By-election interview: Andy Taylor

Andy Taylor, welcome to the Guernsey Press Politics Podcast. Good morning Matt. Thank you for having me. Um, Andy, we've done uh a few of these to get w when you were a deputy, but you didn't stand in the twenty twenty five general election. Tell me how do you serve five years in the States, as engaged as you were in politics? And then decide not to stand in the general election and nine months later find yourself standing in a by election where there is only one seat available.

Rydyn ni'n mynd, iawn, iawn, iawn, iawn, iawn, iawn, iawn, iawn, iawn, iawn, iawn, iawn, iawn. Um and in my life n nine months has changed an awful lot. Uh so at the at the time of the last election, um, I was in the process of selling a business. I was coming to the end of some training I was doing. I had a six-month-old daughter and a child about to start school.

Mae llawer o'r llawer o'r llawer o'r llawer o'r llawer o'r llawer o'r llawer o'r llawer o'r llawer o'r llawer o'r llawer o'r llawer o'r llawer o'r llawer o'r llawer o'r llawer o'r llawer o'r llawer o'r llawer o'r llawer o'r llawer o'r um that I could put forward. So it it my life feels in a very different position to to what it did uh six months ago and well not nine months ago I suppose. I did love politics, I love being involved and I want to give more to the island.

What what is it about politics that that so interests you and why does You know, you're you're still quite a young man, you've got a young family, as you've said. Why do you have such a drive to get back into politics? Do you know, I I I think there is under representation of of y young people generally, uh and I mean it was really interesting reading Chris Green's piece uh in the press, I think it was yesterday. Um

to to find young people that are able and willing to stand in the States, um, I think is quite rare. I feel fortunate that I'm in a position that I can do it and I I I think at at my age on the right side of forty. I've got my parents, I've got my in laws who are a approach the age where they're going to need extra care from the state. Uh and at the other end of the scale I've got my children, um, or my wife and I we've got our children.

uh and they need a future in Guernsey. But I'm also very conscious that I I I mean I'm speaking myself personally, but you could generalize it across the population. There is a large proportion of the the working population who are in a similar pop uh similar position. Um we can't be forgotten about. You know, we are the ones that are going to really be shouldering most of these costs.

We can't sell our parents down the stream and we've got to keep a future here for our pe uh for our children. So I I I I feel a kind of obligation to come forward and actually fight for that, um Yeah, that working middle guarantee.

which no other candidate can, but you must feel that there are some things that make you a distinctive candidate, skills, qualities, experience, whatever it is. I mean can can you share with voters why they should put their cross next to your name. Do you know what? I um I've never worked in finance in Guernsey. Um I think that alone makes me, you know, fairly unique um in in the working population at my age. Um

I've never worked in finance from the age of leaving school doing my apprenticeship, I'd always been on a lower wage than a lot of my friends who did go into finance. So I've always had to kind of a achieve more uh with less and and work hard for that. Uh and so I think that that background puts me in a very different position to most that

I I can uh I can do things differently to others. I think differently. Um I'm not just in the main industry and I think that brings a different perspective. Um getting more done with less. Uh that's I think what I bring.

Um you will have been following the States to a greater or lesser extent over the past nine months. Uh, what do you make of th the start this States has made, perhaps how it differs from the previous states, and what do you think they've got right and what do you think they've got wrong so far? Well I mean it's certainly from looking from the outside in, it it feels a more um

I hate the word, but more cohesive environment. Um, but then it is early days, so it's yeah, uh probably looking back at the last term, it probably looks similar around this stage. There are cracks starting to show, uh some of the the sort of personal disagreements, which is unfortunate. I think in terms of what they've got right, um

parking the super priorities phrase'cause I really didn't like that. But the the super priorities themselves I think are key things that G Guernsey needs to tackle. Yeah, we need long term finances, long term care and housing. to to to condense the government work plan slightly and and be more focused. I think that was a uh was a a bit of good win. But um I'm aware it was uh open to a bit of criticism. Um And personally, the the super priorities phrase sounded a bit in between us for me.

