We come next to the appointment of a panel of the Bailiff’s Consultative Panel. An explanatory note has been circulated by the Greffier to Members and may I accordingly invite nominations for membership.

1.1 Deputy J.M. Maçon of St. Saviour:

Sir, it gives me great pleasure to propose the Deputy of St. John.

The Bailiff:

The Deputy of St. John. Is that nomination seconded? [Seconded]

1.2 Deputy S. Power of St. Brelade:

I would like to propose the Constable of St. Lawrence, please.

The Bailiff:

The Constable of St. Lawrence is proposed. Is that nomination seconded? [Seconded] Any further nominations?

1.3 Connétable D.J. Murphy of Grouville:

I propose Senator Le Main.

The Bailiff:

Yes, Senator Le Main is proposed. Is that nomination seconded? [Seconded] Any further nominations?

1.4 Senator T.J. Le Main:

I would like to propose the Connétable of Grouville, Sir. [Laughter]

The Bailiff:

The Connétable of Grouville is proposed. Is that nomination seconded? [Seconded]

1.5 Senator F.E. Cohen:

Sir, I would like to propose the Deputy of Grouville.

The Bailiff:

The Deputy of Grouville is proposed. Is that nomination seconded? [Seconded]

1.6 Deputy D.J.A. Wimberley of St. Mary:

I would like to propose Deputy Martin.

The Bailiff:

Is the nomination of Deputy Martin seconded? [Seconded]

1.7 Deputy T.A. Vallois of St. Saviour:

Sir, I would like to propose Deputy Maçon.

The Bailiff:

Deputy Maçon is proposed. Is that nomination seconded? [Seconded] Are there any further nominations for membership of the consultative panel? May I have some guidance from Members, particularly perhaps from the Chairman of the P.P.C. (Privileges and Procedures Committee)? It is possible for the Greffe to arrange for those names to be printed on a ballot paper unless Members are content to proceed on the basis that they can remember the names of the 7 nominees. [Laughter]

Connétable J. Gallichan of St. Mary:

Sir, I think it might be safer to have them printed on a ballot paper I think. [Laughter]

The Bailiff:

It would be a challenge I think. The Greffe will arrange to print ballot papers and later in the morning we will proceed to a ballot.

QUESTIONS

2. Written Questions

2.1 Deputy T.A. Vallois of St. Saviour of the Chief Minister regarding the adoption of recommendations from scrutiny reports:

Question

Could the Chief Minister advise the number of recommendations from all scrutiny reports that have been adopted by Ministers since the introduction of Ministerial government and how many recommendations have been put forward to departments?

How does the Council of Ministers consider the scrutiny process is working effectively with Ministers and their departments?

Answer

Although I am Chief Minister, I am not in possession of this information and therefore cannot answer the question. This question should be redirected to the relevant Scrutiny Panel chairmen or the Chairman’s Committee, which has a central record of all Scrutiny reports issued and consequential responses from Ministers.

Scrutiny reports are sent by each Scrutiny Panel directly to the appropriate Minister. Scrutiny reports are not copied to the Chief Minister as a matter of course (unless they fall within his domain). Nor do Ministers copy the Chief Minister in on their responses as a matter of course. [Note: Guidelines setting out how Ministers should respond formally to Scrutiny reports is set out in the protocol agreed with Scrutiny in October 2007]

Of course, where a scrutiny report makes a recommendation on a major policy issue, this may be discussed either with the Chief Minister, or with the Council of Ministers. However, the response to the recommendation is in every case made directly to the Scrutiny Panel by the appropriate Minister.

The Scrutiny process has been in place for just over three years. Clearly such a new concept for Jersey will take time to embed itself. However, the Council considers that in general, the Scrutiny process has made great improvements – particularly over the past two years – in performing its role of holding the Executive to account. Panels have produced some excellent reports and contributed to policy formulation. Most Panels have developed good relationships with their Minister and departments, leading to more open and frank discussions. These relationships could be developed further without compromising the role of either the Minister or the Panel.

The Council believes that a strong and fair Scrutiny process is vital to good, orderly and open government and hopes that the process will improve further over time.

2.2 The Deputy of St. Martin of the Chief Minister regarding staff suspensions:

Question

Would the Chief Minister advise the Assembly of the total number of staff, by Department, who were suspended as a result of disciplinary infractions since 1st January 2009 and, in each case, identify the employee group concerned, the period of suspension, the means of disposal of the case and, in those cases where the time between the suspension date and the disciplinary hearing was greater than the eight weeks recommended by the States Employment Board, the reason for the extension?

Would the Chief Minister advise the Assembly of the total number of staff who were suspended during the period 2006 to 2009, and who remain suspended, identifying in each case the employee group concerned, the period of suspension and the reason why the employee remains suspended?

Answer

1 The number of employees suspended as a result of disciplinary infractions since 1st January 2009 is reproduced below:

Dept.	Employee Pay Group	Suspension Commenced	Suspension Finished	Method of Disposal

EDD	Civil Servant	11/02/2009	04/03/2009	Disciplined

ESC	Teacher	07/05/2009	16/06/2009	Disciplined

HSS	Nurses &Midwives	14/01/2009	28/01/2009	Disciplined
HSS	Residential Child Care Officers	23/01/2009	Ongoing	Ongoing
HSS	Doctors & Dentists	02/02/2009	Ongoing	Ongoing
HSS	Nurses &Midwives	23/03/2009	29/04/2009	Disciplined

The table shows that there have been 6 employees suspended as a result of disciplinary infractions since 1st January 2009.

