That is right, Sir. It is with regret that I announce that over the weekend I received the resignation of Senator Cohen as Minister for Planning and Environment. While I would have preferred the Senator to remain as Minister for Planning and Environment as well as my Assistant Minister, I do now appreciate that, given the magnitude of the task in international matters, it is not possible to do both roles effectively. I am also convinced that he is by far the best person to develop the profile of external affairs. I have therefore reluctantly accepted his resignation as Minister for Planning and Environment and I am grateful for his ongoing commitment in the field of external relations. I am also grateful for his determination to see the Island Plan and the North of Town Masterplan through the States before announcing his resignation. In this, as well as in areas such as Eco-Active and Percentage for Art, he has left a significant planning legacy for the Island. I look forward to working with him even more effectively in the area of international relations and thank him for all his efforts in Planning and Environment over the past 6 years.

The Bailiff:

Very well. Then, Chief Minister, you will be bringing forward a replacement either at this meeting or, more probably, at the next one?

Senator T.A. Le Sueur:

Quite possibly later in this session since this meeting goes on over 2 weeks.

Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire of St. Helier:

May I ask if the former Minister for Planning and Environment, Senator Cohen, is going to make a statement or not because I would like to ask a question about who is going to …

The Bailiff:

Deputy, I was about the say, it is in the Order Paper that he is going to make a personal statement and, if Members agree, it would seem convenient that he make the statement at this stage but, of course, no questions are capable of a personal statement.

Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire:

In that case, without reading the statement - I have not done so - I would like to ask a point of clarification from the Chief Minister in regards to his announcement just now and that is who will be taking over the department in the interim period?

The Bailiff:

The Minister continues in office until his successor is appointed. Very well. Then, I invite Senator Cohen to make his personal statement.

PERSONAL STATEMENT

2. Senator F.E. Cohen - statement regarding his resignation as Minister for Planning and Environment

2.1 Senator F.E. Cohen (The Minister for Planning and Environment):

As Members will know, at the end of last year, the Chief Minister asked me to assist him and the Deputy Chief Minister in developing the Island’s external relations. Consequently, I was appointed as Assistant Chief Minister with responsibility for External Relations. The objective is to build our relations with other jurisdictions and to further Jersey’s international standing and this appointment was in response to the request of the Ministry of Justice that Jersey represents itself in discussions with U.K. (United Kingdom) ministerial departments and with overseas jurisdictions. The former Chief Minister, Senator Walker, had already done excellent work in this area and the current Chief Minister and Deputy Chief Minister have continued this work but it was clear that a dedicated post needed to be established. The objectives set out by the Chief Minister are being achieved through direct discussion and are bearing considerable fruit in a wide range of areas. Specifically, we have obtained ministerial support from the U.K. in relation to the future of our Zero/Ten tax regime through agreeing to remove deemed distribution. Visits to China, India and Israel have delivered considerable success in relation to jurisdictional reputation, culture, education, tourism and business. We have even made representations to ensure that the Jersey BBC News Service budget was retained. However, while we are achieving significant results, the task of assisting the Chief Minister and Deputy Chief Minister requires dedicated commitment and fulltime application. To give but one example, over the last 2 weeks, as a result of the extended Island Plan debate, I have been forced to cancel meetings with over 20 leading parliamentarians and officials at Westminster and Brussels. Consequently, last Friday, I signed 17 letters of apology, as I had been forced to reschedule these meetings. These included letters to the U.K. Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister. I am acutely aware that my obligation is to serve the Island in the best manner possible and as this external relations work has grown, it is clear that if I am to carry out my role in this area in the best interests of the Island, I can no longer continue as Minister for Planning and Environment. I have therefore given notice to the Chief Minister of my resignation as Minister for Planning and Environment. There is much important and urgent work needed to be undertaken in the field of external relations. The Chief Minister and Deputy Chief Minister have asked that I assist in ensuring that the Tax Information Exchange Agreement with India is signed in short order. I will also be signing a Tax Information Exchange Agreement with Czechoslovakia very soon. They also wish that I continue to work with them on securing our Tax Regime Agreement while also monitoring the emerging territorial tax issues relating to Gibraltar and elsewhere. There is also immediate work needed to assist ministerial colleagues in the Health, Education and Economic Development Departments. In addition, promoting the Island’s reputation internationally at a cultural level is of increasing importance and I am currently engaged in an important project to facilitate this. It is with great regret that I leave the team at Planning and Environment. I believe that together over the last 6 years, we have delivered substantial improvements to the way the Island’s built environment is managed. Over recent weeks, States Members participated in successfully delivering the Island Plan and the North of Town Masterplan, setting out a vision for the Island and delivering enduring sustainability while providing 900 affordable homes. Architecture has improved beyond recognition with the introduction and assistance of the Jersey Commission for Architecture and we are now seeing the emergence of great works of art on all large projects through the Percentage for Art programme. The Eco-Active environmental campaign has delivered huge benefits in the promotion of environmental awareness and the energy insulation grant scheme, thanks to the foresight and support of States Members, has delivered practical environmental help to 1,000 Island families. It is with a heavy heart that I have made this decision but I believe it is a necessary one if I am to serve Jersey effectively in an international relations role. I wish to thank the Chief Minister, Ministers, and every States Member for their support in my role as Minister for Planning and Environment over the last 6 years. Special thanks go to my longstanding Assistant Minister, Deputy Duhamel, and his predecessor, the Deputy of Trinity, together with the Deputy of St. Peter. I particularly extend my gratitude to members of the Planning Applications Panel led with great competence by the Constable of Trinity. I am indebted to my Chief Officer and the exceptionally competent team at Planning and Environment. The delivery of States objectives would not have been possible without the commitment and dedication of the whole Planning and Environment team. I wish to record my very special thanks to 2 very special people who have assisted me enormously at the Planning and Environment Department over the last 6 years. They are the Director of Development Control, Peter Le Gresley, and my Personal Assistant, Pauline Griffiths. [Approbation] Finally, and most sincerely, I would like to thank my wife for her support. As Members will know, I have been at the firing line for all Planning decisions and recently this has brought its problems, all of which she has borne with grace and fortitude. Thank you all. [Approbation]

PETITIONS

3. Deputy G.P. Southern of St. Helier - petition regarding the restoration of free school milk in Jersey schools

3.1 Deputy G.P. Southern of St. Helier:

Do I get to make a little speech or not?

The Bailiff:

Not a speech, but you can certainly make a few remarks.

Deputy G.P. Southern:

A few remarks. Just weighing this 7,268 signatures and beneath it the far prettier, although no less relevant, petition from over 2,000 children, the people who really matter in this debate, I formally present the petition.

The Bailiff:

Very well. Now, under Standing Orders, Schedule 1, the States must refer the petition and the proposition to the relevant Minister, who is the Minister for Economic Development so the matter must be referred to the Minister.

[9:45]

Then you, in fact, have a period to prepare a report. Minister, when will you be in a position to prepare a report? This proposition has, in fact, been lodged for some time, of course.

Senator A.J.H. Maclean:

Yes, I hope to have a report to the Assembly for the next sitting which in reality is next week.

The Bailiff:

Next week?

Senator A.J.H. Maclean:

Yes, although it is a continuation I think technically speaking, but next week for certain.

The Bailiff:

So next week, thank you.

Deputy G.P. Southern:

I find that somewhat unsatisfactory since the proposition attached to this petition has been lodged for some time and has been down for debate on this session for some time and I wonder why the Minister has not come with his comments to the House?

Senator A.J.H. Maclean:

I would just comment that I have not seen the wording of the petition so until we have seen that we cannot complete. But the proposition, as the Deputy has quite rightly pointed out, that he has brought, is before the States and will be debated and comments are included with regard to that.

The Bailiff:

Yes, it is just that at the moment, the matter has been listed for debate if we get there this week but, on the other hand, Standing Orders are quite clear that if you present a petition, it has to be referred to the Minister for comment and the Minister clearly cannot comment on the petition until it is lodged. So I would suggest to Members that probably this one has got to be stood over until next week by which time the Minister must present his report.

Deputy G.P. Southern:

You just said “next week”. Next week is a continuation sitting.

The Bailiff:

Yes, continuation of this one.

Deputy G.P. Southern:

In the sense that in the continuation …

The Bailiff:

In this sitting but in the continuation part of it rather than this week.

QUESTIONS

4. Written Questions

4.1. The Minister for Planning and Environment tabled an answer to a question asked by the Deputy of St. John regarding a response to P.21/2010 (‘Importation of fireworks in 2007 for a charity event: investigation’).

Question

Could the Minister give details of the reasons for the delay in responding to P.21/2011 ‘Importation of fireworks in 2007 for a charity event: investigation’, which the Assembly was advised would be circulated by June 2011, and advise when the Assembly can expect the response to be released?

Answer

The report is a detailed document comprising inputs from the Ministers for Home Affairs, Planning and Environment, and Economic Development.

These inputs are supported by a significant number of appendices including correspondence between the event organiser; the pyrotechnics owners and States of Jersey Officers and Ministers. Drawing together the diverse range of documents in their hard copy state and formulating a report which contains sufficient information to limit the need or requests for secondary information has taken longer than was anticipated. As a result of collating the volume of information together, the resulting report will be in excess of 250 pages, which will ensure a thorough examination of the chain of events.

The report is now nearing completion and will be circulated to members following final approval from the sponsoring Ministers. It is anticipated that it will be available to States Members in July.

4.2 The Chairman of the Privileges and Procedures Committee tabled an answer to a question asked by Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier of St. Saviour regarding web casting.

Question

Does the Committee propose to introduce web-casting of the States Assembly and other formal meetings such as Scrutiny proceedings and, if so, when?

Answer

The question of uploading audio of States meetings and Scrutiny hearings has been under consideration for some time.

The Committee has undertaken research into a recommendation of the former Media Working Party that recordings of the States Assembly, committee and scrutiny panel meetings should be made available on the internet. The Committee agreed that, provided there was sufficient demand for such a service, meetings should be broadcast live and be available to listen to on demand until the transcript of that meeting had been uploaded. The Committee agreed in December 2010 that, prior to pursuing such an approach, research should be undertaken into the feasibility of uploading audio from pre-recorded meetings on a trial basis so as to establish whether there was a demand for such a service, as the Committee was reluctant to incur additional cost if sufficient demand did not exist.

The proposed uploading of audio from scrutiny hearings was raised by the Chairman at the Chairmen’s Committee meeting which had been attended by Committee representatives on Thursday 12th May 2011.

The minutes of the PPC’s next meeting held on 24th May 2011 state –

“The proposed uploading of audio from scrutiny hearings had been raised by the Chairman at the Chairmen’s Committee meeting which had been attended by Committee representatives on Thursday 12th May 2011. At that meeting, concern had been expressed that members of the public might be able to edit the available audio and upload parts of it to other websites. In response to these concerns, the President of the Chairmen’s Committee had agreed to refer the matter to the individual scrutiny panels for consideration. The position was noted and the Committee agreed to await comments from Scrutiny in this regard.”

The Committee is still awaiting comments from the Scrutiny Panels in this regard, including from the Education and Home Affairs Panel, of which Deputy Le Hérissier is the Chairman.

4.3 The Chief Minister tabled an answer to a question asked by Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier of St. Saviour regarding the role of HR Directors.

Question

What are the differences, if any, in the roles of the HR Director (Operations) and the HR Director (Strategy and Change)?

How is it intended to entrench change within the public sector with these Directors who are occupying temporary appointments?

Answer

The Human Resources (HR) Director (Operations) is accountable for the delivery of Business as Usual Human Resources via the established HR Units in the departments of the Civil Service and related services such as Harbours and Airports. In addition the role leads on key aspects of the reshaping of the function’s services such the introduction of new Resourcing software and Intranet.

The HR Director ( Strategy and Change) is accountable for the Terms and Conditions review , the redesign of HR Policies and procedures and Change support to Central and departmental CSR Programmes. In addition the role leads on capacity building in key areas such as learning and development, reward, and organisational development.

Both roles are temporary and are there to bridge the gap prior to the appointment of a new States of Jersey HR Director, which is currently in train. The roles help to maintain the momentum of CSR change and enhance the capacity of existing staff through coaching and development.

4.4 The Minister for Home Affairs tabled an answer to a question asked by the Deputy of St. John regarding the Jersey Field Squadron.

