In order that the context may be understood for the increase in November 2017 in pay grades and salaries of 126 health professionals and social workers, subsequently described as “inappropriately uplifted”, will the Chair explain the background, in particular –

(a) how the decision came about to instruct the pay uplift;

(b) who was responsible for signing off this decision;

(d) whether unintended consequences have arisen from this decision and, if so, what;

(d) the total cost of this action, up to the present day;

(e) any ongoing costs associated with this action;

(f) whether or not anyone has been held to account for this matter, and if so, how;

and will he commit to publishing the independent report into this matter commissioned by the Health and Community Services Department at the request of the Unions, and any other related reports either commissioned or published; and if not, why not?

Answer

A re-evaluation of certain HCS roles was undertaken in 2017. In mid-2018 concerns that had been expressed resulted in an independent review being carried out, which was then presented to the SEB. The contents of the report are public, have been shared with staff and can be accessed via the following link. The SEB were (and remain) fully supportive of the findings of the report and action was taken accordingly.

The answers to each of the Deputy’s questions are below:

Concerns were raised in August 2017 by the then Chief Officer (CO) of Health and Social Services Department (HSSD) and the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) regarding the impact of the implementation of Workforce Modernisation (WFM). A request was made to the then Employment Relations Director for the re-evaluation of a number of Allied Health Professional (AHP) roles, as identified by the then HSSD Senior Leadership team. Following a number of discussions between senior officers, it was agreed that the roles would be evaluated, this was carried out by Korn Ferry Ltd (Hay).
The Director of Employee Relations at the time confirmed that it was their responsibility to sign off this decision as this was business as usual in terms of job evaluation.
In 2018, the SEB directed that a full and proper independent evaluation exercise (root cause analysis) must be carried out across all AHP roles. It was determined that the most equitable solution to the issue was to re-evaluate all AHP roles to ensure parity across the whole group. This activity was carried out by a project team who worked closely with officers, Trades Union representatives and colleagues to ensure full transparency. The review also included an appeals procedure to allow colleagues to query their evaluation outcome and discuss aspects of the evaluation process with the aim of ensuring colleagues felt engaged as participants in the process.
The key risk issues identified were the lack of acceptance of the outcomes of re-evaluation and the signing of job descriptions, this was mitigated by providing regular updates, escalation points and continued engagement. Sign off sheets and an appeal process was also introduced.
The total cost for the project which includes all of the costs was £892,200. This included pay protection costs for the relevant AHPs/SWs from April 2019 to the end of pay protection in March 2022.
The ongoing cost associated to this is the pay protection element that ceases March 2022, as identified in e.
A root cause analysis was commissioned by the Interim HR Director Health and Social Service Department early June 2018. The purpose of the review was predominantly to establish the facts that led to the decision to evaluate a limited number of AHP posts as business as usual ahead of Work Force Modernisation results being published in early November 2017. Following the root cause analysis, colleagues were held to account, however we are not able to disclose further details.

As noted above, the report can be accessed via the following link

2.2 Deputy L.B.E. Ash of St. Clement of the Minister for the Environment regarding licences to fish in French waters (WQ.471/2021):

Question

Will the Minister state the number of Jersey fishermen who currently hold a licence to fish in French territorial waters compared to the current number of French fishermen granted a licence to fish in Jersey’s territorial waters; and will he explain what action, if any, is being taken to support local fishermen in obtaining a licence from the French Government to ensure that access by both French and Jersey fishermen to the other jurisdiction’s territorial waters is fair and balanced?

Answer

To date, one Jersey vessel has a licence to fish in French Territorial Waters. Seven applications for Jersey vessels are pending. Through the UK, officers have requested that decisions in relation to those applications are expedited as a priority.

To date, 118 licences have been issued to French vessels. 116 were announced previously and, following provision of additional data recently, two further licences have been approved.

Qualification for a licence is clearly set out in the TCA and requires demonstration of fishing activity during the defined track record period. If a vessel provides the necessary information, once analysed and verified, then a licence can be issued.

There has been political engagement via the Ministers for the Environment and External Relations which includes extensive engagement at a technical/officer level with UK, EU and French officials to ensure compliance with the requirements of the TCA.

Government will continue to ensure that those vessels who demonstrate qualification receive a licence to fish in either Jersey and French Waters.

2.3 Deputy K.F. Morel of St. Lawrence of the Minister for Social Security regarding Social Security Contributions (WQ.472/2021):

Question

Will the Minister provide a table showing the total number and value of Class 1 and Class 2 Social Security Contributions paid out each quarter between Quarter 1 2020 and Quarter 3 2021 inclusively?

Answer

The Tables show the number and value of contributions received into the Social Security Fund for each month.

Confirmed figures for quarter C 2021 are not yet available. They will be circulated to States Members once they have been confirmed.

The data for quarters A, B and D 2020 and A 2021 is subject to a higher degree of variation and uncertainty because some categories of employers and Class 2 contributors were able to defer payment of these contributions for up to two years.

Revenue Jersey will continue to engage with employers and Class 2 contributors to ensure that the deferred contributions are collected over the remaining deferral period. This will result in on-going changes to the data the Government has on the number of contributors and value of contributions collected for these quarters.

Year	Quarter	Month	Class 1 Contributors	Class 2 Contributors
Year	Quarter	Month	Number	Number
2020	A	Jan	49,774	3,586
		Feb	49,609	3,512
		Mar	49,748	3,384
	B	Apr	47,638	3,237
		May	47,349	3,140
		Jun	47,966	3,121
	C	Jul	48,709	4,208
		Aug	48,968	4,148
		Sep	48,853	4,218
	D	Oct	48,856	3,937
		Nov	48,818	3,866
		Dec	48,700	3,830
2021	A	Jan	48,231	4,139
		Feb	48,272	4,077
		Mar	48,700	4,103
	B	Apr	49,335	4,223
		May	49,348	4,190
		Jun	50,055	4,175

Year	Quarter	Month	Class 1 Contributions	Class 2 Contributions
Year	Quarter	Month	(£,000s)	(£,000s)
2020	A	Jan	17,921	1,616
		Feb	17,829	1,584
		Mar	18,476	1,496
	B	Apr	17,240	1,442
		May	17,615	1,406
		Jun	17,611	1,404
	C	Jul	18,184	1,857
		Aug	17,850	1,823
		Sep	17,975	1,867
	D	Oct	15,516	1,535
		Nov	15,313	1,499
		Dec	15,853	1,482
2021	A	Jan	15,277	1,666
		Feb	15,266	1,625
		Mar	16,091	1,622
	B	Apr	16,123	1,621
		May	15,640	1,598
		Jun	15,897	1,588

2.4 Deputy J.M. Maçon of St. Saviour of the Minister for the Environment regarding the opportunity to consider the Deputy’s amendment (WQ.473/2021):

Question

Will the Minister advise whether he has considered my amendment to the Draft Building and Planning (Amendment No. 8) (Jersey) Law 202- (P.76/2021) and whether he intends to present comments on the amendment; and, if so, when will the comments be presented?

Answer

Yes, I have considered Deputy Macon’s Amendment to P.76/2021. Before I consider presenting a comment on the Amendment, I would like to have the opportunity to reflect on the Environment, Housing and Infrastructure Panel’s review when it is presented. Any comment would be presented to the Assembly as we approach the debate.

I would like to advise that I have recently written to the Panel informing them that I am minded deferring the debate of P.76/2021 to the 26 April 2022 sitting to afford them and members additional time to review the legislation and the work that will follow P.76/2021, if adopted.

2.5 Deputy J.M. Maçon of St. Saviour of the Chief Minister regarding civil servants attending an Institute of Directors lunch (WQ.474/2021):

Question

Will the Minister state –

(a) the number of civil servants that attended the Institute of Directors lunch on 25th November 2021;

(b) which department each civil servant attending the lunch came from;

(d) how the cost of their attendance, including any food and drink, was covered and by whom?

Answer

a) 4

b) Office of the Chief Executive x1,

Children, Young People, Education and Skills x1,

Economy x2

c) All four were invited by the Institute of Directors (IoD)

d) All four had their costs covered by the IoD.

2.6 The Connétable of St. John of the Minister for Children and Education regarding birth parent support and advocacy services (WQ.475/2021):

Question

Will the Minister provide members with the following information –

(a) the budget allocated for birth parent support and advocacy services for each of the next three years;

(b) the anticipated start date for these services; and

(c) the expected benefits of introducing these services in reducing expenditure on social care interventions for new parents?

Answer

(a) the budget allocated for birth parent support and advocacy services for each of the next three years;

A budget of £70,000 was allocated in 2021 for a pilot with an external voluntary organisation. The pilot has not been possible. No separate budget has yet been allocated for 2022 although it is expected that a pilot can be prioritised from existing resources.

(b) the anticipated start date for these services; and

A pilot was anticipated to start in 2021 but this has not been possible. We are now planning to produce a specification for the service and to commission an external service provider.

(c) the expected benefits of introducing these services in reducing expenditure on social care interventions for new parents?

The specification has not yet been produced. The anticipated benefits include a reduction in the repeat removal of children from the same family, thereby reducing the need for state intervention and oversight.

2.7 The Connétable of St. John of the Minister for Treasury and Resources regarding Jersey Telecom’s process to sell the IoT business ((WQ.476/2021):

Question

Further to the response provided to Oral Question 183/2021, will the Minister advise when she first became aware of JT’s intention to embark on the sale of the Internet of Things (IoT) Division of their business?

Answer

The JT Board adopted a 5-year strategy for the IoT division in 2017 which incorporated a growth strategy with possible exit options. This has been referenced in annual updates to their Budget and Operating Plan.

The Assistant Minister for Treasury & Resources meets with the JT Board on a quarterly basis and the performance of the IoT division was discussed at each meeting. At one such meeting, on 7 February 2020, the JT Board informed the Assistant Minister of their intention to carve-out the IoT division from the core business.

On the 6 November 2020 the Minister was formally advised by the JT Board of the launch of projects to ring-fence the IoT division in a separate Jersey company with the intention of instigating a sales process of the IoT division, which was referenced in the most recently approved Operating Plan of that time.

2.8 The Connétable of St. John of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding occupany rates at the General Hospital (WQ.477/2021):

Question

Will the Minister state the bed occupancy rates at the General Hospital for September, October and the first three weeks of November, for the years 2020 and 2021?

Answer

The table below shows the bed occupancy at Jersey General Hospital in the months requested.

Please note that we have provided information for the whole of November as this avoids the need to re-run the 2020 data which would take considerable officer time.

Bed Occupancy (overnight), Jersey General Hospital*, by month and year

	2020	2021
September	65.4%	62.8%
October	66.4%	73.3%
November	67.9%	77.0%

Data Source: Hospital Patient Administration System (TrakCare, Report ATD3Z)

*Excluding Maternity and Day wards (i.e. Day Surgery Unit, Aubin Ward [endoscopy day unit], MDU [medical day unit], Oncology, Renal Unit, Rozel Ward [private patient day unit]

2.9 Deputy R.J. Ward of St. Helier of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding support given to women in their third trimester of pregnancy (WQ.478/2021):

Question

Will the Minister explain what advice and support regarding protection from Covid infection is given to women in the third trimester of their pregnancy who work in front line services such as health and education?

Answer

As an employer, the Government requires managers and pregnant women to undertake a risk assessment at various stages of the pregnancy. The risk assessments should be recorded and reviewed at appropriate times throughout the term of pregnancy including the third trimester.

The responsibility to protect the health and safety of pregnant women who are working, has always been part of our duty of care and nothing that has happened in this Covid-19 crisis negates this. However, guidance specific to Covid-19 is provided to managers around the safety measure in all service areas including front-line services such as health and education. Our most vulnerable colleagues, including pregnant women, are a priority to ensure that they are safely able to continue working, appropriate adjustments can be put in place or that other suitable alternative work is found.

As part of our business continuity approach, revised policy arrangements are in place to ensure that managers understand specifically the need to undertake risk assessments and make suitable adjustments. The risk assessment involves seeking advice from General Practitioners and/or our Occupational Health provider. Risk assessments and suitable adjustments will vary from service areas and from individual to individual. In some situations, managers/colleagues may need to discuss options around changes to working arrangements if there are any concerns that have been identified through the risk assessment and / or the advice that is provided by the GP or Occupational Health. In exceptional situations where adjustments or other suitable alternative work cannot be found, alternative leave arrangements would be agreed. We will follow the advice provided by Midwives and other clinicians if this varies from our policy.

Those who are pregnant when reaching 28 weeks or over and wishing to remain in a patient-facing role in HCS can do so providing they:

are fully vaccinated
are taking part in workforce swab testing (health surveillance)
do not work in COVID Hot wards or conduct AGPs (aerosol generating procedures)
must be face fit tested and wearing full protective clothing at all times whilst working
have an up to date New and Expectant Mothers Risk Assessment in place.

Alternative non-patient facing work such as admin, audit or education will be considered if any of the above is not in place.

2.10 Deputy R.J. Ward of St. Helier the Minister for Children and Education regarding the Special Educational Needs review (WQ.479/2021):

Question

In relation to the Special Educational Needs (S.E.N.) review, will the Minister provide –

(a) the date the review started;

(b) the date the consultation ended;

(d) the date the first draft of the report was completed;

(e) the date the final draft report was completed; and

(f) the date the report was passed to him as Minister?

Answer

It is assumed the Deputy’s question refers to the recently completed Inclusion Review and the answers below are based on this.

(a) the date the review started;

The review commenced 8th April 2021

(b) the date the consultation ended;

Stakeholder consultation ended 15th July 2021

A list of stakeholders is provided below. 1:1 and focus group meetings, including school visits, were held between 8th and 30th June 2021 and surveys were also used to collect feedback.

(d) the date the first draft of the report was completed;

9th August 2021

(e) the date the final draft report was completed; and

8th November

(f) the date the report was passed to him as Minister?

26th November 2021

(c ) list of the stakeholders consulted

ASCIT team members

Assistant Children and Education Ministers

Autism Jersey

Beresford Street Kitchen

Brighter Futures

Centrepoint

Chair of the Jersey Best Start Partnership

Children’s Policy SPPP

Childrens Service - Director and Chief Social Worker (Children and Families)

Commissioning Team Member

CYPES Finance

CYPES Senior Advisors

Designated Safeguarding Officer - Education

Digital Jersey

Director General CYPES

Early Years Team Manager

Education Reform Programme Director

EOTAS co-ordinator

Every Child our Future

Family & Community Support (Head of Service)

Family Mediation Jersey

Focus on Mental Illness

Founder Mind-Safe

Group Director Integrated Services and Commissioning CYPES

Group Director of Education

Hautlieu School Staff

Head of Children's Health and Well Being

Head of Commissioning and Service redesign

Head of CYPES informatics

Head of Early Years

Head of Inclusion

Head of Office - CYPES

Head of SEN

Head Teachers

Health Jersey

Hearing and Deaf Support Team Leader Inclusion Service

Inclusion and disability review officer

Jersey Association of Carers

Jersey Association of Home Educators

Jersey Childcare Trust

Jersey Disability Association

Millis Separated Family Group

Mind Jersey

Office of the Children’s Commissioner

Parent Carer Forum

Parents

Samaritans

SEN advisory teacher and EOTAS co-ordinator

Service Manager - PAWBS

Service Manager - SEN

Service Manager - Vulnerable Children

Skills Jersey

Specialist Community Public Health Nurse

Speech and Language Therapy staff

Teacher for Visual Impairment

Team Manager- CYPES

Union representatives - Prospect, Unite, NEU, NASUWT and NAHT

Virtual School Interim

Youth service

2.11 Deputy R.J. Ward of St. Helier of the Minister for Children and Education regarding school funding (WQ.480/2021):

Question

In relation to the determination of the formulae for school funding, will the Minister provide the following –

(a) the date the process was started;

(b) the date the consultation ended;

(d) the date the first draft of the report was completed;

(e) the date the final draft of the report was completed; and

(f) the date the report was passed to him as a Minister?

Answer

(a) the date the process was started;

The initiation meeting to start the project to review the funding formula was on 29th April 2021.

(b) the date the consultation ended;

This work is being developed iteratively as a project and is not a consultation. The work to determine how the evolving formula influences the budget for 2022 will be complete by the end of December 2021.

As part of the project, stakeholders were split into three working groups: Primary Schools, Secondary Schools and Inclusion. In the third quarter the Inclusion content was merged into the Primary and Secondary groups.

Members of the Secondary Group are:

2 Secondary School Heads,
1 Bursar from a Fee-Paying School
A representative from the School Improvement & Advisory Service
Project Manager (to ensure what is discussed aligns with other Education Reform Programme projects)

Workshop dates: 12/5, 7/6, 13/7, 18/11

Members of the Primary Group are:

2 Primary Heads (1 town school, 1 Parish school)
1 Bursar from a Fee-Paying School
Project Manager (to ensure what is discussed aligns with other Education Reform Programme projects)

Workshop dates: 14/5, 10/6, 23/6, 12/11

Members of the Inclusion Group are:

1 Primary Head
1 Secondary Head
Head of Inclusion
Head of SEN

A representative from the School Improvement & Advisory Service

Workshop dates: 11/5, 11/6, 25/6, 12/7, 26/7

Additionally, feedback continues to be garnered through a Quality Assuance process from nasen (authors of the Inclusion Review) and the Public Sector Consultancy (formerly 2020, authors of the Independent School Funding Review).

(d) the date the first draft of the report was completed; and

(e) the date the final draft of the report was completed; and

(f) the date the report was passed to him as a Minister?

The project output will be in the form of a proposed budget and is being developed in an iterative process. The first presentation to the Minister will be the proposed 2022 budget in December 2021.

2.12 Senator S.W. Pallett of the Minister for Children and Education regarding a counter bullying policy (WQ.481/2021):

Question

Will the Minister update the Assembly on his department’s ‘Counter-Bullying Policy’ that was introduced in March 2019, including his assessment of whether its introduction has been a success; will he provide details of the number of incidents of bullying reported in primary and secondary schools for each term in the years 2019, 2020 and 2021, broken down by the type of bullying (as defined within the policy), and will he explain how those involved in bullying are dealt with?

Answer

Since the introduction of the new counter-bullying policy, the following has been completed:

Almost two-thirds (63%) of all schools in Jersey, that is primary and secondary, have been trained in the new Counter bullying approach recommendations. This training involves three separate elements

All staff (not just teachers) in schools have been brought up to speed on the changes to the policy and the changes in approaches to the ethos of managing bullying in schools
All the parents/carers in those schools have been invited to attend an evening session with the Educational Psychologist who has designed the new counter-bullying approach on Island. This session outlines the new approach and the role of parents in supporting the staff manage bullying in school. Those who were unable to attend the evening session have had the Teams recording of this training made available to them via the school website.
All pupils in these schools have received a specially designed assembly on the new counter-bullying approaches and how to support peers in this new approach.

Feedback from all schools on this training has been ‘Excellent’. It is our intention to complete training in all remaining schools by the end of the 2021/22 academic year.

Every school has now nominated a ‘Counter bullying Network Lead’ who are responsible for the implementation and coordination of the new policy. These people have been attending regular meetings with the Educational Psychologist coordinating this approach. 70% have been trained in the new tools that have been developed as part of this initiative. This training includes the Whole School Counter Bullying Audit Tool (CBAT). This resource has been specifically designed for this project by the educational psychologist leading on the program and is unique to Jersey. This tool will enable every school to assess how well they are managing bullying in school and focus their attention on things that need improving. There is another training session booked for network leads on Wednesday 8th December to ensure all schools are maintaining the focus of the new counter-bullying approach.

The data for the incidents of bullying reported in primary and secondary schools for each term in the years 2019, 2020 and 2021 is collected and recorded on SIMS by each school’s Counter Bullying Network Lead as incidences occur.

To avoid disparity in the data that is being collected before, during and after the whole school training program, it is our aim to update the SIMS database to include all the forms of bullying as outlined in the policy, once all schools have had the training. This should be completed by the end of this academic year.

It is evident that discrepancies will occur in these circumstances as schools gain a clearer understanding of which acts constitute those of a bully and which can and should be classed just as behavioural, but not bullying. This then will be recorded differently on SIMS in a separate box. This disparity in recording was identified some time ago and is being addressed through the whole school training program as outlined above.

Recorded incidences of bulling within Schools since 2019
Phase	Term	Academic Year
Phase	Term	2018/2019	2019/2020	2020/2021	2021/2022
Primary	Autumn	30	32	17	10
	Spring	22	15	14
	Summer	9	13	11
Secondary	Autumn	75	82	57	31
	Spring	58	25	43
	Summer	41	<5	38

The above table reports on Behavioural Incident data recorded within SIMS.
Records have been included only where the category of the incident indicates bullying.
The data was extracted from a series of reports run on the morning of 2021/12/01 against each schools SIMS instance.
The academic year 2021/2022 is only a partial year of less than one full term.
Overall numbers have been impacted by the impact of the pandemic on school attendance – thus any comparisons with the initial year of 2018/19 may not be valid.
A further detailed breakdown by bullying type is not currently available however we are looking to review and improve the consistency of recording and reporting across schools in 2022.

Schools use a range of methods to address bullying within schools including; restorative practise, social stories that put incidents into context and preventative measures through awareness in the PSHE curriculum. One example of innovation in restorative practice is that Grouville School are piloting a peer mediation approach in partnership with the Resolution Centre. Each incident needs to be looked at individually and within its own context to ensure that those involved understand the consequences of their actions and don’t repeat the behaviours involved.

2.13 Senator S.W. Pallett of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding children’s speech and language therapy (WQ.482/2021):

Question

Will the Minister state –

(a) the current waiting times to access children’s speech and language therapy services;

(b) whether such waiting times have increased since the start of 2021 and, if so, why and how this is being addressed;

(d) whether any current vacancies exist in the service and, if so, what is being done to fill them?

Answer

a) As of 26 November 2021, 137 children are currently on the waitlist for initial assessment, with the next available appointment to be offered to a child triaged as low priority and referred to the service in April 2021. The longest wait time at present is 31 weeks for children who have been indicated upon triage to have low priority needs relative to clinical concerns documented by the referring party (i.e. teacher, health visitor, paediatrician, GP etc).

Once assessed, children are prioritised clinically from 1-4, with 1 being highest priority (greatest need) and 4 being lowest priority (mildest need) and seen for therapy according to assessment priority status. Therapy support is provided post-initial assessment for children assessed to have high priority needs within 8-12 weeks of their initial assessment, dependent on therapist capacity. Therapy is focused around a specific goal or target for each episode of care.

b) As a result of the hard work of the paediatric speech and language therapy team, there has been a decrease in initial assessment wait times since January 2021, when there was a 12-24 month wait time. As of January 2022, the anticipated wait time is expected to have fallen to 4-8+ months. The appendix provides further information.

c) All permanent clinical posts are currently filled after successful recruitment exercises, but the department is catching up on some delays as a result of past vacancies and retirements. The department is about to commission an external review to ensure the service is adequately staffed to meet the demands of Islanders.

d) There are no permanent clinical speech and language therapist vacancies within the team at present. Efforts are being made to fill a number of temporary COVID recovery posts which will support the department’s waiting list recovery initiatives. Difficulties have been experienced in recruiting experienced staff to these posts via locum agencies (demand for such candidates is high in the UK), but potential candidates are now being actively sought internally and locally.

Appendix

Referral received/Triage RAG rating	July- December 2020	January 2021-July 2021	August 2021 – December 2021	January 2022-July 2022
Red	6 months wait	12 months wait	7 months wait	4-6 months wait anticipated
Amber	7 months wait	13 months wait	8-10 months wait	6-8 months wait anticipated
Green	12-18 months wait	18-24 months wait	8- 12 months wait	8+ months wait anticipated

2.14 Senator S.W. Pallett of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding rehabilitation services (WQ.483/2021):

Question

Will the Minister provide the following details in relation to the rehabilitation services provided by Health and Community Services –

(a) the overall cost of providing rehabilitation services at Samares Ward in each year from 2015 to 2019 inclusive;

(b) a full breakdown of all staffing costs for Samares Ward for each year from 2015 to 2019 inclusive;

(c) the overall cost (estimated, if details are not available) of providing a rehabilitation service based at Plémont Ward for the period from 1st June 2020 to 31st May 2021;

(d) a full breakdown of the staffing costs (estimated, if details are not available) to provide a rehabilitation service on Plémont Ward between 1st June 2020 to 31st May 2021;

(e) who made the decision to close Samarès Ward at Overdale, and when that decision was made; and

(f) who was consulted prior to any decision to close Samares Ward at Overdale.

