Will the Minister state what percentage of (a) Key Stage 1, and (b) Key Stage 2, students were assessed as ‘secure’ in reading, in writing and in maths at the end of the following school years –

(i) 2018-2019; and

(ii) 2019-2020?

Answer

The assessment of primary school pupils was considerably hampered by the lockdown of schools in response to the Covid-19 pandemic. As schools closed to the overwhelming majority of children, teaching moved to various online and hard copy methods. This endured from 20th March, until the phased return on June. The focus on the return of children was on their well-being and safe re-introduction under the principles of the Recovery Curriculum. Significant learning time in the core areas of reading, writing and mathematics was lost, as were the means of assessing achievement in these and wider areas of learning. The normal methodology for assessing children at the end of both Key Stage 1 and Key Stage 2 is through moderated teacher assessment under the Jersey Primary Assessment Framework. Under this model, experienced serving teachers from across the education service are appointed and trained as moderators, working with Senior Advisors to moderate the working of teachers in Year 2 and Year 6 classes. In addition, the Department has used the DfE’s Year 6 Curriculum tests to support consistency across the Island’s system as these new assessment approaches under the Jersey Curriculum are developed.

In the summer 2020, teacher moderation could not happen, and the Curriculum tests were cancelled. Both of these decisions (in the UK and Jersey) were directly due to the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic.

Schools hold data on all of their pupils. In this most unusual year, the Department focused on the assessment of primary children as the most useful factor to support transition, specifically the primary-secondary transition. This is the held data, only for Key Stage 2. Therefore, the 2020 data cannot be compared directly with that collected in earlier years. Our normal publication regime of the data requested is here: https://www.gov.je/Government/Pages/StatesReports.aspx?ReportID=5102). In 2020, the data collected and currently held is only from mainstream Government of Jersey schools i.e. this does not include the two special schools, Mont à l’Abbé and La Sente, nor the non-provided (‘private’) schools.

To assist with this question, we have recalculated the 2018/19 Key Stage 2 figures to make a comparison with 2020 possible, mindful that the two years cannot be directly compared.

Year Group	Subject	2018/2019	2019/2020
6	Reading	63%	62%
6	Writing	54%	52%
6	Mathematics	56%	55%
6	All three	47%	45%

2.2 Deputy J.H. Perchard of St. Saviour of the Minister for Education regarding the Reading, Recovery Plan (WQ.343/2020)

Question

Will the Minister provide the following information with regards to the budget allocated to the Reading Recovery Plan –

(a) a breakdown of how the £196,000 allocated to the Plan in 2020 has been spent to date;

(b) how the remainder of the money allocated to reading recovery in 2020 is due to be spent; and

(c) what plans, if any, exist for spending the money allocated for reading recovery in the remaining years of the Government Plan 2020-23?

Answer

(a) £137,054 to cover the staff costs, including mileage reimbursement payments

£1,216 spent on IT devices to continue teaching during school closure

(b) The forecast cost of salaries and mileage for the rest of the year is included in the figures at (a)

Due to Covid-19 challenges and leadership changes there was a delay in the recruitment/availability of the third Reading Recovery teacher, there is a forecast underspend of £57,746. The remaining balance of the 2020 budget has been re-allocated to cover departmental Covid-19 costs as it was not possible to complete the recruitment process for a 3rd Reading Recovery teacher during lockdown.

A third Reading Recovery (RR) teacher has been seconded initially to bring up the complement of specialist teachers
Government Plan money will support three RR teachers in the future

2.3 Deputy J.H. Perchard of St. Saviour of the Minister for Education regarding the impact of school closures on disadvantaged and vulnerable children (WQ.344/2020)

Question

Will the Minister provide the following information regarding the impact of the school closures due to the Covid-19 pandemic –

(a) what assessments, if any, have been made of the impact of such closures on the educational outcomes of disadvantaged and vulnerable children;

(b) in light of the loss of contact time during school closures, what interventions, if any, are planned over the next 6 months for disadvantaged and vulnerable children who need immediate educational support in order to negate any negative impact of the pandemic on their educational outcomes; and

(c) what learning interventions, if any, were implemented by the Department over the period of school closures and the summer to support disadvantaged and vulnerable children who were identified as most in need of them?

Answer

(a) Following the school closures due to the Covid-19 pandemic the focus on the return of children was on their well-being and safe re-introduction to school under the principles of the Recovery Curriculum. The risk of learning loss affects all children, with some evidence of a greater impact on some vulnerable children and those from more disadvantaged backgrounds. This noted, some vulnerable children were able to attend school physically throughout the lockdown, alongside the children of critical workers, so benefited from small class groupings and more focus of their teachers.

The normal methodology for assessing children at the end of both Key Stage 1 and Key Stage 2, through moderated teacher assessment under the Jersey Primary Assessment Framework, was not possible on the children’s return. Moreover, as noted, the focus was on well-being. As the children returned to schools in September were advised to assess pupils on their return, and to do so no later than October half-term. Assessments are internal to the school, but the focus is consistent. This is based on teacher assessments, supported by age-appropriate reading tests and mathematics tests. Schools used a range of assessments, with the most prevalent assessment tools used including PIRA, PUMA and ‘Rising Stars’. Assessments have been used to identify possible gaps in knowledge; on this basis teachers have been planning accordingly.

(b) The latest draft report, A Report Investigating the Impact of ‘Learning at Home’ on Jersey pupils as a result of COVID-19 School Closures: March to July 2020, recognises the impact of COVID-19 on our most disadvantaged and vulnerable pupils.

A Business Case has been submitted that intends to address the impact on specific groups of pupils and covers:

Additional training and support for teachers which focuses on enhancing teaching skills, mathematics knowledge and reading strategies.
1:1 and small group tuition and support. The School Improvement and Advisory Service (SIAS) have devised and prepared a 12-week intensive programme of support for pupils, should the Business Case be successful. If successful these programmes will commence as soon as possible and run until July 2021.

The Department piloted two intervention programmes at Janvrin and Rouge Bouillon School in the summer 2020.
The findings will be collated and shared with headteachers. The proposal will be to offer a refined model for children in 2021 in an increased number of schools based on the evidence from the pilot.

2.4 Deputy L.M.C. Doublet of St. Saviour of the Chief Minister regarding Children’s Rights Impact Assessments (WQ.345/2020)

Question

Will the Chief Minister state, in respect of Child Right’s Impact Assessments (C.R.I.A.s) –

(a) how many C.R.I.A.s have been trialled to date, including any related specifically to policy decisions regarding Covid-19;

(b) which Departments have trialled C.R.I.A.s in terms of policy development to date; and

(c) when he intends to publish any C.R.I.A.s undertaken for Covid-related policies, in line with the commitment made during Questions without notice on 22nd September 2020?

Answer

We are expecting to introduce a Jersey Children’s Rights Impact Assessment (CRIA) process in 2021, as part of the indirect incorporation law which will require Ministers, Assembly Members and named public authorities to have ‘due regard’ to the United Nations Convention of the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) in 2021. CRIA will become mandatory for Ministers and States Members when developing policy, legislation and propositions or amendments for debate in the Assembly but will otherwise be considered the best-practice option for demonstrating due regard.

Jersey’s CRIA process will commence with an initial ‘screening’ step to quickly establish if the policy area in question has any potential positive or negative impacts on children. If the likelihood of impacts is identified, this step will be followed by detailed assessment and prediction of the way in which the identified policy options are expected to impact children and children’s rights; thus allowing potential enhancements or mitigations to be devised. A full CRIA process should include consultation with children and other stakeholders including the Children’s Commissioner.

The template and guidance for the Jersey CRIA process is currently under development, with plans for a pilot programme to run within the Government of Jersey and States Assembly ahead of the legislation’s expected enactment next year. Details of the pilot programme will be published shortly.

