Elaine Millar

Voting Pour delivers this

The St. Helier Urban Renewal Programme including Havre des Pas amendment concerns urban renewal that should include green spaces and community amenities, relevant to the promise.

Voting Pour delivers this

The St Helier Country Park amendment to the Government Plan directly concerns provision of green space, matching the promise to require new developments to include green space.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The promise concerns requiring green space in new developments, while the motion is specifically about funding/establishing a St Helier Country Park, which is related but a distinct mechanism — voting against this particular amendment does not clearly mean opposing green space requirements in new developments generally.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Gas Place Primary School Site amendment directly concerns provision of a new primary school, matching the promise to require new developments to include school access.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Development Levies proposition parts (a) and (b) directly concerns levies on developers to fund community infrastructure including green space and schools, matching the promise.

Voting Pour delivers this

Development Levies part (c) further concerns developer levies for community infrastructure directly relevant to the promise on green space and school access in new developments.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The promise concerns requiring green space and school access in new developments, while the motion concerns development levies — a financial mechanism — which is a different instrument from land-use or planning requirements, making it unclear whether voting against this specific levy measure contradicts the broader planning promise.

Voting Pour delivers this

The La Collette Waste Management Site Development Plan as amended concerns planning for a major site where green space and community amenities are at issue, relevant to the promise.

Voting Contre delivers this

The Supplementary Planning Guidance on Parking Strategy concerns planning standards for new developments; voting contre against reducing parking requirements could protect space for green areas and community uses.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Draft Planning and Building (Conservation Areas) Regulations Third Reading concerns planning standards that protect green and heritage spaces relevant to the promise on green space in developments.

Voting Pour delivers this

The West of Island Planning Framework amendment concerns planning for a large area where green space and school access in new developments are relevant considerations.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Supplementary Planning Guidance on parking paragraph (a) concerns planning guidance that affects how development space is allocated, relevant to the promise on green space in new developments.

Considered and set aside: this motion does not bear on the promise. The promise concerns requiring green space and school access in new developments, while the motion is about supplementary planning guidance specifically on parking, which is a different planning subject unrelated to the promised commitments.

Voting Pour delivers this

Affordable Housing Provision at the Waterfront concerns a major development where inclusion of green space and school access provisions are relevant planning considerations.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Composition of Rent Tribunal amendment Part 1 directly concerns the body that adjudicates rent disputes, relevant to the promise to support affordable housing and rental control.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Composition of Rent Tribunal amendment Parts 2-4 directly concerns the rent tribunal structure, relevant to the promise on decoupling social rents from private sector rents.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Composition of Rent Tribunal as amended concerns the rent dispute body, relevant to the promise to support affordable social housing and rent decoupling.

Considered and set aside: this motion does not bear on the promise. The promise concerns social housing affordability and decoupling social rents from private sector rents, while the motion addressed the composition of the Rent Tribunal — a procedural/membership matter that does not directly bear on either of those substantive commitments.

Voting Contre delivers this

The move to next item would have avoided debate on measures to limit Andium Homes rent increases; voting contre keeps the debate on affordable social housing rents alive, directly matching the promise.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The motion was a procedural "move to next item" vote about whether to debate Andium Homes rent measures at all, and voting Pour (to skip the debate) could reflect a preference for a different mechanism to address social rents rather than a straightforward rejection of the promise to decouple social and private sector rents.

Voting Pour delivers this

This proposition directly concerned measures to limit Andium Homes rent increases during the cost-of-living crisis, directly matching the promise to support affordable social housing and decouple social rents from private sector rents.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. While the promise concerns decoupling social rents from private sector rents, the specific motion's precise measures and mechanisms are not described here, and voting against one particular package of rent measures could reflect disagreement with the specific approach rather than opposition to the general principle of affordable social housing or rent decoupling.

Voting Pour delivers this

The reference back of Rent Control Tribunal Chair and Member nominations concerns the rent tribunal governance, relevant to effective rent control and the promise on social housing rents.

Considered and set aside: this motion does not bear on the promise. The motion concerns a procedural reference back of nominations to a Rent Control Tribunal, not the substantive policy of decoupling social rents from private sector rents that the member promised to support.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Jersey Homes Trust rent increase assistance scheme directly concerns social housing rent affordability, matching the promise to support affordable social housing.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The motion addressed a rent assistance scheme for Jersey Homes Trust tenants, which is a specific, partial measure related to social housing affordability rather than a direct vote on decoupling social rents from private sector rents, meaning voting against it could reflect a preference for a different approach rather than opposition to the underlying promise.

Voting Pour delivers this

Rent Control Measures paragraph (a)(i) directly concerns controlling rents in the social and private rental market, matching the promise to support affordable social housing and decouple social rents from private rents.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. While the member promised to decouple social rents from private sector rents, the motion concerned rent control measures broadly, and it is not certain that this specific amended paragraph (a)(i) was the precise mechanism the member had in mind, or that voting against it necessarily contradicts the promise rather than reflecting a preference for a different approach to the same goal.

Voting Pour delivers this

Rent Control Measures paragraph (a)(ii) directly addresses rental control mechanisms relevant to the promise on affordable social housing.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. While the member promised to decouple social rents from private sector rents, paragraph (a)(ii) of this rent control amendment concerns a specific mechanism for rent control whose exact provisions are not detailed here, and voting against one particular legislative measure does not straightforwardly contradict a general manifesto commitment when the member may have opposed the specific mechanism while still supporting the broader goal.

Voting Pour delivers this

Rent Control Measures paragraph (a)(iii) directly concerns rent control relevant to affordable social housing and decoupling rents.