Answer

(a) & (b)

SAMARES WARD RUNNING COSTS 2015 TO 2019

Expenditure Type	2015	2016	2017	2018	2019
Ward Clerk	£23,773	£31,692	£25,893	£29,529	£35,355
Registered Nurses	£890,800	£925,167	£967,768	£967,210	£1,013,468
HealthCare Assistants	£420,706	£428,500	£510,245	£584,690	£715,370
Medical Staffing	£24,868	£26,355	£36,457	£50,956	£42,632
Therapy Staffing	£449,552	£458,543	£467,714	£477,068	£481,839
Total Staff Expenditure	£1,809,699	£1,870,258	£2,008,078	£2,109,454	£2,288,663
Administrative Expenses	£4,436	£2,559	£4,163	£4,280	£4,500
Clinical supplies	£15,898	£19,801	£19,889	£16,125	£18,872
Drugs & Vaccinations	£38,490	£31,455	£37,976	£33,549	£45,445
Premises & Maintenance	£2,400	£17,989	£1,899	£1,862	£437
Supplies and Services	£22,895	£14,209	£20,028	£25,480	£25,022
Total Non Staff Expenditure	£84,119	£86,012	£83,955	£81,296	£94,276
Income	-£16,480	-£16,000	-£656	-£61	£0
Total Income	-£16,480	-£16,000	-£656	-£61	£0
Total Expenditure	£1,877,339	£1,940,270	£2,091,378	£2,190,689	£2,382,939

	PLEMONT WARD RUNNING COSTS JUNE 2020 TO MAY 2021

	Expenditure Type		June 2020 to May 2021
	Ward Clerk		£24,530
	Registered Nurses		£916,491
	HealthCare Assistants		£697,531
	Medical Staffing		£40,043
	Therapy Staffing		£502,991
	Total Staff Expenditure		£2,181,586
	Administrative Expenses		£3,168
	Clinical supplies		£12,798
	Drugs & Vaccinations		£21,672
	Premises & Maintenance		£279
	Supplies and Services		£8,308
	Total Non Staff Expenditure		£46,225
	Income		£0
	Total Income		£0
	Total Expenditure		£2,227,811

(e) The decision to close the Samarès ward was a clinically-led decision in response to the Pandemic.

(f) There was a requirement to centralise the nursing and medical staff to the General Hospital in preparation for the anticipated admissions relating to the Pandemic. In addition, all medically fit patients were discharged from hospital to reduce their risk of catching Covid-19. Given the pressure to prepare, based on the initial modelling we were presented with, there was no time for an extensive consultation beyond the clinical teams. However, all staff and existing patients and their relatives were spoken to at that time, explaining the rationale for the ward closure as a result of the Pandemic.

2.15 Deputy M.R. Higgins of St. Helier of the H.M. Attorney General regarding Social Security money for alleged overpayment (WQ.484/2021):

Question

Will H.M. Attorney General state whether members of the public who have been held to owe the Social Security money for alleged overpayment have any legal recourse to claim back any money they have paid in the event that it is discovered they were not initially overpaid; if there is such recourse, does any time limit apply legally to claiming back the money; and is any such time limit affected in the event the department is found to have withheld relevant information?

Answer

Article 18 (Return of amount paid in error) of the Social Security (Contributions) (Jersey) Order 1975 (the “1975 Order”) provides that, in respect of an amount paid to the Minister in the erroneous belief that it was a contribution payable under the Social Security (Jersey) Law 1974 (the “1974 Law”), the Minister shall return the amount to the person who paid it.

This is subject to the proviso under Article 18(2) and (3) that the Minister shall deduct from that amount above

(a) Any amount treated under Article 17 - where contributions paid in error may be treated as paid on account of other contributions properly payable; and

(b) Any amount that it has paid by way of benefit in the belief that the amount paid under Article 18 was a contribution.

Article 19 (Return of contributions in excess of required amount) of the 1975 Order provides that where primary Class 1 contributions paid to the Minister in respect of monthly earnings of a Class 1 insured person exceed the amount required by Schedule 1A to the 1974 Law, the Minister shall repay the excess to that insured person.

This is subject to the proviso that the Minister may treat any excess of contributions as paid on account, or in satisfaction of unpaid contributions and shall not be required to make any repayment where the excess is less than one pound (see Article 19(2)).

The Social Security (Contributions) (Jersey) Order 1975 is silent on the matter of time limits. However, the standard procedure for determining claims and questions under the Social Security (Jersey) Law 1974 is found in the Social Security (Determination of Claims and Questions) (Jersey) Order 1974. There are time limits (21 days) where a person wishes to have a decision by a determining officer redetermined by a second determining officer under Article 1A(b) and further time limits (14 or 28 days) where a person wishes to appeal to the Social Security Tribunal against the second determining officer’s decision under Article 9. Such time periods are of course capable of being varied by agreement.

If the department is found to have withheld relevant information, then in principle that would affect the time limit if the information was necessary to inform the alleged overpaying party that they had overpaid, depending on the facts of the individual case.
If the overpayment in question relates to a different type of benefit than mentioned above, then the relevant law relating to the particular benefit would need to be considered.

2.16 Deputy M.R. Higgins of St. Helier of the Chief Minister regarding the digital register of owners of commercial and residential properties (WQ.485/2021):

Question

Will the Chief Minister provide members with a timescale for the introduction of the digital register of all owners of commercial and residential properties in the Island, as requested by the States in September 2020 with the adoption of P.93/2020, and will he explain why the implementation of this register has not been progressed more promptly, given that the data gathered could assist in the development of policy to address the current challenges around housing?

Answer

Further to the answer provided by the Minister Housing and Communities to WQ.376/2021, a business case has been produced and is being reviewed with a Project Manager due to be appointed shortly thereafter.

Once appointed, the Project Manager will be tasked with undertaking a feasibility study which will determine and outline the timeline for introducing the digital register of all owners of commercial and residential properties. Unfortunately, until this has taken place it is not possible to provide a timescale.

With a view to maintain the political pressure on the implementation of this States decision, I have asked my Assistant Chief Minister Deputy Rowland Huelin to take this project forward and I will be asking him to liaise closely with the Deputy as part of this.

I understand and share the Deputy’s disappointment that this project has fallen behind the schedule agreed by the States Assembly, but hope that he will appreciate that this has been caused due to capacity issues and the significant existing pipeline of work including the Government’s response to COVID.

2.17 Deputy M.R. Higgins of St. Helier of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding the secret tape recording of social workers (WQ.486/2021):

Question

Further to his response to Oral Question 221/2021 regarding the secret recording of Social Workers in order to provide a record of meetings, will the Minister confirm the results of his department’s discussions with the Office of the Information Commissioner and whether or not members of the public may make recordings of conversations without advising those civil servants (or any other States employees) concerned that a recording is being made?

Answer

In regard to the request to confirm the results of Health and Community Services’ discussions with the JOIC, this remains as per the response to the Oral Question OQ.221/2021, in which I advised that people may make recordings if they so wish, for their own purpose.

In regard to whether or not Government employees must be advised that the recording is being made, people do not have to advise the employee with whom they are interacting (although I would consider it polite to do so).

2.18 Deputy J.M. Maçon of St. Saviour of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding the use of Ivermectin (WQ.487/2021):

Question

Will the Minister state what analysis, if any, has been carried out by the department of the use of Ivermectin as –

(a) a treatment for Covid-19;

(b) and a preventative measure for Covid-19;

and if no such research has been carried out, will he explain why not?

Answer

We do not have a local research capacity and therefore the Department follows guidance from the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA). Ivermectin is not authorised for use against COVID by the MHRA and we will therefore not be using it.

Ivermectin has been included in the University of Oxford PRINCIPLE trial to determine whether this is a safe and effective treatment for COVID. It is unclear if they are looking at this at present for the purposes of preventing disease.

Ronapreve, a mixture of 2 monoclonal antibodies, is MHRA-authorised and has this week been recommended for use in the community as well as in hospitalised patients. We are in the process of looking at how to best set up the community-based service. A hospital-based service is already in operation.

Molnupiravir is a direct acting antiviral in tablet form active against COVID. It has been authorised for use by the MHRA. We are told that it will be rolled out in two stages initially to test this out in a real life and then more widely. The Crown Dependencies will only receive this agent after the first stage. Other tablet form direct acting agents are in the pipeline.

2.19 Deputy K.G. Pamplin of St. Saviour of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding the A&E referral process (WQ.488/2021):

Question

Will the Minister –

(a) advise the current processes that are followed when patients admitted to the Emergency Department require additional tests, scans or referral to a Consultant following initial assessment; and

(b) provide a breakdown of the length of time between admission and onward referral for Emergency Department admissions occurring between December 2019 and December 2021?

Answer

a) When patients attend the Emergency Department (ED), an initial triage is undertaken followed by a doctor assessment. Depending on each individual case, patients may have diagnostics or specialist review undertaken in different ways:

Patient may have diagnostics or specialist review within the ED.
The patient may require hospital admission where they will be referred to the speciality team for review and, if required, admitted for further diagnostics, care and treatment.
The patient is discharged from ED for further review as an outpatient
The patient is discharged from ED for further review via the GP
The patient is discharged from ED and returns to the Ambulatory Emergency Care Unit for further review & diagnostics.

b) For the period 1 December 2019 to 30 November 2021, the average time from arrival at the Emergency Department to admission to the hospital, and the average time per month from the ED requesting a bed to the patient leaving the department, is shown below:

Month and Year of Attendance	Number of Patients Admitted following ED attendance	Average Total Time in Emergency Department from Arrival to Admission (Minutes)	Average Time from Bed request to Leaving department (Minutes)
Dec 2019	470	295.67	142.70
Jan 2020	455	283.85	142.50
Feb 2020	437	293.62	151.56
Mar 2020	317	246.17	114.80
Apr 2020	200	177.96	90.61
May 2020	297	197.59	93.58
Jun 2020	378	206.16	98.74
Jul 2020	355	236.19	111.36
Aug 2020	402	244.78	122.75
Sep 2020	360	240.79	111.64
Oct 2020	439	268.44	138.18
Nov 2020	377	246.21	111.91
Dec 2020	359	265.00	135.97
Jan 2021	373	250.90	132.95
Feb 2021	353	264.35	134.24
Mar 2021	413	285.89	146.17
Apr 2021	396	288.33	140.07
May 2021	409	298.48	152.36
Jun 2021	431	309.85	148.10
Jul 2021	434	305.99	142.29
Aug 2021	434	309.59	147.79
Sep 2021	427	329.96	158.35
Oct 2021	455	305.66	156.60
Nov 2021	505	305.20	139.30

Data Source: Hospital Patient Administration System (TrakCare, Report ED5A)

2.20 Deputy K.G. Pamplin of St. Saviour of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding waiting lists for all adult health services (WQ.489/2021):

Question

Will the Minister provide a breakdown of the current waiting list for all Adult Mental Health services, to incorporate the number of bed spaces currently available and the capacity across all mental health wards, including those for patients living with dementia?

Answer

Adult Mental Health Services is currently implementing an improved system for tracking referrals to outpatient services. The new process was introduced in October 2021 and in October and November 2021, the system recorded the following referrals:

271 Accepted
40 Rejected
51 Signposted
43 Not Recorded

As of 7th of December there are currently 170 referrals waiting for assessment.

Adult and Older Adult Mental Health Services provide inpatient care across three units. There is no waiting list for inpatient mental health care. The number of beds and average occupancy are shown in the following table:

Service	Unit	Number of Beds	Average Overnight Bed Occupancy – October 2021	Average Overnight Bed Occupancy – November 2021
Adult Mental Health	Orchard House	14	79.7%	90.2%
Older Adult Mental Health/Long Term Continuing Care	Beech Ward	12	88.7%	88.6%
Older Adult Mental Health/Long Term Continuing Care	Cedar Ward	14	88.7%	88.6%

2.21 Deputy K.G. Pamplin of St. Saviour of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding support for senior parents of children with Downs Syndrome (WQ.490/2021):

Question

Will the Minister state what financial, practical and care service support, if any, exists for parents and carers of children with Downs Syndrome where the parents or carers may themselves be retiring, entering care homes or in need of care at home?

Answer

Everyone in Jersey can access the care they need through the long-term care scheme and services provided by Health and Community Services (HCS). Aside from this, financial help is available through Income Support for low-income households. Severely disabled children and young adults who live with their parents in Jersey qualify for a range of payments from Income Support. These payments are independent of the income of their parents.

There would be situations where parents and carers who have retired continue to provide care, but if the situation was such that they were no longer in a position to do so then the (adult) child would have their care needs assessed in their own right and an appropriate package of care would be put in place. Services commissioned after assessment would cover adult social care and HCS support. Following assessment of need, a care plan would be agreed which could include services commissioned via the long-term care scheme, HCS commissioned services, short-break services, domiciliary or shared living services or services provided by third-sector colleagues.

In addition, a Community Learning Disability Team is available to any adult with a learning disability which provides integrated health & social care support that is centred on the individual with learning disabilities and supports the person, their families and carers as well as other health and social care agencies or service providers. These professionals enable health improvements and reduce potential barriers in accessing mainstream services using reasonable adjustments to achieve a positive outcome.

In relation to family members providing care, the work done by all family carers is extremely valuable to Jersey and Government support is already available through a range of schemes.

The long-term care scheme acknowledges the role of family carers within the overall care package for an individual and provides financial support towards respite breaks. The Income Support benefit provides additional support of £51.38 a week to a family carer of any age living in an Income Support household, on top of their normal Income Support entitlement. The Employment Law gives all workers the right to request flexible working to help them arrange caring responsibilities around paid work outside the home.

In addition, through Local Services there is a number of clusters which see Government and Civil Society working to support islanders in specific areas such as Learning Disability, Older Persons, Cancer, Children and Young People, Homelessness and Mental Health as well as Government’s work to deliver the Disability Strategy.

The Social Security Minister has previously announced plans to provide extra financial support for family carers in the Government Plan. This project – Care Needs at Home – was originally planned for 2020 but has been delayed due to Covid. The project will look at the extra household expenses incurred when a family is providing care to a family member at home. The project has recently restarted and will continue into 2022. The intention is that a new tax-funded payment will be created and budget has been set aside for this purpose.

In addition, the Home Carer’s Allowance is a contributory benefit provided through the Social Security scheme. It is available to a working aged adult who gives up full time work in order to care for someone who has high care needs. This benefit is paid at the standard rate of £232.47 a week and requires the carer to satisfy contribution conditions. In November 2021, the States Assembly agreed a change to the Allowance. This will allow carers to undertake paid work for up to 15 hours a week and still claim the full HCA weekly amount. Previously, carers were restricted in the amount of wages that could be earned from an outside job. The change to hours was made following requests from carers to provide more flexibility in this area. When a carer is receiving HCA, they also receive a full pension record for that period.

At pension age, if a carer is already receiving HCA, the Law allows them to choose between continuing to receive HCA or moving to their old age pension. In this way, the carer can choose the benefit which is most advantageous to them. It is not possible to make an application for HCA if the carer is a pensioner when they first make a claim.

2.22 Deputy I. Gardiner of St. Helier the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding orthotics (WQ.491/2021):

Question

Will the Minister state the following for each year between 2015 and 2020 –

(a) the number of pairs of orthotics supplied at the hospital;

(b) the total cost per year of orthotics;

(d) the average number, per year, of replacement orthotics issued due to a change to the original prescription;

(e) the total cost per year of Consultants’ fees to provide a professional orthotics service;

(f) the cost per year of travel expenses for Consultants providing this service;

(g) the average wait time for patients between being prescribed orthotics and receiving them; and

(h) if the average waiting time is longer than 2 weeks, will the Minister explain why?

Answer

We provide a whole range of orthotics, which includes insoles, children’s walking aids, adapted footwear, and callipers, diabetic made to measure footwear/off-loading insoles, hernia supports, spinal jackets, compression garments and knee/ankle braces.

From 2015 to March 2020 the Orthotic Service was provided by South Coast Orthotics.

* From April 2020 the Orthotic Service is temporarily being provided by Steeper Orthotics, until the new contract is in place, which will then go out to tender.

(a) 2015 – 1153

2016 – 1039

2017 – 1041

2018 – 1026

2019 – 1025

2020 – 236 (01/01/2020 – 31/03/2020) Orthotist retired / Contract ended

*2020 – 335 (01/07/2020 – 31/12/2020) No clinics April – June due to Covid

(b) 2015 - £59,306.80

2016 – £56,719.26

2017 – £53,932.54

2018 – £66,639.25

2019 – £57,777.27

2020 – £15,506.97 (01/01/2020 – 31/03/2020) Orthotist retired / Contract ended

*2020 – £46,730.06 (01/07/2020 – 31/12/2020) No clinics April – June due to Covid

(c) It is difficult to give an average number. Children’s orthotics could be replaced 3-4 times per year due to growth, wear & tear. Adults have a yearly entitlement of 2 sets of orthotics per year, with the option of purchasing more if required. The total number of repeat orthotics was as follows:

2015 - 447

2016 – 416

2017 - 413

2018 - 421

2019 – 440

2020 – 253 (lower number due to Covid and cancelled clinics)

(d) Information is not held in this format.

(e) 2015 – £28,880.40

2016 – £28,880.40

2017 – £29,169.24

2018 – £30,044.28

2019 – £30,344.88

2020 – £7,586.22 (01/01/2020 – 31/03/2020)

*2020 – £16,785.63 (01/07/2020 – 31/12/2020)

(f) The average cost of travel expenses per year (including flight, parking, hotel, taxi is £460 per trip x

18 trips per year) = £8,280

(g) From 2015 – March 2020, the average wait for orthotics was 2 weeks (longer for made to measure footwear: 6-8 weeks)

(h) Bespoke/Made to measure footwear takes 6-8 weeks for the initial rough fit then another couple of weeks until they are completed and are ready for the final fitting.

*From April 2020 the average waiting time from appointment to receiving orthotics has been 3-6 weeks. This is mainly due to the Covid pandemic and staff shortages at the supplier. The new supplier is also experiencing delays receiving components to make the orthotics, which it says is due to Brexit.

2.23 The Connétable of St. John of the Minister for Children and Education regarding lack of homes for children in care and those leaving care (WQ.492/2021):

Question

Will the Minister provide the following information –

(a) the number of homes currently available for both children in care and children leaving care;

(b) data showing how the number of homes for care leavers has changed over the past 10 years;

(d) the Minister’s own assessment of why a shortage in homes for children leaving care has arisen; and

(e) advise what actions, if any, are being taken to prevent similar shortages from occurring in future?

Answer

(a)

November2021 residential homes and their registered capacity:

Accommodation for 12-25 year olds provided by CYPES:	For	Capacity
4 residential children’s homes	Ages 12 – 18	10
1 secure children’s home	Ages 12 – 18	4
1 residential YP home	Ages 18 - 21	4
1 supported independent living property	Ages 18 - 21	7
1 property for independent living	Ages 18 - 25	4

Accommodation for 16-25 years provided by others
Strathmore at Shelter	16 Beds
Avalon	5x male
Bryan Skinner	5x mixed
Jeune House	11x female
Lydale	5x male
Woodbine	3x mixed

(b)

We do not have access to this level of historical information.

(c)

Dedicated resources have been allocated to develop a Sufficiency Strategy. This key action is detailed in the CYPES business plan. The purpose of this Strategy is to set out the Government of Jersey’s vision for, and approach to, providing sufficient, safe, secure and appropriate placements for children over the next 10 years.

It has been long recognised that having such a strategy will significantly improve the outcomes for our most vulnerable children, young people and families. Securing appropriate placements that meets the needs of children and young people in the island is a vital step in ensuring stability and permanence in care.

The Strategy will not only review the right number of beds for children and young people that come into our care, but it will also ensure that the right support and interventions are in place to enable children and young people to remain at home where it is safe to do so and to prevent coming into care or placement breakdown. For some children, young people and families, their specialist needs require short term or longer periods of accommodation and care outside of the family. We therefore need to ensure that we have available not just the right amount, but the right sort, of placements available to provide the best care for individuals who need placements away from their family home.

In the same way that a parenting role doesn’t stop at an arbitrary age, as corporate parents we have a responsibility to ensure Jersey children leaving care continue to receive appropriate support whilst they grow to live independently.

The Sufficiency strategy and recommendations will be published in Q2 of 2022, in the meantime we are working closely with external stakeholders to ensure we are meeting the needs of care leavers and enabling them to find safe and secure accommodation.

(d)

There has been an unexpected demand as a result of the global pandemic.

Barnardo’s withdrew from providing the 7-bed supported accommodation service. The Government of Jersey stepped in to deliver the service creating unexpected staffing and finance pressures. We have since decided to deliver the service permanently which will be fully considered in the Sufficiency Strategy.

We are working closely with stakeholders such as JPH, the Housing Advice Service and Andium Homes to increase the provision in this area and to ensure our care leavers are supported through the housing process and allocated suitable properties through our partners Andium. Unfortunately, the demand is higher than supply at the moment with a number of urgent requests for properties needing to be prioritised.

‘Staying Put’ has enabled young people past the age of 18 to remain with their foster families. This is a positive outcome for those young people but it reduces the number of foster families available.

Difficulty in recruiting foster carers, particularly for teenagers, a review is taking place as to how best to address the recruitment to meet the needs of foster families and the children and young people they look after.

(e)

We are reviewing and using our data to help forecast future needs and requirements and developing a long-term sufficiency strategy. We continue to liaise with key stakeholders to increase their awareness of the needs of care leavers and encourage them, as corporate parents, to prioritize resources for these young people.

2.24 The Connétable of St. John of the Minister for Children and Education regarding a reduction in the Children’s Social Care budget by 10 percent (WQ.493/2021):

Question

Following comments made on social media by the Director of Children’s Services that the Children’s Social Care budget has been reduced by 10% since his arrival in post, will the Minister explain how such a budget reduction is consistent with the Government’s promise to provide safe, stable and loving homes for children in care?

Answer

Since 2019, the budget held by the Director of Safeguarding and Care has increased by £9 million, from £20,158,755 to £29,184,134. £3,345,934 was transferred out of the budget to support other services in CYPES.

£2,704,200 has been taken out in efficiencies and in our drive to provide better value for money – for example, there has been a reduction in spend on off-Island placements as we have worked hard to enable children in the care of the minister to be supported in Jersey. That gives a final budget of £23,134,000. The saving as a percentage of the closing budget 2021 is 12%.

Put simply, the budget available to safeguard and care for children and young people has increased overall, from £20,158,755 to £23,134,000 and the money available is being used more effectively and efficiently. This is very much in keeping with our commitment to Put Children First.

2.25 The Connétable of St. John the Minister for Children and Education regarding C.A.M.H.S. reporting R.A.G. status as green (WQ.494/2021):

Question

Given that the Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (C.A.M.H.S.) has recently reported a Green R.A.G. (red, amber, green) rating despite the current waiting list for accessing services, will the Minister state –

(a) whether or not he agreed the objectives that underpin a Green R.A.G. rating for this service;

(b) his assessment of whether a Green R.A.G. rating is appropriate given the current waiting time to access services; and

Answer

(a)

The development of the complete performance management framework for CAMHS is still in progress and the Minister will approve the objectives once this is finalised. There is work ongoing to ensure data accuracy and appropriate business intelligence reports are in place, as well as developing outcome measures and key performance indicators.

The above question refers to the R.A.G. rating for routine appointments. For some children or young people referred they are seen the same or next day due to the urgency of issues. For others it is appropriate that they wait for the next routine appointment. Waiting times for routine appointments was R.A.G. rated green as the 2021 ambition was to reduce waiting times which continues to be achieved. Quarter three data for 2021 indicates a mean waiting time for routine appointments of just two weeks. In 2019 and 2020 mean waiting times were higher at six and five weeks.

(b)

The performance of the service has improved considerably in the last number of months in the context of very difficult operating conditions due to the pandemic and a significant increase in referrals. In 2021 79% of routine CAMHS referrals have been seen within 28 days, compared to 49% in 2020. The mean waiting time in 2021 for referral to assessment is 3 weeks, compared to 5 weeks in 2020. There have also been reductions in waiting times for autism assessments (currently 2 months, compared to 18 months earlier this year) and ADHD assessments (currently 6 months, compared to 12 months earlier this year). The team’s performance was recognised when it won a national award for its delivery of a DBT programme with young people on the island.

