Steve Falla

Motion put to the States: subject to the following: a person who constructs, or commissions the construction of, a residential property otherwise than in the course of a business shall be entitled to recover GST incurred on goods and services supplied for the purposes of that construction.

Voting Pour delivers this

The motion lets self-builders recover GST on construction costs, which directly eases a self-build route to a home.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: SHOULD PROPOSITION 1 AND PROPOSITION 2 CARRY 3 (a) To agree that the Committee for Housing shall have the right of first refusal over the future use of the land at Lukis House, Swissville and Garden Hill for the delivery of Affordable Housing and mixed tenure housing, with such use to be given priority over alternative uses of the sites, subject to the Committee for Housing confirming the suitability and viability of the land for housing development; (b) To direct the Committee for Housing, in consultation with the Policy & Resources Committee, to identify the land required for housing development at these sites and undertake an outline viability assessment in order to identify preferred development strategies; (c) To direct the Committee for Housing to confirm its intentions for the use of such land no later than 31 December 2028 or 18 months before the planned opening of the new Children's Hub, whichever is earlier; (d) To direct the Policy & Resources Committee to reserve the land identified by the Committee for Housing under sub-paragraph 3(b) for housing purposes and, subject to any necessary statutory and property approvals, to make the land available for housing development following its vacation by the existing Health and Social Care users; (e) To direct the Policy & Resources Committee, not to allocate or commit any of the land at Lukis House, Swissville or Garden Hill to alternative uses until the Committee for Housing has had the opportunity to exercise its right of first refusal under sub-paragraph 3(a) unless the Committee for Housing has failed to confirm its intentions within the timeline specified in sub-paragraph 3(c).

Voting Pour delivers this

The proposition gives the Committee for Housing first refusal on sites for affordable and mixed-tenure housing, which supports the Committee's delivery.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: Whether, after consideration of the Policy Letter ''Tax Reform 2026'' dated 8 June 2026, they are of the opinion: 1. To direct the Policy & Resources Committee to implement the package of tax reforms to make Guernsey and Alderney more financially sustainable as set out in sections 9 and 10 with the rates and thresholds as described in Appendix 7, save that, in relation to GST, food produced or grown by small independent suppliers is to be taxed at a rate of 0% and not at 3%, and with the following clarifications, and subject to the following: A) the Policy & Resources Committee, working with the Committee for Employment & Social Security, shall not bring GST into operation unless: i. the associated personal income tax and social security contribution mitigations are in force and operational, and are being applied through the relevant deduction, collection and assessment arrangements, before GST becomes chargeable; ii. the approved GST-related increases in the States Pension, income support and other benefits have taken effect, with payments at the increased rates commencing before GST becomes chargeable; and iii. the Essential Costs Relief Payment arrangements are in force and operational; for the purpose of this Proposition, an intention to apply relief retrospectively, make compensatory payments later or complete the necessary systems after GST has commenced shall not constitute implementation of the Mitigation Measures; b) the Policy & Resources Committee: i. shall defer the commencement of GST where any of the conditions in this Proposition 1(a) cannot be met; ii. shall revise the implementation timetable so that those conditions are met, including any necessary alignment with the commencement of a tax or contribution year; and iii. shall report promptly to the States on the reason for the delay, its financial implications and the revised timetable; c) no authority otherwise given under this item shall permit GST to commence in advance of compliance with those conditions; d) the Policy & Resources Committee and the Committee for Employment & Social Security, before any instrument bringing GST into operation is made or submitted for approval, shall publish a joint implementation assurance report: i. identifying each Mitigation Measure, its commencement date and the date from which its financial effect will be delivered; ii. setting out the evidence that the necessary legislation, staffing, systems, payroll interfaces, assessment arrangements and payment processes are ready to deliver the measures in accordance with this Proposition; and iii. identifying any outstanding implementation risks and explaining how those risks have been addressed, including the arrangements for receiving and determining Essential Costs Relief Payment Claims; e) where compliance depends upon an event occurring after publication of that report, the Committees shall publish confirmation that the event has occurred before GST becomes chargeable, if the conditions cannot be met, the terms under this proposition at 1(b) shall apply notwithstanding any commencement date previously appointed; f) the legislation implementing GST shall give effect to these commencement conditions and shall not confer power to dispense with them by administrative decision; and

Voting Pour delivers this

The main Tax Reform 2026 proposition implements a broad package including GST, which widens the tax base rather than relying on further increases to individual income tax; voting Pour advances the promise.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: To delete propositions 1, 2 and 3 and to substitute therefor: “1. To agree that the individual standard rate for income tax should be 22% for 2027 and 2028 and at 20% for 2029 and onwards. 2. To direct the Policy & Resources Committee to investigate an increase to the Maximum liability on income for non-Guernsey sources (including Guernsey bank interest and income derived from Guernsey exempt investment schemes, which are non-resident for Guernsey tax purposes) and the maximum liability – worldwide income and to report back to the States via the Annual Budget for 2028.”.