(a) & (b) To date, we are aware of two CRIA ‘Initial Assessments’ that have been trialled. The first of these was undertaken by CYPES in relation to the reopening of schools during the summer term. This can be found on the “Guidance for education and childcare: coronavirus (COVID-19)” page of Gov.je.

A second CRIA was started by officers from IHE in conjunction with the draft Public Health and Safety (rented Dwellings) (Licensing) (Jersey) Regulations.

(c) The publication of the CRIA undertaken by CYPES is a matter for the Education Minister to determine. The partial CRIA undertaken by IHE is not a Covid-related policy.

2.5 Deputy of St. John of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding the doctors and surgeons employed within the Department of Health and Community Services (WQ.346/2020)

Question

Will the Minister provide detailed lists of the doctors and surgeons employed within the Department of Health and Community Services, indicating –

(a) employment grade;

(b) whether the contract is temporary or permanent; and

will the Minister state how many medical personnel employed by the Department are at present suspended from practice, indicating the length of suspension in any such case?

Answer

(a) employment grade;

Below is a list of the post descriptions showing the grades of the doctors and surgeons in HCS.

Post Description
Consultant in Respiratory Medicine	Consultant in Paediatrics
Consultant Orthopaedics and Trauma	Consultant in Cardiology
Consultant in Diabetes	Consultant in Haematology
Dental Consultant - Oral Surgery	Consultant Histopath. and Cytopath.
Acute Physician Consultant	Consultant
Consultant in Radiology	Consultant in Anaesthetics
Consultant in Ophthalmic Surgery	Medical Director
Consultant in Restorative Dentistry	Consultant in Cardiology
Consultant in ENT	Clinical Advisor
Acute Physician Consultant	Consultant in Microbiology
Consultant Accident and Emergency	Consultant Obstetrics and Gynaecology
Head of Secondary Unscheduled Care	Consultant in Gastroenterology
Consultant Accident and Emergency	Consultant Accident and Emergency
Consultant in Dermatology	Consultant in Paediatrics
Consultant in Radiology	Consultant Accident and Emergency
Consultant in ENT	Consultant Histopath. and Cytopath.
Consultant in Radiology	Consultant in Oncology
Consultant in Gastroenterology	Consultant in Care of the Elderly
Consultant Orthopaedics and Trauma	Consultant in Anaesthetics
Consultant Alcohol and Drug Dual Diag.	Consultant
Consultant Obstetrics and Gynaecology	Consultant in Respiratory Medicine
Consultant	Consultant in Radiology
Consultant Neurology and Rehabilitation	Consultant in Ophthalmic Surgery
Consultant Obstetrics and Gynaecology	Consultant in ENT
Consultant in Oncology	Consultant
Consultant Histopath. and Cytopath.	Consultant in Oncology
Consultant in Paediatrics	Corporate Governance Lead
Consultant Accident and Emergency	Consultant in Ophthalmic Surgery
Consultant Orthopaedics and Trauma	Consultant in General Surgery
Consultant in Radiology	Consultant in Pain Medicine
Consultant Urologist	Consultant in Old Age Psychiatry
Consultant in Anaesthetics	Consultant in Anaesthetics
Consultant in Paediatrics	Locum Consultant - Radiology
Consultant in Anaesthetics	Consultant in General Surgery
Consultant Obstetrics and Gynaecology	Consultant in Radiology
Consultant in Oncology	Consultant in Anaesthetics
Consultant in General Surgery	Consultant in Radiology
Consultant	Locum Consultant Oncology
Consultant Child and Adolescent MH	Locum Consultant Orthodontist
Dental Consultant - Oral Surgery	Locum Consultant
Consultant	Locum Consultant - Radiology
Consultant in Renal Medicine	Locum Consultant - Radiology
F1 - Elderly Care	Locum Consultant Orthodontist
F1 - Respiratory	Locum Consultant - Dermatology
F1 - General Surgery	Locum Consultant - Child Adoles Mntl Hlt
F1 - Neurology	Locum Consultant – Dermatology
F1 - General Surgery	Locum Staff Grade Emergency Medicine
F1 - General Surgery	Locum Staff Grade Emergency Medicine
F1 - General Surgery	Locum Staff Grade Emergency Medicine
F1 - Cardiology	Locum Staff Grade Emergency Medicine
F1 - General Surgery	Locum Staff Grade Emergency Medicine
Junior Doctor - F1	Staff Grade - Paediatrics
F1 - Gastroenterology	Staff Grade - General Surgery
F1 Orthopaedic and Trauma	Staff Grade Accident and Emergency
F1 Orthopaedic and Trauma	Staff Grade - Anaesthetics
F1 Orthopaedic and Trauma	Staff Grade - Cardiology
F1 - General Surgery	Staff Grade Orthopaedics and Trauma
F2 Obstetrics and Gynaecology	Staff Grade in Medicine
F2 - Accident and Emergency	Staff Grade - Anaesthetics
F2 - General Surgery	Staff Grade Orthopaedics and Trauma
F2 Obstetrics and Gynaecology	Staff Grade Orthopaedics and Trauma
F2 Orthopaedic and Trauma	Staff Grade - Paediatrics
Locum F2 equivalent - Gen Medicine	Staff Grade Obstetrics and Gynaecology
F2 - Psychiatry	Staff Grade in Psychiatry
F2 Obstetrics and Gynaecology	Staff Grade Accident and Emergency
F2 - Accident and Emergency	Staff Grade in Psychiatry
F2 - Acute Medicine	Staff Grade in Ophthalmology
F2 - Accident and Emergency	Staff Grade - Anaesthetics
F2 - Acute Medicine	Staff Grade - Paediatrics
F2 - Acute Medicine	Staff Grade Accident and Emergency
F2 - Care Of The Elderly	Staff Grade - Paediatrics
	Staff Grade in Psychiatry
F2 - Accident and Emergency	Staff Grade in Psychiatry
SHO Obstetrics and Gynaecology	Staff Grade - Paediatrics
Clinical Fellow in Cardiology	Staff Grade in Medicine
Clinical Fellow in Medicine	Staff Grade Obstetrics and Gynaecology
Clinical Fellow in Medicine	Staff Grade Obstetrics and Gynaecology
SHO Obstetrics and Gynaecology	Staff Grade in Medicine
SHO Obstetrics and Gynaecology	Staff Grade - Anaesthetics
Clinical Fellow in Cardiology	Staff Grade - Anaesthetics
SHO Obstetrics and Gynaecology	Staff Grade - General Surgery
Clinical Fellow in Medicine	Staff Grade - Anaesthetics
Clinical Fellow - Accident & Emergency	Staff Grade - Paediatrics
Clinical Fellow - Accident & Emergency	Staff Grade - Paediatrics
Clinical Fellow in Medicine	Staff Grade Accident and Emergency
Clinical Fellow in Medicine	Staff Grade Orthopaedics and Trauma
Clinical Fellow - Accident & Emergency	Staff Grade - Anaesthetics
Clinical Fellow in Medicine	Staff Grade Accident and Emergency
SHO Obstetrics and Gynaecology	Staff Grade Obstetrics and Gynaecology
Associate Specialist in Palliative Care	Staff Grade - Anaesthetics
Associate Specialist In Care Of Elderly	Locum Staff Grade Anaesthetics
Locum Associate Specialist CAMHS
Associate Specialist - Dental/Oral Srgy	Associate Specialist - General Surgery
Associate Specialist - Anaesthetics	Associate Specialist - ENT
Associate Specialist in Cardiology	Associate Specialist in Cardiology
Clinical Simulation Lab Trainer	Associate Specialist Psychiatry
Associate Specialist in Respiratory Care	Associate Specialist - Anaesthetics
Associate Specialist In Acute Medicine	Associate Specialist Ortho and Trauma
Associate Specialist in Emergency Med.	Associate Specialist - General Surgery
Associate Specialist in Emergency Med.
Associate Specialist in Emergency Med.
Associate Specialist - Ophthalmology
Associate Specialist in Neurology
Locum F2 2 Accident and Emergency
Locum F2 2 Accident and Emergency