Benchmarking against similar services in the UK the local CAMHS service evidence overall good performance although the service continues to strive for improvement across all areas.

The Minister believes that the green R.A.G. rating for routine appointment waiting times is appropriate.

(c)

The CAMHS redesign has been approved with necessary investment a part of the Government Plan. Increasing need and numbers of referrals to the service has been a feature for the last number of years and this has been a significant feature throughout the pandemic, with unpredictable future implications likely for some time.

As part of the redesign, target outcomes include children and young people being assessed and receiving treatment in a timely manner and decreasing waiting times decrease. Recruitment is underway for additional staff as a means of addressing the increased levels of need and numbers of referral to the service. In addition, there is investment in a data analyst post and a Quality Assurance Manager who will lead on quality assurance, performance management and data quality. This will ensure the service is able to accurately report on its performance and outcomes of service users.

The Minister for Children and Education and the Minister for Health and Social services will have oversight of the performance management framework, developed and implemented for mental health and wellbeing services for children and young people.

2.26 Senator S.W. Pallett of the Minister for Health and Social Services (WQ.495/2021):

Question

Will the Minister provide details of the following in respect of rehabilitation services provided in Jersey –

(a) the total number of patients requiring rehabilitation services at Samarès Ward for each year between 2015 and the closure of the Ward in May 2020;

(b) of these patients, how many had experienced –

(i) a stroke;

(ii) a head injury; or

(iii) other injury or illness;

(d) the average length of stay for patients receiving treatment at Samarès Ward during this timeframe;

(e) the estimated number of people requiring rehabilitation services in Jersey upon which 2022-2025 budgets have been based, broken down by treatment provided in hospital and in the patient’s home;

(f) the estimated figure in terms of demand for rehabilitation services that has been used in assessing requirements for rehabilitation services within the new Hospital at Overdale; and

(g) the number of people estimated to require rehabilitation services within the new Hospital at Overdale in 2030, 2035, 2040 and 2050?

Answer

a) The total number of patients requiring rehabilitation services at Samarès Ward for each year between 2015 and the closure of the Ward in May 2020

Table 1 shows the number of patients each year who were discharged from Samares ward and had been recorded in the specialty of “Rehabilitation”. Please note that there were less than 5 patients across the whole time period where the specialty was not “Rehabilitation” – these patients have been excluded from this analysis. The last patient discharge recorded from Samares was in March 2020.

Table 1: Number of patients discharged from Samares ward, by year

Year	Number of patients
2015	175
2016	158
2017	202
2018	213
2019	252
2020 (Jan – Mar only)	90
Total	1090

Data Source: Hospital Patient Administration System (TrakCare, Report ATD5L)

b) of these patients, how many had experienced –

a stroke;

a head injury; or

other injury or illness;

Table 2 shows the analysis of the clinical coding information for these patients. The following clinical codes have been used in the analysis:

U54.3 - Delivery of rehabilitation for stroke
U51.1 - Delivery of rehabilitation for brain injuries
U53.4 - Delivery of rehabilitation for trauma not elsewhere coded.

Other trauma (U53.4) may include a patient with a head injury in cases of polytrauma. These patients would not be having rehabilitation solely for a head injury.

It is noted that there are approximately 50 rehabilitation related admissions episodes still awaiting clinical coding. These have been excluded from the analysis.

Table 2: Patients discharged from Samares ward, by year and clinical coding applied

Year	Patients receiving rehabilitation for Stroke	Patients receiving rehabilitation for Brain Injury	Patients receiving rehabilitation for other trauma	Other discharges from ward
2015	42	< 5	< 5	130
2016	30	<10	<10	120
2017	35	5	12	150
2018	31	7	11	164
2019	51	< 10	<10	189
2020 (Jan – Mar)	9	< 5	< 5	76
Total	198	25	38	829
1090

Data Source: Hospital Patient Administration System (TrakCare, Report ATD5L)

(When the number of patients per year is under 5, then the exact figure is not given as per Exemption 25 under the Jersey Data Protection law 2005. In 2016 and 2019, figures under 10 have been supressed to prevent the exact figure being calculated.)

While Samares had 23 active beds, it should be noted that not all of these were used solely for rehabilitation. On occasion, patients were transferred from the General Hospital to Samares when safe to do so to. This ‘Step Down’ process is a usual function of the hospital and continues today within the General Hospital. This places patients in the ward that best cares for their needs. This included patients waiting for community residential/nursing home placement or care at home provision. These patients are classified as ‘Other illness or injury’ in the table above. These patients are classified as ‘Rehabilitation’ on TrackCare, so form part of the figures in total discharges.

c) The length of stay for each patient treated on Samarès Ward between 2015 and the closure of the Ward in May 2020

Table 3 shows the length of stay data for the patients discharged from Samares ward. This has been grouped into weeks for ease of presentation.

Table 3: Length of Stay of Patients Discharged from Samares ward, by year

Discharge Year	Up to 1 week	1-2 weeks	2-3 weeks	3-4 weeks	4-5 weeks	5-6 weeks	6-7 weeks	7-8 weeks	>8 weeks
2015	12	26	28	20	18	18	15	5	33
2016	19	18	17	19	19	11	11	7	37
2017	31	35	31	25	15	10	9	9	37
2018	23	27	37	32	19	19	19	6	31
2019	30	39	38	33	22	25	22	13	30
2020 (Jan – Mar)	9	27	20	9	5	6	5	2	7

Data Source: Hospital Patient Administration System (TrakCare, Report ATD5L)

d) The average length of stay for patients receiving treatment at Samarès Ward during this timeframe

Table 4: Summary of Length of Stay Data for Patients Discharged from Samares ward, by year

Discharge Year	Patient Count	Average LOS (days)	Median LOS (days)
2015	175	37.2	29
2016	158	42.0	30
2017	202	36.8	23
2018	213	33.5	26
2019	252	31.5	27
2020 (Jan-Mar)	90	25.4	19
Total	1090	34.8	26

Data Source: Hospital Patient Administration System (TrakCare, Report ATD5L)

The in-patient rehabilitation programme is tailored according to the patient’s condition and level of function. Length of stay will vary dependent upon clinical need. At times, other associated medical conditions may delay a person’s discharge from hospital and, likewise, rehabilitation.

e) The estimated number of people requiring rehabilitation services in Jersey upon which 2022-2025 budgets have been based, broken down by treatment provided in hospital and in the patient’s home

The budget set for the inpatient facilities is based on the 14 rehabilitation beds that are based in the General Hospital. Therapies happen as an inpatient, an outpatient, and Out of Hospital Basis. Historically, the budget for therapies was not split between these different locations for treatment. Medical services are conducting a review of rehabilitation services as a priority in 2022. This will help identify options for rehabilitation both as inpatients and in the community.

f) The estimated figure in terms of demand for rehabilitation services that has been used in assessing requirements for rehabilitation services within the new Hospital at Overdale

The UK National Stroke Strategy informed the bed base for rehabilitation as well as an improved offering in the community. In Jersey, the number of persons diagnosed with a stroke is between 100 and 140 people annually. Rehabilitation beds are part of the inpatient bed base. The total number of beds available for acute rehabilitation can be flexible from 12-30. 75% of these are single ensuite rooms. They are adjacent to one of the four gyms used for daily physiotherapy. Patients will have access to Occupational therapy services as well as Speech and language therapy depending on the rehabilitation requirements. Initial assessments and treatments take place in an acute ward.

g) The number of people estimated to require rehabilitation services within the new Hospital at Overdale in 2030, 2035, 2040 and 2050?

The planning does not include any modelling for Healthcare beyond 2036. Healthcare provision forecasting is a dynamic process that requires frequent updates. Partly due to lessons learnt through the pandemic, the service models are being developed further currently. Changes to the model will continue to evolve with advances in medical treatments and knowledge. The design of the Our Hospital allows for change of use of spaces if needed e.g. administration and education spaces can become clinical spaces including rehabilitation units (beds, gyms or clinic rooms). With changing patterns of diseases or increasing healthcare needs, Our Hospital has been designed to be flexible to accommodate the needs of Islanders.

2.27 Senator S.W. Pallett of the Minister for Children and Education regarding the Children and Young People Emotional Wellbeing Mental Health Strategy (WQ.496/2021):

Question

With regards to the Children and Young People Emotional Wellbeing and Mental Health Strategy 2021-2025, will the Minister advise whether the following have occurred, and if not, why they have not –

(a) establishment of a Strategic Advisory Panel to ensure meaningful input for young people;

(b) appointment of a Mental Health and Wellbeing Quality Assurance Manager;

(d) development of an integrated multi-agency perinatal mental health and early years pathway;

(e) co-production of a Quality Reporting Framework;

(f) agreement of a Jersey’s Children First Practice model;

(g) creation of a core early intervention mental health team; and

(h) creation of a dedicated team in Adult Mental Health to support 18-25 year olds;

and will he further state whether the current Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service includes a duty and assessment function that is available 7 days a week?

Answer

The Government plan investment for emotional Wellbeing and Mental Health services for children and young people is in the main available from 2022 with funds prior to that being used to develop the strategy and redesign of services.

(a) establishment of a Strategic Advisory Panel to ensure meaningful input for young people;

The idea of the Strategic Advisory Panel was to set up of a group of interested individuals who would like to support the implementation of the Children and Young People’s Emotional Wellbeing and Mental Health Strategy. The Panel would include young people, parents/carers and professionals across the Island who have lived experience or work experience in the field of children and young people’s mental health.

Work has been undertaken with key stakeholders such as Youthful Minds, CYPES and the wider community to define the draft terms of reference for the group, governance arrangements and selection criteria. Communications will go out shortly (second week of January) to invite people to apply for a role on the panel, including directly to those who have expressed an interest via the draft Strategy consultation. The first meeting of the group will take place by the end of Q1 2022 and happen on a quarterly basis throughout the implementation of the four-year Strategy 2022-2025

(b) appointment of a Mental Health and Wellbeing Quality Assurance Manager;

Interviews for the Health and Wellbeing Quality and Assurance Manager are taking place on Friday 10 December.

The Anna Freud Centre have been commissioned to undertake this as part of a larger piece of work. They will report on findings and provide the competency framework by July 2022

(d) development of an integrated multi-agency perinatal mental health and early years pathway;

The pathway has been developed and funding secured subject to States Assembly approval of the Government Plan 2022 – 2025. The pathway will be formally launched in March 2022.

(e) co-production of a Quality Reporting Framework;

Work around a strategic framework has already commenced in the delivery of the outcomes-based Children and Young People Emotional Wellbeing and Mental Health Strategy. The Quality Assurance Manager (once in post) will further lead the detail of the framework development, consulting with a wide range of stakeholders.

(f) agreement of a Jersey’s Children First Practice model;

The Jersey’s Children First practice model was developed by a multi-agency group and was launched in September 2018. The framework was agreed in 2018 by the Council of Ministers.

The model is underpinned by shared values and principles which promote a restorative, strengths-based, child and family-centred way of working with families across the continuum of need. It establishes the responsibility for all those working with children and their families to identify when a child has additional needs for support or protection through a child and family assessment. For those requiring multi-agency support, the model promotes effective partnership working with a team around the child and family and an identified lead worker developing a single plan with the family. The model promotes providing support as soon as a need emerges at any point in a child’s life through early help and the shared assessment and plan templates ensure that there is continuity in the work with families if they move up or down the continuum of need into or out of statutory provision.

Pre-covid, over 2000 practitioners completed face-to-face training in the practice model and online introduction and essentials training courses were made available in September 2020. A refresh and re-launch of the practice model is planned for early 2022.

(g) creation of a core early intervention mental health team; and

A specification for the core early intervention mental health team has been agreed. Interviews were held on the 7 December to recruit the Early Intervention Mental Health Team Manager

(h) creation of a dedicated team in Adult Mental Health to support 18-25 year olds;

Work has been undertaken throughout 2021 to develop the model of support. Improved governance structures have been created (commenced late 2020) to ensure a smooth transition between CAMHS and Adult Mental health. Funding has been requested via HCS Government Plan to provide additional capacity to meet the needs of 18–25-year-olds who require support from Adult Mental health. Kooth has been commissioned (Dec 2020) to provide online counselling and support for 11-25. We also have a practitioner within the adult Community Mental Health Team who care co-ordinates the more complex cases of 18–25-year-olds and medical provision for this too.

The Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service includes a duty and assessment function that is open 9am to 5pm, Monday to Friday, with the out of hours crisis service for all ages on the island delivered by adult Mental Health Team.

2.28 Senator S.W. Pallett the Minister for Housing and Communities regarding the Jersey Homelessness Strategy (WQ.497/2021):

Question

Following the publication of Jersey Homelessness Strategy more than one year ago, will the Minister state –

(a) what he is currently doing to understand and define homelessness fully in Jersey;

(b) how, if at all, he is evidencing the scale and nature of homelessness in Jersey and whether such evidence will be presented to Members;

(c) whether he has established a complex needs team to take responsibility for dealing with the housing needs of the most vulnerable and, if not, why not;

(d) how he is providing a housing ‘safety net’ to ensure that anyone at risk of homelessness gets the help they require to prevent this happening;

(e) how he is actively supporting private sector tenants and landlords to promote positive relationships; and

(f) whether the delivery plan for the strategy is monitored quarterly and whether he will commit to providing quarterly updates to Members; and, if not, why not?

Answer

(a) One of the immediate actions of the Jersey Homelessness Strategy is to clearly state the agreed definition of homelessness for consultation and approval by the Government of Jersey and Jersey Homelessness Strategic Board. A four-tiered definition of homelessness was supported by stakeholders when the strategy was developed, encompassing, rooflessness, houselessness, insecure and inadequate housing.

The four conceptual categories of homelessness –rooflessness, houseless, insecure, and inadequate housing – are already adopted in Government policies and procedures such as Phase 3 of the plan outlined in R.32/2021: Ministerial Response to the Jersey Homelessness Strategy. These categories will continue to be used for policy and operational purposes prior to the introduction of a statutory definition of homelessness.

A Jersey definition is needed to increase understanding of the issues and provide a criterion for any future service provision, and I will work with our partners to develop an agreed definition during 2022.

(b) As Minister I receive regular updates in terms of islanders accessing accommodation as well as the number of islanders who are roofless. Officers work closely with The Shelter Trust and others to monitor the use of accommodation across the island and this information can be presented to Members. In addition, Statistics Jersey will collect information as part of the 2021 Census on the number of homeless persons in the island, including rooflessness and that information will be made available in due course.

(c) Customer and Local services have introduced the Critical Support team, which The Housing Advice service sits within. Overarching objectives of this team is to support islanders with significant and complex vulnerabilities in a holistic, person centred way, working in collaboration with stakeholders. Targeted accommodation support is at the forefront of operations, the service is currently consulting with Homeless link, a UK based Charity, to develop the offer and deliver homelessness prevention.

(d) The Shelter Trust are commissioned to provide accommodation and outreach support for anyone at risk of becoming homeless. This includes supporting people who are also at risk of becoming roofless. In addition, Officers work closely with providers and civil society to support islanders who need a safety net. In many cases a range of complex factors need to be addressed to ensure that a safety net is provided. This includes access to drug and alcohol specialists, access to General Practice, which is in place at The Shelter Trust as well as mental health support.

To further enhance the safety net the Government has supported through fiscal stimulus, a new female only shelter which will provide an additional 21 beds for vulnerable women.

(e) As Minister I meet with tenant and landlord representatives to listen to their concerns or ideas and explain my programme of policy delivery. Earlier this year I had a constructive discussion with representatives of the Jersey Tenants Forum, who offered their views on COVID-19 emergency legislation and allowed me to advise them on the related government guidance around evictions and rent increases. The Deputy Chairman of the Jersey Landlords Association (JLA) attended my inaugural Strategic Housing Partnership meeting in September. As a result of this engagement the JLA will now make an important contribution to the review of how housing and homelessness services are delivered in Jersey. As part of my Fair Rents Plan, published later this month, I will set out a programme that will offer greater consumer protection for private sector rent increases and will seek to enhance the protections of the Residential Tenancies Law, to the benefit tenants and landlords alike. These actions will be predicated on fostering better dialogue between both these parties.

(f) There is an external Jersey Homelessness Strategic Board which brings together the Private Sector, Civil Society, Government Officers and Providers who are monitoring and supporting the delivery of the Homelessness Strategy. I will be meeting with the Board and will be able to provide regular updates to Members on the progress made. In additional I have invited the Chair of the Board to join the newly formed Strategic Housing Partnership.

2.29 Deputy M.R. Higgins of St. Helier of the Minister for the Environment regarding nursing and residential care homes (WQ.498/2021):

Question

Will the Minister advise –

(a) the number of nursing and residential care homes registered in the Island;

(b) the total number of beds available in both nursing and care homes in the Island; together with the current average occupancy within each;

(c) the number of special beds (e.g. for dementia, physically handicapped and mental health patients) and the current average occupancy;

(d) the total financial contribution made from public funds to nursing and care homes in the Island in each of the last five years; and

(e) the estimated growth in need in nursing and care homes in the next five, seven and ten years;

and will the Minister also advise whether he has access to any information detailing the ultimate beneficial ownership of the nursing and care homes in the Island and, if he does, can he state whether such owners are based in or out of the Island, and the percentage of beds controlled by those based in and out of the Island?

Answer

Note: the following is based on information held by relevant government department(s) and the Jersey Care Commission (the Commission).

The Commission maintain a register of beds which is available online (https://carecommission.je/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/2021.10.19-Care-Home-List.pdf). The register may change to, for example, reflect new beds or those that are decommissioned. When there are two numbers for registered beds, the top number represents beds which are registered for nursing care and the bottom number lists the beds which are registered for residential care.

(a) the number of nursing and residential care homes registered in the Island;

Please note that nursing and residential care homes are not registered separately but rather are collectively referred to as a ‘care home’ by the Commission. For the Commission’s purposes, they differentiate between adult care homes, children’s residential homes and supported accommodation, as each require a modified form of regulation.

45 care homes are registered to provide only residential care (personal care and/or personal support).
12 care homes are registered to provide both residential and nursing care.
4 care homes are registered to provide only nursing care.
8 care homes provide residential care to children and young people - one is in the process of de-registering and currently has no residents.

(b) the total number of beds available in both nursing and care homes in the Island; together with the current average occupancy within each;

975 beds are registered for residential care.
357 beds are registered for nursing care.
35 beds are registered for children and young people – as stated in (a) iv., one care home is in the process of deregistering and so this number in practice is 24. Of these 24, 4 are the secure unit for children.

Data is not held relating to current/average occupancy.

(c) the number of special beds (e.g. for dementia, physically handicapped and mental health patients) and the current average occupancy;

178 beds are registered for dementia care. Note that these numbers may fluctuate depending upon current numbers of registered beds.
78 beds are registered for physical disability. Please note that this number does not reflect actual bed capacity for those with physical disabilities. Depending on the extent of the physical disability, care homes not registered in this capacity specifically may provide services to those with physical disabilities.
126 beds registered for mental health. As with (c) iii, this does not reflect actual capacity. Depending on the extent, care homes not registered in this capacity specifically may provide some services to those with mental health requirements.

As with (b), data is not held relating to current/average occupancy.

(d) the total financial contribution made from public funds to nursing and care homes in the Island in each of the last five years;

The Long-Term Care Fund provides financial support to adults needing long-term care in residential and nursing care homes, as well as in their own home. Government accounts for the last 5 years show total benefit expenditure to be:

Year	Total LTC benefit spend (£M)
2016	42.274
2017	44.564
2018	46.969
2019	48.807
2020	53.909

These totals include:

Cost of care provided in a care home
Cost of care provided at home
Cost of personal allowances to care home residents.

Further specific analysis would be required to provide an exact split between these categories.

For individuals needing a level of care above that covered by the LTC Scheme, HCS provide additional support.

(e) the estimated growth in need in nursing and care homes in the next five, seven and ten years;

Using estimates and forecasts included in the Actuarial review of the Long Term Care Fund [1], the anticipated growth in care home placements is

5 year growth	12%
7 year growth	21%
10 year growth	34%

Actual growth will depend on many factors including planned changes in care provision as set out in the Jersey Care Model.

The Commission advise that there are 494 beds registered in care homes which are owned by UK-based companies/individuals. Further information on UBO is available on the Jersey Financial Services Commission’s website.

2.30 Deputy M.R. Higgins of St. Helier of the Minister for Children and Education (WQ.499/2021):

Question

Following the tragic death of Arthur Labinjo-Hughes in the U.K. will the Minister advise –

(a) whether the Island is following the same social and child protection model used by Solihull (the authority that oversaw Arthur’s care) and, if not, would he outline the main differences between the models and where, if at all, Jersey’s model can be considered more robust;

(b) the turnover of children’s social workers for each of the last five years, together with a breakdown of the average length of employment (weeks, months and years) of each of those who have left the service; and

(c) the number of full-time, part-time, bank or agency social workers employed for each of the last five years, and the length of time they were employed on a continuous basis of, if their employment was intermittent, the number of times and total duration they were employed over this period?

Answer

(a)

The full facts surrounding Arthur Labinjo-Hughes murder are not yet known, however some information is available at this time. The following was put forward by the Children’s commissioner for England on the BBC on Sunday 5th December 2021:

Dame Rachel Mary de Souza identified that:

Arthur's voice appears to have not been heard:
It appears not to be the systems, but the delivery of social work services that have not worked as they should (visits were undertaken but no safeguarding concerns were raised)
There was a lack of professional curiosity
Working with families about their concerns
Lock down impacting on the closure of schools

Additionally, other enquiries following serious case reviews linked to the death of a child would indicate that the following themes are evident in many cases:

Intervening at too late a stage
Hidden adults
Staffing shortages
Lack of training
Professionals not communicating effectively
Procedures not being followed.

Practice and Professional curiosity

Dame Rachel Mary de Souza highlighted from her visits and discussions with local authorities in England during this recent period, that the way social work is delivered to children and young people by practitioners is more of an issue than the systems. Solihull and Jersey Children’s Social Care do not use the same practice model, although the theories and frameworks that sit behind them are similar in nature.

Solihull Children’s Social Care uses the Signs of safety practice model within Children’s Social Care. This is a strengths-based, safety-orientated approach to supporting children and families designed for use throughout the safeguarding process. The framework’s creators highlight risk assessment and case planning as central features of the Signs of Safety process. The approach aims to stabilise and strengthen families through collaboration to identify and harness their own strengths and resources.

Jersey Children’s Social Care practice model is “Jersey’s Children First.” This is also used by other agencies including health and education.

The framework draws upon “getting it right for every child” (GIRFEC) model. This ensures that the social care approach:

is child-focused - it ensures the child or young person – and their family – is at the centre of decision-making and the support available to them
is based on an understanding of the wellbeing of a child in their current situation - it takes into consideration the wider influences on a child or young person and their developmental needs when thinking about their wellbeing, so that the right support can be offered
is based on tackling needs early - it aims to ensure needs are identified as early as possible to avoid bigger concerns or problems developing
requires joined-up working - it is about children, young people, parents, and the services they need working together in a coordinated way to meet the specific needs and improve their wellbeing

This means at the heart of our work with children and their families that relationships are key to understanding what is happening for that child and how best they can be supported, building upon strengths within the family as well as the support from other services.

Currently, there are 70 children who are subject of a child protection plan in Jersey. The child protection conferences are chaired by the Child Protection Advisors who have independent scrutiny of the planning for children in need of protection. They bring high support and challenge to practitioners with their independent oversight of the case work.

The service also has a quality assurance framework which again is published on the Government website.

As part of the QA cycle, Heads of Service chair performance surgeries each Thursday where practice issues are discussed, and plans drawn up for addressing the issues in a timely manner. Jersey Children’s Social Care is supported in detailing this oversight by our specialist informatic team, that collate information about our children and provide this to Social Workers, Team managers, Heads of Service, CPAs, and the Director on a weekly basis. This data is also reviewed at monthly senior leadership meetings with Alistair Gibbons, who is offering additional independent oversight on our improvement journey.

Jersey is able to be more robust because of the nature of geography, being a small community with good communication between agencies to highlight when things are wrong leading to timely risk assessments and interventions.