Question

Could the Minister advise the current numbers of service men and women who form the Jersey Field Squadron and whether the target membership remains 150 officers and men?

Would the Minister detail -

(a) the number on the register;

(b) the number who regularly attend training sessions and how many attended each session over the last 24 months;

(d) the current grant paid to the United Kingdom government for the Squadron and whether the grant covers the cost of the junior Army Cadet Force and, if not, why not;

(e) whether the grant mentioned in the 2010 States accounts for the Army Cadet force is above that currently paid to the UK;

(f) what, if any, are the accommodation costs to the Island for the permanent staff at the Field Squadron living in States rented accommodation?

Will the Minister consider withdrawing funding from the Field Squadron and redirecting the grant to border agencies like Customs and Immigration?

Answer

The Minister for Home Affairs does not run the Jersey Field Squadron but provides finance and other support to the Jersey Field Squadron in accordance with an Inter-Governmental Agreement (IGA).

a) The Jersey Field Squadron RE (Militia) was subject to a service review in October 2006 when it became a Squadron. The Squadron has a maximum Territorial Army Strength of 8 Officers and 74 soldiers. The funding of the Squadron was amended in 2006 to reflect this change. The current number of members fluctuates on a weekly basis, but is approximately 54 Officers and soldiers (not including those on Operation TOSCA and on full time reserve service). This is approximately 66% of maximum strength. If one includes those who are away, the membership is approximately 72% of maximum strength, which is on a par with the other squadrons in the Regiment.

b) The number that attend training must be seen in the context of a Squadron that regularly deploys soldiers on enduring operations and functions within the Graduated Commitment Mechanism (GCM). The GCM, in simple terms, dictates the level of training a soldier needs; the closer a soldier is to deploying on operations the more intensive the training becomes. A Territorial Army soldier has a training liability of 27 days per annum; the number of soldiers who achieved this is set out below [1]:

For the 2008/9 Training Year - 33
For the 2009/10 Training Year - 32
For the 2008/9 Training Year - 31

c) Territorial Army soldiers are only paid when they attend formal training; they are paid ¼, ½, ¾, or a full Man Training Day’s (MTD) pay depending on the time spent training. The MTD cost is in line with Regular daily rates of pay and therefore varies with qualification and rank. The cost of MTDs for the last three years is set out below1:

2008 - £139,502
2009 - £130,751
2010 - £121,753 [2]

d) The current 1988 IGA provides for an annual costing exercise where, by the 1st of September each year, the Ministry of Defence provides a costing showing the full costs to the MOD of providing and maintaining the Field Squadron for the next three MOD financial years. The amount paid to the MOD under the IGA for 2011 (as set out in the Business Plan) is forecast to be £1,054,000. The costings do not cover the cost of the junior Army Cadet Force (ACF) because the ACF is separate from the Squadron. The ACF receives a separate grant (currently £10,000 per annum) from the Home Affairs Department to assist with administrative and operating costs, and there is a Service Level Agreement in place in respect of that grant.

e) Yes. As detailed in d).

f) The Squadron uses States of Jersey property to house its permanent staff; except one property that has a long term private lease. The enduring revenue liability is limited to property maintenance, which is met from the stated Squadron budget, and charges normally associated with residential properties. The housing liability is clearly articulated in the IGA.

2010

maintenance £14,197.00

lease hire & utilities £35,133.002

2011 (first 6 months)

maintenance £21,402.00

lease hire & utilities £16,315.00

Any proposal to withdraw from the IGA would involve the Chief Minister and would, in practice, probably require the approval of the States Assembly. There is currently no proposal to withdraw from the IGA.

When a TA soldier deploys on operations they cease to be a reservist and as such they do not figure in the annual training numbers quoted

The reduced spend during 2009 and 2010 reflects the fact that the figures span the Apr 09 – Mar 10 UK financial year when the Sqn had soldiers deployed in Afghanistan and contracted to the Regular Army on Full Time Reserve Service

4.5 The Minister for Home Affairs tabled an answer to a question asked by Deputy T.M. Pitman of St. Helier regarding an alleged ‘leak’ of a report.

Question

Given that the Minister has stated that he was already aware - prior to my question in the States - of the alleged 'leak' to a UK journalist of material from a then uncompleted and unpublished confidential audit report into the financial management of the historic abuse inquiry, will the Minister outline how he identified the individual he alleges leaked the information; what action he took as a result; further still, why this information and that this serious incident had taken place was not made available to States members or the general public?

Answer

I am concerned that Deputy T Pitman is asking a question, part of which implies that he has formed an opinion that I should have taken certain action at a particular time.

I became aware in October 2009 that some confidential information had been provided to a UK journalist as the result of enquiries by a member of staff of the Home Affairs Department. Those enquiries revealed that, although a draft report existed at that time, it was most likely that what had been provided was information contained in the working notes of a former senior police officer from the UK, who had been employed by the States of Jersey Police to work alongside the accountants who were producing the financial review for the Minister of Home Affairs.

I regret that in an answer to an oral question from Deputy T Pitman on 6 June 2011 I failed to clarify this detail. That was partly because my answer focussed on the question of who had revealed information and not on the question of what was revealed and partly because I was then not clear as to what had been provided to the UK journalist.

The further enquiries also revealed that the person likely to have provided the information was the former Senior Investigating Officer who had left Jersey in August 2009. Prior to leaving Jersey, that officer had given extensive interviews to the press in Jersey which had led to very substantial publicity. This officer was seconded to Jersey from another police force and had retired from that force and therefore could not be made subject to disciplinary proceedings anywhere. Furthermore, it was already very well known in Jersey that this officer had provided extensive information to the press in Jersey and I did not view this matter as being a significant extension of that.

By the time the issue was raised with me in May 2011 I had completely forgotten that this incident had occurred, and I have had to refresh my memory by reference to the written record in 2009. Indeed, it is only as a result of preparing this answer that I have become aware of the detail of the situation.

4.6 The Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee tabled an answer to a question asked by Deputy T.M. Pitman of St. Helier regarding Historical Abuse Inquiry expenditure.

Question

Given that the Education and Home Affairs Scrutiny Panel are about to undertake a review relating to wider related issues did PAC ever examine the report written by BDO Alto into the management of the Historical Abuse Inquiry expenditure; if not, why not? Further still, would the Committee undertake to scrutinize the expenditure incurred by the Wiltshire Constabulary in their investigation(s) surrounding the inquiry - including Operation Blast - and submit a report to the States outlining its findings?

Answer

Both the PAC and the C&AG received copies of the report written by BDO Alto into the management of the Historical Abuse Inquiry expenditure and in July 2010 the C&AG published a report “Historic Child Abuse Enquiry – Public Finances Law 2005”. Weaknesses in the current Accounting Officer arrangements had been identified prior to the publication of the BDO Alto report and this lead to the recommendation by the C&AG that an independent police authority be established – a view supported by the Public Accounts Committee.

This was progressed by the Minister for Home Affairs following consideration by a Working Group that included Deputy Pitman.

The Proposition P192/2010 – Jersey Police Authority: Establishment was lodged by the Minister on the 21st December, 2010 and debated on the 2nd February, 2011. It was unanimously passed with 48 votes in favour, no abstentions, and no votes against.

The Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee was interviewed by the Wiltshire Constabulary as he had made an official compliant concerning the former Chief Officer Graham Power and would therefore be conflicted in any such investigation of the BDO Alto findings. However no other politicians or independent members on the PAC proposed a specific review at the time of the BDO Alto report's publication.

The matter will be discussed at the next full Public Accounts Committee meeting in July and it is not possible at this stage to confirm whether a report with, or will not, be undertaken. However the Public Account Committee would be pleased to hear from the questioner what meaningful benefit to good government may be achieved by carrying out another review which will ultimately be funded by the taxpayer. It should be noted that the BDO Alto report received widespread publicity, including a great deal of published detail. Therefore it is not clear to the PAC what could be achieved by a further investigation.

4.7 The Minister for Home Affairs tabled an answer to a question asked by Deputy T.M. Pitman of St. Helier regarding staff costs for the Wiltshire inquiry.

Question

The inquiry by the Wiltshire Police cost £531,500 in total; will the Minister provide a full breakdown of the costs identifying how many staff these figures covered for the following headings:

Staff costs - £200,700

Travel - £92,000

Hotel Accommodation - £82,000

Subsistence £39,100

Rent - £14,000

Will the Minister further give a full breakdown for what exactly was covered by the remaining three headings -

Other costs - £11,400

Equipment Purchase - £15,200

Legal Fees - £77,100

Answer

The cost of the Wiltshire Constabulary investigation into the management and supervision of the Historical Child Abuse Enquiry by the Chief Officer of Police was £572,532 as I advised in the answer to the Deputy’s oral question on 19 July 2010.

The terms of reference for the investigation agreed by the Chief Minister’s Department stated that ‘All reasonable costs incurred, including funding for independent legal advice for the investigators will be met by the States of Jersey’.

Up to six officers from the Wiltshire Constabulary were working on the investigation assisted by support staff in Wiltshire.

Staff costs (£289,984) comprise officers’ salaries including overtime plus support staff in Wiltshire. Officers’ travel to the Island was arranged by the Wiltshire Constabulary and reimbursed by the Home Affairs Department.

Travel costs (£76,501) include air travel, car hire, mileage allowances for travel to the point of departure and airport parking.

Hotel accommodation (£84,633) was mainly at the Radisson Blu Hotel (4*), which is located close to the independent temporary office facility that was established at the Elizabeth Terminal. The average cost per night was £80. Staff booking the hotel accommodation used the States procurement website to get the best deals.

Subsistence payments (£38,398) were based on £28 per person per day (£25 subsistence plus £3 incidental personal expenses per 24 hour period).

Rental payments (£12,600) are in respect of the independent temporary office facility that was established at the Elizabeth Terminal at a cost of £1,400 per month.

Other costs (£4,984) include amounts paid in respect of telephones, general stationery and minor office equipment, photocopying and photocopying supplies.

Equipment purchase (£17,867) includes media evaluation of Jersey Police, IT purchases and licences.

Legal expenses (£42,963) is for professional fees incurred by Lawyers (Veale Wasbrough) who were acting on behalf of Wiltshire Police Authority in relation to Operation Haven.

4.8 The Minister for Treasury and Resources tabled an answer to a question asked by Deputy T.M. Pitman of St. Helier regarding 1(1)(k) residents’ tax payments.

Question

Given that the Minister concedes that there is no evidence that higher earners or 1(1)k individuals in particular would leave the Island simply because a higher rate of tax was implemented; will the Minister clarify how he justifies proposing allowing 1(1)k individuals to in future pay even less tax - in real overall percentage terms - as a result of proposals to be debated by this Assembly in July 2011; further still, what would the estimated increase in tax take be if the 1% figure was set at 2%?

Answer

The Minister does not concede that there is no evidence that increasing tax rates can affect the behaviour of individuals. He does accept that hard data is difficult to find, although he points to the UK’s experience of introducing a higher rate of income tax of 50%, which suggests that higher earners are increasingly considering relocating. This was acknowledged by the UK Chancellor of the Exchequer in his Budget speech in March 2011.

The Minister refers the Deputy to the report accompanying draft Income Tax (Amendment No 39) (Jersey) Law 201- (P.113/2011) which sets out the rationale for changing the tax regime and to the report from the Tax Policy Unit on the review of the regime dated 2 July 2011.

This review concludes that while the direct tax contribution is significant and very welcome, what is equally important is the substantial indirect contribution from which Jersey benefits through their spending in the local economy, job creation and charitable contributions.

The proposed tax changes are designed to boost the economy and increase tax revenues by attracting more wealthy individuals to the Island. These rules should also encourage wealthy people to bring their businesses to Jersey, creating employment and enhancing economic activity in many sectors.

The annual minimum tax contribution required has also been increased from £100,000 to £125,000.

It is impossible to say with any certainty how many new consents will be granted and what the income levels of people seeking to come to Jersey will be. Therefore, whatever percentage of tax is paid, it is not possible to give a firm figure for additional tax revenues raised, beyond the minimum annual contribution of £125,000. It is clear from the review undertaken that the best way to increase the financial benefit to Jersey is to encourage more wealthy individuals and their businesses to the Island. This proposition is intended to do that.

4.9 The Chief Minister tabled an answer to a question asked by Deputy T.M. Pitman of St. Helier regarding political transparency and integrity.