What about the what they've got wrong or or what you would like to see happening more quickly? And if you get the opportunity to be back in the state. something where where you would want to s push for more action, quicker action? I I I did find it quite frustrating to listen into the scrutiny hearing for the Committee for Housing um last well a couple of weeks ago. given when that was pitched to the States, this laser-like focus, you know, we'll make we'll make changes and and to listen in.

I mean it's it's nine months they've had in the committee, but over a year since that that committee was formed on paper, or the concept of forming it. Uh and to here it's really just finishing off some of E and I's old work streams. no real announcements came out. Um

But it seems to be accepted, you know, that there's only been one set of questions posed to the Committee for Housing and it wasn't actually to do with with housing per se, as open market inscriptions. So I I think more more pressure needs to be put onto the housing committee or committee for housing, uh, and that that issue generally to to have some accountability there.

You talked about this state's perhaps being more cohesive. Uh you were quite an outspoken states member. Do do you do you think that there is uh not enough challenge in the States? I mean that that's the risk, isn't it, of being too cohesive that you end up without adequate scrutiny, without adequate challenge. I mean is is that something that you want to bring to the state?

Yeah, I I I think a challenge is good. Um I would also I I'd probably challenge your point, you know, I was outspoken, but behind the scenes I I worked across the board um with various committees asking questions that didn't necessarily make it into the public domain'cause it but it's helping to shape um helping to shape policy that way. Um But I I think there does need to be a a certain amount of dissent, um, whether it's in a committee position or within the the states generally. I think

y you tease out these issues before before they actually become an issue. You tease them out of the discussion stage as opposed to it being a a delivery issue.

Tell me something that you did in the last states term, uh an accomplishment or or an action or a proposal that you were particularly pleased with or proud about, and tell me something that you look back on now and regret. If I'll start with the the the regret first, this is one. I think I don't know don't know if I've aired this before, but the the future harbours uh debate. Um That was very early.

It's fair fairly early in the stage and and and I can I can look back and see naivety there that I disagreed with the proposal and and I s I think I slightly biased, but I think I vote spoke very strongly against uh the the proposals and I think I got people behind that to vote against it.

I hadn't thought well what comes next. And I think that um although I wasn't happy with the proposal, I didn't bring forward an alternative solution. And that that's a probably a low point for me, I think. Um'cause actually we're still with the the GDA has held up because we don't have a future harbours policy position. Um so actually that that decision has held up a lot of um of moving forward for the island. So that's a regret

A positive one. I think it's um it's it it's a positive but it's got a negative with it. Um quite early in the term, assisting with the sale of um the old education offices on uh on the grain. i we were approached by a third party who were looking to buy a state's property. There was issues with planning, um and actually it was me who brought forward this policy S5 as an option to development that could, I don't want to say bypass, but it could

it creates an alternative route around the the traditional uh planning policies. Um so I I was able to facilitate that which then resulted in the sale of a state's property, which has then been refurbished and vested into and it's actually now it's an it's an active part of um the island's building stock, as opposed to just sitting there empty on the state's book.

So I was proud of that, but the the flip side it was a i it brought out this policy S five that people went a little bit mad for last um, um which sadly cost us a bit of time.

How different are you, do you think, as a candidate standing in this by election? Six years, nearly six years, after you last stood for election at the twenty twenty general election. When you look back now at the at the person you were then, the politician you were on day one in the in the previous state's term. How different or or indeed similar if you don't think you're different at all uh are you now compared to then?

I've got a lot more greys in my beard. That's probably a good starting point. Um Yeah, very different. Yeah, I I'm in in some respects very different because I I understand all the the procedures and I dare I say it the game of politics,'cause there there is an element of of game about it. Um I understand that much better.