Working with families and the whole community about concerns raised for children's wellbeing.

Safeguarding is everyone's responsibility. During the COVID 19 period with restrictions on movement, this was a key message that was shared on social media from the government. This encouraged members of the public as well as professionals to report any concerns to the Children and Family hub.

Family Group conferences are offered to children using our service. This service allows children and their families to discuss concerns that have been assessed as impacting on the children. It allows all members of the child and young person's network to come together to develop plans to reduce the risks for the child or young person in a timely manner. This often runs alongside and feeds into formal meetings such as child protection conferences.

In 2020, the service recruited to the post of Quality Assurance officer. This officer's role is to coordinate complaints and feedback to the service, and to support the completion of the learning loop, by reporting back themes and areas for learning and development.

Covid 19 and its impact on schools

During the Covid period, there were several measures that were undertaken to safeguard our most vulnerable children.

Each Social Worker and Team Manager risk assessed the children they had on their caseload. These children were prioritised in terms of school attendance and visits. Social Workers were provided with Personal Protective Equipment to allow them to continue visits to children, and where the family refused a visit or the impact on COVID 19 on the workforce delayed the visits, the child was discussed at a dispensation meeting with Heads of Service to consider alternative ways to ensure the child’s safety, or to agree a small delay where it did not impact on the safety of the child.

All meetings have continued to be held, and for Child Protection Conferences these mostly take place on TEAMS to allow all the safeguarding work to continue.

Education have always worked closely with Children’s social care to identify concerns for children on their roll and have flagged up when children have not been seen. Schools in Jersey worked with services throughout the last year to ensure that vulnerable children were encouraged and supported to attend school, even when the rest of the school was online.

Moving forward

Jersey Children’s Social Care, along with our partners, are in the process of relaunching our practice model and strengthening it further using trauma informed practices. The relaunch will be presented to DLT and ELT in forthcoming months with a request for lead responsibility for the practice framework to sit with the Multi-Agency Safeguarding Partnership Board. If this is agreed, we will see a whole island commitment to supporting and safeguarding children which all agencies working with children and young people will sign up to. We would welcome the ministers' support with this to move the Jersey’s Children First agenda forward.

Jersey Children’s Social Care would also welcome a visit from any minister who would like to see how the Social Work services support, safeguard and promote children's wellbeing in Jersey Children’s Social Care.

(b)

The following information shows the number of permanent employees who have left the service and their average length of employment in years:

Year	Leavers	Av. Length of Service in years	Av. HC	%
2017	2	8.6	7.3	27.3%
2018	1	25.5	6.8	14.6%
2019	10	10.3	34.2	29.3%
2020	8	3.4	41.8	19.1%
2021	17	2.8	39.4	43.2%
Total	38

You can see in 2021, 17 front line social workers left the service, the highest ever in the last 5 years. This makes for a turnover of front-line permanent staff of 43.2 % in 2021.

C) The number of full-time, part-time, bank or agency social workers employed for each of the last five years, and the length of time they were employed on a continuous basis of, if their employment was intermittent, the number of times and total duration they were employed over this period?

The following information shows the turnover of agency social work staff up to the end of 2020 within Children’s Social Work Services. Data for 2021 has not been available within the short timeframe to report back to the minister but we expect the figures to be similar, if not higher than 2020 in terms of what we know in relation to agency staff leaving.

Year	Agency	Left	Turnover	Length of Service (months)
2016	49	25	51.0%	4.7
2017	76	41	53.9%	6.4
2018	62	35	56.5%	10.3
2019	49	32	65.3%	11.7
2020	49	24	49.0%	15.2
Total		157		8.3

2.31 Deputy M.R. Higgins of St. Helier of H.M. Attorney general regarding glasshouses and agricultural land (WQ.500/2021):

Question

Would the Attorney General advise whether the following are correct interpretations of the Law –

(a) land under glass is defined as agricultural land governed by the Agricultural Land (Jersey) Law 1964 (the “AgLaw”) and therefore is not a building under the Planning and Building (Jersey) Law 2002 (the “PBL”);

(b) internal alteration or creation of rooms in a glasshouse and the installation of plant/machinery unrelated to its permitted use is not a permitted development under the Planning and Building (General Development) (Jersey) Order 2011 (the “GDO”);

(c) the PBL would only become relevant to “agricultural land” if a planning application was required for something unrelated to its permitted use and that does not change it from being “agricultural land” as defined under the Law;

(d) the construction of new rooms in a glasshouse that renders the land unsuitable for its permitted agricultural use is illegal under the AgLaw;

(e) GDO Use Class D Agriculture refers to a building used for agricultural purposes, not “agricultural land”; and

(f) Part 5 of the GDO permits the installation of additional or replacement plant or machinery for the purpose of an industrial process on industrial land but does not apply to agricultural land.

Answer

For the reasons set out below, both Laws apply.

There is nothing in the Protection of Agricultural Land (Jersey) Law 1964 (AgLaw) that creates an offence where an activity is carried out with the benefit of planning permission – irrespective of whether it is planning permission granted by the Minister by a Development Order or on an application made in accordance the Planning and Building (Jersey) Law 2002 (PBL).

Under the AgLaw, “agriculture” is defined to include “horticulture, fruit growing, seed growing, dairy farming, the breeding and keeping of livestock, the use of land as grazing land, meadow land, market gardens and nursery grounds; and references to “agricultural land” shall be construed accordingly.”

Article 2(1) provides:

Subject to the provisions of this Article, if any person –

(a) removes, or causes or allows to be removed, surface soil from any agricultural land;

(b) does, or causes or allows to be done, anything which has, or is likely to have, the effect of rendering any land unsuitable for agriculture; or

(c) with the intent of rendering any agricultural land unsuitable for agriculture, fails to do anything which the person ought reasonably to do in the ordinary course of good husbandry,

the person shall be guilty of an offence. [Emphasis added]

Article 2(8) goes on to provide:

(8) The provisions of this Article shall not prohibit the doing of anything –

(a) in exercise of any powers conferred by or under any other enactments;

(b) in pursuance of, and in accordance with any conditions attaching to, any authorization (by whatever name called) granted under any other enactment or as a reasonable consequence of the grant of any such authorization; or

(c) in pursuance of, and in accordance with any conditions attaching to, a permit in writing by the Minister. [Emphasis added]

Article 1(1) of the Interpretation (Jersey) Law 1954 provides:

(1) In this Law and in every other enactment (as hereby defined) whether passed before or after the commencement of this Law, the expression “enactment”, unless a contrary intention appears, shall mean any provision of any Law passed by the States and confirmed by Her Majesty in Council and any provision of any regulations, Order, rules, bye-laws, scheme or other instrument passed or made in Jersey under the authority of any Order in Council or under any such Law as aforesaid. [Emphasis added]

Article 4(1) of the Interpretation (Jersey) Law 1954 also provides:

(1) The definitions in Part 1 of the Schedule shall, unless the contrary intention appears, apply to every enactment, whenever passed or made.

Part 1 of the Schedule provides ‘“land” shall include houses and other buildings;’

Article 1(1) of the PBL provides:

“building” includes –

(a) a structure or erection of any material and constructed in any manner;

(b) a part of a building; and

A glasshouse can fall within this definition. There is nothing in the AgLaw that leads me to conclude that it is not capable of applying to agricultural land on which there is a building. Put another way, the AgLaw applies to agricultural land irrespective of whether it is inside or outside of a building. Whether an activity inside of a building is caught by the Article 2(1) offence would depend on the facts and circumstances the case.

Assessing what constitutes a “material” change in use is unfortunately not straightforward. It is a matter of fact and degree in each case.

In the context of the question, the PBL is relevant where a person requires planning permission and a person could require planning permission in relation to a glasshouse.

(d) the construction of new rooms in a glasshouse that renders the land unsuitable for its permitted agricultural use is illegal under the AgLaw;

This is a fact-based question and so would depend on the circumstances and the contents of the answer to part (a) above are repeated.

It should also be noted that Part 3 Class AA (which relates to any type of building) of the GDO permits “Internal alterations or building operations that do not amount to an external change or create new floor space.”

(e) GDO Use Class D Agriculture refers to a building used for agricultural purposes, not “agricultural land”

It is correct that the relevant part of the GDO provides:

Class D – Agriculture

Use as a building for agricultural purposes.

However, as above, the AgLaw is capable of supporting the notion of buildings on agricultural land.

(f) Part 5 of the GDO permits the installation of additional or replacement plant or machinery for the purpose of an industrial process on industrial land but does not apply to agricultural land.

Whilst there are aspects of the GDO that only concern agriculture, I cannot exclude the possibility of land being both agricultural land and industrial land for the purpose of the GDO. This is because of how “industrial land” is defined in the GDO. “Industrial land means “land used to carry out an industrial process”. An “industrial process” means any process that is necessary or incidental –

(a) to make an article or part of an article;

(b) to alter, repair, ornament, finish, clean, wash, pack or can, or to adapt for sale or to demolish an article; [Emphasis added]

Agricultural produce is capable of being an “article” for the purpose of paragraph (a), and as regards (b) there is nothing unusual in the activity of washing or cleaning produce on agricultural land, for example potatoes. So, whilst it is correct to say that those parts of the GDO that refer directly to agriculture, it does not mean that agricultural land (or buildings) is not covered by other aspects of the GDO that do deal with plant and machinery. It is a question of construction applied to the circumstances of any individual case.

2.32 Deputy M.R. Le Hegarat of St. Helier of the Minister for Home Affairs regarding the Prison! Me! No Way!!! programme (WQ.501/2021):

Question

Will the Minister provide an update of the current status of the Prison! Me! No Way!!! Programme?

Answer

The Prison! Me! No Way!!! Programme is not currently operating.

Prison! Me! No Way!!! had previously been funded in Jersey from Building a Safer Society (BaSS) funding. The PMNW charity is UK-based and is still running but the Jersey scheme was paused pending review.

A series of workshops was run by Justice and Home Affairs and Children Young People Education & Skills (CYPES), with key stakeholders, to determine the future direction.

An advert is about to go live for a business analyst to scope out the new scheme with the work scheduled early in the new year with a view to getting the new scheme, in partnership with CYPES, up and running by September 2022.

This is one of 7 key objectives for JHA in 2022 and a commitment to this has been included accordingly in the draft 2022 Departmental Operational Business Plan.

This is an opportunity to build on the legacy of the excellent work of PMNW, and design something that really works for the island’s young people, which is targeted to the island’s needs.

I look forward to updating the Assembly further as the plans take shape.

2.33 Deputy R.J. Ward of St. Helier the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding time taken to identify Omicron variant (WQ.502/2021):

Question

Will the Minister state the estimated time required to identify the Covid-19 Omicron variant from positive cases of Covid-19 in Jersey?

Answer

Turnaround time for COVID genotyping /sequencing from time of positive PCR result is about 72 hours. PCR-positive patients are isolated from the outset.

2.34 Deputy R.J. Ward of St. Helier of the Minister for Treasury and Resources regarding projected costs of the South Hill development homes (WQ.503/2021):

Question

Will the Minister advise the projected cost of homes within the Waterfront development, particularly –

(a) 1-bedroom apartments on the open market;

(b) 2-bedroom apartments on the open market;

will she further detail the cost of the above for those purchasers accessing through first-time buyer schemes?

Answer

The Outline Planning Application for the Waterfront development (Key Opportunity Sites 1, 2 and 3 of the Southwest St. Helier Planning Framework) will be submitted this month. Subject to a favourable determination, the detailed design of the first phase will be commissioned. It is forecast that subject to favourable planning determination of the detailed application, construction of the first phase will commence in 2024 for completion in 2027.

As such it is not possible to advise on the projected value of homes as SoJDC is over 2 years away from commencing pre-sales. The value of the open market units will be at the value prevailing in the market at the point that the pre-sale contract is entered into.

2.35 Deputy R. J. Ward of St. Helier of the Minister for Treasury and Resources regarding projected costs of the South Hill development homes (WQ.504/2021):

Question

Will the Minister advise the projected cost of homes within the South Hill development, particularly –

a) 1-bedroom apartments on the open market;

b) 2-bedroom apartments on the open market;

c) 3-bedroom apartments on the open market; and

will she further detail the cost of the above for those purchasers accessing through first-time buyer schemes?

Answer

The detailed planning application was submitted in November for the redevelopment of South Hill to create 153 new residential units. This application is yet to be determined.

The open market value of the completed homes will not be finalised until pre-sales commence in approximately 10 months’ time (subject to a favourable Planning determination). The value of the open market units will be at the value prevailing in the market at the point that the pre-sale contract is entered into.

However, the development appraisal that has been produced to date allows for the following values:

(a) 1-bedroom apartment on the open market – starting price £400,000

(b) 2-bedroom apartment on the open market – starting price £550,000

Shared Equity First Time Buyers will be provided with the ability to purchase 75% of a unit’s equity for 75% of the open market price. Therefore, the following prices would apply to eligible Shared Equity purchasers:

(a) 1-bedroom apartment at 75% Shared Equity – starting price £300,000

(b) 2-bedroom apartment at 75% Shared Equity – starting price £412,500

2.36 Senator K.L. Moore of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding breakdown of permanent and agency staff (WQ.505/2021):

Question

Further to Written Question 425/2021, will the Minister provide the breakdown, between permanent and agency workers, of the staff available to work in the operating theatres at Jersey General Hospital for the week beginning 24th October 2021, with a comparison of the same week for each of the previous 4 years?

Answer

2021 - 72 staff available

11 agency staff

3 Bank Staff

58 Permanent staff

2020 – 72 staff available

3 Agency Staff

69 Permanent Staff

2019 – 73 staff available

6 Agency Staff

1 Bank Staff

66 Permanent Staff

2018 – 74 staff available

5 Agency Staff

69 Permanent Staff

2017 – 62 staff available

4 Agency Staff

58 Permanent Staff

Note: the figures relate to the number of staff available for work in the week stated.

3. Oral Questions

3.1 Connétable K. Shenton-Stone of St. Martin of the Minister for Social Security regarding Long Term Care (OQ.255/2021):

Will the Minister explain how £394,000 constitutes “the full value of a modest family home”, as defined within the long-term care scheme; and will she advise whether there are any plans to increase this figure to reflect current prices and, if so, where these plans are detailed in the Government Plan or, if they are not in the plan, what the financial consequences of increasing the figure will be?

Deputy J.A. Martin of St. Helier (The Minister for Social Security):

I thank the Constable for her question. On page 169 of the Government Plan I confirm that the long-term care fund will be subject to a formal actuarial review in 2022. This review will include consideration of the level of asset disregard included within the scheme and will examine financial consequences of setting the asset disregard at different levels.

[14:15]

3.1.1 The Connétable of St. Martin:

When they review the scheme, if the limit is to be raised in line with house prices, is it the intention of the Minister to index-link these limits in the future?

Deputy J.A. Martin:

The Constable is asking me to predict the outcome of the review. The long-term care scheme is there so people do not sell all of their home and all of their assets at the moment, which they used to do before it was brought in. It has to have enough money coming in so it can cover the cost of care and also then it has to be financially sound so that people can keep some of their assets. I have no idea where it will be paid out. As I say, that is for the review to tell us. Again, if more money people can keep or there is more money paying out we will have to look at the scheme. I was stopped by putting it up by a percentage 2 Government Plans ago. I have 0.5 per cent but that is where we are.

3.1.2 Senator S.Y. Mézec:

Would the Minister agree that to help secure the long-term sustainability of the long-term care scheme when setting this value at something more realistic, the way that that could be balanced out would be to raise the upper earnings cap on the long-term care tax.

Deputy J.A. Martin:

Again, this is all something that I hope will be looked at in the review next year, is if everything was simple we would all do it, collect money in, that may be one of the ways to do it. But you have to be very careful when you are trying to raise tax and make sure the people are still there that are paying it.

3.1.3 Senator S.Y. Mézec:

Is that the Minister therefore confirming that this review being conducted next year will be looking at the upper earnings cap, and whether that is a placed at a suitable level to maintain the sustainability of the funds into the future?

Deputy J.A. Martin:

It is going to be an actuarial review and then if we need to look at changing the house prices, changing the disregards, the money you can have in the bank, different pay-outs, I would not rule out different things but again that is probably this will be done and then that is for the new Council of Ministers to decide on.

3.1.4 Senator K.L. Moore:

Given the considerable increase in house prices over recent years, why has the Minister not sought to readdress this imbalance in simply this focused item rather than waiting a considerable period of time before a full review?

Deputy J.A. Martin:

I thought I had answered that. There are not many people who take a loan out on their house so we think at the moment it is sort of pegged at the right price but it is going to be reviewed. Again, it is a very young fund and when I went for 1 per cent I was going to make it a much more stable fund and there was an amendment brought 2 Government Plans ago that stopped me doing that; so it is 0.5 per cent. As I say, when you are paying out money and you are letting people have disregards you have to have the money there to cover the scheme. I say it is 1,000 times better than before where you lost your whole home and lots of the people who have been in the Assembly a long time, especially Constables, will remember that when it was under their jurisdiction and the whole home is signed over.

3.1.5 The Connétable of St. Martin:

I thank the Minister for her answers and I ask the Minister: would she agree that £394,000 is a very unrealistic price for a family home at the moment and that this review is long overdue?

Deputy J.A. Martin:

The figure was set and if you add the disregards it is £419,000; that is the £25,000 you can have in cash. It was set as a small modest 2-bedroom house when the scheme was introduced. There has only ever been in the one year about 10 loans. All of it needs to be looked at but with the house prices I doubt if they will ever be pegged at the price unless people want to pay into the scheme a lot more. That is what I think, but let us wait for the actuarial review, who is going to take all this into consideration.

3.2 Deputy G.P. Southern of St. Helier of the Minister for Treasury and Resources regarding capital gains in Jersey (OQ.246/2021):

Will the Minister state what proportion of capital gains in Jersey arises from the sale of small businesses compared to that generated by the sale of second homes or shares, for example; and will she seek to introduce measures to ensure that the revenue generated for individuals who become so-called “super-gainers” via business sales is captured in terms of income tax and social security contributions?

Deputy S.J. Pinel of St. Clement (The Minister for Treasury and Resources):

The Government does not collect data about capital gains arising in Jersey from any source. This is because Jersey does not tax capital gains. The taxation of revenue arising from increases in capital values would not be subject to income tax nor social security contributions. Income tax is charged at 20 per cent on income arising from property rental, regardless of how it is held. The Government has no plans to introduce any form of capital gains tax. I hope this answers the questioner’s question.

3.2.1 Deputy G.P. Southern:

Would the Minister not be better advised to rate capital gains tax at zero and thereby find out how much is being squirrelled away, avoiding income tax and social security contributions? Would that not be a useful piece of information that we could get from that sort of mechanism?

Deputy S.J. Pinel:

I am advised it would be very difficult to construct a form of capital gains tax, which was simply focused on small businesses deriving profits from property or which targeted owners of second and holiday homes. With everything else going on at the moment, it would be very difficult to conduct the review that the questioner is asking.

3.2.2 Senator S.Y. Mézec:

Given the presumably immense amounts of wealth that are generated by these completely untaxed capital gains for a small number of people in our community and the Government’s stated commitment to reduce income inequality, does the Minister not consider that conducting some sort of exercise to investigate how this is happening in our community and what gains are being made would be a worthwhile exercise?

Deputy S.J. Pinel:

I think as the Senator and other questioner is aware, we are starting to do a massive stamp duty review under which will be included some of the questions asked by the Senator. I must point out that any capital gains tax would have a serious effect on the finance industry, which would have to be of course taken into consideration.

3.2.3 Deputy G.P. Southern:

Would the Minister not agree that it would be a useful thing to know how much wealth is being generated by these super-gainers in order that we could judge better the state of our economy, including capital gains set at 0 per cent?

Deputy S.J. Pinel:

I think I have already answered that question and there is no intention whatsoever at the moment to introduce, examine or consult on the introduction of capital gains tax.

3.3 Senator S.Y. Mézec of the Minister for Housing and Communities regarding St. Saviour’s hospital site to be allocated for housing (OQ.248/2021):

Following the announcement that the former St. Saviour’s Hospital site will be allocated for future housing development, will the Minister state which housing provider, if any, has been identified to take on the development of the site, and what instructions have they been given on the proportion of affordable homes to be created as part of this development?

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré (The Chief Minister - rapporteur):

It is the Chief Minister in the absence of the Minister for Housing and Communities who unfortunately is not able to get back on to the Island today for reasons completely out of his control. I am sure States Members will be aware that given the size, location and scale of the St. Saviour’s former hospital site as a housing development it is going to be subject to a very comprehensive design and layout. That is all going to be about creating a mixed development both in terms of property type, size, tenure and seeking to build a very strong, balanced and sustainable community. It is a big site. There have been preliminary discussions with Andium Homes who have previously expressed an interest in the site. They are obviously very keen to progress with a suitable bespoke housing development given the importance of that site. At this early stage in the process, it is estimated the site will accommodate as many as 200 units - one would always hope they can achieve more - and the intent is that the vast majority will be social housing and assisted purchase properties with the actual numbers determined as the design progresses. If I am allowed to add a little bit more, there are also a load of factors to take into account. For example, there is scope for key worker accommodation. Very likely, given the size of the site, it would be a village style development and the other thing to take into account is that any renovations of the granite building, which is also a grade one listed building, will be very expensive. That will need to be taken into account. But there are very significant opportunities and, in particular, opportunities definitely to address social housing, assisted purchase schemes in a very significant manner.

3.3.1 Senator S.Y. Mézec:

I am extremely pleased to hear that answer from the Chief Minister as it is exactly what I was calling for a year and a half ago to be done with this site. Can he just confirm beyond any doubt that the 15 per cent target that is being applied to other States-owned sites has been put in the bin in the context of this particular development?

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré:

As I said, at this stage it is intended that the vast majority will be the areas I have already identified.

The Bailiff:

Senator Moore, you say you have a question for me, is that correct?

Senator K.L. Moore:

I wrote to you on behalf of the Scrutiny Liaison Committee to ask you to give a ruling.

The Bailiff:

I think we should leave it until at least the question is finished. I thought it might have been a point of order so let us wait until this particular question has been dealt with.

3.3.2 Deputy K.G. Pamplin of St. Saviour:

My question to the Chief Minister in respect to the area and the site of St. Saviour’s Hospital, which is currently still running its mental health services, what can he tell us about the due consideration that will be needed for the entire area that services that part of Health and Community Services?

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré:

Do you mean how is the present use of the site going to be replaced effectively? There are 2 areas: first is obviously, as we know, a full aspect of the mental health side will move up to Overdale in the new scheme. That obviously will carry out planning permissions, et cetera. Secondly, it is not inconceivable, given the size of the site, bearing in mind which side of the road one is talking around, it is perfectly conceivable that Health may wish to have a modern facility up there, for example, for dementia, as well as having the housing offering that we talked about. That is why we are saying it is very, very early days. The size of the site does warrant a whole range of uses and therefore a quite considered plan that is brought together over the next whatever timescale it is. It will be more than a few months.

3.3.3 Deputy K.G. Pamplin:

I thank the Chief Minister for his answer because I was thinking about not just the in-patient facility but the continuation of the senior adult wards like dementia, as he mentions. I am glad to hear that full process because that is years away but equally it is an obvious question. But the Parish obviously being involved, how can he ensure that the future Government will engage with all the representatives of the Parish pre or post the next election?

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré:

If it helps, as Chief Minister, I give an absolute commitment because I know that the Minister for Housing and Communities had already spoken to the Connétable of St. Saviour on this subject. I give an absolute commitment that the Parish of St. Saviour and any other parties will be engaged in the development of this scheme.

3.3.4 Deputy G.P. Southern:

When will the Chief Minister be in a position to put some figures on what this vast majority of home supplies is going to be?

[14:30]

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré:

I cannot answer that one yet because basically the whole mix of this is around how many you can get on to the site and what the overall site costs are. I am obviously not talking about land value. I am talking about what the planning requirements will be on the existing buildings up there, for example the grade one listed, and also what else has to happen to other parts of that site. Including, for example, if Health do want a dementia unit there or not, which would be for them to consider. But for me, the vast majority is more than 50 per cent. That is the way I would interpret that. But until you know the absolute number of units, I cannot give any more precise figures than that. It will take a while to get that scheme drawn up.