Voting Pour delivers this

Rent Control Measures paragraph (b)(i) directly concerns rent control mechanisms that bear on the promise to support affordable social housing.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. While the promise explicitly mentions decoupling social rents from private sector rents, the motion concerns rent control measures more broadly, and it is not certain that this specific mechanism (paragraph (b)(i) of P.18/2023 as amended) is the same as or directly equivalent to the rent-decoupling initiative the member promised to support, meaning a vote against could reflect preference for a different approach rather than abandonment of the principle.

Voting Pour delivers this

Rent Control Measures paragraph (b)(ii) directly concerns rent control mechanisms relevant to the promise on affordable social housing.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. Although the promise explicitly mentions removing the link between social and private sector rents, the motion concerns rent control measures broadly, and without knowing the specific content of paragraph (b)(ii) as amended, it cannot be established without inference whether this particular sub-paragraph directly enacted rent decoupling or addressed a related but distinct mechanism, meaning a vote against it does not plainly contradict the promise.

Voting Pour delivers this

Minimum Residential Space Standards paragraph (c) concerns housing space standards directly relevant to the promise on affordable social housing quality.

Considered and set aside: this motion does not bear on the promise. The promise concerns social housing affordability and decoupling rents from private sector rents, while the motion addresses minimum residential space standards — a different policy subject with no direct bearing on rent-setting or the social/private rent link.

Voting Pour delivers this

The provision of carpets in Andium Homes properties amendment part (a) concerns quality of social housing provision, relevant to the promise to support affordable social housing.

Voting Pour delivers this

The provision of carpets in Andium Homes properties amendment part (b) concerns quality of Andium social housing, relevant to the promise to support affordable social housing.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Draft Public Health and Safety (Rented Dwellings) (Licensing) Regulations Principles directly concern standards for rented dwellings, relevant to the promise on affordable social housing quality.

Voting Contre delivers this

The rent-a-room amendment to the Government Plan would reduce tax incentives for landlords, with implications for affordable housing supply; voting contre could be seen as protecting against measures that complicate affordable housing policy.

Voting Pour delivers this

The amendment on abolition of interest relief for landlords directly affects private sector rents and the relative position of social housing, relevant to decoupling social rents from private sector rents.

Voting Pour delivers this

The adopted motion on abolition of interest relief for landlords as amended directly bears on private rental market dynamics relevant to the promise on decoupling social rents from private rents.

Voting Pour delivers this

The rented dwellings licensing regulations Regulation 2 concerns minimum standards for rented properties, relevant to the promise on affordable social housing.

Voting Pour delivers this

The rented dwellings licensing regulations Regulations 3-6 concern housing standards in rental properties, relevant to the promise on affordable social housing.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Third Reading of the rented dwellings licensing regulations directly advances housing standards legislation relevant to affordable social housing quality.

Voting Pour delivers this

Minimum Residential Space Standards paragraph (b) directly concerns minimum space standards in housing, relevant to the promise to support affordable social housing.

Considered and set aside: this motion does not bear on the promise. The promise concerns affordable social housing and decoupling social rents from private sector rents, while the motion concerns minimum residential space standards — a related but distinct policy area that does not bear on rent levels or the social/private rent link.

Voting Pour delivers this

Investing stamp duty revenue into first-time buyer funds supports affordable housing access, which materially advances the promise on affordable social housing.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The promise concerns social housing affordability and decoupling social rents from private sector rents, whereas this amendment specifically concerns directing stamp duty revenue into first-time buyer funds — a related but distinct housing affordability mechanism that a member could reasonably reject while still pursuing the promised social housing and rent-decoupling goals through other means.

Voting Pour delivers this

Minimum Residential Space Standards paragraph (a) directly concerns housing space standards, relevant to the quality of affordable social housing.

Considered and set aside: this motion does not bear on the promise. The promise concerns affordable social housing and decoupling social rents from private sector rents, while the motion concerns minimum residential space standards — a different policy instrument with no direct bearing on rent levels or their linkage.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Andium Homes Limited Articles of Association vote concerns the governance of the main social housing provider, relevant to the promise to support affordable social housing.

Voting Pour delivers this

Pets in rental properties as amended concerns tenants' rights in social and private rental housing, relevant to the promise to support affordable social housing residents.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Social Rents Plan to Reduce Rental Stress for Tenants amendment directly matches the promise to support affordable social housing and decouple social rents from private sector rents.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Social Rental Plan to Reduce Rental Stress for Tenants as amended directly advances the promise to support affordable social housing and reduce rental costs for tenants.

Voting Pour delivers this

Amendment 3 to the Draft Residential Tenancy Amendment Law directly concerns tenancy law reform bearing on the promise of affordable social housing.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Third Reading of the Draft Residential Tenancy Amendment Law completes tenancy law reform directly relevant to the promise on affordable social housing.

Voting Pour delivers this

The amendment to the Draft Residential Tenancy Amendment Law directly concerns tenancy law reform relevant to the promise on affordable social housing and tenant rights.

Voting Pour delivers this

Part 1 of the Draft Residential Tenancy Amendment Law directly concerns residential tenancy provisions relevant to affordable social housing and tenant protections.

Voting Pour delivers this

Part 2 of the Draft Residential Tenancy Amendment Law directly concerns residential tenancy provisions relevant to the promise on affordable social housing.

Voting Pour delivers this

Part 3 of the Draft Residential Tenancy Amendment Law concerns tenancy provisions directly relevant to the promise on affordable social housing.

Voting Pour delivers this

Part 3 of the Draft Residential Tenancy Amendment Law (second vote) concerns residential tenancy law reform directly relevant to affordable social housing.

Voting Pour delivers this

Part 4 of the Draft Residential Tenancy Amendment Law concerns tenancy provisions relevant to affordable housing and tenant protections.