The total numbers in each grade are shown below

Grade	Number
Consultant	91
Foundation 1	15
Foundation 2	15
Staff Grade	46
Associate Specialist	21
Clinical Fellow	17

(b) whether the contract is temporary or permanent;

Permanent contract	Temporary rotational contracts (Junior Doctors)	Temporary locum and bank contracts (Consultants, Associate Specialists and Staff Grades)
123	47	35

Time in post(years)	Consultant	Staff Grade	Associate Specialists	Junior Doctors (F1)	Junior Doctors (F2)	Clinical Fellows
21- 22	1
15-16	1
12-13	11
11-12	1
10-11	1
9-10	1	8	5
8-9	1	1
7-8	4	6	2
6-7	4	1	1
5-6	2	4	1
4-5	4	3	1
3-4	6	2	2
2-3	22	2	2
1-2	18	16	5	1	1	3
Less than 1 year	14	3	2	14	14	14

Will the Minister state how many medical personnel employed by the Department are at present suspended from practice, indicating the length of suspension in any such case?

We do not believe it is appropriate to share this information as, given the small number of medical personnel on suspension, it may be possible to identify individuals. However, we can confirm there are less than 5 medical personnel currently suspended.

2.6 Deputy L.M.C. Doublet of St. Saviour of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding the Maternity Voices Partnership (WQ.347/2020)

Question

Will the Minister provide an update on progress to introduce a Maternity Voices Partnership, including –

(a) details of any terms of reference that have been put in place;

(b) confirmation of how members of the public may engage with this group;

if there has been no progress on any such actions, will the Minister state why not?

Answer

a) A draft terms of reference is being worked up which will be reviewed at the next meeting of the Jersey Maternity Voices Partnership (MVP).

b) The next meeting of the Partnership will involve the core group of 11 women who attended the inaugural meeting. The intention is that they will confirm the terms of reference and the vision and goals of the MVP. Thereafter, once the MVP is formally established, all women accessing maternity services will be made aware of the group and invited to attend its meetings and input to the Partnership.

c) The launch of the MVP in February 2020 was attended by 11 service users. They had responded to a social media post on the government of Jersey Facebook page inviting expressions of interest. There was good discussion and excellent feedback. There was general support for the idea that a MVP would provide a centralised, robust support mechanism for ongoing feedback and service improvement.

The planned quarterly meetings have had to be postponed due to Covid-19, but attention is now turning to setting up a meeting to build on the enthusiasm and interest shown at the inaugural event earlier this year.

2.7 Deputy K.G. Pamplin of St. Saviour of the Chief Minister regarding the use of external consultants by the Government of Jersey (WQ.348/2020)

Question

Will the Chief Minister provide a breakdown of the costs to the Government of Jersey, if any, of recruiting and engaging any outside consultants for the purposes of preparing or drafting publications, reports, publicity materials, press releases and any other Government publications (including in respect of the Government Plan) for the period 1st January to 26th September 2020?

Answer

The current state of Government records, with no central record of procurement information, makes both the collation of this report and detailing consultancy costs in any other way, such as that requested above, difficult within the time available to answer this question.

Additionally, the preparation of reports, press releases or publications will cross the entire Government and isolating those consultants who may have had an input into one of these would be a manual process and therefore this information also cannot be produced in the timeframe available.

Details of consultants are however published every six months under Proposition 59 which details the work they are undertaking. The next publication will be issued in December, if not sooner, for January to June 2020.

The ITS programme includes a requirement for timesheet capability which will allow assignment of individuals’ time to projects which will eventually allow more detailed reporting on consultants’ time.

2.8 Deputy K.G. Pamplin of St. Saviour of the Minister for Infrastructure regarding the sale of the J4 Registration Plate (WQ.349/2020)

Question

In relation to the sale of the J4 registration number, will the Minister advise –

(a) who was the owner of the registration plate prior to the sale;

(b) whether the sale of the registration plate was requested by the Department and, if not, by whom the sale was requested or offered;

(c) how much money generated by the sale of the registration plate will be contributed to the cost of purchasing an electric vehicle; and

(d) a breakdown of the costs to the States of the auction, including any payments to external businesses involved in the sale?

Answer

(a) The Government of Jersey owns all registration marks.

(b) The sale of the registration plate was proposed by Government House who approached DVS in the first instance.

(c) As yet, the amount has to be confirmed, however circa £60,000 will be allocated towards the purchase of a replacement vehicle to include any modifications required to make it suitable for official use. The replacement vehicle will remain under the ownership of the Government of Jersey and will be a fleet vehicle, in this case for the use of His Excellency, the Lieutenant Governor.

(d) J4 was part of 51 lots in this year’s auction which raised £592,300 in total. The breakdown of the costs to the Government of Jersey are as follows:

Item	Cost
Marquee	£450
Advertising JEP	£650
Advertising Channel 103	£750
Advertising Social Media	£200
Advertising Banners	£160
Total	£2,210

No commission costs were incurred by the Government of Jersey as they are paid for by the successful bidder.

2.9 Deputy K.G. Pamplin of St. Saviour of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding the budget for healthcare (WQ.350/2020)

Question

Will the Minister provide a breakdown of his Department’s budget to show in particular the current overall cost of healthcare to the Island (including the impact of Covid-19 on such costs), the level of debt (if any) owed by the Department, and the budget available for outstanding maintenance on the Department’s buildings?

Answer

The latest available budget that shows the current cost of healthcare identifies net expenditure to the 30th August on healthcare within HCS as £165.8m, including the impact of Covid-19. This splits into pay of £111m and non-pay of £71.6m, offset by income of £16.8m. Within this, Covid-19 is estimated at £19.4m.

As with all other departments, HCS has creditors which vary throughout the year and which are paid monthly, but those due as at the end of August total £13.9m.

The annual budget for maintenance is £7m.

2.10 Deputy K.G. Pamplin of St. Saviour of the Chief Minister regarding States employees working from home of from the U.K. (WQ.351/2020)

Question

For the period from 1st March 2020 to date, will the Chief Minister provide a breakdown of –

(a) the number and proportion of States employees and consultants either working from home in Jersey or who were working from the U.K.;

(b) the number of days worked by employees and consultants from the U.K. during this period; and

Answer

a) Given the general state of HR records and the current manual processes that have to be used, it is not possible to provide an accurate number or proportion of days worked from home (in Jersey) or from the UK for employees and consultants. It should be noted however, that due to the small numbers of individuals who were working from the UK at the time, we were able to identify those figures in WQ155/2020.

The following information may also be of assistance:

During Level 4 of the Safe Exit Framework which ran from 30/03/20 until 10/05/20, only essential workers were coming into their workplace. There were approximately 1,800 government workers designated as essential, this figure excludes HCS colleagues.

The number working from home decreased over the subsequent months and weeks to the position we are in now, where approximately:

During the outbreak, roughly 2,000 office-based staff worked from home – roughly 25% of the total.
Currently, an estimated 15% of public sector workers are working from home on either a full-time or part-time basis.

Level 3 applied in Jersey from 11 May to 11 June. Non-Essential businesses were able to reopen, however working from home remained the default position within GoJ.

Level 2 applied in Jersey from 12 June to 7 August. Working from home remained the default position within GoJ wherever possible, at this time more staff would have returned to the workplace.

