Opinion divided on funding of Fort Regent revamp

Politicians disagree over how best to fund Fort Regent plans

Opinion is divided on how the £110m redevelopment of Fort Regent should be funded.

An initial £43m is set to be borrowed by the States of Jersey as part of the proposed budget for 2026-2029 to fund the first phase of upgrading the leisure centre.

This will include repairs to the roof and the removal of asbestos.

Some people have told the BBC they think the work should be funded through government borrowing, while others have said they would accept a tax increase to raise the money needed.

Attempts to redevelop Fort Regent are broadly supported by islanders but questions have been raised about how best to pay for the project.

Jersey Development Company's plans for the site include a 2,500-seat theatre, a 12-lane bowling alley, a six-screen cinema, play areas, climbing and bouldering, as well as places to eat and drink.

The government wants to borrow £43m to start the project, saying the remaining £67m would be detailed in future budgets.

Deputy Philip Bailhache has criticised the scale of the borrowing.

He said: "If one borrows £110m, it's not today's people who are going to pay, it's the people of tomorrow. Our children and grandchildren and great-grandchildren will pay the cost".

He has submitted a budget amendment which could increase GST by 1% for a period of five years, with the money ring-fenced for the renovation of the facility.

In his amendment, Bailhache wrote: "The plain truth is that without raising taxes Jersey cannot afford to spend £110m on the restoration of Fort Regent".

Deputy Philip Bailhache wants a re-think on how Fort Regent's redevelopment is funded

But Deputy Sam Mezec said a tax rise would be unfair on those struggling with daily costs.

He said: "Jersey's got plenty of problems with its tax and spend model and there are changes to our tax system that we need to be looking at, but those ought to be focused on asking those with the broader shoulders to carry more of the burden and not just piling it on lower middle earners which seems to be too easy an opportunity too often."

What do islanders think?

The BBC spoke to islanders in St Helier to ask how they thought the project should be funded.

Ian Barette said the project was a white elephant and he preferred privatisation over government funding.

"I'm not in favour of the government spending any more on capital projects," he said. "So let's put this one into the private sector and let's get the private sector to invest on a long lease and get them to finance it."

Ian Barette described the project as a white elephant

Another passer-by said she was not opposed to the idea of paying for things like Fort Regent through tax.

“I'd rather invest in communities and society, so for a lot of things I would be prepared to pay if it benefits the community" she said.

But another responded: "All the tax we pay, all the contributions we pay, I think it should definitely be funded by the government".

Pensioner Clive said it was a difficult decision: "I don't have enough in my pension to pay tax, but something has to be done with the fort, we need the fort."

Nick Halsall questioned whether either option was a good one, considering the current cost of living.

"Both come with drawbacks...do we want people to be increasing their taxes when we've got a cost of living crisis?

Ultimately it will be passed back to tax payers in some way...we're going to be paying for it either way," he said.

A decision on the spending plans, and amendments to them, will form part of the budget debate, beginning on 9 December.