Voting Pour delivers this

An amendment on empty residential properties addresses bringing unused housing stock into use, advancing affordable housing supply consistent with the promise.

Voting Pour delivers this

Appointment of Rent Tribunal Chair, Deputy Chair and Members directly supports the rent adjudication body relevant to the promise on social housing rents.

Voting Contre delivers this

Removal of interest tax relief for buy-to-let mortgages would affect private rental costs; voting contre may reflect judgment about means, but the motion bears on decoupling social from private sector rents.

Voting Contre delivers this

This amendment sought to remove the stamp duty surcharge on second homes; opposing its removal maintains a measure that discourages speculative property holding and supports housing affordability.

Considered and set aside: this motion does not bear on the promise. The promise concerns social housing affordability and decoupling social rents from private sector rents, while this motion was about removing a stamp duty surcharge on second homes — a different policy instrument with no direct connection to the substance of what was promised.

Voting Contre delivers this

An amendment to the empty residential properties amendment could weaken measures to bring empty homes into use, so opposing it supports the housing affordability promise.

Voting Contre delivers this

Removing the stamp duty surcharge on buy-to-let and second homes would reduce a measure supporting housing affordability; voting contre preserves the surcharge consistent with the promise.

Voting Pour delivers this

A second amendment to the empty residential properties motion further shapes policy on unused housing, bearing on expanding affordable housing supply.

Voting Pour delivers this

Introducing residential rent controls directly bears on affordable housing by limiting rent increases, which is closely related to decoupling social rents from private sector rents.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The promise concerned decoupling social rents from private rents and affordable social housing, whereas the motion was about introducing private-sector residential rent controls — a related but distinct mechanism that a member could reasonably oppose while still pursuing the specific social-housing pledge through other means.

Voting Contre delivers this

This vote sought to move past a proposition about measures affecting Andium Homes rent increases, which relates to government housing policy including use of government housing land/stock; voting contre (against moving to next item) would have kept the debate alive on social housing measures.

Considered and set aside: this motion does not bear on the promise. The motion was a procedural "move to next item" vote on Andium Homes rent increases during a cost of living debate, which has no direct bearing on the promise to release government land and brownfield sites for housing development.

Voting Pour delivers this

This proposition concerned cost-of-living measures affecting Andium Homes rent increases, directly bearing on government-managed housing assets and their use for affordable housing purposes.

Considered and set aside: this motion does not bear on the promise. The motion concerned Andium Homes rent increases as a cost-of-living measure, which is a different subject from releasing government land and brownfield sites for housing development.

Voting Pour delivers this

This amendment concerned the Play.Com site as a government-owned brownfield site to be released for development, directly matching the promise to support releasing brownfield sites.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The motion is an amendment to an amendment of the Government Plan concerning the Play.Com site, and while that site may be a brownfield location relevant to the promise, voting against one specific procedural or funding mechanism does not clearly equate to opposing the release of government land and brownfield sites for development more generally.

Voting Pour delivers this

This amendment concerned the Gas Place Primary School site as part of government planning, directly bearing on releasing a government site for development including housing/school access.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Le Squez amendment to the Government Plan concerned development of a government housing estate site, directly relevant to releasing government land for housing development.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The motion is a specific budget amendment concerning Le Squez, and voting against it does not clearly contradict a general manifesto promise to release government land and brownfield sites, as the member could oppose this particular amendment on financial, procedural, or other grounds while still supporting the broader principle.

Voting Pour delivers this

The West of Island Planning Framework amendment to the Government Plan bears on planning for land release and development in the west of the island, relevant to releasing land for housing.

Voting Contre delivers this

The motion to revoke the Aviemore sale concerns a government property transaction; voting contre (against revocation) supports proceeding with releasing government land.

Voting Contre delivers this

The amendment to the meanwhile use of the former Gas Place site would have altered the approach to this government brownfield site; voting contre preserves the main proposition for releasing the site.

Voting Contre delivers this

This motion sought reconsideration of the proposed use of the former Jersey Gas site, a government brownfield site; voting contre supports the original decision to proceed with development.

Voting Pour delivers this

An amendment on empty residential properties could support bringing brownfield or underused sites back into housing use, advancing the promise on releasing land for housing.

Voting Pour delivers this

This motion concerned affordable housing provision at the Waterfront, a government-owned brownfield site, directly advancing the promise to support releasing government land for housing development.

Voting Pour delivers this

The motion concerned meanwhile use of the former Gas Place site, a government brownfield site directly relevant to the promise to support releasing brownfield sites for development.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The promise concerns releasing government land and brownfield sites for housing development, but the motion's title ("Meanwhile Use") suggests a temporary interim use arrangement rather than a definitive release for development, so voting against it does not plainly contradict a promise to release sites for development.

Voting Contre delivers this

The motion sought to defer approval of a land transaction selling the Kensington Place Andium Homes site to the public - voting contre (against deferral) would advance release of government land for housing development.

Voting Pour delivers this

Development Levies parts (a) and (b) concern levies that fund community infrastructure and affordable housing contributions, relevant to the promise on parishes providing housing for residents.

Voting Pour delivers this

The West of Island Planning Framework directly concerns planning for parish areas in the west of the island, relevant to enabling parishes to provide housing for their residents.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Draft Income Support Amendment No. 22 Regulations Principles concern amendments to income support including provision for social care needs, relevant to the promise on consistent social care services.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Vote of No Confidence in the Chair of the Health and Social Security Scrutiny Panel concerns oversight of health and social security services, relevant to ensuring consistent care service delivery.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Health Insurance Fund Transfers amendment to the Government Plan concerns funding for health services, relevant to the promise on consistent social and personal care services.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The promise is a general commitment to consistent and reliable social and personal care, while the motion concerns a specific amendment about HIF (Health Insurance Fund) transfers within the Government Plan, which is a funding mechanism question that requires inference to connect to the broader care services promise.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Health and Community Services Interim Board as amended directly concerns governance of health and community services to ensure consistent delivery, matching the promise on reliable social and personal care services.