The current position is different across all departments dependent on the nature of the work involved, and the ability to perform that work from home.

b) The number of days worked by employees and consultants from the U.K. during this period is not held. As previously stated, WQ.155/2020 confirmed the small number of employees and contractors working from the UK at the end of April.

c) During this period work travel would have only been taken where necessary. Due to the fact that travel may have been incurred in different ways e.g. booked centrally, included in consultants’ charges, added as agreed expenses to invoices it is not possible to detail the total cost of travel for work during this period within the time available. If the Deputy has any further, specific queries, we would be more than happy to arrange a briefing with the relevant officials within Human Resources.

2.11 Deputy K.G. Pamplin of St. Saviour of the Chair of the Privileges and Procedures Committee regarding the financial impact of Covid-19 on the operation of the States Assembly (WQ.352/2020)

Question

Will the Chair provide a breakdown of the costs of the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on the continued operation of the States Assembly, covering the period from 1st March to 25th September 2020, including –

(a) any additional staffing required at the States Greffe;

(b) any overtime or sickness absence days incurred by States Greffe staff;

(c) technical support from Digital Jersey or any digital broadcasting company to enable remote and hybrid States sittings to take place;

(d) any additional technical equipment required to enable remote or hybrid States sittings; and

(e) the hiring of Fort Regent?

Answer

(a) There was no additional staffing required at the States Greffe in the time period from 1st March 2020 to 25th September 2020 because of Covid-19.

(b) In the period from 1st March 2020 to 25th September 2020 there was:

no overtime paid to States Greffe staff; and
no Covid related absence recorded.

£1,404.78 to Ports of Jersey (for the recording set up at Fort Regent and in the States Chamber); and
£9,567.80 to Delta Production Services (for the hire of equipment, set-up, and staff at Fort Regent);
£2,225.00 to ALX (for the support for Chamber sitting and Members training); and
The assistance received from Digital Jersey to set up and run virtual sittings of the Assembly was not charged for.

(d) Costs incurred for technical equipment required to enable remote or hybrid States sittings:

£471.90 to Zoom (Hybrid Meeting Trial);
£127.00 for a monitor for the States Chamber; and
£2,378.79 for 3 laptops for the States Chamber (at a cost of £792.93 each).

(e) No direct cost was incurred for the hire of Fort Regent, however (as per section (c) (ii) above) there was £9,567.80 paid to Delta Production Services for associated equipment hire, set up, and staff costs.

2.12 Deputy S.M. Ahier of St. Helier of the Minister of Health and Social Services regarding Court appeals submitted by his Department (WQ.353/2020)

Question

Will the Minister state –

(a) the total number of appeals to Court decisions, if any, submitted by his Department in the last 5 years;

(b) the total cost to the taxpayer of any such appeals in the last 5 years; and

Answer

(a) One appeal has been lodged on behalf of the Minister for Health and Social Services in the last five years and this case has not been concluded.

(b) and (c) Given the answer to a), it is not possible to answer parts b) and c)

2.13 Deputy K.F. Morel of St. Lawrence of the Chief Minister regarding the rules in respect of minute-taking used by Government staff (WQ.354/2020)

Question

Will the Chief Minister state what rules, if any, the Government of Jersey uses to inform staff as to when they should take and keep minutes and records of a meeting; and if such rules exist, will he provide the Assembly with a copy?

Answer

Specific, formal meetings, such as the Council of Ministers have set processes for minute taking and record keeping. For example, the States of Jersey Law 2005 prescribes in Article 18 how minutes for the Council of Ministers are to be taken and kept.

For these significant groups, formal minutes are taken and recorded by the States Greffe, for which the Chief Minister thanks the ongoing professionalism of the Clerks, particularly for the increased number of meetings during the pandemic due to the meetings of the Emergencies Council and the Competent Authorities Ministers, which have been recorded.

Other specific groups, such as Policy Development Boards maintain terms of reference, which would generally include requirements for minute taking and keeping records of those meetings. Details of requirements for PDBs can be found here, which includes a requirement that “minutes of meetings will be taken to ensure an auditable record is maintained.

Whilst there are no written “rules” for the recording of minutes in one-off or more informal meetings, staff are expected to use professional judgment as to when a record should be kept. The Public Records (Jersey) Law 2002 specifies the retention process for any records that are kept.

2.14 Deputy G.P. Southern of St. Helier of the Chief Minister regarding the Income Distribution Survey (WQ.355/2020)

Question

Will the Chief Minister state what confirmation, if any, he has had from the Chief Statistician of when in Quarter 4 of 2020 the States Assembly will receive figures from the pre-Covid-19-period Income Distribution Survey; and if such figures are available, when will he share them with the Assembly?

Answer

The Chief Minister is scheduled to meet with the Chief Statistician on the 5th October and will update the Assembly as soon as practicably possible after the meeting has concluded.

2.15 Connétable of St. Martin of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding the funding available to families seeking access to I.V.F. (WQ.356/2020)

Question

Will the Minister outline what work, if any, has been conducted on increasing the level of funding available to families seeking access to I.V.F. (in vitro fertilisation), including – but not limited to – raising the household income cap from £34,000?

Answer

HCS has committed to undertaking a strategic review of the Assisted Reproductive Service in Jersey, which will incorporate current policy and how this impacts on access to the service and off-island pathways. The current financial threshold for services will be part of this review which commenced in July and is due for completion by Jan 2021. The review seeks to ensure there is a long-term sustainable Assisted Reproductive service established for Jersey.

2.16 Deputy M.R. Higgins of St. Helier of the Chief Minister regarding the work of the Housing Policy Development Board (WQ.357/2020)

Question

Will the Chief Minister state what research, if any, has been undertaken by the Housing Policy Development Board, or any Government department, into –

(a) foreign direct investment in the housing market;

(b) domestic investment in the housing market;

will he agree to the immediate publication of any such research that exists?

Answer

There has not been any research undertaken by the Housing Policy Development Board in relation to parts (b) and (c) of the question, nor is it believed by any other Department.

Regarding part (a) of the question, the publicly available minutes of the Housing Policy Development Board of the 19 September 2019 state that:

“Foreign ownership of property: The Board was informed that the work undertaken to date in relation to foreign ownership of property has been provided to Altair and the Chair so that the issue can be included in the solutions phase. A summary of the work was discussed setting out the likely positive and negative effects of foreign ownership on the local property market in relation to supply and demand. The work to date has considered the policy interventions used across a wide range of jurisdictions and identified that the size of the issue is not satisfactorily understood locally due to the way in which the information is captured. Changes underway in the Tax Department mean that future data capture will provide for better accuracy as to the size and nature of the foreign buy to let market in Jersey.”

As reflected in the minutes, the Board has been addressing this matter and is currently in the process of producing its final report, which will be submitted to me before the end of the year. A decision will then be made as to whether any additional information should be published alongside the publication of the report itself.

2.17 Deputy M.R. Higgins of St. Helier of the Chair of the States Employment Board regarding the use of non-disclosure and compromise agreements (WQ.358/2020)

Question

Will the Chair state –

(a) the names given to the different types of non-disclosure and compromise agreements used within the States and describe any differences that exist between them and their use; and

(b) who is able to enter into any such compromise agreements and non-disclosure agreements on behalf of the States of Jersey, outlining any checks and balances that exist on those who are allowed to do so?”

Answer

The names given to the different types of agreements used within the Government of Jersey are Compromise and Severance Agreements. Each agreement contains a confidentiality statement also known as a ‘non-disclosure agreement’. These agreements are an important legal framework used to protect sensitive and confidential information from being disclosed by all parties that are subject to them.

Employees who have delegated authority are able to enter into these agreements. Advice is normally sought from the Law Officers’ Department and an approval process is entered into prior to the agreement being signed.

The approval process includes the Director General responsible for the Department, the HR Business Partner and the HR Director. Audits are carried out to ensure checks and balances are in place. The signed approval form must be saved with all agreements for audit purposes.

