Summing up before the vote on the amendments, Deputy Le Tocq attempts to regale the audience with well-worn stories of the Guernsey Donkey spirit and experience. Then a history lesson going back a couple of centuries. Why on earth do Deputies feel such a need to bring irrelevant anecdotes into their speeches? So much to decide on and so little time and yet on they go. Why is it so difficult to speak to the point alone? Next he lets us know he lost chimney’s and roofs in the great blow of 1987 – why – nobody actually cares.
Still he won’t provide any form of detail on what this money will be spent on (in common with the rest of P&R). The message is clearly just “trust us”. Yeah, right, why wouldn’t we?
Apparently, it isn’t about the money, yet. It is merely about assessing appetite “risk”. If that was the intention, why was that not the basis of the proposal (or his amendment) right from the outset? Could it be that they actually thought their standing in the Assembly (or maybe they believe the Island), would permit their back of a fag packet assumptions would permit it to be simply rubber stamped?