Personally though, I I when I look back to the the twenty twenty campaign and look at my manifesto, I d I haven't changed a huge amount really since then. Yeah, I I'm not one to stand with big promises or a big single issue. It it's just a a a sensible approach across the board, not being afraid of making a decision and not being a f afraid to explain why I made a decision, but ultimately being willing to to make a decision. So I think

Yeah, some aspects have changed. Obviously you you have to do the job to then to appreciate how it works. I think that that would apply to any job. So quite different in that respect, I've got the experience. But as an approach pragmatic and realistic I think is still the same.

Mae'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n yw'n. resigned f or tried to resign from the authority and then changed your mind. And w when you look back, do you do you think that you could have done things Which would have made the authority a more harmonious committee? Uh do do you think that there was some unnecessary tension inside the the development and planning authority last term, which which uh undermined or inhibited it in any way.

Dale, yeah, looking back, um, I think it was around Christmas of twenty twenty one, I think they all kicked off. Yeah, I was under an immense amount of pressure. Um यावाव I wouldn't say my head was in the clearest place, but I I I I don't think that was helped at all by the actions of my colleagues at the time. And there was the this were yeah, the political gaming that was going on in the background um really was unpleasant. Uh and I'm I'm I you know, looking back

I'm happy that I called it out and I stood up against it. Uh in terms of policy work behind the scenes Whilst I raise challenges, I've always been civil to everyone. Um I mean I think I would have had a pretty good case for a constructive dismissal at some points, but that isn't an option when you're in the States.

Um, but I still remained civil to all staff, all my political colleagues and and and made the decisions in in committee that were right for the island. So It it was a difficult time but I I I think I I did the best I could in the circumstances.

Since leaving politics Um the Development and Planning Authority has served you with an enforcement notice over a a a personal private matter. Um tell me how does the recent vice president of the Development and Planning Authority find himself served with an enforcement notice and and what is the current status of that case? So the current status we're just awaiting our appeal, which um is due in the next couple of weeks. Um yeah.

I'm a busy guy. I've built a house. Most people can't get in the position of having an enforcement notice because they're not doing anything. That's yeah, the housing committee aren't gonna get served or anything, are they? Um I I am fairly fluent in planning policies and planning laws and our position has been consistent throughout. Um we've tried to deal with the planning authority uh over the last few years uh and we've reached a couple of points that we we simply disagree on. But

I I'm not the final arbiter of the planning law, neither is the planning authority. I must stress to add it is the appeals panel. Uh so we are exercising our right to to challenge the assertions of the planning authority. This is a matter or relates to a matter, over which right at the back end of the previous state's term, some of your colleagues tried to get the state's chief executive to launch his own inquiry about, didn't they?

uh one could say i dubiously close to the election in which you ended not n uh ended up not standing. But do you know Was there ever an inquiry or or ha have you been notified that there isn't going to be an inquiry? Because I I can't understand exactly what's happened with that. What you can you enlighten us? No, sadly I can't. I mean uh a lot of what I learnt uh about that inquiry uh came through the press, came through uh

information that was was printed in the public media. Um and actually as a as the person seemingly although I I should just add, it wasn't me that was at the centre of it, it was apparently the the handling of the civil service w was Uh or the planning staff was wrong. Um yeah, the the accusation from your colleagues was that the the the planning officers may have mishandled an application you may.

Uh, but they were asking the chief executive for an in an inquiry, but as far as you're concerned, there hasn't been one. You don't know uh of anything ongoing. No. Um I mean and I I I I I spoke to the the chief exec chief executive uh very early on. Uh and really just to say if there is going to be inquiry, I I hope I will have a voice because I have concerns as well, you know. Uh from my point of view I'd have said that I I wasn't given a um

always uh the the fairest um treatment. I think there was an extra level of um attention Yeah, in some ways rightly being uh being a member of the authority, but um I felt that we ended up being plastered all over the media in the ways that uh that someone else wouldn't. And

uh as far as we were aware, we'd we'd handled everything properly and we'd been signed off by uh by all the planning staff as doing it properly. So Uh I I had requested that I'd have a uh an involvement or at least have a say in any inquiry, but I haven't heard anything back since then.