Voting Pour delivers this

The amendment to the Health and Community Services Interim Board directly concerns the governance structure for health and community services, relevant to ensuring consistent care service delivery.

Voting Contre delivers this

The reference back of a proposition concerning health and care services governance; voting contre (against reference back) advances implementation of consistent care services.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Health and Care Jersey Advisory Board and Partnership Board amendment concerns governance of health and care services, directly relevant to the promise on consistent and reliable social and personal care services.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The promise is a general directional commitment to consistent and reliable care services, while the motion concerns the specific governance structure of advisory and partnership boards for Health and Care Jersey, making it impossible to conclude without inference that voting against this particular amendment contradicts the broader promise.

Voting Pour delivers this

Paragraph (a) of the Health and Care Jersey Advisory and Partnership Board proposition directly concerns care service governance relevant to the promise on consistent care services.

Voting Pour delivers this

Paragraph (b) of the Health and Care Jersey Advisory and Partnership Board directly concerns care service governance relevant to ensuring consistent social and personal care services.

Voting Pour delivers this

Redirecting funds into palliative and respite care directly advances the promise to ensure consistent and reliable social and personal care services.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The promise to provide "consistent and reliable social and personal care" is a general directional commitment, and while redirecting funds to palliative and respite care relates to that area, voting against this specific reallocation amendment does not straightforwardly contradict the promise, as the member could reasonably judge that the existing budget allocation or a different funding mechanism better delivers the goal.

Voting Pour delivers this

Part 1 of the same amendment to redirect funds into palliative and respite care directly supports the promise on consistent social and personal care services.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The promise to provide consistent and reliable social and personal care is a general directional commitment, and voting against one specific budget reallocation mechanism (redirecting £2.6 million from assisted dying to palliative/respite care) does not straightforwardly contradict it, since a member could oppose this particular reallocation while still pursuing the broader goal through other means or funding routes.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Our Hospital Project reporting proposition concerns accountability for the new hospital project which directly supports the promise on medical professionals delivering high-quality care.

Considered and set aside: this motion does not bear on the promise. A motion about hospital project reporting arrangements is a procedural/governance matter that does not directly bear on supporting medical professionals to provide care to islanders.

Voting Pour delivers this

Funding for multi-morbidity GP consultations directly supports GPs in delivering high-quality care to islanders with complex conditions, directly matching the promise.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The promise to "support medical professionals" is a broad directional commitment, and voting against one specific amendment about GP multi-morbidity consultation funding does not plainly contradict it, as the member could reasonably have opposed this particular mechanism while still pursuing the general aim through other means.

Voting Pour delivers this

Free GP visits for children and young people directly supports medical professionals' ability to deliver healthcare to all islanders, matching the promise on supporting medical professionals.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The promise to "support medical professionals to provide the best care" is a general directional commitment, and voting against one specific funding mechanism (free GP visits for children) does not straightforwardly contradict it, as the member could reasonably have opposed this particular measure on grounds of implementation, cost, or preference for an alternative route while still supporting the broader aim.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Hospital funding amendment to the Government Plan directly supports medical professionals in delivering high-quality care through adequate hospital resources.

Voting Pour delivers this

Financial support for parents of babies needing neonatal care supports medical professionals delivering specialist neonatal healthcare, relevant to the promise.

Voting Pour delivers this

Funding of Acute Cardiac Nursing directly supports specialist medical professionals in delivering high-quality cardiac care to islanders, matching the promise.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Vaccination Service amendment to the Government Plan directly supports medical professionals delivering vaccination services, matching the promise.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Vaccination Service amendment directly supports healthcare professionals delivering vaccination programmes, matching the promise.

Voting Pour delivers this

Medical hosiery and wound dressing funding directly supports medical professionals in delivering specific healthcare treatments to islanders, matching the promise.

Voting Pour delivers this

The amendment on Acute Cardiac Nursing funding directly supports cardiac care professionals, matching the promise to support medical professionals in delivering high-quality care.

Voting Contre delivers this

A freeze on Public Health staff appointments would work against the promise to support medical professionals in delivering high-quality care; voting contre delivers the promise.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The promise to "support medical professionals" is a general directional commitment, and whether voting for a freeze on Public Health staff appointments contradicts that support requires an inference about how such a freeze would affect medical professionals' ability to deliver care, rather than being a plain, direct contradiction.

Voting Pour delivers this

IVF Funding supports medical professionals in delivering specialist reproductive healthcare to islanders, relevant to the promise.

Voting Pour delivers this

The IVF Funding amendment concerns specialist healthcare provision, relevant to supporting medical professionals in delivering high-quality care.

Voting Pour delivers this

New Healthcare Facilities Programme paragraph (b) directly concerns building new healthcare facilities to support medical professionals in delivering high-quality care.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The promise to "support medical professionals to provide the best care for islanders" is a general directional commitment, and voting against one specific paragraph of a healthcare facilities programme does not straightforwardly contradict it, as the member could oppose this particular provision while still pursuing the broader goal through other means or on grounds of preferring a different approach.

Voting Pour delivers this

New Healthcare Facilities Programme paragraph (a) directly concerns new healthcare infrastructure supporting medical professionals in delivering high-quality care.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The promise to "support medical professionals to provide the best care for islanders" is a general directional commitment, and voting against one specific healthcare facilities programme paragraph requires inferring that this particular motion was the right and necessary means of honouring that general promise.

