Gavin St Pier back on Guernsey's top political committee as vice-president
Deputy St Pier formerly served as P&R president between 2016 and 2020 and will now sit alongside the new committee president Lindsay de Sausmarez.
In a statement, Deputy St Pier said: "I'm very grateful to have gained the early support of my colleagues.
"In this role, I look forward to serving the committee and supporting the president.
"The mandate of the Policy & Resources Committee is vast, and I know from experience how challenging it is given its role in providing leadership and coordination to the work of government.
"Many of the challenges faced by our island are, at this point, well-documented and it's essential that this Assembly makes significant progress in addressing them this political term."
Speaking about Deputy St Pier's appointment, Deputy de Sausmarez said: "I'm delighted that Gavin has been elected Vice-President.
"We have a very experienced committee, with each member bringing many strengths to the table, but Gavin's experience as a previous P&R president will be invaluable.
"The whole committee is looking forward to getting on with our work and I was pleased we wasted no time by meeting on Thursday, with our next meeting scheduled for Tuesday."
Guernsey's deputies decided on who will serve as presidents of the 13 political committees earlier this week.
Deputy St Pier received the seventh highest number of votes in Guernsey's recent election.
Want the inside track on the key issues that will shape Guernsey's Election this June? Listen to Guernsey Votes, an ITV Channel podcast packed with expert guests, local insight and analysis you can trust...
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
27 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Trump defense official led thinktank that spread lies about Tren de Aragua
A senior official appointed to the defense department led a thinktank that promoted fake news about the Venezuelan Tren de Aragua (TdA) gang, according to InSight Crime, a non-profit analyzing organized crime. Joseph Humire was appointed this summer to be the head of policy focusing on the western hemisphere within the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy. He was previously the executive director of a conservative thinktank focused on global security. Humire's appointment comes as the Trump administration is ramping up its aggressive strategy against organized crime in Latin America and the Venezuelan government, which it accuses of working with TdA. Under Humire's leadership, the Center for a Secure Free Society thinktank published the 'TdA Activity Monitor', tracking alleged crimes by accused members of the gang throughout the US. According to InSight Crime, at least five event entries in the tracker appeared to have been 'completely fabricated'. InSight Crime found zero basis for the false entries, with local police departments telling researchers the purported crimes were nonexistent. InSight Crime analyzed more than 90 of the entries, finding many relied on unverified sources. 'Some incidents are included multiple times, inflating the gang's perceived presence and activities,' researchers found. The monitor is no longer available online following InSight Crime's reporting. 'The TdA Monitor is an aggregator, not a primary source of information about Tren de Aragua's activities,' a statement from the Center for a Secure Free Society said, adding that it 'reflects the media reporting'. The Department of Defense declined to comment. Humire has spoken publicly about alleged Tren de Aragua crimes on Fox News and other conservative outlets. He has also promoted the idea that the Venezuelan government is directing the gang's crimes around the world, despite doubts from the intelligence community. Humire authored a report in December 2024 for the conservative Heritage Foundation, writing that Tren de Aragua 'is a perfect proxy and tool of asymmetric warfare' by the Venezuelan government to 'destabilize democratic countries'. In March, Humire made similar claims before Congress. But US intelligence agencies have cast doubt on the theory that Venezuelan president Nicolás Maduro directs the gang, according to an intelligence memo whose release angered top officials, who then reportedly ordered a rewrite. TdA has been a major focus of the Trump administration, which designated the group as a terrorist organization earlier this year. Members of the gang have been implicated in violent crimes across the hemisphere but organized crime experts say descriptions of the group have exaggerated its scale, reach and structure. Despite skepticism from US intelligence agencies, Trump officials have repeatedly said the Venezuelan government, under Maduro, is working with Tren de Aragua to 'infiltrate' the US. The accusation was used to justify the Alien Enemies Act invocation in March, leading to the expulsion of hundreds of Venezuelans accused of being gang members to a Salvadorian prison. Humire's appointment to the defense department comes as the administration turns up the pressure on Venezuela. Last week, Trump directed the Pentagon to use military force on some drug cartels – a significant escalation in the 'war on drugs' – and the justice department doubled a bounty on Maduro to $50m. The justice department has accused top Venezuelan officials of running the 'Cartel of the Suns' to traffic drugs to the US. The state department recently declared the Cartel of the Suns to be a terrorist organization, but experts also say this claim may be overstated. Rather than a hierarchical organization trafficking drugs under Maduro's orders, InSight Crime explains it is more-so a 'network of networks' within the military. The Trump administration has increased the US's involvement in Latin America through threats of tariffs and military intervention, alleged backroom deals and prisoner swaps. Rightwing leaders have cozied up to Trump, including El Salvador's authoritarian Nayib Bukele. An analysis by the Guardian and the Quincy Institute shows Latin American leaders have spent millions of dollars hiring lobbyists to influence the White House.