Okay, um sticking with planning, there was a debate late in the term about or the the proposals to uh a as the proponents of the proposals put it, to simplify uh how changes are made to planning policies. Um now you were opposed to those measures. as you wa h had a right to be. Um but but why were you so opposed to measures which could have accelerated our planning process at a time when we need more housing, we need to encourage development?

And when those proposals come to fruition and and and go before the States, as we're told they will in the next few months, will you still be opposed to them? I mean th that's a very different situation. So uh at the time of putting forward the proposals that we make changes, um, my principal objection was that we don't

we don't necessarily need to be doing things quicker. Uh from my experience in in the IDP review I would have said quite clearly that most of the delay came not from the process that we had to follow set out in legislation, the delay came from the disagreement in which direction we should take. Uh so it's what I'm saying is the five members of the DPA didn't necessarily agree on what the right

change was. It it wasn't the process that was slowing us down. Um and I think most of the people who were then in favour of of changing planning laws It was on the the basis of rhetoric. It's oh yes ever you say it so many times it becomes true. It's so difficult to change planning rules. But when you ask people what do you need to change, th there's always a a bit of a blank face, oh just change the whole lot, you know.

Th there's no specifics about what we need to change. And and my view is that at a time when we've got so much legislation to draft, we've got so many changes we need to make elsewhere.

We shouldn't have been focusing on that. We can work within the system we've got. And I think if people got to learn how that system worked better, they would have understood that we could use the current system in a more efficient way and not need to make changes. So I'd rather see us focus on working with what we've got and getting an outcome that helps people get into a new house house, then

change around laws and bits and pieces. Because if if we change this planning law and make it more streamlined for changing, does that affect anyone on the street? Are they gonna are they gonna see a change? No, they're not. I'd rather focus on some sort of delivery.

Let's talk about tax and spending. Um you mentioned it's single issues. uh uh earlier in this interview. And this election could become something of a single issue election if if voters want to turn it into that in relation to GST plus and and some of the candidates who are opposed to GST plus will probably be trying to do that themselves. Now you have a mixed record on voting on GST plus. You you voted against it initially in the previous state.

Uh, the last vote you cast was in favour of G S T plus. Um, can you just tell us why you changed your mind and and whether if you're in the n if you're uh elected to this state, whether you are going to continue to vote in favour of G S T plus or have you changed your mind again? Oh in terms of changing mind should probably add a that the the first time it was considered in the last days was a green paper where

Wasn't so much a vote, was it, on a green paper? But I certainly spoke in favour of uh revenue raising. Um I I think. I think like an I don't support any increases in taxation. Um but I am realistic that the island is facing some serious financial issues and uh no one really addresses well what happens when we do run out of money. Yeah. You you can't afford to be poor. Uh and it'd be regrettable if this if this uh election just boils down to G S T yes or no. Um

So I I'm looking forward to seeing policy and resources um was it it's Q two. So we're only a couple of months away from seeing the the proposal they put forward. I'm sure it will include a goods and services tax. Um and I'll just have to read the policy letter. Uh and and make a long term decision that I think is in the best interest of the island.

But but you are saying now that you are prepared to support a goods and services tax if if it's associated with the uh the mitigating measures for less well off households are are you? If there's mitigations in place then the the the principle of um spreading our taxation base is is something I support. I am still open to any other suggestion that's put forward. Uh I'm not bringing forward an alternative suggestion.

But uh yeah, in the last election I've heard these promises about twenty million from cannabis industry. We can hear a wind farm that's gonna bring in loads of money, all kinds of power generation, all these solutions or we're gonna s make these huge savings. If those proposals are put forward on the day, I will ha give them a a serious consideration. But they never come forward. And you don't expect them to be put forward in in July, do you?