For those involving senior officers or potentially a high liability, the Group Director for People and Corporate Services must agree before discussions are entered into with the employee or their representative and sets the parameters for such discussions.

The Treasurer will be notified of any high value agreements who in turn will seek his own assurance about the level of potential liability from the Law Officers’ Department.

The States Employment Board has oversight of any arrangements with Tier One or Tier Two officers.

Financial Regulations require the Government not to enter into any ultra vires agreement through sums that exceed the potential liability. Should a commercial settlement in excess of these terms be preferable, the States Employment Board must agree to the terms in advance.

2.18 Deputy M.R. Higgins of St. Helier of the Chair of the States Employment Board regarding the case of social workers and health professionals whose pay has been incorrectly increased in 2017 (WQ.359/2020)

Question

Will the Chair provide an update on how the States Employment Board dealt with the case of 126 social workers and health professionals whose pay was incorrectly increased in 2017 through wrongful regrading, including any financial consequences of that act?

Answer

All the involved roles have now been evaluated and the full scope of the project has been fulfilled. The project has received positive feedback from senior members of HCS, Probation and CYPES in terms of how this work has been managed, the outcomes that have been communicated to individuals and their managers, and the mainly positive impact on their teams. Civil Service Staff Side were kept fully appraised throughout the project, enabling them to advise and support their members of each stage of the process. They have positively supported the process including the appeal process.

The overall cost of the project, including the cost of job evaluations and the cost of pay protection for those downgraded as a result of it, amounts to £892,200.

2.19 Deputy K.F. Morel of St. Lawrence of the Minister for the Environment regarding the protection of trees (WQ.260/2020)

Question

Will the Minister provide the number and details of enforcement actions, if any, that have been taken in regard to protecting trees under the Planning (Jersey) Law 2002 for each year since 2015?

Answer

Undertaking work to a tree is not currently defined as ‘development’ under the Planning and Building (Jersey) Law 2002. On this basis, the need to take enforcement action would only arise where work is undertaken to a tree(s) that enjoys some form of protection without the necessary permission being sought.

Trees can be protected where they have high amenity value and where they make a valuable and important contribution to the local environment by adding them to the list of protected trees or protecting them with a planning condition.

The Minister for the Environment is advised that there has been no enforcement action taken, since 2015, for unauthorised work to trees that are on the list of protected trees; or which are protected by planning condition.

There have, however, been 67 applications to remove or undertake works to trees on the list of protected trees during that time; one of which has been refused; two of which have been withdrawn; and the remainder approved.

The Minister for the Environment is concerned at the loss of trees in the island and is seeking to make changes to the law to provide greater control over works to them; and to ensure greater rigour in the assessment of proposals to remove or manage them.

2.20 Deputy G.P. Southern of St. Helier of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding negotiations with G.P.s (WQ.361/2020)

Question

Will the Minister state what negotiations, if any, have taken place between his Department and the representatives of G.P.s over the terms of any future contract for their services, and advise what agreement, if any, there has been over the figures of G.P. salaries contained in tables 2.14 and 2.15 of the report attached to ‘Jersey Care Model’ (P.114/2020)

Answer

Work has been undertaken with GPs in relation to future funding models, however, there have been no negotiations to date over the terms of any future contracts for their services.

As the document states “Table 2.14 below describes the sources of income for GPs for 2019 (based on GP funding data for 2018)”. These are estimated figures used to produce the model – not a negotiated position with GP agreement.

2.21 Deputy M.R. Higgins of St. Helier of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding the ability of hospital consultants to offer private polymerase chain reaction (P.C.R.) tests for Covid-19 (WQ.362/2020)

Question

Will the Minister advise whether hospital consultants are allowed to offer private patients polymerase chain reaction (P.C.R.) tests for Coronavirus; and if so, whether any such tests are processed through the Hospital and Airport laboratories or in the U.K., what charge there is for doing so and whether there is a fixed fee for the patient?

Answer

Covid PCR tests have now been added to the repertoire of hospital-agreed tests administered through pathology services to private patients. Others would be blood tests or tissue biopsies, for example. The vast majority receiving such Covid PCR tests are pre-operative private patients. Such screening tests would need to be done before surgery or on admission whether the patient having the operation is private or public. Such tests are not performed just because someone may be curious about whether they are positive or not. The tests are processed in the normal way ie through public facilities and, as always, only urgent samples are being done on-Island. The charge for the test of £113 is split between the hospital and the consultant with the cost of the test fully met. The number of such tests is relatively small and does not detract from the non-private response.

2.22 Deputy R.J. Ward of St. Helier of the Chief Minister regarding the provision of office facilities and administrative support for Ministers and Assistant Ministers (WQ.363/2020)

Question

Will the Chief Minister provide a full breakdown of costs for the period May 2018 to the present for the following –

(a) administrative support for the 21 members of the Government (Ministers and Assistant Ministers); and

(b) provision of office facilities for the 21 members of the Government?

Answer

In order to answer the Deputy’s question, it is important to understand the rationale for the structural changes made in June 2018. Following the findings of both C&AG, PAC and Scrutiny over the last five years and the due diligence work that was carried out between October 2017 and January 2018,

Ministerial support has now been consolidated and/or centralised as part of the Office of the Chief Executive to address these issues.

Past reviews found that Ministers were not always served well due to a lack of coordinated support and advice across the government.

In particular it was identified that there was:

• Lack of dedicated support to improve the timeliness of Ministers decision making and joint working

• Outdated infrastructure and governance arrangements to support a performance driven organisation

• Outdated working practices in terms of decision making, priority setting and forward planning

More specifically the due diligence found that there was not a culture of serving ministers well

• Insufficient clarity between officers and Ministers

• No dedicated Ministerial support to build alignment between Ministers, their departments and their Senior Management Teams

However to date, the Chief of Staff Office and Ministerial Support Unit (MSU) has been funded to date by temporary funding sources, even though staffing has been in place since 2018. A settled structure has now been established. This was originally discussed and agreed as part of the 2020 Government Planning arrangements with an agreement to bring forward in the 2021 Plan (once the Target Operating Model arrangements had been settled).

The underlying rationale for the improvements made by the formation of the MSU were set out on pages 106 and 107 of the Government Plan 2020 - 2023, as part of closer working between Government and the States Greffe. This also included an additional £2.3m of expenditure on “States Greffe extended services” to facilitate these improvements.

The total costs for the provision of administrative support to the 21 Ministers and Assistant Ministers are given below. This support, provided by the staff of the MSU, enables a range of functions, beyond just administration. These functions were previously provided to Ministers from budgets and teams across the different Departments within the organisation. The centralised MSU has meant that a more coordinated, joined-up support service is being provided.

The services provided by the MSU include:

Enabling the efficient and coordinated flow of information between Government Departments and Ministers.
Supporting Ministers in preparation for the States Assembly and for Scrutiny hearings and briefings.
Acting as the Scrutiny Liaison between Ministers, their Departments and Scrutiny, ensuring queries are fielded and information provided in as timely manner as possible.
Facilitate and coordinate the Council of Ministers and other significant ministerial meetings, most recently including the Emergencies Council and Competent Authorities Ministers meetings.
Provision of a research service for Ministers and Assistant Ministers.
Response to public queries and correspondence directed to the Ministers.
Diary and travel management.
Liaison with the Communications directorate for press queries, briefings and interviews.
Coordination of Members’ briefings.
Record keeping and filing.
Provision of procedural advice.

2018

(May – Dec)

2019

2020

(9 months Jan - Sept)

Comments

259,083

612,886

1,017,147

As part of the One Government organisational changes, the Ministerial Office was created during 2018, and continued to develop in 2019. The figure for 2020 reflects the full costs of the team.