The Guardian
a day ago
- The Guardian
Why have we let side-hustle private landlords seize control of our housing – and our politics?
In the 1970s, private landlordism in the UK was a fringe part of the market – and a dying one. With council housing plentiful and house prices within the range of those with decent, working-class jobs, we did not need private landlords. In the mid-1970s, the Conservative Policy Council had written that their decline was 'quite irreversible' and that within a generation they would be 'as extinct as the dinosaur'. This prediction has proved to be among the worst ever made about the UK housing market. Since then, our reliance on private landlords has exploded. They are now the first port of call for everyone in the market who cannot afford to buy: students, graduates, families, pensioners, refugees and more. There are 2.8 million private landlords in Britain – almost twice as many people as work for NHS England and almost four times the UK's entire workforce of teachers. How did we go from one extreme to the other? We chose it. In 1979 Margaret Thatcher arrived with a new vision for the country. As she defunded and sold off council housing, her plan was that the private market would take its place. A big-bang deregulation of private renting in 1988 swept away rent control and introduced short tenancies where the tenant could be evicted at the end without the landlord needing a reason. Her expectation was big, strategic investment from the corporate world – there was demand for rented housing, so there would be supply. Competition would drive up standards. The state just needed to get out of the way and let it happen. But instead, something else happened. In 1996, 'buy-to-let' mortgages were launched, targeting everyman investors with a bit of spare cash. Previously, the only way to build up a property portfolio was to take out a commercial mortgage. This new product was available to anyone with a deposit, the repayments were interest only and the mortgages could be written off against tax. This came at a time when a global collapse of interest rates left lots of people without a viable pension plan, which meant it was suddenly the most obvious, and perhaps only, route to financial security. By 2001, the number of private landlords had exploded, but a survey revealed that only 9% of landlords saw the profession as their full-time occupation. It was the dawn of what the lawyer and writer Nick Bano terms 'the small-time side hustler'. Today, we live in the wreckage of this policy failure. The thirst for investment assets has driven house prices far beyond the reach of ordinary first-time buyers, especially in big cities. Meanwhile, rents have soared – as landlords make use of Thatcher's 'no-fault evictions' to create an effective ratchet system, where they can quickly and easily evict tenants in favour of whoever can pay the most. We have some of the lowest protections for renters in the developed world, and are, according to the London School of Economics 'at one end of the international spectrum on rent control' – ie the end that gives most freedom to landlords. The consequences of this are plain – people on lower incomes can no longer afford to live in the cities where they need to work; those who fall into homelessness are stuck in temporary accommodation indefinitely; and pensioners and families who cannot buy or find council housing are left without security. It is a great failure of policymakers of all parties over the past 35 years that they have simply sat back and let this happen. All of which brings me to Rushanara Ali. The homelessness minister resigned last Thursday after the revelation that she had kicked tenants out of her private rental property, before putting it back on the market at a significantly increased rent. This was, in effect, a classic example of the 'ratchet effect' of rent increases, and a major driver of the homelessness she is supposed to prevent. Ali resigned as minister, but retains the Labour whip and returns to the backbenches, where she will join the Labour MP for Ilford South, Jas Athwal, who was exposed last year for renting out properties with black mould and ant infestations. They are among 83 landlord MPs in the House of Commons – a list that includes the foreign secretary, David Lammy, and the chancellor, Rachel Reeves. Labour has more landlords among its ranks than any other party, with 43. And this is before we get into the House of Lords – a chamber previously made up exclusively of landowners. There are at least 134 landlord peers in the upper house, although