Voting Contre delivers this

The amendment would raise the individual standard income-tax rate to 22% in place of the reform package; Contre avoids increasing the burden on individuals.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: In Proposition 1 after “Appendix 7” insert the following: “, subject to replacing the proposed goods and services tax with an increase in the standard rate of income tax from 20 percent to a single rate at 22 percent, which increase is to be done as soon as practicable”.

Voting Contre delivers this

The amendment would replace GST with a higher individual income-tax rate, which is the repeated burden on individuals the promise opposes; Contre delivers.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: To delete Propositions 1 to 3 and substitute therefor: “1.To agree that neither the proposed Goods and Services Tax nor the associated Income Tax and Social Security contribution reforms detailed in the Policy Letter shall be introduced as part of the Tax Reform Programme. 2.To agree that the proposed Transport Taxes shall proceed as set out in this Policy Letter at Paragraph 9.7 and as more specifically described therein. 3.To agree that the proposed Corporate Tax amendments shall proceed as set out in Paragraph 9.21 of this Policy Letter and as more specifically described therein, excepting that at the third bullet point of paragraph 9.21, the term “ISE” shall be substituted with “Corporate Levy” (and this substitution shall take effect wherever relevant). 4.To direct the Policy & Resources Committee to develop and bring before the States proposals, for implementation on the same timetable as the tax measures proposed in this Policy Letter where reasonably practicable, for the introduction of a Corporate Levy payable by registered Guernsey companies, having regard to the work previously undertaken by the Tax Review Sub-Committee, and including consideration of whether such levy should comprise: a fixed annual levy payable by each registered company; a levy differentiated according to the size or scale of the undertaking, including consideration of whether existing company classifications may provide an appropriate and proportionate basis for differentiation; or such other structure as the Committee considers best achieves the objectives of fairness, administrative simplicity and efficient revenue collection. 5.To direct the Committee for Economic Development, in consultation with the Policy & Resources Committee, to develop and bring before the States, on the same timetable where reasonably practicable, proposals for the introduction of a Visitor Levy in accordance with the extant States Resolution, with all revenues arising from such levy to be paid into the General Revenue Account and not hypothecated for expenditure by any particular Committee or industry sector. 6.To direct the Policy & Resources Committee to revise the implementation programme and associated implementation budget for Tax Reform to reflect the removal of the proposed Goods and Services Tax and associated Income Tax and Social Security contribution reforms, including the consequential reduction in implementation cost, implementation activity, systems development, staffing and administrative requirements. 7. To direct the Policy & Resources Committee to return to the States with: 1. a revised implementation programme; 2. a revised implementation budget; 3. revised estimates of one-off implementation costs; 4. revised estimates of ongoing administration costs; 5. revised estimates of annual recurring revenues; and 6. revised staffing assumptions, reflecting the alternative package approved under this Proposition within a period that results in the States being capable of meeting the proposed implementation timetable as proposed within the Policy Letter. 8.To direct the Policy & Resources Committee to return to the States with an assurance review in 2030 as set out in section 12 of the Policy Letter, the scope of which shall be adjusted, where necessary, to take account of the removal of GST and Social Security measures from the package under these proposals and the application of those measures considered herein.”.

Voting Contre delivers this

The amendment would drop GST and the associated reforms from the programme, so Contre keeps the broad package alive.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: To delete all propositions and to substitute therefor: “1.To agree a goods and services tax shall not be introduced, and: (i) to rescind Resolution I. 1B. and Resolution I. 1C. of Billet d’Etat No. XIX dated 14th October, 2024 made on 8th November 2024; and (ii) to direct the Policy & Resources Committee to cease all preparations for the introduction of any goods and services tax.”.