Voting Pour delivers this

The New Healthcare Facilities Programme expenditure amendment to the Budget directly concerns funding for healthcare infrastructure, supporting medical professionals in delivering high-quality care.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The promise to "support medical professionals to provide the best care for islanders" is a general directional commitment, and voting against one specific budget amendment concerning healthcare facilities expenditure does not plainly contradict it, as the member could oppose this particular funding mechanism or level while still genuinely pursuing the broader goal through other means.

Voting Contre delivers this

A freeze on Public Health staff appointments would undermine medical professionals' capacity to deliver care; voting contre delivers the promise.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The promise to "support medical professionals" is a general directional commitment, and whether voting for or against a freeze on public health staff appointments better honours that promise requires inference about the practical effects of the freeze—a judgement call that reasonable people could disagree on, not a plain contradiction.

Voting Pour delivers this

The amendment on medical hosiery and wound dressing funding directly supports medical professionals delivering healthcare, matching the promise.

Voting Pour delivers this

The amendment to the Draft Health and Social Care Professionals Register Law directly concerns registration and standards for healthcare professionals, matching the promise to support medical professionals in delivering high-quality care.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The promise to "support medical professionals to provide the best care for islanders" is a general directional commitment, and whether voting for or against a specific professional registration law amendment is the correct way to honour that commitment requires inference about how the amendment's particular provisions affect medical professionals' ability to deliver care.

Voting Pour delivers this

Raising contributions to the Health Insurance Fund increases resources available to medical professionals for delivering care to islanders.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The promise to "support medical professionals to provide the best care for islanders" is a general directional commitment, and voting against one specific funding mechanism (raising the Health Insurance Fund allocation from 2% to 2.5%) does not plainly contradict it, as the member could oppose this particular measure while still pursuing the broader goal through other means.

Voting Pour delivers this

Free GP visits for students supports medical professionals in delivering accessible healthcare, advancing the promise to support medical professionals in delivering high-quality care.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The promise to "support medical professionals to provide the best care for islanders" is a general directional commitment, and voting against one specific funding mechanism (free GP visits for full-time students) does not plainly contradict it, as the member could reasonably oppose this particular measure while still pursuing the broader goal through other means.

Voting Pour delivers this

Funding medical hosiery and wound dressings supports medical professionals in delivering high-quality care to islanders by ensuring clinical supplies are available.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Skills Development Fund vote directly concerns funding for skills development and training, which includes ongoing training and education opportunities relevant to older adults.

Voting Pour delivers this

Fully funded education or training for 16-18 year olds paragraph (c) concerns training access, tangentially relevant to the broader commitment to education and training opportunities.

Considered and set aside: this motion does not bear on the promise. The promise specifically concerned training and education for older adults, whereas the motion dealt with fully funded education or training for 16–18 year olds, which is a different age group and a different subject.

Voting Pour delivers this

Additional funding for education supports broader education opportunities which can include provision for older adults.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The promise supports training and education for older adults generally, but this motion concerned a specific funding amendment to the Government Plan, and voting against one particular funding mechanism does not necessarily mean rejecting the broader commitment to older-adult education.

Voting Pour delivers this

Removing GST from food would improve food affordability, relevant to the promise to support all children's access to nutrition.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The promise to support children's access to "good nutrition" is a general aspiration, and voting against this specific GST-removal mechanism does not straightforwardly contradict it, as the member could pursue child nutrition through other means or judge this particular fiscal measure ineffective or unaffordable.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Draft Children and Young People Commencement Act directly concerns commencing legislation for children and young people, matching the promise on children's access to services.

Voting Pour delivers this

The amendment for multi-morbidity GP consultations funding concerns healthcare access for those with complex needs including children, relevant to the promise on children's healthcare access.

Considered and set aside: this motion does not bear on the promise. The motion concerns GP consultation funding for adults with multiple long-term conditions (multi-morbidity), which does not bear on the promise about children's access to nutrition, education, healthcare, sport and play.

Voting Pour delivers this

The amendment for free GP visits for children and young people directly matches the promise to give all children access to healthcare.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. While the promise mentions healthcare access for children, voting against one specific funding mechanism (free GP visits) does not unambiguously contradict a general directional commitment, as the member could have opposed this particular measure on affordability, implementation, or policy grounds while still supporting children's healthcare access through other means.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Draft Commissioner for Children and Young People Amendment Regulations Principles directly concern oversight of children's services, relevant to the promise on access to services for all children.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Commissioner for Children and Young People Amendment Articles strengthen children's rights oversight relevant to the promise on children's access to services.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Third Reading of the Commissioner for Children and Young People Amendment Law completes strengthening of children's rights oversight relevant to the promise.

Voting Pour delivers this

Financial support for parents of babies needing neonatal care directly concerns children's healthcare access, matching the promise to support initiatives giving all children access to healthcare.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Appointment of the Commissioner for Children and Young People directly advances oversight of children's services, relevant to the promise on all children's access to services.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Draft F.B. Playing Fields Law Articles directly concerns playing fields for sport and play, matching the promise to give all children access to sport and play.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Draft Children (Convention Rights) (Commencement) Act brings children's convention rights into effect, directly matching the promise to support initiatives giving all children access to nutrition, education, healthcare, sport and play.

Voting Pour delivers this

Cash payment at Government Sports facilities concerns access to sports facilities which affects all residents including children, relevant to the promise on children's access to sport.

Voting Pour delivers this

IVF Funding concerns access to reproductive healthcare, relevant to the promise on healthcare access for children (from birth).

Voting Pour delivers this

The Youth Service Statutory Provision as amended directly concerns statutory provision of services for young people including sport, play and education, directly matching the promise.