Question

Following the statement on 30th March 2010 by the Minister for Home Affairs at an Education and Home Affairs scrutiny panel hearing that the Minister did not want to expand on the reasons for the delay in producing the Wiltshire report because he had given an interview to the Jersey Evening Post and, in his words, “I promised the reporter that she would have a scoop”, will the Chief Minister state whether he considers this acceptable conduct by a Minister and within the requirements of the Ministerial Code of Conduct and conduct that shows a satisfactory standard of transparency and integrity?

Answer

The question wrongly implies that the Minister for Home Affairs was declining to provide the Scrutiny Panel with relevant information or refusing to answer a question. Neither of these are correct. The Scrutiny Panel hearing related to the possible appointment of the Acting Chief Officer of Police as the next Chief Officer of Police. During the hearing there was a discussion between the Chairman of the panel and the Minister in relation to delays in the disciplinary investigation conducted by the Wiltshire Police in relation to the then Chief Officer of Police. The Minister was not asked a question in relation to this but began to volunteer information. He then decided to limit the information which he would volunteer as it was not directly relevant to the matter in hand and as he had recently given an exclusive press interview which would make this detail public. The Panel appeared to be satisfied with this approach because no questions were asked on this point. All this is apparent from the transcript of 30th March 2010.

I do not, therefore, believe at all that the Minister for Home Affairs has breached the Code of Conduct for Ministers.

4.10 The Minister for Treasury and Resources tabled an answer to a question asked by Senator B.E. Shenton regarding the income received from the Radisson Hotel.

Question

Could the Minister identify the total amount of rent and/or income received in respect of the Radisson Hotel site by The Waterfront Enterprise Board Limited (now States of Jersey Development Company) in respect of the years 2008, 2009 and 2010?

Answer

The lease of the hotel site was granted from the Waterfront Enterprise Board Limited to the Jersey Waterfront Hotel Holding Limited. The lease went through the Royal Court and is a public registered document. Schedule 3 of this lease sets out that WEB will receive a percentage of room turnover on the following basis:- 0% in 1st year of trading, 1% in 2nd year of trading, 2% in 3rd year of trading and 3% every year thereafter.

The detailed information requested is confidential to the contractual parties at the time, is commercially sensitive and unfortunately not available for publication. The Minister would, of course, be prepared to disclose the details to a properly constituted Scrutiny Panel in accordance with a standard confidentiality agreement.

4.11 The Minister for Health and Social Services tabled an answer to a question asked by Senator S.C. Ferguson regarding 32 locum doctors.

Question

Will the Minister state

a) how many of the Datex incident reports completed in the last 4 years refer to the work of the 32 locum doctors employed to undertake the work of the 4 doctors in the Division of Surgery whose duties are currently restricted?

b) The number of Serious Untoward Incident investigations during this period which have investigated the work of any of the 32 locum doctors?

Answer

a) DATIX is a software system used to capture information about ‘incidents’ that take place across hospital services and in the community. These ‘incidents’ cover a broad spectrum of events from an error in clinical practice to a slip or trip or a potentially faulty heating system. The DATIX system is also used to capture some elements of clinical data, for example HSSD’s caesarean section rates.

The reporting of ‘incidents’ - regardless of whether they relate to clinical practice or a faulty switch - is fundamental to improved patient safety and, in the words of Verita, is the “sign of a strong organisation”. Verita acknowledges that HSSD has invested significant effort in creating and maintaining a culture of openness in which professionals can acknowledge their own limitations, raise concerns about the practice of colleagues or flag up sundry issues and concerns.

Over the 4 year period, 2008 to 2011, there was a total 12,070 DATIX reports across all hospital and community services of which 31 related to the 32 locum doctors (approx to 0.25%).

b) There have been no SUI investigations relating to the 32 locums.

4.12 The Minister for Treasury and Resources tabled an answer to a question asked by Connétable of St. John regarding annual revenue since the removal of car tax

Question

Would the Minister provide details of how much revenue has been raised annually since car tax was removed and a charge per litre of fuel was introduced?

Answer

Motor Tax was abolished in December 1993 and resulted in an annual loss of £1.3 million. In the budget of that year an additional 2.56p of Impôts (excise) duty was added per litre of unleaded petrol and an extra 0.85p excise duty was added per litre of diesel to replace this loss. This resulted in additional yield in 1994 of £1.31 million from fuel duty

The total annual revenue yield from Impôts (excise) duty on fuel since 1994 is as follows:

1994	£4.3 million	2003	£16.4 million
1995	£4.6 million	2004	£18.7 million
1996	£5.2 million	2005	£18.5 million
1997	£5.8 million	2006	£19.1 million
1998	£8.4 million	2007	£19.8 million
1999	£10.9 million	2008	£20.5 million
2000	£11.8 million	2009	£20.7 million
2001	£11.7 million	2010	£20.3 million
2002	£14.0 million

4.13 The Minister for Transport and Technical Services tabled an answer to a question asked by the Connétable of St. John regarding the cost of Island roads.

Question

Would the Minister advise how much has been spent on maintenance and resurfacing of the Island’s roads each year since the removal of car tax?

Answer

The table below shows the highways spend since 1992. Unfortunately we do not have records for years 1995 through to 1998 due to legacy software issues.

Year

Highway Maintenance and Resurfacing

1992

1993

1994

1995*1

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

483,058

555,859

Tax on Fuel started in 1994

425,695

n/a

619,647

655,061

748,880

632,298

600,000

915,000

1,944,532

2,708,961

2,413,777

1,813,339

5,612,000 (Includes Economic Stimulus Funding)

In December 2010 the annualised depreciation value of roads and footways based on a 20 year resurfacing cycle was £2.24 million. This figure can be considered as the lowest maintenance expenditure that should be spent on the roads to offset the depreciation cost. This figure would only maintain the roads and footways to the existing standard, an improved standard will require substantially more funding.

4.14 The Chief Minister tabled an answer to a question asked by the Connétable of St. John regarding pensions and the public sector.

Question

Would the Minister please advise which categories of employees in the public sector are able to retire earlier than 65 and receive a full pension?

Can he also advise what extra percentage is paid as an employer contribution for these employees on top of the amount paid for employees whose normal retirement age is 65 and advise the total cost to the public purse annually of these additional contributions?

Answer

Under the Public Employees Contributory Retirement Scheme (PECRS) there are four different schemes. Within the differing scheme Regulations there are various categories, i.e. Uniformed Members (Category A and Category B) and Non-Uniformed Members. Please note Category A refers to front line uniformed Members such as Police Officers, Fire-Fighters, Prison Officers, Paramedics, whilst Category B covers the Senior Officers of those services.

Table 1 below details normal retiring age, optional retiring age and maximum pensionable service allowed.

Table 1	1967 Regulations	Former Hospital Scheme (FHS)	Existing Members	New Members	New Members (2006 Regulations)
Normal retiring age	65 (males) 60 (females)	65 (males) 60 (females)	65 (males and females)	65 (males and females)	65 (males and females)
Optional retirement age	Any time up to five years before normal retiring age subject to 10 years’ reckonable service	Any time up to five years before normal retiring age subject to 10 years’ reckonable service	Any time up to five years before normal retiring age subject to 10 years’ pensionable service	Any time up to five years before normal retiring age subject to 10 years’ pensionable service	Any time up to five years before normal retiring age. Members who opt to retire before normal retiring age have their pension reduced by (currently) 2.4% for each year the pension is being taken early
Maximum pensionable service allowed	45 years	45 years	45 years	45 years	45 years

Table 2 below details the PECRS Category A and Category B normal retiring age, optional retiring age and maximum pensionable service allowed in order to receive a full pension.

Table 2	1967 Regulations Category A/B	Former Hospital Scheme (FHS)	Existing Members Category A/B	New Members Category A/B	New Members (2006 Regulations) Category A/B
Normal retiring age	Cat A age 55 Cat B age 60	N/A	Cat A age 55 Cat B age 60	Cat A age 55 Cat B age 60	Members who became Cat A members on or after 1 March 2009 no longer have the option of taking early retirement before age 55 the normal retirement age
Optional retirement age	Cat A age 50 Cat B age 55	N/A	Cat A age 50 Cat B age 55	Cat A age 50 Cat B age 55	Cat A age 55 Cat B age 55
Maximum pensionable service allowed	35 years	N/A	35 years	35 years	35 years

Under the Jersey Teacher’s Superannuation Fund (JTSF) there are two different schemes, Existing Members and New Members.

Table 3 below details normal retiring age, optional retiring age and maximum pensionable service allowed in order to receive a full pension under the Jersey Teachers Superannuation Fund (JTSF).

Table 3	JTSF Existing Members	JTSF New Members
Normal retiring age	Not defined in the Regulations	Age 65
Optional retirement age	Age 60 (Subject to 2 years’ service) (Before 1 April 2007 subject to 5 years service)	Subject to 2 years service - any time up to five years before normal retiring age. Members who opt to retire before normal retiring age have their pension reduced by (currently) 2.4% for each year the pension is being taken early.
Maximum pensionable service allowed	45 years (A limitation on pensionable service means that service cannot count if more than 45 years in total or more than 40 years service before age 60).	45 years

Question

Answer

In terms of the PECRS the same percentage is paid for all employees, currently 13.6% this covers all categories of staff within PECRS. The employer also pays an additional 2% based on a figure capitalised as at 2001 for the Pre-1987 Debt.

The Employer contribution rate for the JTSF is currently 16.4% which includes an amount agreed with the actuaries in order to service the Pre-2007 Debt. Again this is a global rate and covers all JTSF members.

4.15 The Minister for Economic Development tabled an answer to a question asked by Senator B.E. Shenton regarding the operation of the States of Jersey Development Company Limited.

Question

Now that the SOJDC has been given power to act as property developer in direct competition to private developers will the Minister request the JCRA to investigate the interaction between the Minister for Planning and Environment, the policies of the States of Jersey, and the operation of the SOJDC, to ascertain whether there are competition or impartiality issues to address in respect of the current structure?

Answer

The Senator asks that I request the JCRA to ascertain whether there are ‘competition or impartiality issues’ between the States and the States of Jersey Development Company (SOJDC). This appears to be a reference to the recent appointment of the Mr. Mark Boleat, Chairman of the Jersey Competition Regulatory Authority, to the Chairmanship of the SOJDC, given that on 7th June, while debating the appointment of the Chairman and non-executive directors to the board of SOJDC, the States rejected the amendment of the Senator which would have forced Mr. Boleat to resign from the Chairmanship of the JCRA in order to Chair the SOJDC.

In respect of issues of impartiality, firstly I would say that the JCRA as a completion regulator is not equipped to opine on those issues, as such matters do not fall within the remit of the Competition (Jersey) Law 2005.

Furthermore, during the appointment debate on 7th June, the Solicitor General addressed the issue of impartiality, saying-

“Does a conflict of interest arise, perceived or real, merely by the appointment of Mr. Boleat as chairman? The answer to that is no. Can a conflict of interest arise depending on factual circumstances that have not yet arisen? Yes, of course … Finally, if a conflict of interest arises, does Mr. Boleat have to take part in the relevant decision making process? The answer to that, from his own email, appears to be no in the sense that he would recuse himself, so to speak, and not take part in the relevant decision.”

If a legitimate competition issue were to be raised with the JCRA in respect of the SOJDC acting as a business then remedies exist within the Competition (Jersey) Law 2005, which the JCRA would be expected to apply in the normal manner. Robust procedures exist for the management of such potential conflicts of interest, which have been repeatedly applied by the JCRA in respect of the Chairman and Non-Executive Directors. These procedures would preclude Mr. Boleat from involvement with the matter.

Further, for the JCRA to act under the Competition Law it must first have a reasonable cause to suspect that there is a breach of some provision of the Law. My Department has spoken with the Executive Director of the JCRA and he has informed my Department that the JCRA is not aware of any concerns in this regard. However should any party have any concerns it would wish to share with him in this regard, the JCRA will consider whether it merits investigation as it would any other matter.

To summarise, I am not of the opinion that issues of impartiality arise in this case, and competition issues will be dealt with in the normal manner. Therefore I do not intend to request the JCRA to carry the investigation the Senator request as I believe it is not warranted.

4.16 The Minister for Health and Social Services tabled an answer to a question asked by Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire of St. Helier regarding cancer rates in Jersey.