the true number is likely to be much higher – with many holding properties via a trust. All of this poses a big problem in policy terms. Listen to the landlord lobby and you would imagine that policy has turned decisively in favour of tenants in recent years, with landlords' representative arm warning that forthcoming changes to tax, law and environmental requirements will drive 24% of its members to sell up. The legal change they are worried about is the Renters' Rights Act, which will abolish no-fault evictions and impose tougher standards for fixing serious disrepair – in other words, attempting to tackle the behaviour of Ali and Athwal respectively. But these laws have been desperately slow coming through. They are a package of changes first announced in April 2019, under the government of Theresa May. That they took six and a half years and a change of government to finally become law owed something to the Conservative party's fear of its backbenches, as Tory MPs pushed back hard against the removal of no-fault evictions. We will now get the act, with royal assent likely in September and implementation from 2026. It makes steps towards a more stable, European-style rental market. That it is coming at all shows progress, and perhaps the start of a break in the dominance of the landlord influence in parliament. That it has taken so long shows the control that force has had over our politics until now. Labour does also appear likely to impose a requirement to bring private rented homes up to a moderate standard of environmental efficiency by 2030 – though this faces continual challenge and was previously scrapped by the Conservatives after landlord pressure. Rental reforms, though, remain off limits, despite support from figures outside parliament such as Sadiq Khan and Andy Burnham. Labour called even limited rent control 'cowardice' before the election. Over the past 35 years, we have dug ourselves into a pit. The dominance of the rental market by small-time side hustlers makes any reform perilous: if these landlords sell up, those who need somewhere to rent will be left in the lurch. If we want a functional housing market again, we need a long-term housing strategy that ends our reliance on side hustlers to meet complex housing needs and encourages an economy that treats homes as places to live, not an investment asset to replace a pension. But we are unlikely to ever see such a strategy when it is the side hustlers themselves entrusted to write it. Peter Apps is a contributing editor at Inside Housing and the author of Show Me the Bodies: How We Let Grenfell Happen
Daily Mail
2 days ago
- Daily Mail
Newsom warns Trump he's 'playing with fire' on redistricting
By Gavin Newsom sent a stern warning to President Donald Trump that he is 'playing with fire' over efforts to rewrite the congressional map in Texas. In a letter penned to the president on Monday, Newsom vowed to not 'stand idly by' as Texas along with other GOP-dominated states attempt to add more Republican seats to protect and enlarge their majority in the U.S. House. Democrats only need to flip three House seats to regain control of the chamber in the upcoming 2026 midterms . 'If you will not stand down, I will be forced to lead an effort to redraw the maps in California to offset the rigging of maps in red states,' Newsom wrote. The White House did not immediately respond to the Daily Mail's request for comment. Newsom goes on to address Trump directly by claiming the president is 'playing with fire' that will lead to the 'destabilization of our democracy.' 'You are playing with fire, risking the destabilization of our democracy, while knowing that California can neutralize any gains you hope to make,' Newsom added. 'This attempt to rig congressional maps to hold onto power before a single vote is cast in the 2026 election is an affront to American democracy.' Newsom, who many believe has aspirations for a presidential run in 2028, made similar comments last week after claiming he will 'fight fire with fire' against Gov. Greg Abbott's redistricting plan. 'The proposal that we're advancing with the legislature has a trigger only if they move forward, to dismantling the protocols that are well-established,' Newsom told the press. 'Would the state of California move forward in kind? Fighting? Yes, fire with fire.' Newsom's new letter to Trump is the most outspoken example of Democrats planning to counter the GOP redistricting in Texas. Democratic state lawmakers fled from Texas to deny the GOP the quorum necessary to vote on legislation in the state capital.