Voting Pour delivers this

Fully funded education or training for 16-18 year olds paragraph (c) directly concerns education access for young people, matching part of the promise on children's education access.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The promise commits to supporting initiatives for children's access to education broadly, but the motion concerns a specific funding mechanism for 16-18 year olds' education or training, and voting against one particular funding arrangement does not plainly contradict a general commitment to supporting educational access initiatives.

Voting Pour delivers this

Fully funded education or training for 16-18 year olds paragraph (a) directly concerns education access for young people, relevant to the promise on children's education access.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The promise is a general directional commitment to support children's access to education, while the motion concerns a specific funding mechanism for 16–18 year-olds' education or training, and voting against one particular scheme does not necessarily mean opposing the broader goal of educational access.

Voting Pour delivers this

Increasing childcare funding rates for 2-3 year olds directly supports children's access to early years provision, which is central to the promise on children's nutrition, education and care.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The promise supports broad initiatives for children's access to nutrition, education, healthcare, sport and play, but voting against one specific budget amendment increasing childcare provider rates by £0.50/hour could reflect concerns about affordability, fiscal priorities, or preference for a different mechanism rather than opposition to the underlying goal.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Care Experienced Fund directly supports children who have been in care, matching the promise to support initiatives giving all children access to nutrition, education, healthcare, sport and play.

Voting Pour delivers this

Income Support special payments for carers of children with life-threatening illnesses or complex healthcare needs directly matches the promise to support all children's access to healthcare and support services.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Draft F.B. Playing Fields Law Principles directly concerns playing fields for children's sport and play, matching the promise.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Draft Children (Convention Rights) (Jersey) Commencement No. 2 Act further commences children's convention rights legislation, directly advancing the promise on all children's access to services.

Voting Pour delivers this

Adding funding to the Jersey Premium scheme for sport and physical activity in primary schools directly advances the promise of giving all children access to sport and play.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. While the amendment concerns sport and physical activity for children (overlapping with the promise), voting against one specific funding mechanism—a two-year pilot funded from a particular budget line—does not plainly contradict a general manifesto commitment to "support initiatives" for children's access to sport, as the member could oppose this particular measure on grounds of funding source, design, or affordability while still pursuing the broader goal by other means.

Voting Pour delivers this

Protecting the Office of the Children's Commissioner's budget supports oversight of children's rights, which materially bears on the promise to support initiatives giving all children access to services.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The promise is a broad directional commitment to support children's wellbeing initiatives, while the motion concerned a specific budget savings allocation affecting the Office of the Children's Commissioner — a procedural/funding mechanism question where a member could reasonably vote against the amendment while still pursuing the general promise through other means.

Voting Pour delivers this

Inflation-adjusting apprenticeship grants supports educational and training opportunities for young people, bearing on the promise of education access for all children.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The promise concerns children's access to nutrition, education, healthcare, sport and play, while the motion specifically concerns inflation-adjustment of apprenticeship grants—a distinct, specific mechanism in a different policy area (workforce training), making it impossible to call voting against it a clear breach without inferential reasoning about whether this particular measure was the right or necessary way to honour that general commitment.

Voting Pour delivers this

Funding free GP visits for full-time students supports children's and young people's healthcare access, directly relevant to the promise on children's access to healthcare.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The promise supports initiatives giving children access to healthcare generally, but voting against one specific funding mechanism (free GP visits for full-time students) does not plainly contradict that general commitment, as the member could oppose this particular measure while still pursuing improved child healthcare access through other means or on affordability grounds.

Voting Pour delivers this

Additional funding for education directly advances the promise to support initiatives giving all children access to education.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The promise supports initiatives for children's education generally, but voting against one specific funding amendment in the Government Plan could reflect concerns about the particular mechanism, funding source, or prioritisation rather than opposition to children's education access as a principle.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Jersey Business Revenue Expenditure amendment to the Government Plan directly funds the organisation supporting businesses, relevant to making government processes more business-friendly.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The promise to reduce red tape and make government more business-friendly is a general directional commitment, and voting against one specific budget amendment for Jersey Business revenue expenditure requires inference about whether this particular funding measure was the right or necessary vehicle for honouring that broader promise.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Regulation of Estate Agents proposition as amended introduces new regulatory framework for estate agents, relevant to making business registration and operation processes clearer.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Jersey Business funding amendment to the Government Plan supports the organisation that helps businesses navigate government processes, relevant to reducing bureaucracy.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. While the promise concerns reducing bureaucracy for business and Jersey Business is a business-support body, voting against one specific amendment to a Government Plan about Jersey Business funding or arrangements does not plainly contradict a general directional commitment to making government more business-friendly, as the member could have had reasons unrelated to that commitment for opposing this particular amendment.

Voting Pour delivers this

The amendment concerning Jersey Business and Digital Jersey savings in the Budget directly affects business support organisations that help reduce bureaucracy for local businesses.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. Voting against one specific budget amendment affecting Jersey Business and Digital Jersey funding does not straightforwardly contradict a general manifesto promise to reduce red tape and make government processes more business-friendly, as the member could oppose this particular measure while pursuing the broader goal through other means.

Voting Pour delivers this

The motion for curbing growth of the public sector through an end-to-end review of government processes directly matches the promise to reduce bureaucracy and make government processes more business-friendly.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. While the motion relates to government processes, voting against one specific "end-to-end review" mechanism does not clearly contradict a general manifesto commitment to reduce red tape, as the member could reasonably oppose this particular approach while still pursuing the same goal through other means.

Voting Pour delivers this

Freezing government spending could reduce bureaucratic expansion, touching on making government leaner and more efficient for businesses.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. Freezing government spending at 2025 levels is one specific fiscal mechanism that could affect bureaucracy, but voting against it does not clearly contradict a promise to reduce red tape and make processes more business-friendly, as a member could oppose the spending freeze on other grounds while still pursuing that general goal through different means.