Question

Could the Minister for Health and Social Services give the most current figures for each type of cancer in Jersey and also indicate the age brackets for each type of cancer? Does the Department maintain data on how the figures and age brackets compare with the UK and the neighbouring region of Normandy?

Answer

Cancer Information

Locally statistics on cancer incidence (the annual number of new cancers diagnosed) and cancer mortality (annual deaths) are maintained by the Health Intelligence Unit within HSSD. This data is collated and analysed to look at trends and compare with other areas where possible. Because of the small numbers for some cancers annual rates do vary from year to year so it can be difficult to get an accurate picture of what is happening.

Cancer Incidence

The statistics for incidence of new cancers in Jersey are contained within the regular reports produced for us by the UK South West Cancer Intelligence Service. The latest Channel Islands Cancer Registration Report 2010 covers the three year period 2005 - 2007 and is available on from:

http://www.gov.je/Government/Pages/StatesReports.aspx?ReportID=538give link

This report showed that the main cancers diagnosed in Jersey in 2005-07 were non malignant skin cancer, lung cancer, breast cancer, prostate cancer, colorectal cancer, malignant melanoma and blood cancers (see p7 of report).

Table 1 summarises the information from this report for the 5 main malignant cancer types diagnosed in Jersey.

Table 1: Summary of the main malignant cancer types diagnosed in Jersey

Cancer site	Annual average no. of cancers diagnosed	Age Standardised Rate (ASR) per 100,000 2003-07	Rate compared with South West	By age group
Cancer site	Annual average no. of cancers diagnosed	Age Standardised Rate (ASR) per 100,000 2003-07	Rate compared with South West	0-19	20-64	65+
Breast (F)	65	113.5	low	0	46%	54%
Prostate (M)	74	146.2	high	0	28%	72%
Lung	61	55.7	high	0	29%	71%
Colorectal	51	43.4	ns	0	37%	63%
Skin Malig.Melanoma	35	34.3	high	3%	58%	39%

Data shows that 1% of all new cancers occurred in the under 20’s, 40% in those aged 20-64 years and 59% in the over 65’s. This is a similar pattern to Guernsey & the South West.

Analysis carried out by the South West Public Health Observatory over the years has shown that Jersey has rates of cancer roughly comparable with the mainland and Guernsey for colorectal cancer, gynaecological cancer, leukaemia and upper gastro-intestinal cancer and, more recently, slightly lower for breast cancer incidence.

Incidence rates were significantly higher in Jersey than the South West for lung cancer, head & neck cancer, malignant skin melanoma, stomach cancer, prostate cancer and testicular cancer in 2005-07 (see p13 of the report for full details). However, the numbers for some of these cancers are low so the data must be treated with some caution.

Higher incidence rates are not always a bad thing. If an area has better systems in place to detect a certain cancer and/or specialists skilled in diagnosing that cancer then more people will be picked up with it. High incidence rates can indicate better detection of a cancer. Early detection of cancer can led to better outcomes & cure.

The Health Intelligence Unit is working on finding reliable European data (including French regions) for further comparison. Such data is not always suitable for comparative purposes due to differences in the way it is collected, coded or analysed. For example French cancer incidence data is patchy across the various regions and does not cover all cases (unlike the UK & Jersey where almost 100% of cases are picked up by a robust cancer registration process).

Cancer Mortality

Mortality data is collated and analysed annually by the HSSD’s Health Intelligence Unit.

Jersey data shows that lung, upper gastrointestinal (oesophagus, stomach & pancreas) and colorectal cancers contribute to almost half of all cancer deaths in Jersey. This reflects world wide and European trends where lung cancer the single main cause of all cancer deaths.

Cancer of digestive organs (including upper gastrointestinal and colorectal cancers) accounts for a quarter of all Jersey deaths due to cancer. The second most common cause of cancer death is cancers of respiratory organs (mostly lung cancer) at 24%, followed by female breast cancers at 9% and male genital cancer (mostly prostate) at 7% (See Figure 1).

Figure 1: Jersey cancer deaths by site (2005-09)

In terms of the age groups affected HSSD’s Health Intelligence Unit maintains detailed spreadsheets for the main cancer sites by age group with data going back to 1996. This allows in depth analysis of individual cancers as required. From this we can show that nearly 60% of all cancer deaths in Jersey occur in those aged 70 or over and we have very few cancer deaths under aged 40 (Table 2).

Table 2: Jersey cancer deaths by age (2005-09)

Age group	Total (2005 – 2009)	Annual average no. of cancer deaths	Proportion of cancer deaths
under 20	3	1	0.3%
21-39	12	2	1.2%
40-59	185	37	17.9%
60-69	230	46	22.2%
70-79	296	59	28.6%
80+	309	62	29.8%

Figure 2: Cancer deaths by age group 2005 – 2009

Using Incidence & Mortality data

Ideally cancer incidence and cancer mortality should be looked at together.

A high incidence rate and an equally high mortality rate would indicate that that cancer was a particular problem, for example lung cancer.

But a high incidence rate can also be due to better diagnosis and detection of a cancer, and, if linked with lower mortality rates, indicate better treatment of those cancers, for example breast cancer.

4.17 The Minister for Health and Social Services tabled an answer to a question asked by Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire of St. Helier regarding radiation levels.

Question

Could the Minister for Health and Social Services state whether there is any routine testing of radiation levels in Jersey and in the surrounding coastal waters, and does the Department maintain data on how the radiations levels in Jersey (including in our drinking water) compare with other jurisdictions?

Answer

HSSD’s Public Health Team undertake routine testing for radio-activity (not radiation) with assistance from the Environment Department. The data collected is published annually in UK’s CEFAS (Centre for Environment, Fisheries & Aquaculture Science) report entitled “Radioactivity in Food and the Environment"

(www.cefas.defra.gov.uk/publications/scientific-series/radioactivity-in-food-and-the-environment).

CEFAS “Marine Radioactivity in the Channel Islands 1990 – 2009” report concludes that:

Relatively low concentrations of radionuclides were detected in the marine environment around all the Channel Islands.
Most non-transuranic radionuclide concentrations reported (caesium-137 and ruthenium-106) have declined since the last review in 1998.

Transuranic radionuclide concentrations reported (plutonium-239+240 and americium-241) have either declined since the last review in 1998, or there has been no significant change in concentrations.
The effects of discharges from local sources1 have continued to be of negligible radiological significance.

Information can be found at:

www.gov.je/Environment/ProtectingEnvironment/Land/Contamination/Pages/Radioactivity.aspx

Jersey drinking water (both supply and raw water) is routinely tested by Jersey Water and is regulated by the Department of the Environment according to the provisions of the Water (Jersey) Law 1972 (as amended) and associated orders.

Radioactivity analyses requires specialist analytical equipment and is undertaken by the Jersey Water’s consulting analyst’s laboratory in southern England. Verification of water quality results are checked against duplicate samples analysed by the States of Jersey Analyst and the Consulting Analyst’s laboratory results.

The three main local sources which could impact Jersey’s marine environment include: the French nuclear fuel reprocessing plan at La Hague; the French nuclear power station at Flamanville; historic disposals of radioactive waste in the Hurd Deep, a natural trough in the western English Channel.

4.18 The Minister for Home Affairs tabled an answer to a question asked by Senator J.L. Perchard regarding financial means-testing of prisoners.

Question

Will the Minister introduce financial means testing of those detained at HMP La Moye and levy a fee based on a scale of charges up to a maximum of the full cost recovery on inmates?

Answer

I am not intending to do that for four reasons. Firstly, I am not aware of any such scheme anywhere in the British Isles or the European Union. I am aware of some such schemes in the U.S.A., but they are not subject to the European Convention on Human Rights.

Secondly, I believe that this would be contrary to the European Convention on Human Rights for two reasons. It would be viewed as a second penalty in addition to the imprisonment being imposed by the Court. It might also contravene the right to private property being a charge which was not a legitimate tax which was being imposed on an individual without their consent.

Thirdly, because of the potential adverse effect on the family of an offender which had already lost a major source of income. A family could be forced to sell a home or be otherwise penalised by reason of this.

Fourthly, other means already exist to confiscate the proceeds of crime both in relation to drugs offences and in relation to wider crimes. I support current proposals to extend this by way of a civil confiscation scheme which allows for confiscation of the proceeds of crime without the need for a criminal conviction.

4.19 The Minister for Transport and Technical Services tabled an answer to a question asked by Senator B.E. Shenton regarding recorded accidents.

Question

Can the Minister detail the date, time, location and brief details of all recorded accidents since 1st January 2010 along the following roads;

1. La Grande Route de St. Clement;

2. La Grande Route de la Côte;

Answer

The following road traffic collision statistics have been provided by the States of Jersey Police. It should be noted that only collisions resulting in injury, recorded in the States of Jersey road traffic collision database, have been provided. The States of Jersey Police do have non-injury accident data though this is less reliable and, thus, this is not provided to Transport and Technical Services. The Department follows recognised engineering standard practice and limits the assessment of data to those collisions involving injuries.

[Tables reproduced within the dedicated Questions section of www.statesassembly.gov.je]

4.20 The Chief Minister tabled an answer to a question asked by Deputy D.J. de Sousa of St. Helier regarding the impact of Greece’s financial difficulties.

Question

Has the Chief Minister assessed the possible implications for Jersey if Greece was to default on its debts and the Euro was to cease to exist, in view of concerns expressed in this regard by the Bank of England and in light of Jersey’s dependency on the finance industry and, if so, would he give members details?

Answer

I visited Brussels on the 27th June and met with senior European Commission officials and heard at first hand the action being taken in response to the Greece sovereign debt crisis.

Here in Jersey the Financial Services Commission is monitoring the possible impact on the regulated financial institutions of Greece defaulting on its debts. As the banks in Jersey are primarily deposit gatherers rather than major lenders there is understood to be very little direct exposure to Greek debt. The impact of a default by Greece can be expected to be felt more by some if not all of the parent banks. However, as was the case with the global financial crisis, we can take comfort in the strength of those parent banks and the degree of oversight being exercised by the parental supervisory authorities.

There is every reason to expect that the European Central Bank and the Euro zone countries will continue to take all necessary measurers to support the Euro. However, should the Euro cease to exist it would then be replaced by national currencies. This change and its possible influence on the holding of other currencies such as pound sterling or the US Dollar might be expected to provide business opportunities as well as challenges for the finance industry. There is no reason to expect that this will have an adverse effect on the deposit gathering by the Jersey banks and insofar as the UK and pound sterling are seen as more attractive options this could have an advantage for Jersey with its close complementary relationship with the City of London.

The position on the crisis in Greece will continue to be closely monitored and in this having an office in Brussels is proving to be of great value.

4.21 The Minister for Treasury and Resources tabled an answer to a question asked by Deputy D.J. de Sousa of St. Helier impact of Greece’s financial difficulties.

Question

Has the Minister assessed the possible financial consequences for Jersey if Greece was to default on its debts and the Euro was to cease to exist, in view of concerns expressed in this regard by the Bank of England and in light of Jersey’s dependency on the finance industry and, if so, would he give members details?

Answer

While the States investment funds do not have any direct exposure to Greek government bonds the financial consequences for Jersey of both a Greek default and the cessation of the euro are difficult to predict and assess. Such a scenario could take many different forms and have a wide range of implications for all European and global economies and financial markets.

It is not a central scenario but would pose a risk to the Jersey economic outlook and the global economic outlook, particularly if it were accompanied by another banking crisis and/or financial market contagion.

As a finance centre where the key banking activity is deposit taking and with no government debt we remain in a strong position to weather any future financial market turmoil. However, the current uncertainty serves as a timely reminder that we should maintain what has been a fundamental element of our approach to the Comprehensive Spending and Fiscal Strategy Reviews. That is, with the global economic outlook uncertain and with significant risks, we should plan to get our finances on a sound medium-term footing so we have the flexibility and scope to respond should the economic outlook prove more negative than current forecasts suggest.

4.22 The Minister for Treasury and Resources tabled an answer to a question asked by Deputy S. Pitman of St. Helier regarding the cost of suspensions.

Question

Would the Minister advise the cost of suspensions for each year from 2005-2011?

Answer

Information and statistics held on suspensions prior to 2009, when the Suspension Review Panel was set up, are incomplete. Central data held for 2009 to date, covers only the cost of basic salary for the period of the suspension, and does not include employment costs (Social Security, pension contributions, tax, etc), allowances, alternative cover arrangements, etc. - the details of which are held independently by departments.