(b)Whilst it is hard to isolate costs for the provision of physical office facilities within the wider Broad Street building for the 21 Ministers and Assistant Ministers, the MSU consists of an office for the Chief Minister, a shared office for the Deputy Chief Minister and Minister for External Relations and a shared hot desking facility for the remaining 18 Ministers and Assistant Ministers. The estimated cost of providing this, including the office space for the members of staff of the MSU, is £247,124. The breakdown for this estimate is as follows:

	May – Dec 2018	2019	Jan – Sept 2020
Printing and Stationery	12,907	12,213	10,881
Telephones	12,440	6,605	8,768
Fuel and Power	15,483	13,539	0
Facilities Management	59,400	94,888	0

It should be noted that it is presently envisaged that better facilities for States Members might arise out of the office accommodation strategy. More information on this will be forthcoming in the next few months.

2.23 Deputy R.J. Ward of St. Helier of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding overpayments of Social Security benefits (WQ.364/2020)

Question

Will the Minister state how many people of pensionable age are currently re-paying legacy overpayments from Social Security benefits?

Answer

Overpayments of Social Security benefits may occur for a number of reasons and are not categorised as “legacy.” It is not clear from the question what this term refers to.

There are 194 recorded overpayments across 157 Income Support (IS) claims containing a pensioner. There are 1886 IS claims with at least one participant of pensionable age, so this figure means that approximately 8 % of IS claims which include participants of pensioner age have an overpayment that is currently being repaid via an IS claim. These figures do not differentiate between claims where the overpayment was in respect of a pensioner participant or a working age participant who is part of a claim that also includes a pensioner.

The IS system is designed to provide payments in advance to low income households. Paying in advance ensures that vulnerable households are not left without funds to support their basic needs immediately following a change to their household income. A system that makes payments in advance will always require adjustments where household income has increased after a payment has been made. These adjustments will often cause small overpayments that are repaid by weekly adjustments.

Where overpayments are larger these are usually caused by a household failing to notify IS of a change in circumstances, such as an increased income. For pensioners this might be the award of a foreign or private pension. The best way to prevent significant overpayments is for households to notify the Department of any changes that would affect the rate of benefit. This policy is stated in every letter sent to an IS household. Where this policy is followed the levels of overpayment will in most cases be small and the recovery of them will have little impact on the household.

2.24 Deputy R.J. Ward of St. Helier of the Minister for Infrastructure regarding the financial return received from LibertyBus (WQ.365/2020)

Question

Will the Minister advise, in respect of Liberty Bus –

(a) the total financial return made from on-Island operations to the parent company, HCT Group, since the commencement of the Liberty Bus contract with the States of Jersey; and

(b) whether he holds any information to show how this return compares with the financial returns made by HCT Group-run services in other jurisdictions?

Answer

(a) As with the previous contract dating from 2002 and awarded to Connex Bus UK, the 2013 Bus Operating Contract was competitively tendered under Treasury procurement rules. As such, the financial information submitted as part of that tender process was and remains commercially confidential. Information about financial returns is included within HCT Group’s own published accounts.

(b) HCT Group’s stated aim is to use the profits they make from operating commercial contracts to fund charitable activities and community reinvestment in the local authority areas where their subsidiaries are based. No information on other HCT Group subsidiaries is held as this is not relevant to the performance of the Jersey Bus Operating Contract.

2.25 Deputy R.J. Ward of St. Helier of the Chair of the States Employment Board regarding the Education Partnership agreement (WQ.366/2020)

Question

Will the Minister advise what the current status is of the Education Partnership agreement between the States of Jersey and the National Association of Schoolmasters Union of Women Teachers (N.A.S.U.W.T.) that was agreed in September 2014?

Answer

The States Employment Board and the National Association of Schoolmasters Union of Women Teachers both confirmed their commitment to partnership working as part of the resolution of the 2018/19/20 pay negotiations. Joint working between SEB, officers and NASUWT through the many schools-related issues arising from Covid has provided excellent outcomes for parents and carers, children and young people, and teachers. Officers and NASUWT are seeking to meet within the next few weeks to explore ways to strengthen partnership working in line with the agreement.

2.26 Deputy R.J. Ward of St. Helier of the Minister for Economic Development, Tourism, Sport and Culture regarding the Economic Council (WQ.367/2020)

Question

Will the Minister state, in respect of the work of the Economic Council since its formation in July 2020 –

(a) what recommendations have been made by the Council to date;

(b) what actions, if any, have been taken based on these recommendations;

(d) whether it is the Minister’s intention to ensure these minutes are accessible by the public?

Answer

a) The Economic Council has not delivered its formal recommendations as yet. A report is being concluded by the Economic Council membership with a view to publication by the end of October 2020.

b) The Economic Council will make recommendations which will subsequently be consideration by the Economic Recovery Political Oversight Group. A number of actions from the Government Plan 2020-23 remain relevant and will continue in the Government Plan 2021-24 that will be lodged shortly.

c) The Economic Council has met on 8 occasions. A further meeting is scheduled for 21st October 2020 for the Economic Council to sign-off on their interim report and recommendations.
Minutes for the Economic Council have not been published.

d) There is no intention to publish the minutes of Economic Council meetings at this stage although they have been provided to Scrutiny. The report and recommendations will be published and will reflect the work undertaken to date.

2.27 Senator S.Y. Mezec of the Chair of the Privileges and Procedures Committee regarding the trial 3-weekly meeting cycle of the States Assembly (WQ.368/2020)

Question

Will the Chair state, in relation to the trial 3-weekly sitting cycle of the States Assembly starting in January 2021 –

(a) what the criteria are for measuring the relative success or failure of the 3-weekly sitting cycle trial, and how these criteria have been developed;

(b) how members will be engaged with reviewing the trial, and how the Chair will ensure a balance between the feedback of executive and non-executive members; and

(c) if the trial is deemed a success, what the proposed timescale is for adopting the 3-weekly sitting cycle permanently?

Answer

(a) Criteria for measuring the success or otherwise of the 3-weekly sitting cycle trial are in development. PPC has not had the opportunity to meet and discuss this issue since the Assembly adopted P.106/2020 on Friday, 25th September. Its next scheduled meeting is on Monday 5th October at 2:30pm, after the submission deadline for this written answer.

The trial does provide the Assembly, perhaps for the very first time in its history, with the opportunity to measure any impact on performance during the course of a new model of operation against that which has been operating unchanged for many years.

Starting with elements of our procedures the Assembly traditionally wishes to avoid: last minute or late filing of comments papers or amendments; suspension of standing orders requests to allow debate on propositions not lodged for the requisite time; written answers which avoid the question; protracted adjournment debates at 5.30pm; sitting late; debates held overnight; sitting on unscheduled continuation days and so on. It will not be difficult to measure the frequency of these against those for an equivalent period - though 2019 might be more accurate given the extraordinary circumstances of 2020.

No doubt PPC will consider other indicators in due course from both executive and non-executive/private members’ perspectives. As mentioned in the debate, Scrutiny Panels will have their own criteria which may include availability of interviewees and late cancellations.

Comparing and contrasting measurable data is one factor, another is the personal perception of each Member as to the success or otherwise of the trial.

(b) All members will be individually surveyed at the six-month stage. In addition, collective evaluations will be sought from the Council of Ministers, Scrutiny Panels and other Committees. A balance between the feedback of executive and non-executive members must be struck for the trial results to achieve validity.

(c) PPC will lodge a proposition in time for debate in July, before the summer recess, placing before the Assembly data collected and survey results and seeking its view on any continuation on a permanent basis or reversion. The 2022 dates for States sittings will be then be published in accordance with the wishes of the Assembly.

3. Oral Questions

3.1 Deputy D. Johnson of St. Mary of the Minister for Economic Development, Tourism, Sport and Culture regarding work on updating the Licensing (Jersey) Law 1974 (OQ.253/2020)

Further to the response to Written Question 123/2020, will the Minister advise what progress, if any, has been made as to the establishment of a joint working party to consider options to update the Licensing (Jersey) Law 1974 and, in particular, will he inform the Assembly as to the membership of any such working party?