Voting Contre delivers this

The amendment would reject GST and cease work on it, narrowing tax reform; voting Contre advances the broader-reform promise.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: 1. To agree that, should the States decide in the second quarter of 2026 to adopt Workstream 1 of the Tax Reform proposals, a. the individual standard rate of income tax shall be reduced to 15%, with 20% becoming an individual higher rate of income tax; and the higher rate will apply at a defined threshold (£32,400) as agreed on 8 November 2024, with appropriate adjustments to reflect the impact of inflation between that date and the date of implementation;

Voting Pour delivers this

Part of the Workstream 1 package, which pairs GST with a lower individual income-tax standard rate; Pour moves toward broader reform with less burden on individuals.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: To delete all propositions and to substitute therefor: “1. To agree a goods and services tax shall not be introduced, and: (i) to rescind Resolution I. 1B. and Resolution I. 1C. of Billet d’Etat No. XIX dated 14th October, 2024 made on 8th November 2024; and (ii) to direct the Policy & Resources Committee to cease all preparations for the introduction of any goods and services tax.”. View this proposition's information page on gov.gg

Voting Contre delivers this

The amendment would rule out GST and cease work on it, leaving individual income tax as the main lever; voting Contre keeps broader reform alive.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: b. (i) the Goods & Services Tax should be applied at a standard rate of 5%, andthat all foodstuffs should be subject to the tax at the standard rate; AND (ii)an Essentials Cost Relief Payment scheme should be implemented as outlined in Section 4, with the fixed payment set provisionally (subject to review as set out below) at £520 a year for a single adult or £860 a year for a couple, reflecting the estimated annual GST incurred by a household on Income Support; and that the responsibility and administering of this payment should be added to the mandate of the Committee for Employment & Social Security; and that the payment should be increased each January in line with Income Support rates, the value of the payment being fully reviewed in line with the minimum income standard whenever that exercise is repeated;

Voting Pour delivers this

Agreeing GST at 5% with a relief payment is a broad-based tax measure that reduces reliance on repeated individual tax rises; Pour advances the promise.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: To agree that maintaining and strengthening the Island’s economic capacity is fundamental to the successful delivery of the Government Work Plan and to note the following, which should be included in the consolidated version of the Government Work Plan to be published on gov.gg: “Economic development, competitiveness and productivity are enabling conditions which underpin the delivery of all super priorities set out in this Plan, rather than representing a discrete policy area or a competing objective. Economic growth, resilience or recovery (termed depending on prevailing financial conditions) materially strengthens the Island’s ability to fund public services, invest in infrastructure and meet community needs over time whilst actively promoting innovation. Economic development should therefore be regarded as a cross-cutting consideration informing prioritisation, sequencing and delivery decisions across the Government Work Plan. Responsibility for supporting economic development and long-term economic capacity is a whole-of-government responsibility. While specific policy levers may sit with individual committees, the economic consequences of decisions are shared across government and should be considered accordingly in the delivery of all super priorities.

Voting Pour delivers this

The motion makes maintaining and strengthening economic capacity fundamental to the Government Work Plan, supporting business-led growth.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: To insert two additional propositions as follows: “6.To agree that maintaining and strengthening the Island’s economic capacity is fundamental to the successful delivery of the Government Work Plan and to note the following, which should be included in the consolidated version of the Government Work Plan to be published on gov.gg: “Economic development, competitiveness and productivity are enabling conditions which underpin the delivery of all super priorities set out in this Plan, rather than representing a discrete policy area or a competing objective. Economic growth, resilience or recovery (termed depending on prevailing financial conditions) materially strengthens the Island’s ability to fund public services, invest in infrastructure and meet community needs over time whilst actively promoting innovation. Economic development should therefore be regarded as a cross-cutting consideration informing prioritisation, sequencing and delivery decisions across the Government Work Plan. Responsibility for supporting economic development and long-term economic capacity is a whole-of-government responsibility. While specific policy levers may sit with individual committees, the economic consequences of decisions are shared across government and should be considered accordingly in the delivery of all super priorities.”. 7.To agree that in setting priorities, sequencing work and allocating resources under this Plan, committees should have regard not only to policy objectives and fiscal constraints, but also to the impact of proposed actions on economic activity, productivity, labour participation and the Island’s longer-term economic capacity, and where delivery of super priorities involves trade-offs with economic competitiveness or growth, those trade-offs should be explicitly identified and considered; and for this to be included in the consolidated version of the Government Work Plan to be published on gov.gg.”.

