← Leaderboard·Manifesto rating·June 2025 election manifesto
Rank 2 of 39

Steve Williams

The manifesto presents a detailed housing programme covering planning density, IDP land allocation, document duty changes, income tax incentives for developers and landlords, a stalled-projects review, greenhouse site reclassification, construction workforce development, fast-track work permits and a 24-month tip-fee trial, with most measures carrying specific figures or timeframes. It also addresses fiscal sustainability, education, health, connectivity and energy at a higher level of generality. The manifesto acknowledges the States' income shortfall, opposes GST, and points to previous savings reports as a starting point, without naming a revenue source for the tax relief measures it proposes.

Read the manifesto
020406080100
0
Overall · out of 100
“A respectable sketch”

The five dimensions

Select one to jump to the reasoning behind its score.

Weighted into the overall score
62
/ 100

Ambition

Weight 15%
“A credible stretch”

The manifesto centres on housing but extends into fiscal policy, education, health, connectivity, energy and climate, giving it a scope beyond its housing focus. Within housing, the programme is detailed and multi-layered, combining supply-side planning reform, tax incentives for developers and landlords, workforce development and procurement changes. The non-housing sections, while present, remain at a higher level of generality and do not form a connected reform programme of comparable depth.

71
/ 100

Tangibility

Weight 25%
“Shows its working”

The housing section carries specific figures throughout: a £600,000 threshold for document duty and developer tax relief, a 10% income tax rate for build-to-let income for five years, a 25 to 30 per cent discounted land price in perpetuity, a 20 per cent reduction in developable area every three years for unbuilt sites, a 24-month tip-fee trial, and a 14-day fast-track work permit window. The DEC curriculum carries a September 2026 start date. Pledges outside housing, covering education, health, connectivity, finance and fiscal policy, are stated as directions without figures, timeframes or named mechanisms, which limits tangibility in those sections.

55
/ 100

Realism

Weight 20%
“Needs a tailwind”

The manifesto acknowledges that 'government annual spending exceeds its income' and states that the States must increase its income, while opposing GST and pointing to previous consultants' reports on savings as a starting point; no revenue source or saving is named for the tax relief and duty abolition pledges, which carry fiscal cost. The income tax reductions for developers and landlords and the abolition of document duty on second homes would each reduce revenue, and no mechanism for offsetting that reduction is identified. The planning and IDP measures are grounded in an existing review process the manifesto states the candidate has already engaged with, and the construction workforce pledges are incremental and proportionate to the issue described.

65
/ 100

Deliverability

Weight 30%
“Needs a majority and a willing P&R”

The Scorecard records Williams as President of the Committee for Housing. The housing supply, IDP, planning resourcing, mixed-tenure development, brownfield reclassification, tip-fee trial, joint venture and construction workforce pledges are all in the same subject area as that role. The tax relief measures for developers, landlords and first-time buyers, the document duty changes, the income tax rate reductions and the education and health pledges depend on other committees and a States majority of 20 of 38 deputies. The connectivity and energy pledges similarly depend on other committees and, in some cases, external parties.

45
/ 100

Low waffle

Weight 10%
“Admirably concrete”

Much of the housing section moves directly from problem statement to numbered mechanism. General statements of values and intent appear mainly in the opening framing, the biography section and the non-housing policy areas, where phrases such as 'Action needs to be taken' and 'constant evaluation' carry intent without specifying a mechanism. The proportion of specific, numbered commitments in the housing section is high relative to these passages, keeping the overall waffle level moderate.

← Back to the leaderboardRank 2 of 39 · Scored by the Guernsey Deputy Scorecard team

Stay up to date

Every promise. Every vote. In your feed.

Join the Guernsey Deputy Scorecard group for new data, corrections and analysis as the States term unfolds.

Join the Facebook groupPublic group · free · no advertising