They call me a cynic, but they haven't come for you know, we had a debate I say we are wasn't a part of it. There's a debate only recently which was to take GST off the table, but no No solution. Uh so there are a lot of people who have already pledged their promise on what can be done as an alternative. But none of them have brought forward the delivery on that. So I'm I'm open to their suggestions. But for me the bottom line is that we're not going to be able to

Irrespective of where money has been wasted or who's wasted it, we can play the glip blame game all we want, but while we're playing that blame game, we're running out of money. And when we run out of money, Guernsey's I mean, I don't know what'll happen, but Yeah, I mean you're not going to be able to do Pretty sick.

Excuse me, y you do want to raise additional revenue, don't you? I mean y you voted in favour of a temporary increase in income tax in the last six because you were one of a group of states members who in the end took the view that uh in a sense the states had run out of road, it was necessary to raise more revenue, and you were prepared to back. almost w any kind of reasonable option that was on the table.

um to raise revenue. But it is you are now fighting an election. We are to some extent in a cost of living crisis. It makes it harder for you, doesn't it, to to be elected to the state. If you're out there arguing in favour of tax rises against some candidates who, whether you agree or not with them, are saying there is no need to raise additional taxes. I mean that isn't that going to make it less likely that you are elected?

Oh yeah no doubt that saying that I uh I think Guernsey is in a tricky financial position um will lose me votes. Well saying that's okay, but saying that. Yeah, i it it is certainly the more difficult position uh or difficult side of the fence to sit on. I could sit here and say, Oh yes, no matter I'll vote against any tax increases. I'll do that.

Long term that doesn't do anyone any good. Um so I I'm aware that I'm in uh I'm in a a more difficult position, but I'd rather be frank uh with the elector uh electorate. Um And and if I get a position in the States I can I can walk in with a clean conscience, not knowing that I've I'm not saying anyone's deceiving anyone, but

I I've I've not kind of led people down a path of something that they they want to be achievable when realistically it's not. And you know, wind farms they might come off in the distance. Um But to to rely on that as our solution for our financial position I think is very risky.

What about savings? I mean, you you've you've served a full term in the States. You sat on more than one States committee. What scope is there, do you think, in the States? To cut spending in ways which don't impact frontline services. And and how much of a contribution could that make to dealing with the shortfall in public finances, do you think?

I I think there is there is clearly money that could be saved. I don't think it's going to touch the sides, um, in terms of our long term position. Certainly on on the DPA if just for an example off the top of my head, the local planning brief for the harbour action areas, that costs in the region of three three hundred, three hundred and forty thousand pounds.

I voted against that. It was my view that actually we could work with the existing policies. It might not be ideal and yes, the the local planning brief I think is a good document, it's brought out some good information, but

Could we have done without it? Yes, I think we could have. Would the island be any different if we didn't have it? No, I don't think it would. Um, but that's only a a one off payment of three hundred thousand. On home affairs, um We sat down with all the service leads and uh looked at ways where could savings be made, where are our biggest costs? I was keen to explore and again this will probably lose me some votes, but I was keen to explore looking at our alcohol, our opening hours.

Yeah. If we if we look at the biggest cost, say for police overtime is the nighttime economy, uh courts. Yeah, so much of our our court system is tied up in alcohol related crime. So if we brought forward the the the closing time for a pub or a club by one hour, the knock on effect that would have on a reduced amount of overtime requirement for the police

But there there wasn't a huge amount of traction to look at things like that. You know, it's it's a small change. It would yeah, it would have an impact on the nighttime economy, but a small change that might see a saving, could we explore it? But the it it was seen as unpal unpalatable. Um so I think a a a lot of the savings that could be made I think would be unpalatable for for the general public.

If you're elected there isn't a a ready committee seat, is there, because the the committees have already been formed and there is a saying about the devil finding work for idle hands. W what are you actually going to do? I mean if you if you are elected you're you're going to have quite a lot of time on your hands in a political sense. Where are you going to put that time to start with?