Voting Contre delivers this

Development levies add regulatory/financial burden on developers; opposing this amendment (which imposes levies) aligns with reducing bureaucracy and making government processes more business-friendly.

Voting Pour delivers this

Amending regulations on supervised businesses under anti-money-laundering/proceeds-of-crime law affects the regulatory framework for Jersey's financial services industry and its global competitiveness.

Voting Pour delivers this

The amendment concerning Jersey Business funding directly supports the business support infrastructure that benefits financial services and other sectors' global competitiveness.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The promise is a general commitment to support financial services competitiveness, while the motion concerns a specific budget amendment relating to Jersey Business, and voting against one particular funding or organisational measure does not straightforwardly contradict a broad directional promise about the financial services industry's global standing.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Enhanced Capital Allowance amendment to the Government Plan provides tax incentives that support business investment, relevant to maintaining Jersey's competitive financial and business environment.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Draft Banking Business (Amendment No. 7 – Commencement) Act directly concerns Jersey's banking sector, a core part of the financial services industry the promise commits to supporting.

Voting Pour delivers this

The bilateral treaty with the UAE paragraph (a) concerns financial and economic relations, relevant to Jersey's financial services sector maintaining international relationships for global competitiveness.

Voting Pour delivers this

The bilateral treaty with the UAE paragraph (b) concerns financial and economic relations, directly relevant to Jersey's financial sector's global reach and competitiveness.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Draft Limited Partnerships (Continuance) Regulations concern the legal framework for limited partnerships, a key financial services vehicle, supporting Jersey's global competitiveness.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Draft Income Tax (High Value Residents – Amendment) Law Principles concerns Jersey's tax regime for high-value residents, relevant to the attractiveness of Jersey's financial environment.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Third Reading of the Income Tax (High Value Residents – Amendment) Law concerns Jersey's tax framework for wealthy individuals, relevant to the island's financial competitiveness.

Voting Pour delivers this

The EU Legislation (Information Accompanying Transfers of Funds) Amendment Regulations concern financial services compliance with international standards, directly relevant to Jersey's financial sector competitiveness.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Draft Taxation (Exchange of Information – Amendment) Regulations concern Jersey's international tax information-sharing obligations, directly affecting Jersey's standing as a globally competitive financial centre.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Government Plan Amendment 2 concerning Regtech (regulatory technology) directly relates to supporting financial services industry competitiveness through technology.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The promise is a general commitment to support financial services competitiveness, while the motion concerns one specific RegTech amendment to the Government Plan, and voting against it could reflect concerns about the particular measure rather than opposition to the broader goal of keeping Jersey's financial services industry globally competitive.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Draft Financial Services (Disclosure and Provision of Information) Amendment Regulations directly govern Jersey's financial services sector regulatory framework, relevant to global competitiveness.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Economy Strategy amendment to the Government Plan directly bears on Jersey's broader economic competitiveness including financial services.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The promise is a general directional commitment to support financial services competitiveness, while the motion is one specific amendment to an Economy Strategy within a Government Plan, and voting against it does not clearly equate to opposing the broad goal, as the member may have preferred a different approach or objected to other elements of the amendment.

Voting Pour delivers this

The adopted Enhanced Capital Allowance amendment directly incentivises business capital investment, supporting Jersey's competitiveness including for financial services.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Draft Multinational Taxation (Global Anti-Base Erosion - IIR Tax) Law Third Reading directly concerns Jersey's alignment with international tax standards, a key factor in maintaining the financial services industry's global competitiveness.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Acte Opératoire for the Multinational Taxation (IIR Tax) Law implements global minimum tax rules critical to Jersey's financial services sector remaining globally competitive.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Taxation (Common Reporting Standard and USA) Amendment Regulations Third Reading concerns international tax information exchange, a key compliance requirement for Jersey's global financial services competitiveness.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Draft Patents Law and Registered Designs Law Amendment Regulations concern intellectual property law that supports Jersey's business and financial services competitive environment.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Draft Financial Services (Disclosure and Provision of Information) Jersey Amendment Law Third Reading directly governs financial services disclosure standards, relevant to Jersey's global regulatory standing.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Principles vote for the Financial Services (Disclosure and Provision of Information) Amendment Law directly concerns the regulatory framework for Jersey's financial services sector.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Third Reading of the Financial Services (Disclosure and Provision of Information) Amendment Law directly governs financial services regulation, supporting Jersey's global competitiveness.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Draft Multinational Corporate Income Tax Law Principles vote directly concerns Jersey's implementation of global tax rules essential to maintaining the financial services industry's international standing.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Third Reading of the Multinational Corporate Income Tax Law implements international tax compliance frameworks that directly bear on Jersey's financial services competitiveness.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Acte Opératoire for the Multinational Corporate Income Tax Law completes implementation of global tax standards essential for Jersey's financial services sector.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Principles vote for the Multinational Taxation (IIR Tax) Law directly concerns global tax compliance for Jersey's financial services industry.

Voting Pour delivers this

The agreement with the Kingdom of Bahrain for elimination of double taxation directly supports Jersey's financial services sector maintaining globally competitive international tax treaty arrangements.

Voting Pour delivers this

Extension to Jersey of international IP treaties (PCT, Hague, Madrid, Nice) supports Jersey's legal framework for business and financial services competitiveness.

Voting Pour delivers this

The minimum wage amendment regulations affect employment costs for local businesses including hospitality and farming sectors that rely on minimum-wage workers.