3.3.5 Deputy G.P. Southern:

Without wishing to argue with the Chief Minister, over 50 per cent is a slim majority.

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré:

I am not bandying words with the Deputy on this one. I think the point is we want to see the site used for the outline that we have given because that is also the commitment we gave in the previous debate. This is the type of site that lends itself to this type of development. But we do know equally there are a lot of pressures of all sorts of areas, as I said, including key workers, for example. I would hope and imagine that a scheme with significant provision, as I have talked about, and as we said more by far, the majority, being in those categories.

3.3.6 Deputy R.J. Ward of St. Helier:

Does the Chief Minister have an indicative timescale for when these homes might be built and available for people who are so desperately in need of a new place to live?

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré:

I do not have one to hand. There was a timeline that was produced. I thought that was shared with Members and I think it did refer to St. Saviour on there. One also has got to make sure that, for fairly obvious reasons, the certainty or the reason we have been able to release this site is because we believe we have got certainty on Overdale in terms of States decisions. If, for example, there is any change to that project ... we need to make sure that the planning permissions on Overdale in my view are achieved, which will hopefully be before the elections or around the elections, and then that will give absolute clarity as to the timeline we can work on. That then gives clarity as to when the mental health unit, for example, will be moved out of St. Saviour to go up to Overdale. That will then determine when we can essentially be ready to go into devolution and to clear the site.

The Bailiff:

A supplementary, Deputy?

3.3.7 Deputy R.J. Ward:

Yes. I did not have one until that answer. Can I just confirm with the Chief Minister that there is still a risk that this site will not be used for housing, from what he has just said, and that we will not have an indicative timescale until a number of other variables seem to have been decided upon? Am I interpreting that wrongly?

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré:

Sorry, I probably phrased it slightly badly. The point I was trying to make is if there is any delay in getting the mental health facility agreed up at the Overdale site that would mean then the provision would continue at St. Saviour’s Hospital until that had been resolved and that could delay. In other words, there are things that are lined up that free these up. We believe we are in a position to start planning, but one will not have absolute certainty until the fate of the scheme at Overdale is resolved. That, we hope, will be in the first few months of next year and at that point one will then have absolute certainty and certainty as to a timeline. I do agree with public comments that have been made over the weekend. What we should be doing when we have that certainty is then essentially have that planning happening in parallel such that when the site is vacated essentially the diggers can move in.

3.3.8 Deputy G.J. Truscott of St. Brelade:

St. Saviour’s Hospital is a grade one listed building and does afford the greatest protection in planning terms. What is the general consensus? Is the main view to knock it down or to preserve it?

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré:

I think we are getting significantly ahead of ourselves in terms of what that scheme might look like. I genuinely do not have an answer to that. Certainly, bearing in mind I know Deputy Truscott is a member of the Planning Committee, I am not going to have a debate on planning policy, particularly around grade one listed buildings because that is definitely within the remit of the plans that the Planning Department will put together in relation to this scheme. My understanding at present would be that we would be expected to keep the existing building.

Deputy G.J. Truscott:

I do believe it will come in front of Planning so I will leave it there.

3.3.9 Connétable S.A. Le Sueur-Rennard of St. Saviour:

I am a little bit disappointed with this going on here at the moment. St. Saviour, yes, Deputy Labey has spoken to me about it and I have said what I feel should be needed there, but it will not be my problem, because I will no longer be in office because I am stepping down.

The Bailiff:

Connétable, this has to be a supplementary question. It cannot be a statement of your …

The Connétable of St. Saviour:

No, I am saying, Sir, this would have to go to a Parish Assembly, and I know the Deputy is not here, but surely the parishioners who are already being railroaded will have a say on what happens to St. Saviour’s. This is very rude to the parishioners.

The Bailiff:

So, will the parishioners have a say I think is the question, Chief Minister?

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré:

I thought I gave a commitment as clear as I could that, as Chief Minister, as far as I am concerned, the Parish will have absolute engagement on getting this project moving forward. I would just say I think the point I am trying to make as well in some of the responses is that there are a number of issues one has got to get past, before one is even starting to put pen to paper, and that process has not started yet, as far as I am aware. We have got to have certainty and as part of that process I am absolutely committed that the Parish should be involved.

3.3.10 The Connétable of St. Saviour:

Everybody is discussing this for St. Saviour and I am going to hold you to this, Minister, even if I am not in office when this does take place. You must involve the St. Saviour parishioners. They have enough …

The Bailiff:

Connétable, I am really sorry. Connétable, I am very sorry, but that is not a supplementary question. That is a statement made to the Chief Minister. If you have a supplementary question then you are more than at liberty to ask it, but otherwise this is simply not the place and the time for those kinds of statements.

The Connétable of St. Saviour:

Thank you, Sir. Well, could the Minister please guarantee that he will involve the new Constable and whoever is in St. Saviour, please?

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré:

If I am in a position to do that, bearing in mind there is an election, then absolutely. What I have done as Chief Minister, which I would hope would carry forward, is that as Chief Minister I have committed that the Parish will be engaged, and that will obviously include the Connétable.

3.3.11 Senator S.Y. Mézec:

Will the Chief Minister agree that this project stands in stark contrast to those that have been proposed to be led by the States of Jersey Development Company in their ability to provide the homes that we demonstrably need in Jersey? Would he further agree that Andium Homes should be seen as the provider of choice for affordable housing on all States-owned sites in future?

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré:

I think the point is each site comes with its own characteristics and its own challenges and each provider we have brings different skill sets, different planning, different approaches to that. I do agree that there is merit in reviewing those overall structures to make sure that we do not have too many overlaps in how we do things, but I do not think we can give a preference over one developer to another, even though both are in ... because they both have different remits, both of which have been approved by this Assembly.

The Bailiff:

Very well. Now, Senator Moore, we have come to the end of that question. Do you have a point of order that you wish to raise with me?

Senator K.L. Moore:

Forgive me for not raising it at an earlier point in the sitting, however the Scrutiny Liaison Committee did write and ask if you would be kind enough to consider a ruling, and it prompted me to raise this point with you, to see the Chief Minister sitting in his office in Broad Street answering questions rather than being here in the Chamber today, Sir. We have pointed out that there is a level of concern in relation to the potential for officers assisting Ministers in question time but also in major debates. Of course, the main reason for the letter was because of the coming Government Plan debate but also we raised the concern about these behaviours creeping into question time also.

The Bailiff:

So the concern is about the presence of officers or other persons with Ministers when they answer questions?

Senator K.L. Moore:

Yes, Sir, but also the fact that it is perfectly possible to be socially distanced in this Chamber. We have one Minister here today, yet no others.

The Bailiff:

I am aware that I have received a communication from Senator Mézec, who has raised a very similar point and asked me to make a ruling. He indicated that he would ask for that ruling at the end of the afternoon. Are you content to wait until the end of the afternoon for that ruling?

Senator K.L. Moore:

Sir, I do think that some ruling needs to be made with regards question time, because this is another opportunity and I see no reason why Ministers, if they are able to attend their office today, then they should be able to attend the Chamber.

The Bailiff:

Senator, did you wish to raise your point of order, which is on very similar terms, I think?

Senator S.Y. Mézec:

Sir, if it is convenient to do so now. Obviously I do not want to disrupt the running of question time.

The Bailiff:

We will allow injury time, as it were.

Senator S.Y. Mézec:

Excellent. I am pleased to hear that, Sir. As you know, I communicated with you over the weekend to raise a very similar point to that which Senator Moore has raised, which is that on a previous occasion a Bailiff has made a ruling with regards to strangers in the precincts of the States Chamber when in the past there has been an abundance of civil servants in the facilities here, and a ruling was made that they should not be present at that time. Things have now changed because of hybrid sittings where you could argue that the precincts of the States Chamber now extend to the other side of a computer screen, irrespective of where in the Island that would be. I wanted to ask you if you would be able to consider that previous ruling in the new context we find ourselves in, where States Members, and in particular Ministers, do not have to be present in the Chamber and where certainly today it seems that there is a choice for many Members to not be present in the Chamber, with the admirable exception of the Minister for Health and Social Services. I would like to ask if you could consider that previous ruling and consider whether that principle of there being a degree of separation between Members and officers can be considered now, so that those Members holding the Executive to account can be sure that we have direct access to Ministers without any interference that would not be present physically in this Chamber.

The Bailiff:

I am able to give a ruling now. Because of the helpful notice that I have had of the ruling and the fact that it would be asked today I was able to consider it over the lunch period. I have been asked to rule on the presence of officers and others with Ministers where Ministers are answering questions with or without notice during a sitting of the Assembly. The Standing Orders which permit remote participation are silent on this point, but they are clearly, as I have ruled in the past, intended to permit Members to participate in a sitting whereby for reasons of the pandemic they would otherwise be unable to do so. Those orders were not designed to extend beyond what is necessary to achieve that end and, as far as is possible, the conditions that obtain in the Assembly should be replicated in the remote environment. The rule of the Assembly extends into those spaces as well. Accordingly, in my view, Ministers should have no greater access to officers and advice than they would if they were in the Assembly. Therefore, it seems to me that officers should not, unless it is impossible to arrange otherwise, be present with Ministers during Ministerial questions. This applies also to non-Ministers answering questions in the formal environment of the Assembly. I appreciate that this ruling may be difficult to police, but I am conscious, as has always been the case, that Ministers will act with integrity and honesty, as is expected of all States Members and will of course adhere to this ruling. As to whether Ministers should be required to be in the Assembly, I think that the position that we are in at the moment is permissive.

[14:45]

Ministers are not required to be in the Assembly, but I would warmly encourage Ministers who are in a position where they are responding directly to questions raised by Members or dealing with a matter that they are bringing before the Assembly, unless they are otherwise unable to do so, to be in the Assembly. I think I can do no more than encourage that at this point. That is the ruling from the Chair. I will allow a further 5 minutes to question time.

3.4 Senator S.W. Pallett of the Chief Minister regarding Housing Rights and Children in Jersey (OQ.250.2021):

Further to the publication of Housing Rights and Children in Jersey and the related policy position of the Children’s Commissioner, will the Chief Minister advise what action he will take to implement the recommendations of the commissioner, particularly in respect of the conflict of interest identified by the commissioner in the role of the Deputy Chief Minister in hearing appeals under the Control of Housing and Work (Jersey) Law 2012?

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré (The Chief Minister):

Sorry, Sir, I was reflecting on the points that have been raised previously. I thank the Children’s Commissioner for her report, which was received last Monday and we are obviously considering the points raised in that report. As the Senator will be aware in his role as the chair of the Migration and Population Review Panel, a review of the current Control of Housing and Work (Jersey) Law 2012 is underway. As part of this review, proposed amendments to the appeal process are already in draft. The intention is to lodge in December and ahead of the population policy, however the draft Control of Housing Work (Jersey) Law 2012 has been reviewed by the Law Officers’ Department and some further changes are required before it can be brought forward for lodging. Some of those changes relate directly to the appeal system and it is ensuring that it is Article 6 of the human rights compliant.

3.4.1 Senator S.W. Pallett:

I fully appreciate the answer given by the Chief Minister in which he very much talks about the Control of Housing and Work (Jersey) Law and potential amendments to it, but there are other recommendations within the Children’s Commissioner’s report and policy suggestions. When would he take the other recommendations into account and is that something that he is currently looking into and working on?

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré:

I think the short answer is it came in last Monday. The Senator may appreciate we have been dealing with the 26 amendments brought by Members over the past week and, in fact, if I give a summary of my first 2 hours of my morning it has been fisheries, Brexit, COVID, international tax and preparing for the Government Plan. Oddly enough, I have not started the planning for it. The report is being looked at, and we will consider those points in due course.

3.4.2 Senator S.Y. Mézec:

The Chief Minister will hopefully be aware of the legislative gap analysis that was undertaken through the Children’s Commissioner’s office previously to investigate which areas of law need to be updated so that Jersey Law is compliant with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and what the Children’s Commissioner has raised with housing rights here is a very clearcut issue. Will the Chief Minister commit here and now to updating or amending our Control of Housing and Work (Jersey) Law in some form or another pending a review to confirm the most appropriate way to do so, to ensure that in the future this law is fully compliant with the principles that are outlined in the U.N.C.R.C. (United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child)?

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré:

I think the important thing is that it is human rights compliant, and that is what we are ensuring. That will no doubt come across when those changes come through to Members which, as I said, I would be anticipating in the next few weeks.

3.4.3 Senator S.Y. Mézec:

The Chief Minister just mentioned this being human rights compliant, and I do not doubt that that is true, but the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child goes beyond what is simply in the E.C.H.R. (European Convention on Human Rights) or the Human Rights (Jersey) Law, to ensure that Jersey’s children are genuinely being put first. I appreciate that may have been a slip of the tongue from the Chief Minister, but will he confirm that he will be seeking to update the Control of Housing and Work (Jersey) Law to ensure that it is compliant with the U.N.C.R.C., irrespective of whether it is already compliant with the E.C.H.R., because they are 2 different things?

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré:

We will make sure that we adhere to our commitments under the various European Conventions that we have to do. What I am not going to do at this stage is commit to something when we are still analysing the report.

3.4.4 Senator K.L. Moore:

Could the Chief Minister inform the Assembly when he last met with the Children’s Commissioner to discuss these matters?

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré:

On the basis of these matters as captured by the report issued last Monday, I have certainly not met the commissioner since then, although I may have seen her at a distance at St. Peter’s Garden Centre yesterday.

3.4.5 Senator K.L. Moore:

These matters are very serious. They have been raised by the Children’s Commissioner on a number of occasions and, as Senator Mézec stated, it is particularly clear in her legislative gap analysis. Would the Chief Minister inform the Assembly how regularly he meets with the Children’s Commissioner and when he last met with her, please?

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré:

I do not have my diary immediately to hand, so I cannot tell the Senator when I last met with her. I have met her in Broad Street in the last few months and she also presented to the Council of Ministers, also in the last few months. Yes, I am fully aware of the legislative gap analysis because she presented it to the Council of Ministers when it was produced.

3.4.6 Deputy R.J. Ward:

Can the Chief Minister give us a timescale as to when this report will be dealt with and acted upon, given that the Government Plan debate should finish this week?

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré:

No. I will say that Deputy Wickenden will be liaising with the Children’s Commissioner on this, but I do not have a timescale to answer.

Deputy R.J. Ward:

I apologise, I could not hear that.

The Bailiff:

Deputy Wickenden will be meeting with the Children’s Commissioner, but the Chief Minister cannot provide you with a timescale at this point. Is that correct, Chief Minister?

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré:

Yes, Sir.

3.4.7 Senator S.W. Pallett:

In the meantime, before any amendments are made to the current Control of Housing and Work (Jersey) Law, we are dealing with the current system. Can the Chief Minister say whether he is going to take any action to ensure that appeals that are heard under the Control of Housing and Work (Jersey) Law do take fully into account the best interests of children and their families?

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré:

In essence, as I understand matters, most of the appeals process is to the main body of H.A.W.A.G. (Housing and Working Advisory Group) as opposed to the D.C.M. (Deputy Chief Minister) and therefore it is on very few occasions that the issue that has been identified arises. I will be having a discussion with the appropriate officials and with the appropriate Ministers at some point to see what is needed to be resolved and if this is an issue it obviously will be.

3.5 Connétable M.K. Jackson of St. Brelade of the Minister for Infrastructure regarding restrictions in Broad Street (OQ.245/2021):

Given the Assembly’s request to the Minister to report back to the States on the success or otherwise of the pedestrian-priority restrictions in Broad Street by the end of 2021, will he state whether he will be in a position to provide an update by the end of the year as agreed?

Deputy K.C. Lewis of St. Saviour (The Minister for Infrastructure):

The answer is yes, I can confirm it is my intention to present a report by the end of the year as required by P.28/2021. I can also advise I recently met with Deputy Gardiner and with Constable Crowcroft, the sponsors of the proposition, to discuss my initial findings and explore future opportunities, with a particular emphasis on parking and access provision for people with disabilities and limited mobility. I was encouraged by their feedback and look forward to continuing to work closely with them as the study progresses.

3.5.1 The Connétable of St. Brelade:

Would the Minister agree that the closure has failed to produce tangible results in terms of commercial benefit?

Deputy K.C. Lewis:

I cannot argue with the Constable on that point, but all will be revealed in the report which will be coming forward in the very near future.

3.5.2 Deputy R.J. Ward:

Can I ask the Minister what he sees as a tangible success for this project?

Deputy K.C. Lewis:

Members are aware that I intended to reopen Broad Street, but a proposition was brought by the Constable of St. Helier and amended by Deputy Gardiner to keep it closed with certain provisions. The ball is not in my court, as such. I work at the bidding of the States Assembly. We also have lots of other things coming into the mix. We have increased a lot of the disabled parking in Sand Street Car Park and also increased the parent and child parking, so in fact the entire level 4 in Sand Street Car Park is now disabled and parent and child, which could also include grandparent or guardian. There is lots in the mix, plus we have got the town bus service in the pipeline, so all that will come through into the report.

3.5.3 Deputy R.J. Ward:

Can I glean from that that the Minister cannot see this as possibly a successful project, as he does not know what success looks like for the project of Broad Street itself, which is what the question is about?

Deputy K.C. Lewis:

I am not sure that I understand what the question is, that I do not know what success looks like. That is quite bizarre. It is a matter for Members. It is not my proposition that this was put forward, so it is the view of the Members. If States Members direct me in a certain way then that is what I must do. The success from my point of view is an amendment to our bus service into Broad Street. That was a success, and cycling also is permitted one way down Broad Street. That is a success, obviously taking care with pedestrians. The work is ongoing to measure where success lies.

3.5.4 Deputy J.M. Maçon of St. Saviour:

Has the Minister been made aware of the concern that if a disabled person wishes to stay at the Premier Inn with a suitcase, for example, there is anecdotal evidence from taxi drivers that they cannot pull up and assist that disabled person that way? Is the Minister aware of this concern and will he act on it?

Deputy K.C. Lewis:

I am indeed aware of it. It is not anecdotal, it is a fact that taxis are not permitted down there, not after 11.00 a.m. That is the usual scheme that is going on at the moment. There have also been a few shop owners who would like access after that time. It is a problem and officers are working on that. There is ample disabled parking but not exactly where people want it, for instance just around the corner. Literally 50 yards away in Sand Street Car Park there is a whole basement of disabled parking plus level 4, which I have previously mentioned. Parking outside is obviously very difficult. There is Dumaresq Street, which is literally around the back.

Deputy J.M. Maçon:

I am glad it has been heard. Thank you.

3.5.5 Deputy I. Gardiner of St. Helier:

As the Minister mentioned regarding the proposition, I would like to seek a clarification from the Minister. As the proposition intended that we would have a bus service that would go around the Library Place and allow Broad Street to be purely pedestrian, what we have created is half pedestrian and half traffic through, and it does not help any of the parties. Would the Minister agree that creating clarity if it is pedestrian or non-pedestrian would help for the public to use Broad Street accordingly?

Deputy K.C. Lewis:

I await the report which the Deputy will be feeding into that. As I say, I think it is a success at the moment to get the buses going back down Broad Street and lots of people who do have mobility problems are able to use the bus and to be dropped off in Broad Street is a great bonus for them. Also, it assists in getting around various other parts of St. Helier town, which is very difficult if they took an alternate route. Everything is in the mix.

[15:00]

3.5.6 Deputy I. Gardiner:

Would the Minister see a success if the bus would be able to get to the Library Place, which is almost the same place, and keep Broad Street purely pedestrian?

Deputy K.C. Lewis:

Not the way the routes are laid out, no.

3.5.7 Deputy G.J. Truscott:

I think there was a fair deal of criticism right at the beginning that not all of the stakeholders in Broad Street were consulted. Could the Minister assure the Assembly that this time everyone was consulted that have either businesses or premises in Broad Street?

Deputy K.C. Lewis:

I believe that will be part of the process in the report. As I pointed out, it was not my proposition, but the report does come back to me and I will make sure that all the premises in Broad Street are consulted.

3.5.8 The Connétable of St. Brelade:

Would the Minister confirm whether the extended closure is influenced by the impending demolition of some properties in Broad Street as part of an imminent large development taking place there?

Deputy K.C. Lewis:

Not to my knowledge. I am aware there is a large development in the pipeline halfway down Broad Street, but that should not impact on the road.

3.6 Senator S.C. Ferguson of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding General Medical Council investigation (OQ.243/2021):

Will the Minister advise whether he is aware of the results of any investigation by the General Medical Council into the conduct of a senior ophthalmic surgeon and a senior maternity consultant in connection with the withdrawal of an offer of employment to Dr. Alwitry, and if so, will the Minister state what action, if any, has been taken by Health and Community Services as a result?

Deputy R.J. Renouf of St. Ouen (The Minister for Health and Social Services):

I am aware that the General Medical Council conducted an investigation into an ophthalmologist in 2015 in relation to the Alwitry case. This case was closed in October 2015 with no action taken by the G.M.C. (General Medical Council) and consequently no action taken by Health and Community Services. I am not aware of any G.M.C. investigation into a maternity consultant in connection with the Alwitry case.

3.6.1 Senator S.C. Ferguson:

Given that it has cost the taxpayer a substantial amount, why is the taxpayer not entitled to know what they have paid for?

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

I am sorry, I do not understand the question. The taxpayer does not pay for the General Medical Council.

Senator S.C. Ferguson:

No, but the whole investigation has arisen and has cost the taxpayer because of the behaviour of the members of the medical profession in turning down and sacking the doctor before he took up his post.

The Bailiff:

Senator, I am not sure the Minister can comment on any of those things. It seems to me your question was designed to the General Medical Council’s investigation into the conduct of 2 members of the medical profession. Only one has been investigated and the Minister has said he is not aware of any other investigation and he said that no further action will be taken, so it is not clear that there has been a cost to members of the public as a result of the actions of members of the medical profession. Are you able to reframe your question in a way which …

Senator S.C. Ferguson:

Given that the investigation of the senior ophthalmic surgeon has led to a course of action which has eventually cost the taxpayer a substantial amount, why cannot the taxpayer know what the results of the investigation were? It seems unreasonable that eventually it is causing them to have to pay money or taxpayers footing the bill for something like nearly £3 million in gross damages and goodness knows what, and yet an investigation …

The Bailiff:

Senator, forgive me. What is the question? You have said a number of things, but I am not quite certain what the question is directed to the Minister.

Senator S.C. Ferguson:

What were the findings of the investigation?

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

There was a reference in one case to the General Medical Council but, as I have said, no action was taken by the General Medical Council and that is what appears on the record. I do not believe there has been any expense to the taxpayer in the reference to the General Medical Council, so I am afraid I really cannot understand what the Senator is seeking from this question.

3.6.2 Senator K.L. Moore:

A general question now, if the Minister could describe to the Assembly whether it is usual practice for the findings of a report to the General Medical Council to be shared with the Minister?

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

I believe the General Medical Council reports would be sent to the Island’s medical director, who would then brief me accordingly, but the results of General Medical Council investigations are posted on the Council’s website, and anyone can go to the website, look up the name of any healthcare professional to see if there is any investigation that has been conducted and what the results of that investigation might be. In this case, there has been one investigation and the Council chose to take no action.

3.6.3 Senator K.L. Moore:

Would the Minister be aware of more recent reports that have been suppressed from publication on the G.M.C.’s website?

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

I am not privy to how the G.M.C. reports. That would be a question of their own governance. I am certainly not aware of any suppression of reports but the G.M.C. is not something that comes under my remit, of course. They are a large organisation.

3.6.4 Senator S.C. Ferguson:

In fact the Minister confirms that we can go on to the G.M.C. website and look up this investigation?

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

I think it is the case that what is available is the record that an investigation was undertaken but no action was taken.

3.7 Deputy M.R. Le Hegarat of St. Helier of the Minister for Home Affairs regarding Prison! Me! No Way! (OQ.252/2021):

Will the Minister advise how “Prison! Me! No Way!” is currently being delivered?

Deputy G.C. Guida of St. Lawrence (The Minister for Home Affairs):

“Prison! Me! No Way!” is not currently being delivered. It was suspended pending review.

The Bailiff:

I am sorry, Minister. I certainly cannot hear you and I suspect many others cannot either. Are you able to either get closer to the microphone or speak a little more loudly, please?

Deputy G.C. Guida:

Sorry, can you hear me now?