I mean first first and foremost it would be pushing to get a committee position. Um I I have no doubts that there are people who want to have a little bit of a change around. Um

I I personally like the idea of midterm elections as a way of, you know, giving an opportunity to, you know, re secure a mandate or um or just have a bit of a change around, give people the options. So I I would certainly approach and I'd I'd be I'd be happy to take a seat on any committee. Um So we've got experience on home affairs and planning, but

I I would like to have some involvement in looking at older adult care and long term care. So I'd be interested in HSC or ESS. But I am aware there are no there are no positions available. It's not guaranteed. I would like to try and bring some things before the States uh by raquette.

So with direct options looking at uh some sort of housing solutions, whether it's through downsizing initiatives, subdivision, uh putting some form of grant in place to allow people to free up some underutilised housing stock. Uh I think that's something that I could I could draft the direction myself and and put together the policy.

If I'm not on a committee, you know, I've got that extra time. That's something I think I could work on quite clearly. I can't guarantee I'd get another six colleagues to sign it, but that is where I would would put my time in in actually bringing a a a concrete proposal to the state. Let's, if we can, quite quickly run through your position on some of the other issues which may be on voters' minds. Our electoral system. I mean, you have only ever stood under an island-wide system.

Um are you a a f fan of island wide voting or if there is a proposal for another referendum before the next election, would you be inclined to to vote in favour of that? I mean as a starting point, I wouldn't say I'm a fan of island wide voting. I I'm I like politics but I wouldn't put my I wouldn't say I'm nerdy on that on on that kind of thing. But I I probably wouldn't support

uh looking at changes at this stage. I think we've got far more pressing issues. Uh yes, you know, the the the electoral system underpins the way government is formed and it's a big issue, but with the resources we've got and the challenges we face, I I I feel it could be a bit of a distraction. Um if it came forward I'd I'm absolutely open to considering it, but it's not something that's high on my agenda. I certainly wouldn't be putting forward a raquette to to to make any changes.

Uh population policy. Which in the last states got through a a change to the island's population policy. Uh I I mean essentially the underlying assumption is that there would be faster population growth than there had been in the few years before that. D do you think, given what's happened now, that that was an a mistake and that in fact uh the state is going to need to um make its population policy rather less liberal than that Committee for Home Affairs did.

Yeah, I mean I so I was on the committee uh that brought forward those proposals, but I think when actually came to the States I was one of only nine deputies to vote against it. Um and I think of those that voted in favour, I think there's only Nine or maybe ten that remain in the States? the strategic strategic population objective of plus three hundred.

I I i I don't think it's working. Um and i it does need a review, which I think is underway. That's part of the I think that's in the first term uh first half of this term. Um But I think looking more widely, we're gonna listen to what the public want, yeah. The public want more shops, restaurants, bars, cleaners. All these different kind of roles that make island life, yeah, f for the people who who use those services more enjoyable, more acceptable.

But that those those niceties come at a cost that it all adds pressure onto our onto our housing system. Um And they're out of kilter. You know, the population is growing and it was being allowed to grow without uh the subsequent delivery of housing or some sort of housing solution to to to ease the uh ease the pressure there. So

It needs to be it needs to be changed fairly quickly. Um but it is a very difficult balancing act and that and that's something I really did uh did get to grips with on home affairs. You have You have businesses that are crying out they've got demand for for business and they can't satisfy that demand because they can't get the start. Um but on the flip side you then have other businesses that can't get the staff because they can't get the housing or you know, looking at um healthcare.

There there is an absolute demand for additional healthcare staff, but the cost of living of being here is too high because there's so much competition on housing. So Who who do we want to let in? Who do we want to courage in? And and I think ultimately it needs to be uh it needs to be better balanced. It seems more likely than not that assisted dying will be uh in front of the states before the end of this term. Uh are you

In favour of an assisted dying regime? I mean w th there may be work to do with the UK, but just parking that to one side, in principle. Um, i if the legislation is viable working with the UK, would you be in favour of an assisted dying regime or opposed? I think at this stage the best thing I could say is that I I don't have any objections uh to it being looked at.