Voting Pour delivers this

Removing GST from food would reduce costs for consumers and food businesses, relevant to supporting farming and hospitality sectors.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The promise is a general directional commitment to support local businesses including farming and hospitality, while the motion is one specific tax policy (removing GST from food) that may or may not be the most effective route to that goal, and a member could reasonably oppose this particular mechanism while still genuinely pursuing support for those sectors through other means.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Trainee Minimum Wage proposition as amended affects staffing costs for local businesses including hospitality and farming, relevant to the promise to support those sectors.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Draft Food (Jersey) Law Principles vote concerns food regulation which directly affects farming and hospitality businesses in Jersey.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Third Reading of the Draft Food (Jersey) Law directly governs food safety regulation affecting farming and hospitality sectors.

Voting Pour delivers this

This motion directly concerns increasing revenue expenditure for agriculture and fisheries, specifically supporting the farming sector named in the promise.

Voting Pour delivers this

The alcohol duty amendment to the Government Plan affects hospitality businesses through their cost base for alcohol products, relevant to the promise to support the hospitality sector.

Voting Pour delivers this

Increasing revenue expenditure on agriculture and fisheries directly supports the farming sector, which the candidate specifically committed to supporting.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Draft Agriculture (Loans) Amendment Regulations directly support the farming sector by amending agricultural loan provisions, a specific commitment in the promise.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Third Reading of the Agriculture (Loans) Amendment Regulations directly advances support for Jersey's farming sector through agricultural loan provisions.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Principles vote for the Agriculture (Loans) Amendment Regulations directly supports the farming sector, a sector explicitly named in the promise.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Agricultural Loan Restrictions amendment to the Budget directly affects lending support available to Jersey's farming sector, explicitly named in the promise.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The promise to "support local businesses including farming" is a general directional commitment, and voting against one specific amendment to agricultural loan restrictions does not straightforwardly contradict that goal, as the member could have opposed this particular mechanism while still supporting farming businesses through other means.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Agricultural Loan restriction amendment as amended directly bears on financial support for Jersey's farming sector.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The promise to support local farming businesses is directional, and voting against one specific agricultural loan amendment in a broader budget does not unambiguously contradict that general commitment, as the member could have opposed this particular mechanism while supporting farming through other means.

Voting Pour delivers this

Small distillers relief in the Budget amendment supports small-scale hospitality and agricultural producers, relevant to the promise to support local businesses including farming.

Voting Contre delivers this

Barring agricultural loans for cannabis-based products restricts farming sector support options; opposing this amendment would preserve broader agricultural loan access for farmers.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The promise to support local businesses including farming is general and directional, and voting to bar agricultural loans for cannabis-based products is one specific regulatory measure within farming finance policy that a member could support while still genuinely pursuing broader support for farming and local business.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Draft Food (Jersey) Commencement Act brings the Food Law into force, directly affecting food businesses in farming and hospitality sectors.

Voting Contre delivers this

The amendment to the Continuation of Rural and Marine Support proposition would have altered the support package; voting contre preserves the main motion supporting farming and rural businesses.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The promise to "support local businesses including farming" is a general directional commitment, and whether voting for or against a specific amendment to a Rural and Marine Support continuation motion better honours that promise requires inference about the amendment's content and effect rather than being self-evident from the promise alone.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Continuation of Rural and Marine Support motion directly supports farming and rural businesses, explicitly matching the promise to support local businesses including farming.

Voting Pour delivers this

The amendment to the thirtieth amendment modifies the bar on agricultural loans for cannabis products, and the direction it moves in affects farming sector support.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Draft Non-Profit Organisations (Amendment of Law) Regulations Principles directly concern regulation of charities and non-profit organisations, relevant to the promise on securing recognition and funding for charities supporting public services.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Non-Profit Organisations Amendment Regulations directly govern the legal framework for charities, relevant to the promise on recognition and funding for charities.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Third Reading of the Non-Profit Organisations Amendment Regulations completes the legal framework for charities, relevant to the promise on securing recognition and funding for charities.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Channel Islands Lottery Distribution of Proceeds directly concerns funding distributed to charities and community organisations, relevant to the promise on securing funding for charities.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Channel Islands Lottery Distribution of Proceeds 2024 directly distributes funds to charities and community groups, relevant to the promise on securing funding for charities.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Channel Islands Lottery Distribution of Proceeds 2025 distributes funds to charities, directly relevant to the promise on funding for charities supporting public services.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Channel Islands Lottery Distribution of Proceeds 2026 distributes funds to charities and community organisations, relevant to the promise on securing funding for charities.

Voting Pour delivers this

Financial support for local disasters concerns emergency funding mechanisms that charities and voluntary organisations often deliver, relevant to the promise on securing funding for charities.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The promise concerns ongoing recognition and funding for charities supporting public services, while this motion relates to financial support for local disasters—a specific, situational funding measure that is not clearly the same thing as the general charitable-funding commitment the member made.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Care Experienced Fund directly funds support services for care-experienced individuals, relevant to the promise on securing funding for charities supporting public services.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Digital Services Platform amendment to the Government Plan directly concerns digital infrastructure for businesses, supporting the promise to enable access for new businesses in the digital sector.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Skills Development Fund vote concerns funding for skills and training which supports new businesses and workers entering the digital sector.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Patents and Registered Designs Law Amendment Regulations support intellectual property protection important for digital and technology businesses.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Third Reading of the Patents and Registered Designs Law Amendment Regulations supports IP frameworks that enable new digital businesses.

Voting Pour delivers this

Extension to Jersey of international IP treaties supports the digital sector's ability to protect intellectual property, enabling new digital businesses.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Government Plan Regtech Amendment directly concerns regulatory technology and the digital sector, matching the promise to enable access for new businesses especially in the digital sector.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The promise is a general directional commitment to support new businesses in the digital sector, and voting against one specific amendment to a Government Plan concerning "Regtech" requires inference about whether this particular measure was the appropriate or only route to fulfilling that broad commitment.