The Bailiff:

That is somewhat better, yes.

Deputy G.C. Guida:

I am sorry, my screen says that I have been queued but if you can hear me that should be good enough. “Prison! Me! No Way!” is not currently being delivered. It was paused pending review. Both Justice and Home Affairs and C.Y.P.E.S. (Children, Young People, Education and Skills) are working on plans to deliver a new programme to meet the needs of the Island’s young people as part of their 2022 Business Plan. We are now looking for a business analyst to scope the new scheme in partnership with C.Y.P.E.S. with a view to having it up and running by September 2022. In the meantime, the States of Jersey Police community policing team continue their activity work with children and young people to provide support and advice around preventing offending and antisocial behaviour. I look forward to updating Members further as plans emerge.

3.7.1 Deputy M.R. Le Hegarat:

When was the funding withdrawn for “Prison! Me! No Way!” and what workshops have been run by Justice and Home Affairs and C.Y.P.E.S. in the interim time as explained in his answer?

Deputy G.C. Guida:

“Prison! Me! No Way!” was suspended just before the pandemic started, so I believe that would be the end of 2019. There have been several workshops run by Justice and Home Affairs and C.Y.P.E.S. with key stakeholders to determine the future direction.

3.7.2 Senator K.L. Moore:

What was the rationale for withdrawing the delivery of “Prison! Me! No Way!”? Were there any particular concerns about the outcomes or the effectiveness of that project, given that the Minister described it had been ceased before COVID?

Deputy G.C. Guida:

I do not think there were any specific concerns about the delivery of the programme by “Prison! Me! No Way!” but we were certainly looking at a more efficient system to work with C.Y.P.E.S. and J.H.A. (Justice and Home Affairs).

3.7.3 Deputy K.F. Morel of St. Lawrence:

Could the Minister confirm, post-pandemic, a pandemic in which young people were locked down, as the rest of us, and it was predicted there would be a rise in antisocial behaviour and possible offending by young people, is it then the case that there is currently no preventative programme in action, preventing youth offending?

Deputy G.C. Guida:

There are always programmes in action and certainly the police have had very specific programmes in the last 3 years, 2 of them were operations that were fairly similar and again the community policing team is still actively at work. We are looking for a replacement for “Prison! Me! No Way!” and I hope it will be operational before the end of 2022.

3.7.4 Deputy K.F. Morel:

Would the Minister then please advise the Assembly as to the names and the titles of those programmes, particularly those that have been operating in the past 12 months since the main lockdown finished, and can he confirm whether or not the vast increase in the numbers of stops and searches of young people is one of those programmes?

Deputy G.C. Guida:

The name of one of them escapes me right now, but I certainly remember Operation Porter, which was an extremely targeted operation, which did happen with the help of schools, but it was something that was at the same time to prevent offending but in the same vein as what “Prison! Me! No Way!” was delivering.

Deputy K.F. Morel:

Are the stop and searches part of these preventative programmes?

Deputy G.C. Guida:

No, they were not.

3.7.5 Deputy R.J. Ward:

Can the Minister confirm what saving was made in the removal of the programme “Prison! Me! No Way!” as in what costing was not spent on it and where the funding that previously funded “Prison! Me! No Way!” went to?

Deputy G.C. Guida:

Sorry I do not know the budget of “Prison! Me! No Way!” The B.a.S.S. (Building a Safer Society) system is supposed to be a seed corn system that does not entirely finance the charities but helps them start, so I do not know what the budget was when we suspended our help to it. I can provide this answer of course if the Deputy wishes.

Deputy R.J. Ward:

No, thank you.

3.7.6 Deputy M.R. Le Hegarat:

“Prison! Me! No Way!” was a very successful tool in the box for the States of Jersey. What I will ask the Minister is when they come back with a programme will this be delivered in schools as in all of the programmes that were and including all of those people who participated, for example, fire service, ambulance service, youth service, police, et cetera?

[15:15]

Bearing in mind that I think the Minister has alluded to some operations. Operations are not what was delivered by way of “Prison! Me! No Way!”

Deputy G.C. Guida:

Absolutely. First of all, we have no reason to think that “Prison! Me! No Way!” was not successful. I think it delivered exactly what it was supposed to do and certainly whatever replaces it does have to happen in school and with the help of the other services of Home Affairs.

Deputy R.J. Ward:

Sir, sorry to interrupt. I am really struggling. I do not know if it is my hearing, it might be, I have damaged my hearing over time.

The Bailiff:

Is this a point of order?

Deputy R.J. Ward:

It is, Sir. I am struggling to make out answers and I do not know if something can be done. I do not know what to do about it. I cannot believe that for anyone at home who may have any difficulty in hearing that this is accessible. I cannot help pointing out that it would be a lot easier if Ministers were in the Assembly because the sound is pretty good in here.

The Bailiff:

Deputy Guida, what I can say is that it is quite difficult to hear your answers. I was able to hear them, but I had to strain a little bit in order to hear them and it may well be that other Members were not in a position to hear them as easily as they might otherwise have been. I would also mention, and should have done so before, that that is not the first time that I have had that experience. It would be helpful, I think, if you are not able to be in the Assembly during this time when Members do not have to be physically present if your sound system could be tested so that you are able to be heard very clearly to the Assembly when the time comes that you answer questions, and in fact will be passed on for the benefit of all Ministers or those answering questions in the Assembly, because that has been the experience of the Presiding Officer as well.

3.8 Deputy R.J. Ward of the Minister for Housing and Communities regarding monthly mortgage costs (OQ.253/2021):

Will the Minister state the anticipated monthly mortgage cost on a 2-bedroom and 3-bedroom home at the new waterfront and South Hill developments, if purchased via a shared equity or deferred deposit scheme?

Deputy J.M. Maçon (Assistant Minister for Housing and Communities - rapporteur):

On behalf of the Minister, it is Deputy Maçon here, I will be taking this question. Deputy Ward has agreed. I can confirm that I am at home with no officers and I have only got the cat for company. The South Hill development is at least 10 months away from being released for presale and the first phase of the waterfront is at least 2 years away from being released for presale. The value of the open market units will be at the value prevailing in the market at the point where a presale contract is entered into. At this early stage in the developments’ timeline, it is impossible to give accurate monthly mortgage costs associated with the property, as this will depend on the eventual sale price of the units, the Bank of England base rate prevailing at the time, the individual circumstances of the purchaser, which includes a number of variables, for example the age, level of deposit, et cetera, the funder’s interest rate - these obviously vary from funder to funder - and whether the purchaser has opted for a variable, fixed rate or tracker rate mortgage. With a shared equity option Islanders are able to access these homes which are built to a full B.R.E.E.A.M. (Building Research Establishment’s Environmental Assessment Method) standard offering energy efficiency homes in a good location close to improved local amenities.

3.8.1 Deputy R.J. Ward:

It is clear that there is absolutely no clue as to how much these things are going to cost. Can I ask the Assistant Minister therefore how can we have been reassured during the recent debate that there was not a need for more affordable homes on that site, given that we have absolutely no idea how much the other homes are going to be, even in the shared equity or deposit scheme? Can the Minister reassure people that they will be affordable and, if so, how can he do that?

Deputy J.M. Maçon:

The question that was proposed to me was about monthly mortgage payments. What S.o.J.D.C. (States of Jersey Development Company) have as a way of estimated cost of the project are of course different and they will be working off that model, which of course they have to work from. That is the explanation. The thing is you cannot tie the final unit price with the monthly mortgage payments, which is what the Deputy asked for.

3.8.2 Senator S.Y. Mézec:

The Deputy said in his original answer that this would be based on the prevailing market rates at the time. Given that in the last 12 months the cost of an average home in Jersey has increased by £97,000 can we assume that for those waterfront-based properties that we will be looking at a cost in the range of £200,000 more than they would be worth today?

Deputy J.M. Maçon:

I am unable to answer that question. I simply do not know and I do not think anyone can know.

3.8.3 Senator S.Y. Mézec:

Given that that has been the case for the rate of increase over the previous year, is the Assistant Minister telling us that there is currently no ability to anticipate how much those properties will be valued at that time, and if they are unable to anticipate that does that not make a mockery out of the financial projections that were given to States Members in a previous debate and used for grounds for opposing more affordable housing?

Deputy J.M. Maçon:

I do not agree with the assertions that the Senator is putting together, in that yes, anyone can make estimates, anyone can apply percentages to them and come up with a figure, but of course we will not know what that will be for when a presale contract is passed.

3.8.4 Deputy R.J. Ward:

Given that we do not know how much they will be but there are huge increases in the market and they will go on to market value, can I ask the Assistant Minister to confirm, if they are a price that is unaffordable for first-time buyers, unaffordable to young families, unaffordable for those trying to get somewhere to live, will they then go to investors because they have to be sold, given that circumstance? Can the Minister rule out that they will be sold to investors?

Deputy J.M. Maçon:

All of this I think is addressed in the report, which was published earlier in the year, which ties into the next question from Deputy Ward. I think that the caveats in that report are quite clear.

3.9 Deputy R.J. Ward of the Minister for Housing and Communities regarding foreign buy-to-let investors (OQ.254/2021):

I look forward to this answer. Will the Minister advise when the bans on foreign buy-to-let investors from purchasing homes, as agreed by the Assembly, will be put into place, and take action?

Deputy J.M. Maçon (Assistant Minister for Housing and Communities - rapporteur):

I think that Deputy Ward is referring to P.165/2020, and to remind Members of the wording of that proposition as amended it says: “The States are asked to decide whether they are of opinion - that, in the proposed development of the waterfront (defined as Key Opportunities Sites 1, 2 and 3 in the Southwest St. Helier Development Framework) by the States of Jersey Development Company - (a) no residential properties should be sold by the S.o.J.D.C. to foreign buy-to-let investors.” Ministerial guidance to prevent foreign-owned buy-to-let investors was issued to S.o.J.D.C. in respect of the South Hill development and the waterfront development on 1st September and 30th September 2021 respectively. This is publicly available in our P.157/2021. The South Hill and waterfront development properties will be sold as flying freehold to either entitled or licensed residents as per the Control of Housing and Work (Jersey) Law 2012. Furthermore, all S.o.J.D.C. developments or future S.o.J.D.C. developments will be structured by way of flying freehold.

3.9.1 Deputy R.J. Ward:

Can I just confirm then from the Assistant Minister that all future - as he has suggested - developments in the States of Jersey Development Company, waterfront, South Hill and whatever else comes along, will not end up in the hands of foreign buy-to-let investors at any stage during their life span?

Deputy J.M. Maçon:

I can only reiterate what I have already told the Assembly, which is that the S.o.J.D.C. have been given instruction that future developments, so that is excluding waterfront or South Hill, although they have been included as part of it, that we are talking about developments other than those particular ones, the future ones, will be flying freehold and they will be subject to the provisions within the Control of Housing and Work (Jersey) Law in accordance with the report 157.

3.9.2 Senator S.Y. Mézec:

The wholesale banning of foreign buy-to-let investor properties in Jersey across the whole Island, not just the waterfront, was the one tangible policy that was found in the Creating Better Homes action plan. Can the Assistant Minister confirm when that will be enacted in Jersey and when it will be legally impossible for a foreign buy-to-let investor to acquire property in Jersey?

Deputy J.M. Maçon:

Can I confirm when that will be done? No, because as the Senator quite correctly identifies, it is quite a legally complex matter to deal with. What we have been able to do over the sites and the States of Jersey through their shareholder representative can do, we have done, but as for across the whole of the Island I am unable to give a timeline on that because of the legal complexities.

3.9.3 Senator S.Y. Mézec:

Is the Assistant Minister therefore confirming that the one tangible proposal in the entire Creating Better Homes action plan document is one which he is unable to provide a timetable for when it will be implemented? It was the only tangible proposal in that entire document. When will that be implemented?

Deputy J.M. Maçon:

I can only reiterate what I have said, it is quite a significant piece of work that requires a significant amount of legal consideration, which at the moment we do not have an implementation date for.

3.10 Senator S.W. Pallett of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding reinstating Samarès Ward (OQ.251/2021):

Will the Minister explain why he did not meet the official 28-day deadline, and a later deadline of his own making, to respond to an e-petition seeking to reinstate the rehabilitation services of Samarès Ward; and will he explain how it was assessed as acceptable that the service is now located in a 12-bed ward in the General Hospital rather than the original purpose-built unit at Overdale?

The Deputy of St. Ouen (The Minister for Health and Social Services):

I take responsibility for the time taken to respond to the petition. I recognise the concern about rehabilitation provision, and I wanted to fully understand the issues giving rise to those concerns and ensure that I could respond with assurances to patients. Accordingly, I went about asking questions and visiting the wards in question. I consulted and met practitioners, and responded to the petition only when I felt assured we were able to deliver the care needed by patients. A stroke patient begins rehabilitation as soon as possible after admission following a stroke. Some patients are able to be discharged home and receive ongoing rehabilitation and support there. This is recognised as usually delivering the better outcomes, however some patients will still require rehabilitation in an in-patient setting and will be moved on to Plémont Ward, which is now our in-patient rehabilitation ward. Prior to March 2020 they would have been moved on to Samarès Ward. All staff from Samarès were transferred to Plémont. There has been no reduction in staffing levels and as Written Question 483 shows, the staff and non-staff expenditure on the service is much the same as it was when the service was delivered at Samarès but, of course, the environment has changed. Samarès Ward was a spacious, calm, healing environment with patients having their own rooms. I recognise it was close to people’s hearts. Plémont Ward was designed as an acute hospital ward and patients do not have their own rooms generally, although 4 private rooms are available, and of course much has changed for staff arising out of the pandemic. We must recognise that the early days staff were working with fear and uncertainty, they had extra procedures and additional P.P.E. (personal protective equipment). Some were redeployed. We acknowledge that many staff are still exhausted and face apprehension and anxiety. It is difficult to deliver therapies in that atmosphere, but there has been no reduction in the package of care available. I do acknowledge communication has been …

The Bailiff:

Minister, I must ask you to bring your answer to an end, I am afraid. It has been well over 2 minutes on the normal one minute 30 seconds.

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

Thank you, Sir. I would just say and I am sure I will elaborate in supplementaries that we are taking extensive steps to review the situation and make all improvements that we can.

[15:30]

3.10.1 Senator S.W. Pallett:

I think anybody listening to that answer would come to the conclusion that we are paying the same for what is now a much-reduced service. I do understand the Minister saying that the staff are doing a fantastic job, and there is no doubt that they are, but as much as I appreciate the Minister’s answer on an issue that is such a major concern to Islanders, can he explain why so many Islanders recovering from severe stroke or illness are not getting the support they desperately need, both within hospital and when they return home and what is he currently doing to remedy these issues?

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

The transition may have given the appearance and may have, in some respects, reduced the service. That is not what is intended, of course, and the service does not need to be reduced. We can deliver in Plémont what was delivered at Samarès. It is a different environment, clearly, but there is no reason why the therapeutic care cannot be delivered in Plémont Ward, and the staff are still there to do so. As for the work in the community, we must recognise as well that the pandemic impacted the community teams. They were not able to visit people in their homes. The out-patient clinics were severely curtailed and backlogs have arisen as a result. Those staff also have been affected by all that the pandemic has brought. But we have established a task and finish group to bring both the in-patient provision and the community provision to a point where it is delivering just as we want it to, and there is a lot of work that has been going on in recent months to do that. In my response to the petition, I also said that we would initiate an independent review to ensure that we are delivering the best provision we can in the Island.

3.10.2 Connétable A. Jehan of St. John:

Is the Minister aware that, unlike the patient experience on Samarès, rehab patients on Plémont are still going for days without any physiotherapy and, therefore, there has been a reduction in service?

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

Well, I am not aware of that because those are not the reports that I am getting. There are 9 therapy staff that work on Plémont Ward and that is well-staffed: physiotherapists, occupational therapists, speech and language therapists, who are providing the services they are trained to provide to their patients. If the Connétable wishes to refer any specific case to me, I would want to look into it. I would certainly want to.

3.10.3 The Connétable of St. John:

There is not one case but many cases I could refer. Would the Minister agree with me that it is a completely different ethos and that rehab on an open, general ward is not conducive for rehab patients?

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

Yes, I accept that Plémont Ward is not Samarès Ward. Samarès Ward was spacious. It was calm. It was a different environment, but that does not mean to say that we cannot deliver the therapeutic interventions needed for patients.

3.10.4 Senator S.C. Ferguson:

Given the complaints, as the Connétable of St. John has said, we have received with regard to facilities for therapy in Plémont Ward and following up at home, does it not give the Minister cause for concern about this with regard to the Jersey Care Model?

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

No, I do not relate this to the Jersey Care Model. This has been an impact of the pandemic, when a decision was taken to bring all services into one central place. The pandemic caused the services in the community to cease of necessity for that while at the height of the pandemic. It is recognised by all those working in the area that rehabilitation in the community is the best option and delivers the better outcomes for patients so that as soon as possible patients should be discharged and receive rehabilitation in the community. We are working to deliver that and much effort is going into ensuring that happens.

3.10.5 Senator S.C. Ferguson:

Does the Minister not realise that getting physiotherapy and so on in the community very often requires the patient to pay for services which they would normally have received for free and that this is killing ... I was going to say killing people off but it is really making life extremely difficult, if you can get a physio to actually visit you. Because obviously if they are visiting Samarès Ward, where there are 28 rooms cheek by jowl, they can get to far more patients than if they are scattered around the Island. Do these things not bother the Minister? Does the Minister not think about these things?

The Bailiff:

Senator, the question I think is was there a reduction in the level of care when people have to have physiotherapy in the community and does it cost people money. Is that correct?

Senator S.C. Ferguson:

Basically, they are not getting the care in the community. They are not getting the equivalent care that they would get at Samarès Ward.

The Bailiff:

Senator, I probably should not have interrupted you but there does have to be a question that the Minister can answer. It cannot be a speech. It cannot be a number of assertions.

Senator S.C. Ferguson:

I did ask a question but you chopped me off in my prime, Sir.

The Bailiff:

Well, I would hate to be accused rightly of doing that, but let me give you the opportunity just to ask the question in question terms now.

Senator S.C. Ferguson:

Does the Minister really believe that the quality of service has not fallen?

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

I will accept there were challenges with this workforce as a result of the pandemic and we are working to overcome that, but the purpose of rehabilitation is to try and restore the functionality of the patient to what it was before they were admitted. Now, that is not always possible following a stroke. Not everyone can work miracles. So it may be the case that when hospital treatment or secondary care treatment has gone as far as it can, then people have to enter into the long-term care scheme arrangements. This is not just a rehabilitation need or others, but there may come a stage in life where long-term care is needed and patients take that step into the long-term care scheme. We know the criteria around that, which means that where patients can afford to do so there has to be some contribution made. But at the end of the day it is a good job we have that scheme because it means people do not need to be selling their homes to access long-term care.

Deputy G.J. Truscott:

I wanted to thank the Minister for his open and very frank appraisal of the situation. Quite frankly ...

The Bailiff:

No, I am really sorry, Deputy, this is question time.

Deputy G.J. Truscott:

Sorry, Sir.

The Bailiff:

You have just opened by thanking the Minister and you were about to make another statement. Is there a question:

3.10.6 Deputy G.J. Truscott:

I do apologise. It is just the nice nature of myself. It would appear that Plémont Ward is somewhat wanting in its present state. Could the Minister indicate how soon we can see a tangible improvement on the services offered there?

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

I mentioned the task and finish group and we are looking at how we can improve the environment, create more space by using present storage areas. I would like to put a dining table in and we are working to do that because Samarès Ward had a dining table where patients gathered. The independent review I have spoken about will be asked as well to comment on the facilities available. There is a gym in Plémont Ward with all the equipment there. We want to make sure we maximise that space and ensure we have all the equipment that is needed to provide good rehabilitation.

3.10.7 Senator K.L. Moore:

Will the Minister agree that there is a connection between 2 major shortages in the Island at the moment, one for housing and one for staff, which is particularly impacting upon the availability of care in the community? This is placing pressure on patients who are being sent home after rehabilitating on Plémont Ward as they struggle to either find adequate or affordable care in the community or, due to the housing crisis, they find themselves in accommodation that is unsuitable. We have had reports, for example, if I may ...

The Bailiff:

Well, we really are very tight on time for this particular question ...

Senator K.L. Moore:

Well, we only have 13 questions today, Sir.

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

I think the Senator’s question is quite wide-ranging insofar as it concerns the H.C.S. (Health and Community Services) community rehabilitation team there. There are 10 physiotherapists who work ... 7 physiotherapists, 3 rehabilitation assistants who work in the community. That is not a shortage. There is not a shortage in that team. But more widely perhaps, as I think the Senator was asking about provision of care in the community and provision of healthcare assistants perhaps, yes, that is part of the challenge, but we know many healthcare assistants came from European countries. It seems that they are no longer ... or not many of them are any longer in the Island and that is an immediate cause of some shortage. Whether that is going to rectify itself in the medium term we just do not know. Yes, we know well about the difficulties of recruiting to an Island where accommodation and cost of living is a factor.

3.10.8 Senator K.L. Moore:

I am grateful to the Minister for acknowledging that there is a connection. So why does the Minister persist in sending patients home to both unsuitable accommodation and unsuitable care provision?

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

Patients will be discharged when it is appropriate to do so and that is a medical decision, it is not my decision. They will be discharged to their own homes wherever possible because that is recognised as providing better outcomes. It is better that people recover in their own homes and if they need rehabilitation they are in their own environment to move around and learn how to live independently. So we have a team that will be assisting them, but I said in the answer to the petition also that we will ensure that the team that looked after them, if they were in Plémont Ward, will manage a transition, will assist them in their own homes as well, while handing over to the community rehabilitation team. So we will ensure a seamless transition and that care will continue to be available. We will do everything we can to improve the care.

3.10.9 Deputy I. Gardiner:

I am grateful that the Minister recognised the concerns about the quality of the care. I would like to ask the Minister how he can explain that we have gone from 28 rehabilitation centre delivering patient in private room with gym and dining room and other facilities for half of the beds for the same cost.

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

There were 28 beds in Samarès but it is not to say that they were always occupied. I understand that the assessment has been made that this service can be provided with 14 beds, although, of course, there is good bed capacity in the General Hospital and if it were ever needed other beds could be used.

[15:45]

Rehabilitation does take place on other wards, orthopaedic wards, for example, so this is a flexible service.

3.10.10 Deputy I. Gardiner:

I would like to clarify my initial question. From 28 beds we have gone to the 14, or I thought about 12, so it is less than half beds and it costs more or less the same amount of money. How does it work?

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

It appears that it does cost about the same amount of money. I do not have the bed occupancy figures for Samarès, I think. I am just looking back on the ... I think that would depend on how many beds were occupied in Samarès to be able to draw a comparison.

3.10.11 Senator S.W. Pallett:

The Minister used the phrase “using storage areas”. I am not sure how low we are sinking here but he has a task and finish group to improve services and while he is sorting that out patients are suffering. Will the Minister consult further with all the key stakeholders in rehabilitation care in Jersey as a matter of urgency and reconsider his decision to close what was a centre of excellence in rehabilitative care for Islanders?

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

As a matter of urgency we are working with all involved. I have spoken to the charities involved as well. If the Senator has specific concerns because patients have brought those to his attention, then please let me know those specifics because we do want to get it right. This is causing concern to all those working in the area. They are working hard to put it right. So we have that task and finish group. We are conducting the independent review. We are also recruiting a stroke consultant and a frailty consultant, who will be working in the service as soon as we have recruited them. We are working urgently to provision the best service we can for our patients.

Senator S.W. Pallett:

Sir, sorry to jump in but I asked the Minister whether he would reconsider his decision. He has not answered that question.

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

Specifically concerning the move, it seems to me if we move back to Samarès Ward it would only be a very, very temporary move, given that this Assembly has decided that those buildings must be demolished if a planning application is approved to build the new hospital there. So that just causes more disruption. We can deliver the service in Plémont Ward. There has been no need to reduce services. The staff are there. There has been no reduction in what is on offer, so there is no need to reconsider the move back to Samarès.

3.11 Deputy G.P. Southern of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding home care (OQ.247/2021):

Will the Minister state how many people are currently receiving home care, how many healthcare assistants are providing such care, and the number of hours of care delivered? Will he indicate how these figures compare to those for 2019, pre-COVID, and will he advise what measures are being taken to ensure that more people who need access to homecare are able to do so?