Estimated Cost of Suspensions 2009 to date

YEAR	COST
2009	£207,132
2010	£94,236
2011 to date	£34,647

Information on the number of suspensions is included in an Annual Report published by the States Employment Board. The latest is R.C.41/2011.

4.23 The Minister for Treasury and Resources tabled an answer to a question asked by Deputy S. Pitman of St. Helier regarding underspends.

Question

Would the Minister advise what the total underspends were for each year from 2005-2010?

Answer

The below table provides details of the total departmental underspends for each year as requested.

Year	Total Underspend
	£ Million
2005	9.7
2006	38.1
2007	3.0
2008	6.0
2009	13.5
2010	23.9

4.24 The Minister for Treasury and Resources tabled an answer to a question asked by Deputy S. Pitman of St. Helier regarding interest earned by the Strategic Fund.

Question

Would the Minister advise the amount of interest earned on the Strategic Reserve Fund for each year from 2005-2010?

Answer

The interest received by the Strategic Reserve Fund for each year from 2005-2010 is shown in the table below, together with the overall returns. Interest earned by the Strategic Reserve Fund is only one way in which the fund changes in value in year. The table below summarises the growth in the fund for the years 2005-2010:

	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010
	£	£	£	£	£	£
Interest income	1,953,219	997,938	1,441,667	1,846,355	514,891	206,660
Investment income*	17,759,107	18,098,376	18,948,810	22,997,837	18,153,292	8,967,184
Expenditure	(2,551,653)	(2,493,629)	(2,468,054)	(2,632,130)	(2,001,833)	(2,325,342)
Change in value of investments**	20,735,993	4,492,531	4,894,466	(24,648,587)	25,600,603	30,015,652
Total Recognised Gain	37,896,666	21,095,216	22,816,889	(2,436,525)	42,266,953	36,864,154
% movement in Fund	9.1%	4.4%	4.8%	(0.5)%	8.3%	6.7%
Total Net Assets	456,097,509	477,192,725	510,084,530	507,648,005	549,914,958	586,779,112

* Investment income includes dividend income, bond interest income, and any other income on investments held by the fund.

** The change in market value of investments is the increase or decrease in the capital value of investments, compared to the previous year, including both gains and losses made when investments have been sold, and gains or losses compared to the original value of those investments which are still held by the fund.

Source: All information provided is taken from the States of Jersey Annual Accounts for the relevant years. The accounts can be found at

http://www.gov.je/Government/PlanningPerformance/BudgetAccounts/Pages/StatesofJersey2008Accounts.aspx

4.25 The Minister for Treasury and Resources tabled an answer to a question asked by Deputy S. Pitman of St. Helier regarding payments on terminated contracts.

Question

Would the Minister advise the amount of payments made upon termination of contract for each year from 2005-2011?

Answer

The States of Jersey has moved to GAAP accounting with the first full GAAP-compliant set of accounts published recently for 2010. I can, therefore, provide the following information:

2011 (to date) £0.5m (provisional, unaudited data)

2010 £7.5m

2009 £0.7m

Payments for years prior to 2009 were recorded in a different way which means collating termination payments across departments from payroll information is more difficult. To do so would involve significant amounts of work in reviewing individual transactions. For that reason the Minister is unable to provide the earlier information requested.

The figure for 2010 is disproportionately high due largely to the Voluntary Redundancy Scheme approved by the States. Approximately 100 individuals left the States in 2010 to improve the ability to deliver restructuring and CSR savings.

4.26 The Minister for Treasury and Resources tabled an answer to a question asked by Deputy S. Pitman of St. Helier regarding tax revenue from GST.

Question

Would the Minister advise the amount of tax revenue from GST on food for 2010?

Answer

The amount of GST revenue raised in 2010 from the consumption of all food was in the region of £4.5 million. This figure is calculated using 2004/5 Household Expenditure Survey data updated for 2010 covering all food and non-alcoholic drinks.

4.27 The Minister for Health and Social Services tabled an answer to a question asked by Deputy M. Tadier of St. Brelade regarding qualifications and conditions for staff in private care homes.

Question

Is the Minister satisfied that all the staff currently employed by private residential and respite care homes are suitably qualified? Is the Minister satisfied that working conditions in all such homes are satisfactory enough so as to not create instances of low morale which may lead to instances of client neglect? If so, what evidence does she have to know that this is the case? What mechanisms are there in place to monitor private care homes? Are there sufficient whistleblowing mechanisms in place to flag up staff concerns, and if so, what are they?

Answer

All independent nursing and residential homes [3] are required to be registered under the Nursing and Residential Homes (Jersey) Law 1994 and are regulated under the associated Orders.

It is a requirement of registration that all nursing homes “employ by day and by night suitably qualified and competent professional technical ancillary and other staff in numbers which are adequate to ensure the well being of patients”.

It is a requirement of registration is that all residential homes “employ by day and where necessary by night suitably qualified and competent staff in numbers which are adequate for the well being of residents”

To support these requirements, HSSD issues staffing standards setting out what will be assessed for compliance with the Order. These standards require both nursing and residential homes to have:

“a staff training and development programme that includes induction and further training and opportunities to undertake qualifying/educational courses”.
“a minimum of 50% of the care staff employed (who) have either NVQ level 2 or equivalent or have previous experience as a care worker.”
“on any one shift, a minimum of 50% of the care staff are either qualified to NVQ level 2 in care or equivalent or have previous experience as a care worker.”

Nursing and residential homes are inspected at least once and usually twice a year to monitor compliance against standards. The inspections, which are generally unannounced, can take anything from one day to three days depending on the size of the home and what is found during the inspection. The inspector talks with staff and residents, consults the home manager and inspects staff rotas and a sample of personnel and training records.

If standards are not met this is formally recorded in the inspection report alongside the required actions. This is monitored at subsequent inspections or, in more serious cases through follow up visits. A formal notice would be served in the event of persistent non-compliance which could lead to prosecution. In such cases the Minister would be informed.

Where concerns exist about clients’ well-being additional visits are conducted between the formal inspections and, where necessary, additional investigations are undertaken.

Care homes generally have their own whistle blowing policies, however any individual can report directly to HSSD’s Registration and Inspection Team if they believe their concerns will not be satisfactorily addressed through the home’s own procedures.

In addition to existing whistleblowing policies, Jersey was the second jurisdiction to sign a memorandum of understanding with the Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC), which is the regulator of nurses across the UK. This memorandum aims to safeguard the wellbeing of all Islanders by enabling anyone to raise concerns about any Jersey based health or social care service directly with the NMC.

4.28 The Chief Minister tabled an answer to a question asked by Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier of St. Saviour regarding the classification of jobs and pay scales for police.

Question

Can the Chief Minister confirm how jobs in the Police uniformed service are classified and pay scales are arrived at?

Answer

The States of Jersey Police Officer ranks, in the main, mirror the ranks of the UK Police Forces with a few exceptions. The current ranks are:

States of Jersey Police	UK Police Forces
Chief Officer	Chief Constable
Deputy Chief Officer	Deputy Chief Constable
N/A	Assistant Chief Constable
N/A	Chief Superintendent
Superintendent	Superintendent
Chief Inspector	Chief Inspector
Inspector	Inspector
Sergeant	Sergeant
Constable	Constable

The origins of the scales are historic. There was a major review in the 1970s or 1980s which led to a substantial increase in the scales for junior and middle ranking officers. Annual pay awards have been by negotiation and agreement with the States Employment Board and the Police Association, and occasionally by independent arbitration.

4.29 The Minister for Treasury and Resources tabled an answer to a question asked by Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier of St. Saviour regarding repairs to Hautlieu School.

Question

What is the cost of the repairs to the roof of Hautlieu School, why have these repairs been required and are they covered by warranty?

Answer

Cost

The cost incurred to date for stripping and re-fixing the existing fibrous cement slates is as follows:

Art and Music	£16,100
Canteen	£9,780
Science	£10,480
Dayworks	£9,500


Total	£45,860

Reason for Repairs

The building was handed over in April 2004. The Certificate of Making Good Defects was issued in March 2007 with the Final Certificate issued the same month. At this time, three years after the building was occupied, there was no indication of problems with the slate fixings.

In 2008 Jersey was exposed to severe wind conditions and a section of the ridge was damaged and several slates were lost. This damage was repaired and there was no indication of continuing problems until 2010. It then became clear that a solution to the problem of the failing fixings had to be found as there was a serious risk of injury from falling slates.

The solution was to strip the existing slates, drill three holes to accommodate fixing by two nails and a rivet and re-fix the existing slates. This work was carried out in September 2010 to the most exposed roofs. The remaining areas of roof will receive the same improvements, as necessary, in the future.

‘Warranty’ Position

The Contractor fitted the fibrous cement slates using the wrap type hooks in accordance with the then relevant British Standard BS5534-Part 1:1997. In 2003 this British Standard was revised and became BS5534:2003. This later version no longer recommended the wrap hook fixings which were used at Hautlieu School.

It is the wrap hook fixings which have proved not to be fit for purpose and are being replaced with the more traditional two nails and a rivet. Neither the method of fixing nor quality of workmanship was challenged during either the construction or defects liability stages as there was no indication of problems with the slate fixings. It is considered an action brought against the Contractor for a latent defect is unlikely to be successful. The cost is therefore being met by Jersey Property Holdings from its maintenance budget.

JPH has instructed that under no circumstances will the hook type fixings be specified on any other States of Jersey contracts.

4.30 The Minister for Treasury and Resources tabled an answer to a question asked by Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier regarding the use of commercially sensitive information.

Question

Further to his answer given on 20th June 2011 would the Minister inform members what restrictions, if any, are in place to prevent a former employee of a States owned body using, to his or her business advantage, commercially sensitive information gained in that position?

Answer

In my previous answer to this question I stated that I expected States owned companies to be competitive and to protect their competitive advantage wherever they can.

I am confident that the Boards do all that they reasonably can to protect the use of commercially sensitive information. Employers are entitled to protection against any employee taking unfair advantage of information obtained during their employment. Whilst restrictive covenants can be used in employment contracts, a covenant intended merely to protect an employer against bona fide competition from a former employee would not be upheld.

As I have stated previously, the precise terms and conditions of individual employment and commercial contracts are confidential and a matter for the Company Boards, their employees and other contractual parties.

4.31 The Minister for Treasury and Resources tabled an answer to a question asked by Deputy G.P. Southern of St. Helier regarding 1(1)(k) taxation.

Question

Can the Minister explain to members how the proposed new policy on 1(1)(k) taxation, containing the requirement to declare worldwide income and to pay 1% tax on it will attract more applicants?

Answer

The Minister would refer the Deputy to the report accompanying the draft Income Tax (Amendment No 39) (Jersey) Law 201- (P.113/2011) which sets out the rationale for changing the tax regime for future 1(1)(k)s. In brief, however, the policy is intended to make Jersey’s tax regime more attractive to the mobile wealthy by simplifying the tax regime. Advice suggests that the current regime is considered too complex by potential applicants and their advisers. Looking at Jersey’s nearest competitors in this area, Guernsey and the Isle of Man impose a simple cap on the maximum amount of tax payable by any one individual. Switzerland charges a flat tax, while Monaco charges no income tax at all. By comparison, Jersey’s multiple tax rate and different types of income sources appear overly complex, as well as deterring investment and business activity in Jersey.

The changes proposed are intended to rectify these issues and form part of a package of measures intended to increase revenues from the 1(1)(k) regime. This package follows the decision to increase the annual minimum tax contribution required from new 1(1)(k) applicants from £100,000 to £125,000.

4.32 The Chief Minister tabled an answer to a question asked by Deputy G.P. Southern of St. Helier regarding States employees’ terms and conditions.

Question

What specific measures does the States Employment Board (‘SEB’) have under consideration to achieve the £14m of CSR savings identified by the Tribal reports on States employees’ terms and conditions?

Have any changes to the terms and conditions of any specific groups of employees yet been identified and/or agreed, and if so, can he state which groups and what changes and whether any refer to no-strike agreements?

Have any specific proposals been formally put to employee representatives yet and if not why not?

How many meetings have been held between representatives of employees and SEB and what was their nature and duration?