Senator L.J. Farnham (The Minister for Economic Development, Tourism, Sport and Culture):

Senator Pallett will be taking this question.

Senator S.W. Pallett (Assistant Minister, Economic Development, Tourism, Sport and Culture - rapporteur):

The proposal to establish a joint working party has now been superseded by a decision of the Council of Ministers to establish a task and finish group with the following members. It will be myself, the Minister for Home Affairs, the Minister for Health and Social Services, and the Assistant Minister for Treasury and Resources, Deputy Ash. This new group has been charged with developing a draft statement of alcohol and licensing policy and either proposing new legislation or amendments to the existing 1974 law, as appropriate to achieve the necessary reform. It will aim to lodge an in-principle policy proposition for debate by the States Assembly in quarter 1 2021, with detailed policy and legislative proposals to be lodged as soon as possible thereafter and no later than December 2021.

3.1.1 The Deputy of St. Mary:

I thank the Assistant Minister for his reply. In the written response to which the original question referred to, the statement said that the group then envisaged will be chaired by Senator Pallett with membership including representatives of the Licensing Bench. Are Members to take it from this new initiative that there is no intention to amend the constitution of the Licensing Bench, as now so constituted?

Senator S.W. Pallett:

I think at the current stage the working party needs to consider all options. The change to a more political based working party is a decision of the Council of Ministers. We do intend to work closely with the Licensing Bench, as I think all Members would expect. They currently oversee the Licensing Law both from an administrative point of view and policy so it is important that we do involve the Licensing Bench and the court in regards to any future decision-making. But it very much is a decision that we need to take a political lead on this particular issue.

3.1.2 Connétable A.S. Crowcroft of St. Helier:

Will the Assistant Minister confirm that he has had productive meetings with the St. Helier Shadow Conseil Municipal about the possibility of the Parish of St. Helier taking more of an active role in determining licensing applications in our Parish?

Senator S.W. Pallett:

I certainly can confirm that. It was a very interesting meeting that we had with the Shadow Conseil in regards to what options may be available for working more closely with the Parish of St. Helier, and that type of proposal does need further consideration and will be something that the working party will look into.

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

In his answer the Senator referred to a “task and finish group” and in my ignorance I have not heard of a task and finish group before so I was wondering if the Senator would be able to cut through the jargon of the Assembly and explain what a task and finish group is and how it exists from a working party?

Senator S.W. Pallett:

We have a set terms of reference in regards to the work that we will be setting out to do. That will be considering issues such as alcohol availability, alcohol pricing, advertising, promotion - something that we will be discussing later today with P.105 - and various other issues, including category models and fee models. Cutting through the jargon, I think we need to consider 2 main issues: one is whether we amend the current law or whether we come forward with a new draft law. The most important thing for me is around statement of licensing policy that will put policy firmly in the States Assembly where I think Members would prefer it to be.

3.1.4 Deputy K.F. Morel:

With regards to this task and finish group, the Senator mentioned that it is principally political, is this just another example of the Government retreating from the stakeholders that are involved with the Licensing Law and turning in on itself and not consulting, not getting opinions from elsewhere, and trying to come up with the answers in isolation?

Senator S.W. Pallett:

I can assure the Deputy that is absolutely not the intention of this group. It will be consulting widely with all stakeholders, as I have already said. We could not do this piece of work without having a close collaboration and consultation with the Licensing Bench, with stakeholders, such as the industry and, in fact, the public more generally, because I think it is important that we have a balanced view of the way forward.

[9:45]

As I have already said, the intention is to have an in-principle debate within the States Assembly so that we can gauge the views of all Members in regards to what they want to see of a new law and a statement of licensing policy.

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

I am sure the Senator, who is a past Constable, will not have forgotten this, but I can just ask him to confirm that he will be consulting with the Comité des Connétables on any new licensing proposals?

Senator S.W. Pallett:

Absolutely, and I certainly have not forgotten the Constables and the Comité, they are key to, I think, finding a solution to this, as the Constable of St. Helier has already made clear. I think there is a role for the committee and Parishes themselves in finding a solution to some of the issues that we face, but there is no intention to keep anybody out of consultation. It is going to be a wide-ranging. It needs to be wide-ranging because I think the issues are quite complex and we need to get a solution that works for all parties.

3.1.6 Connétable D.W. Mezbourian of St. Lawrence:

Will the Assistant Minister recognise that there are 12 Parishes in Jersey and that all Parishes should be treated in the same manner? Will he confirm therefore that St. Helier will not be treated differently to the other Parishes?

Senator S.W. Pallett:

I think the Constable will know that that certainly is not the case. There is no intention to treat any Parish any differently than others but clearly St. Helier do have a ... I think it is 50 per cent of all licences within the Island so they are a key stakeholder, but as are all the other 12 Parishes, whether you have got one pub or whether you have got 50 pubs. It is important to have an understanding from each of those Parishes, what their concerns are and have a holistic view from the Constables as to future solutions.

3.1.7 The Connétable of St. Lawrence:

Clearly we are not discussing only pubs in this regard, it is all licensed premises. The Comité has, as the Assistant Minister knows, very full agendas when we meet. Will he commit to giving us as much notice as possible please of his intention to meet with us?

Senator S.W. Pallett:

Absolutely. When the resource is made available in terms of officer support for this piece of work we will start to engage more closely with all the stakeholders, obviously including the Comité themselves.

3.1.8 The Deputy of St. Mary:

In the Minister’s notes or comments to P.105, which is to be debated later today, he concludes that the Scrutiny Panel involved in P.103/2017 supported the general concept of a new law that will provide it for a States approved statement of alcohol licensing policy. Given the measure of agreement that was reached on that occasion would it not be simpler and more expedient to effectively replicate or resurrect P.103 with a view to bringing a new Licensing Law into force as soon as possible?

Senator S.W. Pallett:

Any in-committee debate will probably use that draft piece of work, P.103, as a basis for discussion. I think the Deputy is right. There are elements of that law that are as true now as they were when we lodged it. But there are issues within that draft law that do need some further consultation, certainly with stakeholders, but I think it is key that we fully understand what States Members really want from a new draft law and from a statement of licensing policy before we start that piece of work.

3.2 Deputy K.G. Pamplin of St. Saviour of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding the work of the Mental Health Improvement Board (OQ.261/2020)

Will the Minister provide the Assembly with an update on the progress of the Mental Health Improvement Board, with particular reference to any proposed mental health service improvements that are currently outstanding in terms of delivery?

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

I will ask my Assistant Minister , Senator Pallett, to also answer this question.

Senator S.W. Pallett (Assistant Minister, Health and Social Services - rapporteur):

I thank the Deputy for his question. Certainly as we head towards World Mental Health Day this coming Saturday, although the question does not specifically mention the mental health improvement plan, which was developed to guide the work of the board, I will briefly update Members on both the board and the plan. The Mental Health Improvement Board has continued to meet throughout the pandemic and has supported mental health service providers to respond to the effects of COVID-19. To ensure its ongoing effectiveness the board is currently reviewing its scope, terms of reference and membership. This review is at an early stage and once complete evidence-based changes will be discussed more widely with a wide range of partners and stakeholders, including with our Scrutiny Panel. Moving on to mental health improvement plan, this was always intended to be a live document. It is rag-rated and updated to show progress on each workstream. The Deputy will no doubt be aware of recent successes that include delivery of the Listening Lounge, the review of Jersey Talking Therapies, that has already seen waiting lists removed for low intensity step 2 support, and completed upgrades at Orchard House and La Chasse. With the mental health care group in place our strong leadership team are working towards closer integration of social care and mental health functions to improve patient care. COVID-19 has had an effect on service delivery delaying the development of the crisis prevention service. As a response to the pandemic, we established our home treatment team in a street triage service, and these are being progressed further, but is now the priority to set up a 24-hour crisis line for Islanders in immediate need. We must continue to improve our collaboration with external partners but also need to build even better relationships with our government colleagues who have important roles to play in supporting the mental health of Islanders. Just to finish, I want to assure the Deputy that many of the recommendations within the Scrutiny Panel report of 2018 have been implemented and I am more than happy to take the Deputy and his Scrutiny Panel through the mental health improvement plan in more detail, as it is impossible to do it justice in an oral question.