The Deputy of St. Ouen (The Minister for Health and Social Services):

There is a lot of data requested by this question, but in fact it is not possible to give definitive figures relating to home care as many individuals are arranging and accessing care on a private basis. However, we do have details of those who are accessing home care through the long-term care scheme. At the end of 2019 there were a total of 478 long-term care claims for domiciliary care and as at 8th December this year there are 570 of those claims. The Deputy has asked about the number of hours of care delivered and, of course, we can only say that as what is billed through the long-term care scheme. That was 19,589 in 2019 and 29,391 so far in 2021, so that is a significant increase in hours of care provided. The Deputy may have heard of the recent help at home scheme that has been launched. H.C.S. is working with 17 partners in the domiciliary care sector. They were asked to provide information on their staffing capacity in terms of their number of employees and vacancies. In October this year 974 employees were recorded. However, they are not all homecare assistants as this total is made up of homecare assistants and healthcare professionals; 126 vacancies were recorded at the time of submission. Of course, this does not include all homecare providers but only those who are part of the help at home scheme. The Deputy asked what measures are being taken and I would refer him to the help at home scheme funded by the Fiscal Stimulus Fund, £621,000 investment to grow the homecare sector and support it with a recruitment campaign. It is producing results and it is a continuing campaign.

3.11.1 Deputy G.P. Southern:

Yes. I hear the words “is producing results”, this new mechanism, but does the Minister not accept, given his previous answer to the previous question, that there is a shortage of qualified staff available to fill these positions and this is a fundamental aim of the Jersey Care Model to deliver more support in the community rather than in care homes?

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

Yes, I said there is at the moment a shortage of staff and the sector is feeling that. I think this has primarily arisen as a result of Brexit. The sector was reliant on a number of workers who came from eastern Europe and many of those do not seem to be in the Island anymore, which is why we are seeking local recruits. It is a valuable and rewarding sector to work in, but it is hard work and it is not everyone’s cup of tea. I know those who do work in it are dedicated and hardworking. We do need to resource that sector and much thought is going into how that will happen over the longer term.

3.11.2 Deputy R.J. Ward:

Given the reinstatement of COVID regulations allowing care providers to use staff to perform tasks that are usually carried out by more experienced staff, is this affecting the number of qualified healthcare assistants available and providing a service?

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

No, I do not believe those temporary measures are affecting the number of staff available. Clearly, the staff are there. Well, sorry, the agencies, by which I mean the employers, are working with the staff available to them and managing their workload.

3.11.3 Deputy R.J. Ward:

I suppose the question is: does this care order extend to homecare providers and will the costs of those receiving care remain the same from other private providers, given that they may be receiving care from less experienced staff in this interim period of the COVID regulation being enforced?

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

The order is made by the Minister for the Environment. Just at the moment I am not totally sure it extends to domiciliary care providers, so I do not want to mislead the Assembly if I get that wrong, I am sorry.

Deputy R.J. Ward:

Sir, I wonder if we could have an answer to that in some way because I think it is relevant to this question, but thank you.

The Bailiff:

Are you able to provide ...

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

Yes, Sir, I will ask those listening to come back to me, to the Assembly, to say precisely what the order covers.

3.11.4 Deputy G.P. Southern:

It seems to me that the Minister has effectively stated that he cannot make a comparison between this year and 2019, before COVID, because he does not know the figures and that his department has withdrawn from measuring those figures to see if we are succeeding in our primary aim of delivering care in people’s homes through the Jersey Care Model. Is that not the case?

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

Not at all. We have been able to make a comparison with the 2019 figures that come through the long-term care scheme, and that is all we can access because the Deputy will understand that some people seek private care and Government does not get involved with that. So we cannot know or quantify what is being delivered privately. Thank you; that is all I can answer.

3.12 Senator S.Y. Mézec of the Chief Minister regarding the Island’s foodbanks (OQ.249/2021):

Following reports that the demand for one of the Island’s foodbanks has risen by nearly 130 per cent in the last 2 years, will the Chief Minister provide his assessment of this development, particularly in respect of whether Jersey’s welfare system is providing an adequate safety net for Islanders who fall into poverty?

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré (The Chief Minister):

I am extremely grateful to all voluntary organisations who provide help to others within the community. The Senator has asked me for my assessment and I consider that Jersey’s welfare system does provide an adequate safety net for low-income Islanders. We all recognise that the COVID-19 pandemic has created a number of challenges for all Islanders and it may be that assistance provided during the pandemic as co-ordinated, for example, by the Government’s Connect Me initiative has increased awareness of the existence of food and other support available from Jersey’s charitable sector. It is also important to note that Jersey’s foodbank network is more accessible than the U.K. (United Kingdom) as, unlike the U.K., Islanders do not need to be referred by Citizens Advice to receive a temporary voucher to use a foodbank. Income support is available to anyone who has lived in Jersey for at least 5 years and provides a means-tested benefit system based on household income to help with daily living costs, including utilities and rental costs and provides additional payments to help with health costs, sickness and disability. In addition, the new health access scheme provides free G.P. (general practitioner) visits for children and low cost visits for adults receiving income support. Unlike the U.K., income support is paid in advance to ensure that low-income families have money for the coming week.

3.12.1 Senator S.Y. Mézec:

I am so staggered by that answer it is so difficult to come up with a supplementary question to that. Is the Chief Minister really saying that a rise in the use of foodbanks in the Island of 130 per cent, when in a wealthy society the use of foodbanks here should be zero per cent, that he thinks our welfare system is adequately providing for these people whose desperation is so great that they are having to rely on charities just to eat? Is that what he is really telling this wealthy society?

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré:

No, and I think yet again the Senator, who I do usually have a lot of respect and time for, is playing a little bit for the headlines as well. Firstly, we have to understand what the background is to those increases. Secondly, if we use, for example, the United Kingdom as a comparable, on very rough and ready figures it would seem about 3, just under 4 per cent, of U.K. residents have accessed foodbanks in 2020-21 for at least 3 days. That is around, I think, 2.5 million, I believe. The Jersey position on a rough estimate is somewhere between 0.2 and 0.4 per cent, so what I am trying to say is that we need to understand it to see if it is an issue, but we do have a good income support system that is probably more accessible than the equivalent in the U.K. I think we also need to accept that on the Island we have a fantastic community, voluntary and honorary set of systems, which do provide certain services in a different way, and equally we have an income support system that, as I said, is probably a bit more generous than that of the U.K. as well.

[16:00]

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré:

Sir, I can see a point of order, I believe.

The Bailiff:

I beg your pardon, point of order, Senator Moore.

Senator K.L. Moore:

Thank you. Not only did the Chief Minister take an excessive amount of time in providing us with some sort of an answer but that was not an answer to the question, if I may.

The Bailiff:

I am not sure that that is a point of order, but you are seeking a ruling. It seemed to me that the Chief Minister made a number of points relating to the foodbanks and made a comparison. His answer I think to Senator Mézec’s point could be inferred but, of course, Senator Mézec does have a final supplementary question available to him at the end of this question, which undoubtedly he will use in the direction he feels that he wishes. The excessive amount of time, I am timing all of the answers. Some of them are running over one minute 30 seconds, some considerably, but quite often the questions have a lot of subdivisions within them. Given that we have a fair amount of time available to us, I am making allowances for those. But you are right, a number of Ministers have in their answers exceeded one minute 30 seconds and that is a practice we should try and avoid. Thank you very much, Senator.

3.12.2 Deputy J.M. Maçon:

Does the Minister agree that individuals accessing foodbanks can be done for various factors, not having enough income is one of them but also not being able to manage their finances well might also be another reason as to why individuals need to access foodbanks in Jersey? The solution to that particular problem is different again.

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré:

I think that would be a reasonable assumption and also demonstrates the point about understanding the position before jumping to conclusions.

3.12.3 Deputy J.M. Maçon:

I thank the Chief Minister for his response and is there a further complication in that understanding exercise that the Chief Minister wants to do in that those that provide the equivalent of foodbank services in Jersey, the robustness and the criteria that is used, is not consistent across all these providers and therefore actually gathering that data to understand what the drivers are is even more complex?

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré:

Again, I find myself in vehement agreement with the Deputy.

3.12.4 Deputy G.P. Southern:

The Chief Minister praised our care system, income support system, for its work. Is he aware that if you are on income support after your rent is paid you are going to live, all in, on something like £130 a week? Could the Chief Minister estimate what his own consumption might be in such circumstances? Would he survive on £130 a week?

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré:

I am informed that a single person out of work would be on £156.87 a week after the rent was paid. I suggest that the Deputy’s assertion at the beginning is incorrect.

3.12.5 Deputy G.P. Southern:

£130 or £150, the question remains the same: could the Chief Minister survive, all in, for food, electric, transport, et cetera, after rent, on that sum?

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré:

I honestly cannot answer that question. For the purposes of food and electricity, I think on a limited lifestyle one probably can and the reason I put it that way around is obviously if one is on income support one will lead a different lifestyle to the one we lead when we are leading a fully employed and salaried lifestyle. The short answer, on the basis of a change in lifestyle, yes, I could.

3.12.6 Deputy R.J. Ward:

What does the Chief Minister consider as an acceptable level of foodbank usage and at what point he considers that people should have to go to foodbanks?

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré:

I do not think we should go into this territory of what point do I consider that people should go to foodbanks. We have had an exceptionally challenging 2 years and there are a low number of individuals, relative to the population of this Island, who have, for whatever reason, needed some extra support. We do not have the data to understand the full increase. It is possible, given that we have had some quite significant turmoil, particularly around employment, that people who ordinarily would be absolutely fine, have had gaps in their employment and have therefore needed help. I do remind the Deputy and Members that there have been a number of programmes that we have put in place over the last 2 years to help Islanders, whether it has been the extra £100 we gave to income support, whether it has been the 2 per cent reduction in social security or whether it has been the co-funded payroll scheme, we have done a lot, including previously reducing the cost of seeing a G.P. for low-income families. There is a lot of support that has been put out there and, compared to particularly our U.K. neighbours, I think we have supported Islanders well, as well as could ordinarily be expected.

3.12.7 Deputy R.J. Ward:

May I ask the Chief Minister what proportion of foodbank users does he believe are there, as suggested by one of his Assistant Ministers, because they simply cannot handle their finances and, by definition, he considers it to be their own fault?

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré:

Firstly, to pick up the last part of the Deputy’s question, he is making an assertion because that was not inferred at all in the question put to me by Deputy Maçon. So if that is the Deputy’s own interpretation, he can stand by that but I would not agree with that. Secondly, it is not helpful to speculate in the absence of data on the subject.

3.12.8 Senator S.Y. Mézec:

Is this not a case of res ipsa loquitur where the very fact that there are rising numbers of people using foodbanks is evidence that our welfare system is failing? Would the Chief Minister like to take the opportunity to say that as part of his commitment to reduce income inequality, not increase it as this statistic demonstrates has been the case in his tenure, that he would like to see a welfare system that does not leave people relying on charity to make ends meet because the point of a welfare system is to keep people out of poverty, is it not?

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré:

I do not do that. I did not realise Latin was an allowable language in the Assembly, Sir.

The Bailiff:

Senator, res ipsa loquitur is a legal expression which means the facts speak for themselves.

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré:

Okay. I assume it is Latin, though. The point I had made earlier is that this Island, as I would hope many Members recognise, does do something slightly differently to jurisdictions Senator Mézec seems to favour often, for example the United Kingdom. As I said, we have a very strong and very welcome community, voluntary and honorary sector who do step in to help where there are gaps in the services that Government provides. To date I believe that input - for want of a better expression - from those sectors should be widely welcomed and, as I said, I do believe … he asked me for my initial assessment and my initial assessment is our welfare system does protect the Islanders it is designed to protect.

3.13 Senator S.C. Ferguson of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding Hope House (OQ.244/2021):

Given that the recent independent review of the Mental Health Department included substantial criticism of the department’s management, will the Minister advise whether he has considered the department’s evaluation of the services which Hope House was prepared to offer youngsters and, if not, why not?

The Deputy of St. Ouen (The Minister for Health and Social Services):

Health and Community Services Adult Mental Health Department has not evaluated the services offered by Hope House as Hope House is registered as a children’s home under the Jersey Care Commission and therefore does not provide services that would come under the remit of H.C.S. Decisions on this service sits with C.Y.P.E.S. and the Minister for Children and Education.

3.13.1 Senator S.C. Ferguson:

Given that the Health Department know the excellent reputation of Silkworth and given that we have a very new Minister for Children and Education, does the Minister not consider that he should be working with the new Minister to give the very best of opportunities to children at Hope House rather than wait for the education do it yourself scheme to commence?

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

I share the Senator’s view of Silkworth as an excellent provider of services and it is true that H.C.S. has services that it commissions from Silkworth in the adult sphere. The Senator suggests that I should … and I think that is known to the Minister for Children and Education and C.Y.P.E.S. I have not had any dealings with C.Y.P.E.S or the Minister for Children and Education on this. I have not been asked to intervene in the way the Senator suggests and I cannot answer as to why this service has not moved forward.

Senator S.C. Ferguson:

Given that the Minister’s own hospital …

The Bailiff:

Senator, you will have a final supplementary but there are others to ask questions first.

3.13.2 Deputy R.J. Ward:

Referring to the first part of the question with the criticism of the department’s management, can the Minister confirm whether any of the managers in question or any structures within that system have been involved in commissioning of mental health services to either charity providers or, more relevant, profit-making providers for mental health services, i.e. is that criticised management involved in now commissioning their services away?

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

Yes, H.C.S. has commissioned services in the mental health field from charitable providers and private providers and that would have involved those working in the Mental Health Department and the Social Services Department. Those services and that commissioning has gone through a proper process and I am satisfied all is in order.

3.13.3 Deputy R.J. Ward:

Can I just confirm with the Minister that he is confident in those commissioning services, that there are no conflicts of interest or those making decisions on commissioning that may have interest in particular groups or companies?

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

Certainly no conflicts have been brought to my attention and I am certainly not aware of any. I would not expect there to be. There are checks to make sure that those conflicts do not arise. If the Deputy has any doubt at all, any information that he wishes to bring to my attention I hope he would do so.

3.13.4 Deputy I. Gardiner:

At a recent P.A.C. (Public Accounts Committee) hearing with the director general for Health and Community Services, the director general mentioned that this service came ahead of time when we questioned if we need these type of services in the community. Would the Minister address the comment that Hope House came ahead of time and it would be very beneficial for the Jersey Care Model but not now?

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

I am sorry, I did not quite catch that. The Deputy was suggesting Hope House had something …

Deputy I. Gardiner:

The director general commented that the Hope House has excellent facilities but came ahead of time, too early and it would be beneficial later on in the Jersey Care Model but not now. Any comments?

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

That is a view expressed. As I said, I have not been briefed on the services that were intended to be offered at Hope House because it did not sit within H.C.S. I am afraid I cannot comment on the service that was intended.

[16:15]

3.13.5 Deputy I. Gardiner:

The director general for Health is responsible for arrangements in the hospital and obviously the director general for C.Y.P.E.S. was responsible for arrangements in the community. During the P.A.C. hearing, we questioned how the process from the hospital to the community was working and currently, from the Minister’s response, it seems that there are still siloes between health and the community and the process is not working smoothly. Is that correct? Apologies, in relation to Hope House.

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

The Deputy has the advantage on me because I was not at that hearing. It is true that H.C.S. delivers services to children in the hospital, for example Robin Ward, and that C.Y.P.E.S. delivers services in the community to children of course, such as the children’s mental team, C.A.M.H.S. (Children and Adolescent Mental Health Service). There are structures around that, there are memoranda of understanding as to how that operates between the 2 departments and those are always under review. I know the professionals working in those areas are dedicated to their work and are ensuring that the system flows well and works well for children. I hope that helps the Deputy.

3.13.6 Deputy K.G. Pamplin:

The building used to be in the hands of Health and Community Services, it is now in the hands of the charity but the charity’s remit is to help teenagers with alcohol and drug problems, an issue that does affect Health and Community Services when dealing with those young people in the hospital. Given the Minister’s response about knowing the charity, will he seek to sit down with all relevant Ministers to look at why this service is not being used to benefit young people, because that is one of the main remits of those they hope to help?

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

That question should be referred to the Minister for Children and Education, if the Deputy wants to know why the service is not being used to benefit young people, because it is not a service that H.C.S. would commission or would come under my remit. I am afraid I cannot provide the answers. The question needs to be asked elsewhere.

3.13.7 Deputy K.G. Pamplin:

I was also just prying on to the Minister who mentioned he was aware of the charity’s work, that he would take that forward to sit with the other Ministers and look at what referrals could be put in place with his understanding of the charity’s work, because there is linkage between all the services, and that is the point of the Jersey Care Model.

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

I undertake to have a conversation with the Minister for Children and Education, as that seems to be the wish of the Deputy. There will be organisations that work across Government and will be involved in various departments, and because one department does not commission services I do not think it is for another department to persuade. But I will have that conversation with the Minister for Children and Education.

3.13.8 The Connétable of St. John:

It is a little like déjà vu because at the P.A.C. hearing that Deputy Gardiner referred to, the director general of Health and Social Services confirmed that they provided resource for children and education. It was confirmed by both director generals that neither were responsible but both were responsible. Is Health responsible for this service?

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

No. Health was never asked to commission this service. The discussions, I understand, around Hope House have always been with C.Y.P.E.S. and the Minister for Children and Education.

3.13.9 The Connétable of St. John:

Could the Minister update us on where the memorandum of understanding between his department and C.Y.P.E.S. currently is in the provision of services on their behalf?

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

There is a memorandum of understanding relating to the delivery of services within C.A.M.H.S. and that exists.

3.13.10 Deputy L.M.C. Doublet of St. Saviour:

Given that Silkworth provides services for those affected by substance misuse and dependency, does the Minister agree that these issue are a health issue and therefore should sit under his remit?

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

The decision was taken before I came into office to establish a Ministry for Children. I would guess the Deputy might have supported that. This is to support children whose lives are affected by substance misuse and clearly the Ministry of Children have that within its remit. There is an overlap with Health, of course, but there is an overlap between many Ministries. This service clearly falls within C.Y.P.E.S. remit and all discussions have been with C.Y.P.E.S. I am sorry I have not been able to answer these questions in detail because I have never received a briefing and never expected a briefing, and it was never suggested I would be briefed. It was always going to be a service provided and commissioned by C.Y.P.E.S. if agreement was reached.

3.13.11 Deputy L.M.C. Doublet:

Just on that, does the Minister agree that our actions relating to drug misuse and dependency should take a harm reduction model, which I believe is what Silkworth advocates?

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

I am sure that is right. A harm reduction model would seem the most sensible but I am not immediately aware of all of Silkworth’s statements of purpose, for example. But if the Deputy says that is within it, I can understand that.

3.13.12 Senator S.C. Ferguson:

Will the Minister discuss, over coffee perhaps, the extremely competent service provided by Silkworth and suggest to the Minister for Children and Education that he should visit the organisation himself and seek verification of the comments that have been made to him by his in-house staff? As Professor Reagan said: “Trust, but verify.”

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

I have said I would embark on a conversation with the Minister for Children and Education but I am not going to do so with any preconceived ideas in telling him what to do because is clearly the lead on this, so I would wish to listen to what he has to say. I will speak to him of our relationship in H.C.S. with Silkworth when delivering services for adults and we will see where that leads.

4. Questions to Ministers without notice - The Minister for External Relations

The Bailiff:

That is the end of questions with notice, we come to questions without notice. The first Minister to be asked questions it the Minister for External Relations. Does any Member have any questions for the Minister for External Relations?

4.1 Deputy D. Johnson of St. Mary:

I thank the Minister for his input into the news release over the weekend regarding permanent fishing licences. Could the Minister please clarify whether, having granted the further applications to the French, the licences applied for by Jersey fishing vessels are guaranteed to be issued as I note that the press release refers to these applications being determined under the terms of the T.C.A. (Trade and Co-operation Agreement) rather than having been determined? Could you please clarify?

Senator I.J. Gorst (The Minister for External Relations):

Perhaps I could apologise to Members that I am not in the Assembly, that is for family reasons. The Deputy is as eagle-eyed as ever. The officials from the Marine Resources Department determined on Friday that there were another 5 vessels which had met the appropriate threshold for the Minister to issue licences. There were questions outstanding from the Commission in regards to the 7 Jersey licences that have been requested. Those questions have been answered and were done first thing on Friday morning. The working assumption is that the Minister for the Environment will issue the 5 licences to French vessels at the same time that the E.U. (European Union) issues the 7 licences to Jersey vessels and that should be done quickly.

4.1.1 The Deputy of St. Mary:

I thank the Minister for that reply which ties in with his statement at the public hearing. My supplementary relates to the landing of catches by Jersey vessels in French fishing ports. Again, the press release is silent on that matter. Could he confirm what the state of play is with regard to that aspect, please?

Senator I.J. Gorst:

The Minister for the Environment and myself are very mindful that we run up to a period whereby access to markets is critically important and my officials continue to communicate with their French officials in that regard. We have to be realistic and recognise that, while a conclusion has been drawn to these conversation about licence issues, there may be some dissatisfaction still on the French side and we say the same thing that we have said previously, that if there is dissatisfaction the appropriate course of action is to use the mechanisms of the Trade and Co-operation Agreement and not take unilateral measures to stop access to the market. We continue to make that case as we have done to the Commission as well.

4.2 Deputy S.M. Ahier of St. Helier:

Has the Minister prepared a response to a possible incursion by Russian forces in the Republic of Ukraine?

Senator I.J. Gorst:

No, that is a matter within the remit of the United Kingdom Government.

4.2.1 Deputy S.M. Ahier:

Is the Minister aware of any assets in Jersey being owned by members of the Government of the Russian Federation?

Senator I.J. Gorst:

I am not quite sure the detail of what the Deputy is asking. We have in place all the required international sanction orders, therefore if there is anything inappropriate or falls within those sanctions orders appropriate action will be and should already have been taken by those firms that are responsible for either administering or holding those assets on behalf of those people that are sanctioned. If the Deputy has more concerns then perhaps he might wish to communicate with myself and my officials if I am not quite understanding his question correctly.

4.3 Deputy G.J. Truscott:

I understand the Minister has just returned from the U.S.A. (United States of America) after flying the flag for Jersey and promoting Jersey Finance and Jersey business generally. Could the Minister indicate if anything tangible business-wise came from that visit?

Senator I.J. Gorst:

The business flows from the U.S.A. in funds used in Jersey structures during the course of this year have increased by 17 per cent. That is good news. My visit was focused in Washington on taxation matters as I have indicated and in New York on promoting Jersey as a place through which to structure investment into Europe and, indeed, further afield. I expect those positive numbers that have taken place during the course of this year to be enhanced, yes in light of the visit, but during the course of the next year as well as the Assembly is asked to finalise the L.L.C. (limited liability company) products, therefore providing to the U.S. market a product that they well understand.

Deputy G.J. Truscott:

No supplementary, thank you.

4.4 Senator K.L. Moore:

Returning to the fishing situation, could the Minister describe to the Assembly what efforts he and the Minister for the Environment are taking to deal with the disparity between the cost of licences to Jersey fishermen versus their French counterparts?

Senator I.J. Gorst:

I thank the Senator for that question because there is some confusion about the costs of licences. A cost of a local domestic licence is not very great but the cost of a licence to fish in non-Jersey U.K. waters can be extremely excessive and that is perhaps the crippling cost that some Jersey fishing vessels have to pay for.

[16:30]

If French vessels wish to fish in non-Jersey U.K. waters they, of course, have to make that payment as well. As I understand it, the Minister for the Environment is not yet charging French vessels for their licences but he does have a plan to do so. I understand that that will come into force in the new year and it will be a similar, if not equivalent, cost to what Jersey fishers pay for their Jersey licence.

4.4.1 Senator K.L. Moore:

I am sure fishers will warmly receive that information. How does the Minister propose to progress the situation to ensure that Jersey fishers can land their catches in France in time for Christmas?

Senator I.J. Gorst:

As I said in answer to the Deputy of St. Mary, we are in daily contact with our colleagues in France to ensure that markets remain open. Just as importantly, of course, is the medium-term opening of a border inspection post in Granville and we continue those conversations as well. We expect to be able to move on from the closure of the conversations about licence numbers, to move on to nature and extent and to move on to the conversations about the creation of that border inspection post. We will continually work with fishers and wholesalers to alleviate any issues around market access and are hopeful that they will run smoothly between now and over the Christmas period.