Voting Pour delivers this

The motion makes strengthening economic capacity fundamental to the Government Work Plan, supporting business-led growth.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: To agree that: a) the expenditure reductions assumed within the financial modelling supporting this Policy Letter shall be supported by a published Savings and Service Optimisation Programme; b) the Programme shall identify, for each financial year to 2029: i. each individual savings or service optimisation initiative; ii. the Committee responsible for delivery; iii. the expected annual financial benefit; iv. the implementation timetable; v. delivery milestones; vi. the principal delivery risks; and vii. whether the saving is cashable, recurring or non-recurring; c) the Policy & Resources Committee shall report to the States half-yearly on progress against the Programme, including any variance between projected and realised savings and any replacement measures proposed where savings are not achieved; and d) the 2030 Assurance Review (or such other method in the event the 2030 Assurance Review is not approved) shall include an independent assessment of the extent to which the assumed expenditure reductions have been delivered and whether they have proved sustainable. (inserted by A13)

Voting Pour delivers this

A published Savings and Service Optimisation Programme identifies specific efficiency initiatives.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: 1. To insert a new Proposition: "To agree that: a) the expenditure reductions assumed within the financial modelling supporting this Policy Letter shall be supported by a published Savings and Service Optimisation Programme; b) the Programme shall identify, for each financial year to 2029: i. each individual savings or service optimisation initiative; ii. the Committee responsible for delivery; iii. the expected annual financial benefit; iv. the implementation timetable; v. delivery milestones; vi. the principal delivery risks; and vii. whether the saving is cashable, recurring or non-recurring; c. the Policy & Resources Committee shall report to the States half-yearly on progress against the Programme, including any variance between projected and realised savings and any replacement measures proposed where savings are not achieved; and d. the 2030 Assurance Review (or such other method in the event the 2030 Assurance Review is not approved) shall include an independent assessment of the extent to which the assumed expenditure reductions have been delivered and whether they have proved sustainable."

Voting Pour delivers this

A published Savings and Service Optimisation Programme identifies specific efficiency initiatives.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: To direct the Policy & Resources Committee to incorporate into the Funding and Investment Plan, in consultation with all Committees, a structured public service efficiency programme that targets a 1% real-terms annual reduction in baseline public expenditure for the years 2027,2028, and 2029 (with 2026 as the baseline year).

Voting Pour delivers this

The motion creates a public service efficiency programme targeting annual real-terms savings, which directly addresses States inefficiency.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: To direct the Policy & Resources Committee, working with Principal Committees, to establish a programme for zero-based budgeting, under which material areas of States’ expenditure are reviewed from first principles rather than by reference to historical baselines; and to require that the scope, methodology (including reporting) and initial findings of this programme be included by no later than in the mid-term Government Work Plan report, with the outcomes of such reviews used to inform Committee Work Plans, future budget proposals, and major policy decisions during the remainder of the term.”

Voting Pour delivers this

Zero-based budgeting reviews expenditure from first principles, which helps identify inefficiencies.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: 1. To insert an additional proposition as follows: “ To direct the Policy & Resources Committee to incorporate into the Funding and Investment Plan, in consultation with all Committees, a structured public service efficiency programme that targets a 1% real-terms annual reduction in baseline public expenditure for the years 2027,2028, and 2029 (with 2026 as the baseline year).”

Voting Pour delivers this

The motion inserts a structured public service efficiency programme targeting annual savings, which addresses States inefficiency.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: To insert an additional proposition as follows: “6.To direct the Policy & Resources Committee, working with Principal Committees, to establish a programme for zero-based budgeting, under which material areas of States’ expenditure are reviewed from first principles rather than by reference to historical baselines; and to require that the scope, methodology (including reporting) and initial findings of this programme be included by no later than in the mid-term Government Work Plan report, with the outcomes of such reviews used to inform Committee Work Plans, future budget proposals, and major policy decisions during the remainder of the term.”

Voting Pour delivers this

Zero-based budgeting reviews expenditure from first principles, which helps identify inefficiencies.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: To agree the following workstreams should be undertaken by the States’ Assembly & Constitution Committee: a) Consider the possibility of including a supervisory authority to oversee complaints and appeals as part of the workstream to establish an independent Electoral Body; b) Explore additional approaches that could be adopted to foster youth engagement in politics and elections.

Voting Pour delivers this

The motion sets electoral and constitutional workstreams for the States' Assembly & Constitution Committee, which bears on reviewing the system of government and elections.

Official voting record →