Is it his intention to include specific and costed proposals to achieve the £14m savings in the 2012 Annual Business Plan to be presented to the States on 13th July 2011 and if not why not, and when will proposals be made public? Will any proposals be made public before the run up to the next election starts in early September?

Answer

The Tribal Report highlighted a range of options, some more practical for implementation than others.

To date a temporary pause has been placed on changes to allowances, for example the mileage, and discussions will take place with Employee Representatives regarding these allowances as part of the overall negotiations on revised Terms and Conditions. At this stage, there have not been any discussions on the inclusion of no-strike agreements although all aspects of Terms and Conditions of employment will be open to discussion with the relevant Unions. Some employee groups already have such a clause in their existing agreement.

The States Employee Relations team are currently working on proposals for Civil Servants and Manual workers. In that regard the team have held exploratory meetings with both Prospect and Unite to explain the broad areas under consideration. This will include a desire to harmonise under a single pay spine for both groups and will coincide with consultations/negotiations on a revised set of single policies, terms and conditions.

Unite in particular have expressed a preference to engage more fully when concrete proposals are put before them. A full package of proposals will be ready to coincide with the negotiation process for pay claims for 2012. The broad direction for Civil Servants and Manual Workers has been shared with SEB but detailed discussion of the Management sides position prior to going into negotiation with employee representatives has not yet taken place.

Turning to the business plan process for 2012, it would be wrong to anticipate the outcome of negotiations prior to them taking place and therefore the pay budgets remain unchanged from 2011. As part of the 2010/11 two year pay award, agreement was reached with all negotiating groups to move the pay award period into line with the annual budget cycle. Therefore, we anticipate the process of negotiation to commence in the autumn of 2011 and will take sometime to complete. This process will be dependent upon receipt of 2012 pay claims which we expect to be lodged by Trade Unions in late summer/early autumn.

4.33 The Chief Minister tabled an answer to a question asked by Deputy G.P. Southern of St. Helier regarding work permits.

Question

Further to his response to my question (6371) on 7th June 2011 on the 178 work permits granted to the financial, legal and medical private sectors in 2010, will the Chief Minister ascertain from the relevant Minister what the duration of these permits was and whether they were replacement or new posts, and how many dependants were attached?

Will he further state how many J-category permits were granted in these sectors and in the private sector overall in 2010 and state how the combined numbers match his migration target of 150 heads of households?

Will he further state what the equivalent figures for the period 2007 – 9 were?

Answer

The 178 work permits granted to these sectors in 2010 include figures for employees in the Public Service, notably within the Health and Social Services Department, and not just the private sector.

Permits may be issued for a maximum period of 3 years in the first instance, with the exception of Doctors employed by Health and Social Services where a period of employment not exceeding 5 years may be authorised. The duration of work permits issued in 2010 varied from between 2 days and 5 years depending on the type of role being filled by a work permit holder.

Information is not specifically collected by the Customs and Immigration Service to confirm whether these posts were replacement, or new. Hence, the contribution to the net inward migration target of the net change in the number of holders of work permits and their dependents, which may be numerically positive (inward) or negative (outward), is not accessible from currently available administrative sources.

All work permit holders are also required to be in compliance with housing regulations, which means that J-category figures include a number of work permit holders, i.e. that you cannot simply add the number of the number of work permits to the number of 1(1)(j)s issued.

Applications for persons seeking to enter as the dependant of a work permit holder are assessed against immigration (visa) rules as opposed to work permit rules. Work permit holders may be accompanied to Jersey by their dependants only where a work permit is issued for a period of 12 months or more.

It has not been possible, due to the length of time it would take to collate the information, to answer Deputy Southern’s specific question on work permit dependants for those permits issued during 2010. However, information on the number of work permit holders and their dependants, who were living in Jersey on 31 December 2010, was provided in response to a written question to the Minister for Home Affairs by Deputy Le Claire (1240/5(5976)), tabled on 1st February 2011. For ease of reference these figures are repeated below.

Sectors	Total No. Work Permit Holders	Total No. Work Permit Dependants
Finance	171	114
Hospitality	73	9
Information Technology	38	16
Health	35	31
Legal	23	14
Other (Education, Sport, Telecommunications, Engineering)	17	21
Total	357	205

307 1(1)(j) permissions were granted in 2010 for employees in the financial, legal and medical sectors, some of which were also on work permits. In 2010, however, the total number of 1(1)(j) employees in the private sector in Jersey decreased by 30 (as recorded in the Labour Market Report published by the Statistics Unit).

This illustrates that turnover in 1(1)(j) employees is high, and that numbers approved cannot be taken in any way to be reflect of changes in population, as so many leave each year. Indeed, this is the nature of career progression in many aspects of the finance industry given its international nature.

Prior year figures are as follows:

	2010	2009	2008	2007
1(1)(j) approvals	450	348	523	498

The net decrease in the number of 1(1)(j) employees in private sector employment in 2010 constitutes a numerically negative (i.e. outward) component of total net migration for that year.

4.34 The Minister for Health and Social Services tabled an answer to a question asked by Deputy G.P. Southern of St. Helier regarding waiting times for physiotherapy.

Question

The response to my question (6394) on 20th June 2011 on waiting times for physiotherapy following the loss of 3.5 staff under CSR stated –

“waiting times for clients referred directly by GPs have increased from 1 to 5 weeks in the first 4 months of 2011. This is a result of a significant increase in referrals (up 29%) creating delays not as a result of CSR cuts. Similar patterns of delay are created whenever there is an increase in referrals.

All fluctuations are negligible”

Given the 5-fold increase in the waiting time in response to a 29% increase in referrals what steps is the Minister taking to enable the physiotherapy service to cope with such fluctuations in demand?

Will she apologise to patients who have been kept waiting for appropriate treatment?

What steps if any will she take to improve waiting times in this service, and if not why not?

Answer

The increase in waiting times in the physiotherapy service is not the result of CSR cuts, it is the result of significant increases in referrals. Fluctuations and increases in waiting times occurs in any service operating at full capacity that has to manage either a sudden increase in demand or a reduction in capacity (for example through staff illness).

For illustrative purposes Table 1, which is based on an imaginary scenario, shows how an increase in referrals over a relatively short period of time creates a significant backlog, hence extending waiting times into the future.

The physiotherapy department provides direct GP access which can result in referral volumes varying from month to month with no obvious seasonal pattern. When backlogs occur they are balanced out by a catching up process that occurs when referral rate drops. This has been the trend over the past three years. The physiotherapy department works to minimise the impact on patients by prioritising all urgent referrals based on clinical needs.

Fluctuations in demand present a challenge due to lack of spare capacity across all HSSD services, not just physiotherapy. HSSD regrets the impact this has on patients and where possible manages it through short term increases in capacity, the use of locums etc. HSSD recognises however that these pressures will only increase as a result of demographic changes and hence proposes the major service redesign outlined in the Green Paper.

Figure 1: Illustration of impact of increase in referrals (based on an imaginary scenario)

Week	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
Number of patients that can be seen each week in Clinic A	50	50	50	50	50	50	50	50	50	50
Standard number of weekly referrals to Clinic A	51	51	51	51	51	51	51	51	51	51
20% increase in standard number of referral over 4 weeks = 10 additional patients over 4 weeks)	0	3	3	4	0	0	0	0	0	0
Number of patients now having to wait	1	5	9	14	15	16	17	18	19	20
% of patients now waiting	2	10	18	28	30	32	34	36	38	40

4.35 The Minister for Health and Social Services tabled an answer to a question asked by Deputy G.P. Southern of St. Helier regarding a breakdown of savings.

Question

Will the Minister provide a detailed breakdown of the £37m of savings in the cost of delivering Health by 2040, projected by option 3 in her consultation Green Paper, to include which services will be affected; what savings will be delivered by each, and how those savings will be delivered?

In particular will she state what current services, if any, will be subject to charges, including means testing, and whether any services are to cease, or to cease being delivered on-Island?

Answer

The Green Paper outlines 3 different scenarios and projects what each scenario will cost, in terms of total health and social care expenditure by 2040. £37 million is the projected difference in cost between Scenario 1 and Scenario 3. It is not a saving, it is the estimated difference in expenditure that could result if there were to be significant changes to our existing models of health and social care provision, staff roles and organisational structures.

The Green paper clearly outlines the demographic changes which will result in increased demand for services and increased costs. It identifies how by changing the way we work we can meet increasing demand and deliver safe, sustainable care which is more affordable than our current model (as described in Scenario 1). Increased affordability (as described in Scenario 3) will be delivered through:

greater integration between all services and improved team-working, including joint working between GPs, hospital consultants and specialist UK centres;

the use of new technology and new ways of working to care for more people in their own homes, rather than in hospitals or care homes;

an associated reduction, although not the removal, of the requirement for capital and other investment in the hospital and other forms of institutional care.

Scenario 3 will allow us to provide better care, to more people, at a lower cost than Scenario 1. It will achieve this, not by ceasing to deliver services but by delivering them in different, more appropriate settings. For example the community pharmacy, the GP’s surgery or, if required, the UK centres that have specialist resources and expertise available to them. This will, in turn, help contain our Islands increasing health care costs.

At this present time there are no proposals to introduce new charges, or means test more services, other than those potentially identified for CSR 2011-2013.

4.36 The Chief Minister tabled an answer to a question asked by the Deputy of St. Mary regarding a comparison of targets set by UK authorities.

Question

Before setting the target of 10% savings in water and energy consumption in States buildings to save around £1 million, did the Chief Minister assess how this target compares to targets set and/or achieved in the best local authorities in the UK?

Answer

The 10% target was seen as a realistic and achievable figure in the Jersey context and was not compared directly with the targets set in the best local authorities in the UK. Progress in the UK is being monitored closely but direct comparisons are difficult as the UK targets are based on emissions rather than consumption.

The setting of wholesale reduction targets for the States as an organisation is a new initiative and certain management information is currently missing in some areas. The initial target to be achieved is a 10% reduction in consumption against a 2010 benchmark. As departments improve resource efficiency with experience and better information the initial 10% target will be revisited and increased if necessary. The start of this process is a roll out of ‘energy dashboards’ which will provide monthly updates on energy consumption and progress towards the 10% reduction target.

If the Deputy wishes to discuss this initiative further he is welcome to meet with the appropriate officers where much more of the project’s detail and evolution into the future could be covered.

4.37 The Minister for Economic Development tabled an answer to a question asked by the Deputy of St. Mary regarding the Depositor Compensation Scheme.

Question

Can the Minister inform members of the work, if any, he has carried out, including consultation, in the area of including SME’s (Small and Medium Enterprises) in the scope of the Depositor Compensation Scheme, and can he inform members about progress made?

Answer

Following analysis of the results of the Business Deposits Survey, my Department is currently taking forward an amendment to the Banking Business (Depositors Compensation) (Jersey) Regulations 2009 that will extend the scope of the Jersey Bank Depositors Compensation Scheme (“DCS”) to include deposits held by certain small Jersey businesses.

In keeping with Principle 1 of the International Association of Deposit Insurers’ “Core Principles for Effective Deposit Insurance Systems”, the qualifying criteria will ensure that the focus of DCS protection will continue to be on the most vulnerable depositors.

A draft amendment will be the subject of consultation with relevant stakeholders, including the Institute of Directors and Chamber of Commerce, over the next few months. It is hoped that a draft amendment can then be lodged later in 2011.

4.38 The Minister for Treasury and Resources tabled an answer to a question asked by the Deputy of St. Mary regarding tax systems and tax burden.

Question

In view of the fact that the Minister now has a dedicated tax policy team will he inform members whether he will

a) carry out a study into exactly how progressive is the tax system in Jersey, and / or the tax and benefit system in Jersey, across different household types, and, if not, why not;

b) carry out a study into exactly how great the overall tax burden in different jurisdictions is, including what are seen as competitor jurisdictions, in order to inform the taxation debate, and, if not, why not?

Answer

The recent Fiscal Strategy Review fully considered the tax burden on various households and compared Jersey’s tax system to competitor jurisdictions.

As the Deputy will be aware from responses to the recent review of Income Support benefit levels by the Health, Social Security and Housing Scrutiny Sub-Panel, work is being undertaken by the Social Security Department to look at benefit levels. The Tax Policy Unit will work with that Department in reviewing the benefits system and in particular how it works with the tax system.