It it's a similar position I take on a lot of issues where I don't think Guernsey needs to be this lighthouse approach, you know, leading the way and drafting this bespoke legislation to to to Yeah, to put forward a solution to these issues. Similar with with cannabis, I think now I think my position there had been vindicated that it is more complicated than just

allowing shops to sell it, there's there's there's much more to think about. And and I don't think Guernsey's got the resources to put in place some kind of bespoke scheme. I think we're better off sor sorry to say but I think we're better off following uh another jurisdiction on those and I I take a similar approach, but I don't have any strong objections um or strong feelings either way. Where do you think the state's sixth form centre should be located?

In the long run. I mean I know it's at Lamar Dicartre at the moment, but this States is going to have to decide where to base it in the long run. Where do you think that should be? We built one, didn't we? Where do we build? I if a decision like that is coming forward, I would like to go and have a look around Lamar Descartes to see exactly what condition it is in. Um my memory of Lamar Descartes is is based on attending that as a school.

I was probably talking nearly twenty years ago, more than twenty years ago. Um It's clearly changed since then. So I'd want to see before we commit to moving the sixth form, uh, I'd want to see exactly what condition they're in to know if it is worth all the upheaval of moving them again. Uh we've got ourselves on a pickle. Um I d I I don't have the answer need to look at the state's uh state's estate and and see what was available to use and what we could could make the most use of.

Certainly when it comes to moving moving states entities around in our estate, I I I pushed quite hardly last um uh to make better use of a burnt lane site, which was it was a criminal. It was just sitting there for a huge amount of time as a a relatively new office building whilst um whilst we had a lot of the, you know, community nursing teams were in these ropey old buildings like Lucas House where the the heating didn't work, the windows were drafty, so

I w we could make a better use of all of our our buildings, education and um and for more office accommodation and yeah, I I'd certainly be open to considering anything there. Uh finally, i if you had let's say three areas of policy or um three objectives, three areas of work that you could uh hit the ground running with and get your teeth into straight away as soon as you're elected.

In a way, I'm talking about y three priorities for you. What would they be if you're back in the States at the end of April? So I I say population housing I think are yeah, they're interlinked. until we turn off or turn down the dial or turn down the tap on housing, if we keep flooding the market with more people, um

that demand for housing we're we're not gonna meet it. We can't change anything overnight that suddenly allows us to build three hundred houses a year or whatever our target we might set. Um, so I think addressing the population issue is is the first thing that should be done uh to ease housing uh and housing pressures. So I'd like to see that done as as looking at exactly what we want from Guernsey, you know.

what economy d makeup do we want? Is it is it gonna be lots of services? Are we gonna have all these lovely nice like restaurants and bits and pieces and things to eat in the uh places to eat that we can then attract visitors? Um

But accept that that comes with a cost. So that would be my first thing to tackle exactly what we want our population makeup to to be. Um it's very much, I think at the moment, it's very much demand-led. There's demand for this role, therefore uh it it deserves a permit. Uh and then on housing, I I think, you know, the was it twenty twenty four housing indicator really picked up on under occupation of existing housing.

So given the rising cost of materials, every square meter you build is going up in price. So if you've got a square meter of housing that was built forty years ago, it's not going up in it's not affected by materials prices in quite the same way. So I think that's an area we could Um yeah, working with existing planning policies for subdivision, the creation of houses of multiple occupancy would be a good way of addressing these apparently underutilised um dower units.

So that would be a second place that I would sort of see a lot of focus on, you know, working with the existing housing stock, uh, whether that's through grants to assist people to downsize or subdivide their homes. Um As for a third one, I I I I decline to pick a third one. Because I think those two are so key and actually they would then unlock a lot of the problems um that we're facing elsewhere. Okay. Andy Taylor, we wish you good luck in the remaining weeks election campaign