3.2.1 Deputy K.G. Pamplin:

I thank the Senator for his answer and equally for working together on Tuesday on the States Assembly Facebook page to talk about mental health services. He is indeed correct, it is World Mental Health Day on Saturday. Mental health is one of the most neglected areas of public health, the World Health Organization ...

The Bailiff:

Is there a question please, Deputy?

Deputy K.G. Pamplin:

Yes, just getting to it as quickly as I can. Is driving this year their theme of investment into the service. Will he champion the continued and improved funding required for the mental health service lacking on this Island?

Senator S.W. Pallett:

As the Deputy knows, the answer to that is absolutely yes. We have within the Government Plan committed a great deal of funding towards supporting mental health services within the Island. I think, as importantly, making sure that the physical infrastructure is modern and fit for purpose. Recently we have updated Orchard House, as he knows, and we have got La Chasse opening very soon, are key parts of the service. So the investment will be there and he is right, we do have to commit to investing in mental health not just now but in the future.

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

Could the Assistant Minister please give some detail of what is within this mental health plan in terms of improvements to perinatal mental health services please?

Senator S.W. Pallett:

In terms of the specifics around perinatal, I am sorry but I am going to have to get back to the Deputy on that. It is a very long and detailed plan. I do have it in front of me but I am going to take time going through it to find it, but I am happy to get back to the Deputy on that particular issue.

3.2.3 Deputy L.M.C. Doublet:

I thank the Minister for that and I hope he will get back to me. Does he agree with me that perinatal mental health is an extremely important area, given that it affects children’s mental health and we have committed to putting children first?

Senator S.W. Pallett:

Absolutely. I think in supporting children from the earliest possible age is absolutely vital. I also include families and parents within that as well. It is absolutely key that we provide the support for new parents and, in fact, parents when they have second and third children, making sure that they get the support that they need at a very difficult time. I can assure the Deputy that we will be putting the investment and the effort into making sure parents and young children get that support.

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

Will the Minister commit to a full range of mental health support beyond initial programmes, such as Talking Therapies and the Listening Lounge, i.e. when referrals are needed beyond those services?

Senator S.W. Pallett:

Absolutely. The Deputy is absolutely right. It is not just about the initial early intervention work, it is very much making sure that those that need more acute support have got that to be able to access. We are currently recruiting people into position to make sure that our trauma pathways are correct and make sure that people do get the support that they need. It has been a difficult time for the mental health team, especially through the COVID period, but we are now getting back to business as usual, our psychology teams are back to full strength. I think the move back to La Chasse, which is really our adult mental health front door and where most of our contacts take place, getting that back in service is going to be really important to providing the care that people need.

3.2.5 Deputy R.J. Ward:

What would the Minister consider to be an acceptable waiting time for this further help that may be needed?

Senator S.W. Pallett:

To be blunt, I think anybody that needs to wait ... there is no acceptable wait. I would like to see people treated as early as possible but I think under the current restraints we have got in terms of staffing it is difficult to see people sometimes when they are most at risk but we are making all efforts now to try to bring waiting times down in step 3 and step 4 within mental health. Jersey Talking Therapies is back up and running and we are looking at our waiting list for step 3, for example, that currently stands at 167. For me that is too many and people are waiting too long. But we are getting that service back to where it needs to be and we will carry on investing in that service until we have ... I do not want to see any waiting lists for people with mental health issues because for me that is only going to mean they get worse, their condition gets worse and that is clearly not acceptable.

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

To what extent are mental health improvements dependent on progress on the Jersey Care Model in 2021 and, in particular, what measures have been prioritised on progress towards, for example, greater G.P. (general practitioner) involvement in mental health issues?

Senator S.W. Pallett:

I pick up on the last point because I think the Jersey Care Model to some degree is based on preventative care, and I think G.P.s have a huge role to play within that service. For many, going to the G.P. will be their first point of contact. We do say to people that are struggling with mental health issues that G.P.s quite often are the right route into the service. So we are working more closely with G.P.s in terms of making sure that they fully understand the issues involved around mental health and know the key pathways to making sure people get the right help that they need. Sometimes it is not always medical help. Quite often it can be other issues and social prescribing where we can provide other sources of help and support for people, quite often can be an answer to those that are in mental health stress. It will be linked closely to the Jersey Care Model. Mental health and physical health do need to be treated as one. I mentioned parity of esteem in the past and it is true. We do need to ensure that mental health is treated in the same way that physical health is treated. It needs to be equal treatment.

3.2.7 Deputy G.P. Southern:

In particular, how involved have G.P.s been in making primary care in the community, which is the aim of the J.C.M. (Jersey Care Model), making that affordable? To what extent is that happening?

Senator S.W. Pallett:

In terms of affordability, I think it goes into a wider issue that I know the Deputy has close concerns around. Again, I support him. I think there has to be care, it does not matter whether it is physical care or mental health care.

[10:00]

It needs to be affordable and it needs to be accessible to people in the community. I think with the G.P. service we do. There are some decisions we are going to have to make about how we deal with that affordability, as the Deputy is aware. But people need to be able to access it quickly. There are various pathways into our mental health services, some of them are already free, others we may have to consider how we deal with the affordability and accessibility. But I support the Deputy. They do need to be affordable. That is a decision the Assembly are going to have to make in the next few weeks.

3.2.8 Deputy K.G. Pamplin:

I thank Members for joining in. Can the Senator update us on the impact of the outstanding strategies, I talk about the carer strategy, dementia strategies, and how they are so important to the ongoing support of mental health services.

Senator S.W. Pallett:

I suppose one of the disappointments I have around the dementia strategy is we have not really progressed in a way we need to. We know that we are going to be dealing with a lot more elderly people - although it does not just affect elderly people - with dementia in coming years. So we do need to have a strategy that deals with that. That is something we do need to put some effort and concentrate on before the end of this political term. As I think the Deputy knows, suicide framework is being moved forward - another key area - in ensuring that we are supporting Islanders through difficult times and they do not end up doing something that is avoidable with the right support. But all areas of mental health need to be dealt with equally but I think some of the strategies that are involved are cross-cutting through Government, and it is important that I think we assess and we take time to reflect before too long on some of the strategies that have not had enough effort put into to date, and dementia strategy is one of those. I have spoken to the dementia charity and they are clear that they want to see some more progress made on this, and I understand where they are coming from.

3.3 Deputy S.M. Ahier of St. Helier of the Minister for Home Affairs regarding the measures available to deal with cyclists who injured pedestrians (OQ.252/2020)

Will the Minister advise of any measures he is able to take to prevent incidents of pedestrians being hospitalised after being hit by a cyclist travelling downhill on the pavement against the flow of traffic?

Connétable L. Norman of St. Clement (The Minister for Home Affairs):

I would not wish to take any measures to prevent incidents of pedestrians being hospitalised after being hit by a cyclist, on a hill or otherwise, against the flow of traffic or otherwise, if the injury justifies such hospitalisation.

3.3.1 Deputy S.M. Ahier:

The person in question had 3 broken ribs, a punctured lung, and a gash to the head, she was detained in hospital for one week. Will the Minister consider introducing legislation to ensure that all cyclists have third party insurance so that those who are injured by cyclists can receive just recompense?