Any future tax changes reviewed by the Tax Policy Unit will take full consideration of the impact on all of Jersey’s tax payers as well as how the overall tax burden compares to competitor jurisdictions.

4.39 The Minister for Economic Development tabled an answer to a question asked by the Deputy of St. Mary regarding Jersey Enterprise.

Question

Can the Minister inform members how many firms in the energy efficiency, energy management and renewable energy sectors have received help from Jersey Enterprise or Jersey Business Venture in the last 5 years?

Can the Minister inform members of how many such firms there are in total and how many people they employ?

Does the Minister know what the availability of skills in renewable energy installation, maintenance and repair, energy efficiency advice and installation, and energy systems management, in Jersey is, and if not why not? Will he be taking steps to increase the level of these skills?

Can the Minister inform members of what the actual and potential economic value is of this sector?

Answer

The ECO-ACTIVE Energy Efficiency Service (EES) supported by the States of Jersey and Jersey Electricity plc provides energy efficiency services to the socio-economically vulnerable in our community. Currently this initiative concentrates on demand side measures such as home insulation and does not implement renewable energy installations, although over 1,000 applications for assistance have now been received.

The EES’s second initiative, the Community Buildings Programme, was launched in May 2010 and delivers improvements to charities and not-for-profit organisations which provide a service to socio-economically vulnerable islanders. Applications from 21 diverse organisations have been received by the Community Buildings Programme. These organisations represent over 400 individuals through the provision of residential and day centre facilities.

It is fair to say that the Energy Efficiency Grants scheme has meant that a number of local building companies have invested and geared up to deliver energy efficiency services on Island. The surety of the investment from grant allocations has meant that in addition to the carbon, financial and comfort savings from the scheme, we believe that a number of local jobs have either been secured or created. Regrettably however, precise numbers and bench marks of skill sets are not available.

The ECO-ACTIVE Energy Efficiency Service has a long term aim to expand its activities into the “able to pay sector”.

If it achieves this, there will be a significantly increased amount of work for this sector, with the need to ensure standardized training and up-skilling is made available, possibly requiring a future skills audit.

In terms of other elements of the Deputy’s question, I would like to firstly confirm that over the last five years, Jersey Enterprise and Jersey Business Venture (JBV), between them, having supported 12 local companies operating in the energy efficiency sector.

I am not in a position to provide the precise figures that the Deputy seeks regarding companies operating in the stated areas, or the employment generated therein. Many of these services are provided as extensions to more traditional services provided by heating engineers, plumbers and electricians based in the island.

There is evidence however that a growing number of local courses are now being organised for local suppliers in the area of renewable technologies, (especially heat-pump applications - where planning requirements have just been eased by the Environment Minister). It could therefore be argued that the private sector is already preparing itself for an increase in demand in the renewable energy sector without any need for States intervention or support.

Given the high costs of investment in renewable technologies in Jersey and the lack of incentives such as ‘feed-in-tariffs’, commercial and private investment in renewable energy installation remains at relatively low levels. Demand-side awareness remains relatively low, thus the market is still evolving and not yet mature, meaning that economic value is difficult to isolate.

4.40 The Minister for Planning and Environment tabled an answer to a question asked by the Deputy of St. Mary regarding the anomaly identified within the report of the Complaints Board into the ‘Construction of a Wall in the Countryside Zone’ (R.55/2011).

Question

The report of the Complaints Board into the “Construction of a Wall in the Countryside Zone” (R55/2011) said that the “curious anomaly” whereby “a wall could be slated as ugly, incongruous, and harmful to the character of the countryside by the Department, yet could also be regarded as perfectly acceptable in the eyes of that same department solely dependent on its location within the domestic cartilage of a domestic dwelling house” should be addressed.

What steps, if any, has the Minister taken or will he be taking to address this anomaly?

Answer

The wall referred to by the Deputy is in the Parish of Trinity, but the issue could equally apply anywhere in the Island. The matter relates to the Planning and Building (General Development) (Jersey) Order, 2011 and its predecessors.

Members will be aware that the 2011 Order allows for certain small scale development to be carried out on land without the need to apply to the Minister for planning permission. Typically, it allows home owners to build walls, fences, garages and small extensions. Members may recall that I recently extended these regulations to allow for loft and garage conversions and the extension of industrial and warehouse premises. In addition to removing red tape from many minor works, this legislation is useful because it also allows the Planning Department to focus upon larger applications.

The effect of the 2011 Order is to grant wholesale planning permission for these minor types of work across the Island, although certain areas and buildings (such as Listed Buildings) do not benefit. Apart from size and height restrictions, the Order does not specify what these structures should look like and the planning system has conceded that it cannot act as an arbiter of taste in these types of development. The structures which can be built have no requirements over the material from which they are constructed and a wall which is exempt from control could be constructed from granite, blockwork (with or without a render finish) brick, or any other material

The issue is one of balance and in order to allow freedom from some restrictions of the planning process for householders there has to be an acknowledgement that the department has to relinquish its role in championing appropriate design.

4.41 The Minister for Social Security tabled an answer to a question asked by Senator F. du H. Le Gresley regarding survivors’ pension.

Question

How many survivors have ceased to receive a survivor's pension due to co-habitation or marriage during the last ten years? How many survivors, currently in receipt of a survivor's pension, live outside Jersey? What steps are taken by his Department to ensure compliance with the terms of receipt of a survivor's pension?

Answer

Currently there are 852 claims to Survivor's Pension in payment. This benefit is paid to survivors under pension age, with 79 % of claimants aged over 50.

The number of individuals claiming Survivors Pension, analysed by age is given in the table below (as at 30 April 2011). Please note that some women will have a pension age of 60.

Age 30 and under

Age

31-40

Age

41-50

Age

51-60

Age

61-64

Total

149

419

254

852

Of the above 488 claimants are resident in Jersey and the remaining 364 claims are paid outside of the Island.

Since January 2005 75 Survivor’s Pension claims have been closed due to co-habitation or remarriage.

Checks are made on overseas claims on a regular basis. Forms were issued to all overseas claimants in 2009 to verify claim details. This exercise is due to be repeated towards the end of 2011. More information is available on local claimants and the department pro-actively investigates all cases of potential customer error or fraud.

4.42 The Minister for Health and Social Services tabled an answer to a question asked by the Deputy of St. John regarding private nursing homes.

Question

Would the Minister inform members of the name and number of private nursing homes and care homes for the elderly in the Island together with the total number of residents licensed for each establishment?

What are the total number of full time and part-time staff for each of the licensed establishments?

How often are the premises inspected by Health and Social Services, and would the Minister give details of number of inspections to each establishment in last 3 years?

Have any reports of ill treatment of patients/residents been reported to the Department in the last 3 years and, if so, how many, and what action is taken in response to such a report? Is the Minister or her department aware of any bullying of residents/patients in either private or public sector nursing/care homes and, if so, how is this being dealt with?

Does the Department monitor the food and beverage that patients/residents receive and, if not, why not?

Do the private nursing/care homes have to comply with the same standards as establishments operated by the Parishes and the States and, if not, why not? How do staffing numbers compare in the private sector and the Parish/States sector?

Answer

Numbers of private care homes

Please see table 1 for details of private care homes and total number of licensed residents.

There are currently 38 registered residential care homes, 3 nursing and 9 dual [4] registered homes making a total of 45 homes regulated by HSSD. They comprise private, voluntary and Parish homes catering for a variety of health and social care needs for a range of age groups.

Staff numbers

Independent homes are regulated under the Law and it is a requirement that:

all nursing homes “employ by day and by night suitably qualified and competent professional technical ancillary and other staff in numbers which are adequate to ensure the well being of patients”.
all residential homes “employ by day and where necessary by night suitably qualified and competent staff in numbers which are adequate for the well being of residents”

To support these requirements, HSSD issues staffing standards which require both nursing and residential homes to ensure that:

The number of staff employed is sufficient to ensure that individual members of staff do not, on a regular basis, work in excess of 48 hours per week.
Sufficient staff are employed to cover holiday and sickness absence.
Any member of care staff must not work anymore than 12 hours in a 24 hour period unless this includes an overnight break.
For residential homes the minimum ratio of care staff to residents is 1:10 by day and 1:15 by night.” In units for high dependency residential care the ratio is 1:7 by day and 1:12.5 by night.
For nursing homes the minimum ratio of non-registered care staff to residents is 1:5 by day and 1:10 by night.
For nursing homes the minimum qualified nursing staff to resident ratio is as follows:
- Up to 10 residents there is one registered nurse by day and by night,
- Between 10 and 20 residents there is one registered nurse by day, except where the home takes acute cases where there are two registered nurses by day and one by night.
- Between 20 and 40 residents there are two registered nurses who can demonstrate the necessary competencies, by day and one by night.
- Over 40 residents there are three registered nurses who can demonstrate the necessary competencies, by day and two by night.”

The person registered as in charge of the home, has adequate periods of supernumerary time, not counted as part of the staff ratio, to carry out their management duties.
Domestic staff are employed in sufficient numbers to ensure that the standards relating to food, meals and nutrition are fully met and that the home is maintained in a clean and hygienic state, free from dirt and unpleasant odours. Ancillary staff numbers are calculated on the following basis:

3.5 hours per resident per week for laundry and domestic staff
2.5 hours per resident per week for kitchen and catering staff.

Number of inspections

HSSD’s registration and inspection team has responsibility for the statutory inspection of registered care homes and nursing agencies. An inspection schedule has been developed based on size of home and an associated risk assessment. High risk services are fully inspected twice a year and more often if required, medium risk homes are fully inspected at least once a year with a second limited follow up inspection. Low risk homes may only have one full inspection once a year.

	Number of homes having 2 inspection	Number of homes having 1 inspection
2009	35	7
2010	30	3 (as a result of closing part way through year) 3 (as a result of being new registrations part way through the year) 9
2011 to date		32 (of which at least 25 will have a 2nd inspection to be conducted later in the year )

Reports of ill treatment and departmental response

When HSSD receives complaints the complainant is advised to contact the home in writing requesting an investigation and response. This letter should be openly copied to HSSD.

If the response is not satisfactory, HSSD will investigate to establish whether the complaint constitutes non-compliance with statutory requirements. In cases where a complaint is serious or indicates a risk to an individual resident/s – whether through bullying or maltreatment - HSSD will directly investigate. Such cases are usually part of a safeguarding process conducted jointly with Social Services.

In 2009 the team was involved in 12 adult protection investigations and 4 complaints.

In 2010 the team were involved in 3 adult protection investigations and 4 complaints.

In 2011 to date, the team has been involved in 6 adult protection investigations and 9 complaints.

Monitoring of food and beverage

Inspections, which are usually unannounced, involve assessing whether the home complies with the statutory requirements for standards of care: These include: resident choice; staffing;; record keeping; infection control management; medication management; quality of the environment; compliance with fire and safety requirements and food.

This includes an assessment of the quality of food and drink provided, plus the quality of support provided with feeding and fluid intake.

A detailed list of inspection standards is available on request.

Parity of standards across sectors

As present care homes provided by HSSD fall outside the Law and are therefore not regulated under the law. HSSD is currently working with Law Officers to develop a Regulation of Care Law which will bring HSSD Care Homes under the same standards as private sector homes. It is envisaged that phased implementation of the Law will commence in 2013/14.

A comparison of staffing levels across States, Parish and private homes is not available.