4.5 Senator S.Y. Mézec:

Senator Moore asked almost exactly the same question that I wanted to ask on this but can I ask the Minister: following the announcements that were made on this recently, whether he has full confidence that those Jersey fishing crews will face less disruption in future now when trying to land their catch in French ports, as some of them have found previously?

Senator I.J. Gorst:

Of course there are customs issues and access to market requirements post-Brexit but there are also frictions that can be encountered at borders through the actions of individuals. One is much more straightforward to deal with because we can deal with that through conversations with the U.K., through conversations with the E.U. and our colleagues in France. Some of the individual actions are more difficult to deal with. We continue to support, as we have done throughout this crisis, on a virtual daily basis to ensure where possible we alleviate those difficulties that fishers have experienced landing into Europe. Of course there are some differences arising out of the Brexit decision because we are now for goods considered to be a third country; that is about water classification. I know that is a great concern of the Jersey fishers. That is about when and where those species that require to be depurified can be done so and those are conversations that we will need to wrap up into the nature and extent and seek to have a more level playing field in that regard.

4.6 Senator S.C. Ferguson:

With all the talk of a global tax rate, will this kill off Zero/Ten?

Senator I.J. Gorst:

The Senator, I am sure, will have read the political consensus coming out of the O.E.C.D. (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development), which Jersey agreed to. The O.E.C.D. Pillars 1 and 2 - 2 including the global corporate tax rate - deals with large multinational companies. We have said that we will implement the minimum standard; that is minimum standard in Pillar 1 and part of Pillar 2. As the Senator will know, the Irish Government have decided not to change their 12.5 per cent but to have an additional regime of 15 per cent for those relevant companies. We in Jersey have not yet decided exactly how we will respond and if and how we would implement the minimum standards of Pillar 2 around the 15 per cent. We continue to consult with industry and we will make decisions in what we consider to be the best long-term interests of Jersey.

4.7 Deputy K.F. Morel:

The Minister spoke about his recent trip to the U.S.A. where he clearly spoke a lot about financial matters. But I was wondering, obviously the Minister has his global market strategy as well and so with the need for Jersey to diversify its economy, I was wondering if he could give the Assembly a sense of how much time on a trip, such as the one to the U.S.A., he devotes to promoting Jersey’s other industries, specifically export industries such as digital, agriculture or fisheries as well?

Senator I.J. Gorst:

I thank the Deputy for his question. This trip was purposefully a financial service focus trip, which is quite unusual. Because of the global tax matters it was really important to go to Washington and understand exactly what was happening there. Then of course in New York the purpose was to promote Jersey to the fund sector. I can, however, assure the Deputy that that is quite unusual for a trip of mine simply to be focused on financial services. But when it comes to the American market we have, during the term of this Government, divided up the responsibilities and I focused on financial services matters and the Chief Minister has focused on all of the other sectors of the economy and the cultural links. The Chief Minister will be intending to make a visit State-side early in the new year to do just that.

4.7.1 Deputy K.F. Morel:

Essentially a similar question but would he be able to give a greater sense to the Assembly in the kind of rough breakdown of his work when he is travelling overseas to various destinations? How much effort or what proportion of his time is spent on non-finance sectors of the economy?

Senator I.J. Gorst:

That is quite difficult to do of course, being also responsible for financial services, so the Deputy would expect me for that to be an important part of my remit. International development matters are rightly and expertly represented by the Deputy of Grouville and I also, of course, pick up all of the other matters. I find that interlocutors and those that I visit around the globe are just as interested, if not more so, in Jersey’s history, culture, education, language, digital sector, as they are about financial services. Therefore, my time is spent, probably well divided, across all of those sectors.

5. Questions to Ministers without notice - The Minister for Health and Social Services

The Bailiff:

Thank you very much. That brings the time available for questions to this Minister to an end. The next Minister is to ask questions of the Minister for Health and Social Services.

5.1 The Connétable of St. John:

The Minister mentioned in an earlier answer today that there is good capacity at the hospital. Can the Minister confirm what capacity we have at present for staffed adult beds and is he aware of reports of ambulances having to wait up to 70 minutes at A. and E. (Accident and Emergency) due to lack of beds?

The Deputy of St. Ouen (The Minister for Health and Social Services):

Dealing with the last points first, I do not believe that is the case of ambulances having to wait 70 minutes. We were concerned just last week that an ambulance had to wait less than 2 minutes, which was the first time that had happened that an ambulance had needed to wait. Again, I do not know where the Connétable is getting his information.

5.1.1 The Connétable of St. John:

The Minister did not answer about the capacity in the hospital but perhaps I can ask it a different way. What capacity is there for any potential rise in COVID, especially Omicron admissions if required, and what contingencies are in place?

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

There is good planning around the receipt of COVID patients; areas can be designated as hot. At present COVID patients are housed within Bartlett Ward. If Bartlett Ward was to be filled there is another ward available to take COVID patients. Our I.C.U. (Intensive Care Unit) capacity is also available, so there is good planning around this.

5.2 Deputy R.J. Ward:

Are we testing for the Omicron variant on-Island or does it have to be sent away and, therefore, is it present today and what is the time lag for identifying? I should have put that point first.

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

Yes, I understand the P.C.R. (polymerase chain reaction) tests we do on Island do not pick up the Omicron variant and so that needs to be sent away to a U.K. lab for sequencing. We are sending the results of tests principally from travel but also a random selection of community tests for sequencing in the U.K. To date no Omicron cases have been picked up, though I think it is inevitable that it will reach the Island.

5.2.1 Deputy R.J. Ward:

Given the concerns in the U.K. and elsewhere, and the announcements today in the U.K. of this spread, can the Minister assure us that we will not face another lockdown at Christmas or soon after Christmas in the New Year and the measures being taken are adequate to prevent that?

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

I do not believe we are in the position where we will face another lockdown. The best protection we can give against any variant known to date is vaccination. Our population is substantially vaccinated, which makes the big difference with last Christmas. We are urging all Islanders, if eligible, to get themselves vaccinated. There are ample slots available at Fort Regent; that is the best protection that can be offered but at the same time to consider their actions. We have the ability for Islanders to register to receive L.F.T. (lateral flow tests) and when they are going out and consider possibly mixing to take an L.F.T. before they go out to ensure that they are not positive.

5.3 Connétable P.B. Le Sueur of Trinity:

Is the Minister able to confirm if it is a requirement that all specialist surgeons coming to work in Jersey need to be on the G.M.C.’s specialist register?

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

I know that all medical professionals coming to work in Jersey need to be registered by the General Medical Council. But the Connétable asked about a specialist register and I am afraid I am not completely au fait with the detail of General Medical Council requirements, if there is a distinction between a specialist register and any other sort of register.

5.3.1 The Connétable of Trinity:

I thank the Minister for his reply but what I would ask is: is he able to comment more specifically on the employment of a Syrian vascular surgeon employed in 2021? What pre-employment checks were conducted on him and whether he was registered as a specialist with the G.M.C.?

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

I do not have the details of the particular case that the Connétable knows about. If the Connétable wished to give me those details at any time. But I can confirm that any medical practitioner, from G.P.s onwards and all hospital doctors, do need to be registered with the General Medical Council; that is a requirement of our local law and to be registered with the Jersey Care Commission they need to prove a registration with the General Medical Council.

5.4 Connétable R.A. Buchanan of St. Ouen:

Could I ask the Minister for Health and Social Services if he would give consideration to publishing by percentage breakdown the current admissions to the General Hospital? There are 2 reasons for asking this question.

[16:45]

Firstly, the recent Omicron variant has highlighted the need for people to be not just single and double-vaccinated but triple-vaccinated and, secondly, the U.K. has just started publishing those statistics.

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

We do discuss this as Ministers. The statistics team, the analytics team, have some caution about possible identification of patients if detail was published. But I and other Ministers have asked, and we will ask again, and if, as the Connétable suggests, the U.K. have recently started doing that, then I would like to at least, if we are not publishing the immediate current statistics, we could give some historical data month by month perhaps. Because it is the case that if you are unvaccinated you are at far greater risk of being hospitalised as a result of COVID, and I would like that message to get through to Islanders. The best thing to do to keep themselves and their friends, neighbours and loved ones safe is to be vaccinated.

5.5 The Connétable of St. Ouen:

I will press the Minister on this point and ask him if he could highlight to his officers the importance of emphasising to people the importance of getting vaccinated in the current circumstances and the publication of these statistics would, in my view, add immeasurably to that persuasive argument.

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

Yes, I will highlight, we will have that discussion again.

5.6 Deputy G.P. Southern:

Given the earlier answers from the Minister on the delivery of domiciliary care, can the Minister outline to Members what powers he has to ensure that the highest standards of domiciliary care are maintained?

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

I, as Minister for Health and Social Services, do not really have any powers in relation to domiciliary care because we do not provide that service. The powers lie with the Jersey Care Commission under statute law passed by this Assembly; they are the regulators. I think that is as far as I can go with that question.

5.6.1 Deputy G.P. Southern:

What sanctions, if any, does the Commission have in this particular sector?

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

I would need to refer to the law in question. I imagine a licence can be withdrawn by the Commission and if it believes there have been offences committed it would report to the appropriate authorities.

Deputy G.P. Southern:

Could I just seek clarification there, with the appropriate authorities was that his Ministry or some other?

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

No, I am not the regulator or the H.C.S. is not the regulator. I am thinking it would be the Attorney General if the Commission believed that any offences had been committed.

5.7 Deputy K.F. Morel:

Would the Minister for Health and Social Services advise the Assembly as to whether he believes Jersey should get its own radiotherapy unit?

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

I would like Jersey to have its own radiotherapy unit because that would avoid that traumatic trip to Southampton, often away from family, and I know that patients sometimes do not choose not to undertake that because of all that it involves. If it is possible I hope we can deliver that. But of course we are a small population and these centres are usually provided in larger centres of population. We need to make sure we can deliver, effectively, a radiotherapy service and provision it, and make sure that our patients get at least equal treatment to what they are presently receiving. We are considering how we might do that, whether we might partner with a U.K. hospital, whether we might reach out to Guernsey and how combined we might be able to support a service. Then of course there is the question of cost because it will be expensive to provide, though that is not the determining factor.

5.7.1 Deputy K.F. Morel:

Thank you for the answer. Can the Minister confirm then that that review in the lighter sense is being undertaken or that work is being undertaken by the department at the moment? If so, will it be able to report before the States debate on the matter in January?

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

Yes, I have asked for a full business case to be written up and there is a lot of work needed in investigating this thoroughly; that is going to report by March of next year. I have already had conversations with Deputy Tadier before he lodged his proposition, which I welcome. I think his proposition is an in-principle type of proposition and tasked me to go away and do the work, which is being done. But I will speak to Deputy Tadier again about exactly how we might proceed with his proposition.

5.8 Senator K.L. Moore:

Following the announcement just I think a few moments ago from the U.K.’s Health Minister that they have run out of lateral flow tests, could the Minister inform the Assembly what the take-up is of lateral flow tests in the Island and whether he is content that we have sufficient stocks?

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

I was not aware of that announcement that the Senator has just referenced. We, I believe, have had an excellent take-up of the registration for lateral flow tests. I think within the community we have had something like 33,000 people register and in addition there are approximately 10,000 schoolchildren taking the tests and a similar number of people registered through the workforce scheme. We could be in the region of 50,000 people registered and taking tests. That is really an excellent protection and I am very pleased with the take-up that has been in the Island, and I still continue to urge people who have not yet registered to do so. It is very easy to do so on the gov.je website. After you have taken 2 or 3 of these lateral flow tests it becomes quite a routine and easy thing to do and just gives us that assurance that we are not carriers of COVID. I have been at the warehouse where we have an ample supply of these tests. We have no issues around provisioning supply.

The Bailiff:

Deputy Doublet. I am sorry, Deputy, I have called on you and in fact we have run out of time for questions for this Minister and I apologise for calling you in those circumstances.

6. Questions to Ministers without notice - The Chief Minister

The Bailiff:

We go on to the final section of questions, which is questions for the Chief Minister.

6.1 Senator S.Y. Mézec:

Could the Chief Minister sum up the tangible actions proposed in P.116, their population policy, which will have a clear and direct impact in managing population levels over the short term?

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré (The Chief Minister):

I do not think I can do that in 90 seconds. The short answer is that what we said is that in relation to the population policy is around emphasising the importance of data. It is about the future direction of travel and it is about emphasising in summary about doing the same with less. In this instance it means with less people, ultimately, but it is also recognising that that has to be done very carefully and very considerably because otherwise there will be very unintended consequences.

6.1.1 Senator S.Y. Mézec:

Could the Chief Minister, therefore, confirm that the adoption of P.116 will have precisely no impact in the short term in managing Jersey’s population levels? Would he further confirm that rather than it being a population policy it is in fact a policy to create a population policy?

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré:

No, I would not be able to confirm that.

6.2 Deputy K.G. Pamplin:

I thank the Chief Minister for his response to my emails over the weekend, he can probably see where I am going with my question. But does he not agree with me now that there needs to be more regular updates for the members of the public, considering the fast-moving pace of the Omicron variant in the United Kingdom? There is an information gap and the national news is carrying English responses by their Prime Ministers and leaders and very little, apart from social media posts, that the time has come to reintroduce to calm measures and get the truth and the facts of this situation to Islanders on a more regular basis.

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré:

As and when we have more updates with the different statements out, as matters started to change in the last week or so. S.T.A.C. (Scientific, Technical and Advisory Cell) is meeting today. The competent authorities are going to continue to meet on a weekly basis and will be meeting tomorrow evening to consider matters. At that point, if there are any changes, we will absolutely keep reinforcing that message. What I will just say, again, is to date the message remains unchanged. That is very much about the importance of vaccination, about the importance of using lateral flow tests. We have heard the fantastic update from the Minister for Housing and Communities and obviously wearing masks where possible in indoor spaces where it is difficult to physically distance.

6.3 Deputy G.P. Southern:

My reading of this proposal is that we need more data, it really says that, and yet we have spent the last 7 years collecting data on it in the form of a names and address register and we have not completed a decent version yet. Is that not the case that we are going to spend significant time researching more and more data to get nowhere?

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré:

Firstly, researching data is not the point, getting nowhere is also not the point. In my view, there will be nothing that will prevent implementation of some limited controls to come in, i.e. setting some principles, as there are a variety of matters that need to be put in place to enable to do that. The Assembly have obviously approved in principle and legislation has to follow, and we have to get that legislation in place to then start being able to implement. However, the data is critical. As we have said, polarising right in areas, the data and the I.T. (information technology) systems that we have at present have been woeful and that is what we are seeking to address. We will get some data as and when the census comes through but obviously not the same as the database that the Deputy is referring to, and it does need to be resourced properly. That is one of the proposals and indeed where, if the Government Plan is approved, some of the money is likely to go.

6.4 The Connétable of St. John:

Can the Chief Minister tell us if there are any plans to make the booster vaccination available in the community and would he consider using Parish Halls for this?

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré:

As of right now, I have not been updated on any plans. What it is we are saying is obviously we took the second jab basically for young people into the schools. Certainly if there was any indication that this would assist with a significant increase in take-up I would be very open to it. Obviously, as we know, there have been logistical issues in the past with the fact you have still got to keep the Pfizer vaccination very, very cold. We did seem to be able to overcome that in the schools. I would be open to anything that encourages people to get it early. But, as I said, to date having the centralised system up at Fort Regent has proved to be the most efficient method. I have asked those questions and I do expect an update from the competent authorities tomorrow evening in terms of what we can do to speed up the delivery of the first jabs.

6.4.1 The Connétable of St. John:

Is the Chief Minister satisfied that we have sufficient capacity at the General Hospital for potential Omicron patients?

[17:00]

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré:

It is a question again I will put to the director general for Health. I have been informed many times that the capacity in the hospital is absolutely fine, relative on COVID; I will not just focus on Omicron. Absolutely to date I am not aware of any changes to date. As I said, we will get an update tomorrow. But very much to date every assurance has been given that the hospital is fully capable of coping with the numbers that they are having at the moment and are presently projecting. I do emphasise again, I take the opportunity and that is why I have been encouraging members of the public as well to have a flu jab, which has had a very successful take-up rate. Because, again, that is about producing non-COVID impact and, therefore, again reducing the call on the hospital over the winter months.

6.5 Senator K.L. Moore:

Following the adoption of P.86 by this Assembly on 3rd November, when does the Chief Minister plan to share the minutes of the competent authorities with us?

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré:

I cannot give a date yet. We had instructed officers to put the best facts together, and that I do know is in the handout, I have seen them on people’s desks. There has been a diversion of time obviously in dealing with the Government Plan but I would hope we are trying to get them ready to get them to the Scrutiny Panels as quickly as we can, obviously respecting the arrangement that will need to be made for confidentialities.

6.5.1 Senator K.L. Moore:

Could the Minister describe what exactly poses such a difficulty for the officers to have to spend such time producing these?

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré:

There is quite a degree of paperwork that comes with it.

6.6 Deputy R.J. Ward:

I had 2 questions and one of them has just gone. Can I ask the Chief Minister whether he believes there are enough venues on this Island for live music in order to promote this Island as a tourist venue, which I think is under the Chief Minister’s remit because he does promote the Island?

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré:

I am trying to find a serious answer to this and, frankly, obviously Deputy Ward has a lot of time on his hands if he is able to frequent the various venues that, as far as I am aware, are still on the Island for doing his, I guess, Michael Gove impression on the dance floor. But I do not think my remit for promoting the Island extends to promoting its social venues and nightclubs. I think that is very much a question that should be sent towards the Deputy Chief Minister or the Minister for Economic Development, Tourism, Sport and Culture, and who I am sure would be delighted to do a tour of the various venues with the Deputy over the Christmas period to demonstrate the quality and width of the venues that we have. Of course, as the Deputy well knows, I have been promoting my singing abilities on Twitter more recently or at least somebody else has been for me.

6.6.1 Deputy R.J. Ward:

To be honest, I only heard half of those; it is like a nom collier appreciation we will call that one but I am going back a few years. I would just like to ask the Chief Minister, this is a serious question, about the lack of venues on the Island and there is an industry on this Island of live music and talented musicians that have not got the venues to play in and go to. As the Minister goes abroad and promotes Jersey as a venue, does he agree that he should be promoting this live music and the talent that is on this Island and to do that there needs to be more venues? Will the Minister please push his Council of Ministers and the appropriate Minister to look into this and address this issue?

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré:

I am very happy to feed back the Deputy’s remarks to the Minister for Economic Development, Tourism, Sport and Culture.

6.7 Deputy I. Gardiner:

I have been asked several times by members of the public why the census figures have not been released yet and why it takes so long. Would the Chief Minister please explain in simple terms to the public why does it take so long?

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré:

The last update I had is that Statistics Jersey is trying to release the figures during the first quarter of next year. They are very, very focused on quality and the professional delivery of those figures. They do a lot of calculation. I think the volume of analysing those figures is obviously very intensive from a manpower point of view. I do understand there have been one or 2 changes in personnel which has hit, unfortunately, the capacity to do it any quicker than what they are now planning. In short, Deputy, that has been a culmination of things, partially to do with changes in the personnel with the Statistics Department.

6.7.1 Deputy I. Gardiner:

While I accept the census remains unfinished, can we have just the total number of people resident in Jersey at the time of the census, as I believe that number will be already known?

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré:

I am equally as keen as the Deputy to receive those numbers. The Deputy will also know from answers I have given in previous responses that while I can always ask and request, I cannot direct because obviously that would then threaten the independence of the Statistics Department. On that basis, I can certainly forward the request into the chief statistician. But they are only obliged to produce it when they consider that figure to be sufficiently robust.

6.8 Deputy K.F. Morel:

Would the Chief Minister let the Assembly know whether he is satisfied that the Island and the States of Jersey are getting value for money from the modernisation and digital programme, particularly with regard to the integrated technology solution?

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré:

It is always tricky to identify value for money on this particular area. What I plan to say is that the work categorically needs to be done and by that I mean I am more and more convinced of the risk that we, as an organisation, may have faced and that could have been in 2 years’ time, could have been 4 years’ time. I obviously cannot put a time period on that, if we had not made the investment that we are making. Because of - the word I have used a number of times - the workable state of our systems. In terms of where we are at this present time, we are going through what is called a discovery phase and that is basically, having set the initial scope, which does effectively validate that scope, and I believe one use that is presently happening is as, effectively, a deeper dive is done on some of the systems they are still finding more problems. While they are doing the work, I hasten to add, that is before that work commences and that is why I have been quite careful about this is not how to control the project in any shape or form, it is one that is being very carefully prepped. As I understand matters, that is at a very high level and very simplistic level. It is work that needs to be done, there is no question about that, and we will see benefits from having a fit-for-purpose system going forward and a far more robust system. I would expect there to be benefits in terms of personal or extra benefits but those are as yet unquantified.

The Bailiff:

Chief Minister, that brings the time allocated for questions to the Chief Minister to an end and the end of the business of the Assembly for this afternoon. Could I just mention to Members that there is to be a statement from the Chief Minister at the beginning of the Government Plan? It has been erroneously listed under Personal Statements in the Consolidated Order Paper. It should be listed as Statements on a Matter of Official Responsibility and, accordingly, there will be a 15-minute question period following on from that statement. Senator, you are asking something in connection with future business.

Senator S.Y. Mézec:

Yes, Sir. I apologise if this is something that has already happened that I may have missed but I think it might be helpful for Members in advance of the Government Plan proposals being debated if some sort of comprehensive list of some sort could be provided showing which amendments the Government has accepted and is intending to propose incorporated into the Government Plan so that we do not spend time in our evenings preparing for debates that will not take place. Just as my part of helping in that, I have discussed with the Minister for Housing and Communities and I have told him that I am happy for my first amendment on social housing rents to be proposed in the Government Plan as amended. It would be helpful if there was some comprehensive list of that so we can use our time properly in preparing.

The Bailiff:

I think that is a point well made, Senator. The fact is that that is not for the States Greffe to do that, it is for Government, I think, to explain what it is accepting and what it is not. Therefore, I am sure that would be passed back overnight, if it is possible to do so. There is an updated running order, which has been prepared by the Greffe, and will be disseminated and available to Members, I think, first thing in the morning, if not this evening. There are some minor alterations still to be made to it, so I understand. But, as I say, I am sure your point will be taken on board if it is possible to do so. Chief Minister, do you wish to respond to that?

Senator J.A.N. Le Fondré:

Only briefly, only to thank Senator Mézec for constructively allowing us to propose the Government Plan as amended by his amended amendment, so thank you for that. Thank you, Senator, for that. Secondly, Sir, if your view is it is the Government rather than the Greffe to circulate, I will arrange for that to be done, hopefully, this evening.

The Bailiff:

Deputy Ward, did you have a question?

Deputy R.J. Ward:

It was just about the updates, which you have answered. But can I say again, Sir, if we are going to have this hybrid sitting with the debates, can we please ask Members if they are remote to try and do something about their sound? Perhaps it is just me, I do not know, I ...

The Bailiff:

Well, I mean it is interesting to note from the chat, Deputy, I had some difficulty with the sound, which Members more remote than the Assembly were able to hear perfectly clearly. I think they are just aberrations within the system. But it will be very, very helpful, I think, to the Assembly if Members could check that they can be well heard before they participate in the debate. Minister for Health and Social Services, you are asking if you can answer a question on domiciliary care, I am not sure that that is possible; question times are over. I do not really know what it is you are …

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

It is just that I said I would try and come back to the Assembly, Sir.

The Bailiff:

I am sorry, that must be done outside the parameters of question time.

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

I will do, Sir, thank you.

The Bailiff:

Otherwise you will appreciate there was a risk of a precedent there where people will come back and answer questions at all stages during the sitting and that really cannot work for us, I do not think. Other than the confirmation that everything is very clear in St. Ouen apparently, that concludes the business of the Assembly. We will reconvene again at 9.30 a.m.; that is a comment in the chat in case one was wanting to make reference. We will reconvene again at 9.30 a.m.

ADJOURNMENT

[17:13]

[1] R.136/2018