TABLE 1

NAME & ADDRESS	Owner	No of Beds	For older people	For Older People - Dementia Care
Residential care homes 2011
*AZTEC HOUSE	Shelter Trust	50
BEAUMONT VILLA	Caring Homes Health Care Group Ltd.	24		Y
*CAMELOT	Jersey Focus on Mental Health	8
*GLANVILLE	Glanville Home for the Aged & Infirm	29	Y
GLENFERRIE	Personal Care Ltd	9
*LA MABONNERIE	Les Amis Incorporated	3
*L’AVENIR	Les Amis Incorporated	5
*LE FIGUIER	Les Amis Incorporated	5
*LES AMIS	Les Amis Incorporated	10
LES HOUMETS	Les Houmets Residential Home Ltd	26	Y
LONGFIELDS VILLA	Apex Nursing Care	19
*MAISON DE VILLE	Parish of St Helier	50	Y
*#MAISON LA CORDERIE	Methodist Home for the Aged	32	Y
*MAISON ST BRELADE	Parish of St Brelade	51	Y
#PINEWOOD	Millais View Ltd	48	Y
*RIDOUT	Caesarea Association	9	Y
#RONCERAY	Mr Altaf Nanji	21		Y
*ROSENEATH CENTRE	Roseneath Centre	31
*ROSEVALE	Les Amis Incorporated	5
*SILKWORTH LODGE	Families in Recovery Trust	12
*SOMERS HOUSE	Les Amis Incorporated	6
*ST HELIER HOUSE	Parish of St Helier	56	Y
*ST JAMES STREET SHELTER	Shelter Trust	25
#*STUART COURT	Methodist Homes for the Aged	28	Y
*WESTLEY LODGE & COTTAGE	Les Amis Incorporated	5
*12 CLOS DE VILLE	Les Amis Incorporated	5
26 – 28 WEST PARK AVENUE	Jersey Council on Alcoholism	9
*43 CLUBLEY ESTATE	Les Amis Incorporated	5
*75 LA TOUR	Les Amis Incorporated	5
*6 LEMPRIERE ST	The Weston Healthcare Foundation	5
17/18 WESTMOUNT	Les Amis Incorporated	5
1 KEROUSSEAUX	Les Amis Incorporated	2
2 KEROUSSEAUX	Les Amis Incorporated	5
Nursing homes
*CLARKSON HOUSE	Jersey Hospice Care	6
LITTLE GROVE	Guardian Nursing Services	34	Y
PALM SPRINGS	Palm Springs Nursing Home	25	Y

DUAL REGISTRATION HOMES – 2011

NAME & ADDRESS	Owner	No of nursing beds	No of residential beds	For older people	For Older People - Dementia Care
*#CHESHIRE HOME	Jersey Cheshire Home	15	10
CLIFTON CARE HOME	Clifton Care Home Ltd	29	5	Y
#HIGHLANDS LUXURY CARE HOME	Sandown Care Services (Jersey) Ltd	8	17	Y
*#JEANNE JUGAN RESIDENCE	Little Sisters of the Poor	10	70	Y
#LA HAULE	Sandown Care Services (Jersey) Ltd	49	5		Y
LAKESIDE	Lakeside Residential Home Ltd	39	28	Y
#L’HERMITAGE	Caring Homes Health Care Group Ltd	25	16	Y
SILVER SPRINGS	Sandown Care Services (Jersey) Ltd	33	34	Y
*ST EWOLDS	Parish of St Helier	5	61	Y

* Denotes charity or Parish-run Homes # denotes respite care facilities

4.43 H.M. Attorney General tabled an answer to a question asked by Deputy M.R. Higgins of St. Helier regarding super injunctions.

Question

Further to his answer about so-called ‘super injunctions’ given on 7th June 2011, would the Attorney General ‑

(a) explain why the existence or otherwise of super injunctions should be denied to States Members and to the people of Jersey;

(b) set out the circumstances and grounds upon which such injunctions could be granted in Jersey?

Answer

For the purposes of this question and answer the expression “super injunction “ is taken to refer to an injunction that prevents not only something from being done but also prevents the disclosure that such an order has been made.

The Royal Court has a wide jurisdiction to grant interim or final injunctions. Interim injunctions (injunctions granted pending the final determination of the issue between the parties) may be granted ex parte or after argument depending on the circumstances of the case. Any party subject to an ex parte injunction can apply to the court granting it to discharge it. A final injunction is one granted on the final determination of the issues between the parties. Any person subject to an injunction, interim or final, can appeal against it to the Court of Appeal.

Whilst there is a presumption that justice is done in public and the decisions of the court and the reasons for them are known, that presumption can be set aside and there are circumstances in which it does not apply or is qualified (in cases relating to children, for example, the court sits in private to hear the argument and anonymises its judgement for the purposes of publication of what has taken place).

The Royal Court has the jurisdiction to grant a super injunction as defined above. It is impossible, however, to set out the circumstances in which such injunctions may be granted definitively. The injunction is a flexible tool and may be used in many different circumstances.

It would not be hard, however, to suppose that the court would be sympathetic to the grant of an injunction in such terms where to do otherwise would compromise the personal safety or life of a party or another person or would compromise the integrity of legal proceedings or an investigation.

It should be born in mind, however, that the Court is a public authority and must exercise its discretion in a Human Rights compliant manner. In considering, for example, an application to restrain publication of information about a person the Court would have to balance competing rights such as the right to respect for private and family life (Article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedom (“ECHR”)) with the right to freedom of expression (Article 10 ECHR). The Human Rights (Jersey) Law 2000 at Article 12 requires the Royal Court to have particular regard to the right of freedom of expression.

I am not aware of any Judgment of the Court that sets out the principles of a grant of an injunction that balances Article 8 rights with Article 10 rights and prevents publication of the fact that an injunction has been granted. In my opinion the Court would probably only grant such an injunction in exceptional cases where the matters of which the applicant sought to restrain publication represented an egregious invasion of the privacy and family life of the applicant or his dependants or was tantamount to an abuse of the right to freedom of expression that could not be justified on compelling public interest grounds.

I repeat, however, that it is impossible to be definitive about the circumstances in which such an injunction might be granted.

It should accordingly be apparent that the grant of such a “super injunction” would be very rare and done in exceptional circumstances in which the Court, in balancing the competing considerations, has found that there is a compelling case for this measure of secrecy. It is for that reason that the existence of an order in any particular case should not be known to anyone, States Members or otherwise, outside the Court, the parties and their lawyers.

The answer given to the question on the 7th June 2011 simply reflects that I would not be aware of such an injunction if I was not a party to it and if I was a party I would be prevented from referring to it. For the reasons referred to in my answer of the 7th June, I could not therefore answer that question.

4.44 The Minister for Transport and Technical Services tabled an answer to a question asked by Deputy M.R. Higgins of St. Helier regarding the Energy from Waste plant.

Question

a) In a written answer on 7th June 2011 the Minister stated that “many technical or operational issues” had been highlighted with the new Energy from Waste Plant amd that “these were being resolved by CSBC Jersey Limited”. Will the Minister set out the details of each of these technical or operational problems and explain how they are being resolved by CSBC Limited and the estimated costs of such rectification?

(b) Although the Minister in his previous answer stated it was normal to discover problems during the commissioning period and that the contractor was required to address these issues and is liable for any associated costs, can he inform members whether the contractors have indicated whether they –

(i) will be seeking any additional funds for any purpose in relation to the construction of the facility and the amounts involved; or

(ii) will be lodging any claims against the States in relation to the contract, and if so what they relate to and the amount of the claims?

Answer

a) The Energy from Waste plant is still under the control of the Contractor CSBC (Jersey) Limited. TTS are working with the CSBC commissioning engineers to get the plant to the point where it can be officially handed over to the States of Jersey. The plant is a large and technical piece of machinery and there have been many minor snags to resolve. The cost of resolving these snags is within the original contract price. To date 70% of the snags have been resolved.

The Contractor, CSBC (Jersey) Limited has diligently worked to provide a plant which has processed all of the Island’s waste since Christmas 2010.

b) The Energy from Waste plant is being constructed by CSBC (Jersey) Limited on behalf of Transport and Technical Services. The Contract is a design and build Lump Sum contract. The Contract form is the IchemE red book and has a variety of mechanisms for dealing with claims and penalties. At this critical point in the Contract whether the contractor will seek additional funds or lodge any claims against the States of Jersey remains to be seen. The high level of project governance, on going audit and proactive risk management mechanisms are in place to protect the interests of the States of Jersey and I am confident that our position is satisfactory at this time.

4.45 The Minister for Economic Development tabled an answer to a question asked by Deputy M.R. Higgins of St. Helier regarding Air Traffic Control staff.

Question

Will the Minister advise the States whether:

(a) the Air Traffic Controller employed by Jersey Airport who failed his local radar validation is still employed at Jersey Airport and, if so, in what capacity and salary;

(b) the baggage consultant employed by Jersey Airport whose work was taken over by, or superseded by, Capita Symonds is still employed at Jersey airport and if so in what capacity and salary;

and, if so, justify the continued employment of these individuals when they are not doing the jobs for which they were employed?

Answer

(a) The air traffic controller you refer to, who has previously been the subject of a States question, is in discussion with Jersey Airport management over his future. It would not be appropriate to discuss the details of this matter during current negotiations other than to say that both parties, with union involvement are working towards an appropriate and acceptable outcome.

The air traffic control officer is an ATCO 2 grade 6 salary.

(b) The external resource you refer to, who has previously been the subject of a States question, was appointed by Jersey Airport in 2010 to act on our behalf in support of a number of initiatives for which he has the required knowledge and experience. These included changes to the hold baggage system as well as renegotiations and renewals of service level agreements with our ground handlers. He was appointed on a fixed term one-year basis, for a fee of £65,000. This contract is due to finish on 31 August 2011 and will not be renewed.

4.46 The Minister for Economic Development tabled an answer to a question asked by Deputy M.R. Higgins of St. Helier regarding the Channel Islands Control Zone.

Question

Will the Minister explain fully to members the air space redesign project at Jersey Airport which relates to the Channel Island Control Zone setting out the work and cost involved, the companies and individuals involved - setting out what each is doing, the sums being paid to them and how they were appointed/recruited and provide details of any aspect of the scheme which is yet to be put out to tender?

Answer

The Channel Islands Control Zone (CICZ) airspace redesign project is already underway and has been since the contract was awarded through competitive tender to Cyrrus Ltd in 2010. The project is expected to finish in 2013.

The tender process was conducted in accordance with States of Jersey procurement and financial directions.

The redesign project is a project that encompasses a modernisation of the airspace and the procedures contained within the boundaries of the CICZ, this includes but is not limited to:

 Investigation of the reclassification of the airspace at the lower levels in order to best meet customer and service provider requirements;

 Modernisation and improvement of the interfaces between Jersey and the UK and France;

 A review and improvement of the missed approach and aircraft procedures and positions;

 An investigation into increased airspace responsibilities in order to simplify co-ordination between the islands, UK and France and provide a more efficient and improved service;

New departure and arrival routes in the CICZ, based upon traditional navigation and modern Performance Based Navigation (PBN).

The modernisation will ensure the future viability of the airspace as well as building foundations for the forthcoming requirements of PBN to which the aim is to ensure global standardisation of Precision Area Navigation (P-RNAV) and Required Navigation Performance (RNP) specifications and to limit the proliferation of navigation specifications in use world-wide.

All of the changes will follow the Civil Aviation Publication 725 process as agreed with the Director of Civil Aviation.

An approved budget of £800,000 has been allocated to this project.

There are no other elements of the project that need to be put out to tender.

There are a number of companies and individuals involved in the airspace redesign project, including:

Jersey Airport Executive Management Team, Senior Management Team, Air Traffic Controllers, Strategic Planning, Air Traffic Engineering
Director of Civil Aviation for the Channel Islands
UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA)
National Air Traffic Services (NATS)

 Egis Avia (French air navigation service provider, in partnership with Cyrrus Ltd)

 UK Directorate of Airspace Policy

 Guernsey and Alderney Air Traffic Control

 Guernsey, Jersey Environmental Departments

5. Oral Questions

5.1 Deputy K.C. Lewis of St. Saviour of the Minister for Economic Development regarding the lottery franchise.

Further to the Minister’s encouragement that we should support local business, can he explain why the local lottery franchise has been taken away from a Jersey company and given to a U.K. company?

Senator A.J.H. Maclean (The Minister for Economic Development):

If I can, I would like my Assistant Minister to answer this.

Connétable L. Norman of St. Clement (Assistant Minister for Economic Development - rapporteur):

The proposed new arrangements follow an open and public tender exercise advertised both on and off Island last year. The proposals are designed to stimulate interest and materially increase sales volumes through a combination of increased marketing, point of sale presence and additional distribution via electronic terminals. However, an existing local company will be responsible for all on-Island activities leading to the creation of local jobs. It is vital that we reinvigorate the Channel Islands Lottery for the benefit of Jersey good causes and we anticipate that over the next 2 years, double the amount currently available will be distributed to those good causes.

5.1.1 Deputy K.C. Lewis:

I have spoken recently to one of the ladies concerned who has given me full permission to use her name, Jersey lady, Mrs. Le Brocq, who is now £40,000 down on the deal and was given one month’s notice. Does the Minister think that this is right and just and, if not, what is he prepared to do about it?