Of the 6 employees suspended, 4 were dealt within the 8 week period recommended by the States Employment Board.

The 2 remaining employees who have been suspended for longer than the recommended 8 week period are subject to police investigation.

2 The number of employees who have been suspended during the period 2006 to June 2009 and who remain suspended is reproduced below:-

Dept.	Employee Pay Group	Suspension Commenced	Reason
HSS	Doctors & Dentists	18/10/2006	Police investigation now complete. Currently pending disciplinary action
HSS	Civil Servant	12/06/2008	Police investigation now completed. Currently awaiting decision regarding potential disciplinary action
HSS	Health Care Asst.	01/12/2008	Police investigation ongoing
HSS	RCCO	23/01/2009	Police investigation ongoing
HSS	Doctors & Dentists	02/02/2009	Police investigation ongoing

Note: Both parts of this answer do not relate to Police Officers, who are office holders, and for whom the Minister for Home Affairs is responsible.

2.3 Deputy T.M. Pitman of St. Helier of the Minister for Education, Sport and Culture regarding plans to privatise or outsource elements of service delivery:

Question

Following on from the Strategic Plan, what sector, if any, in his department’s service delivery does the Minister plan to privatise or outsource and how many jobs will this effect; further still, what savings are planned?"

Answer

As stated by the Chief Minister on 16th June 2009, in response to an oral question from Deputy G.P. Southern of St. Helier, all organisations change and adapt as technological improvements, economic conditions and other innovative opportunities arise. This applies equally to the public sector which must change and adapt, particularly in the current economic conditions. All departments need to keep the provision of their services under constant review, which must include whether there are more commercial ways of working or opportunities for wider private sector involvement as a means of improving efficiency and keeping costs down.

At present, the Education, Sport and Culture Department does not have any plans for the privatisation or outsourcing of services.

2.4 Deputy T.M. Pitman of St. Helier of the Minister for Home Affairs regarding plans to privatise or outsource elements of service delivery:

Question

Answer

There are no specific areas within the Home Affairs Department which are being considered for privatising or outsourcing at this stage.

However, with the requirement to make efficiency and other savings, and with considerable pressure on resources to deliver services at existing levels, the Minister cannot confirm that areas for privatisation or outsourcing will not be investigated in the future.

2.5 Deputy T.M. Pitman of St. Helier of the Minister for Planning and Environment regarding plans to privatise or outsource elements of service delivery:

Question

Answer

As stated by the Chief Minister on 16th June 2009, in response to an oral question from Deputy G.P. Southern of St. Helier, all organisations change and adapt as technological improvements, economic conditions and other innovative opportunities arise. This applies equally to the public sector which must change and adapt, particularly in the current economic conditions. All departments need to keep the provision of their services under constant review, which must include whether there are more commercial ways of working or opportunities for wider private sector involvement. As such opportunities arise Departments will be expected to implement them as a means of improving efficiency and keeping costs down.

In the past the Chief Minister has informed States members of a good example of this in the recent exercise tendering for the improvement and upgrading of the States website in his own department. As a result a consortium of private companies successfully bid for and are now undertaking not only the development but also future provision of web facilities.

Within the Planning and Environment Department, there are no plans within the current budget process (2010 – 1012) to privatise or outsource the main activities of the Department. Work will commence however, on a review of the Jersey Meteorology Department, in line with the recommendations made by the Comptroller and Auditor General in 2007. The review will explore different delivery models for the Met service and the costs associated with States provision, as opposed provision via external agencies. If any savings are to be achieved these will not be delivered until 2013 at the earliest, and it is too soon to indicate if there are any staffing implications.

In addition, work will be undertaken to challenge the extent of existing regulation and to explore whether it is appropriate for further self certification by the private sector, for instance in the field of Building Control or by increasing permitted development rights.

The Department will also be exploring options for improving the cost recovery of certain services through the introduction of higher or additional charges and fees. This will effect a range of services including Building Control and Development Control as detailed in the 2010 States Business Plan which is to be presented to the States for debate later in the year.

2.6 Deputy T.M. Pitman of St. Helier of the Minister for Treasury and Resources regarding plans to privatise or outsource elements of service delivery:

Question

Answer

As stated by the Chief Minister on 16th June 2009, in response to an oral question from Deputy G.P. Southern of St. Helier, all organisations change and adapt as technological improvements, economic conditions and other innovative opportunities arise. This applies equally to the public sector which must change and adapt, particularly in the current economic conditions. All departments need to keep the provision of their services under constant review, which must include whether there are more commercial ways of working or opportunities for wider private sector involvement. As such opportunities arise Departments will be expected to implement them as a means of improving efficiency and keeping costs down.

Whilst there are no definite plans to privatise or outsource current services, the Treasury keeps under constant review ways to increase efficiency and reduce the costs to the taxpayers.

2.7 Deputy T.M. Pitman of St. Helier of the Minister for Transport and Technical Services regarding plans to privatise or outsource elements of service delivery:

Question

Answer

As stated by the Chief Minister on 16th June 2009, in response to an oral question from Deputy G.P. Southern of St. Helier, all organisations change and adapt as technological improvements, economic conditions and other innovative opportunities arise. This applies equally to the public sector which must change and adapt, particularly in the current economic conditions. All departments need to keep the provision of their services under constant review, which must include whether there are more commercial ways of working or opportunities for wider private sector involvement. As such opportunities arise Departments will be expected to implement them as a means of improving efficiency and keeping costs down.

The strategic plan states that Transport and Technical Services (TTS) and Treasury and Resources will investigate alternative ways to fund and deliver key infrastructure services, such as disposing of liquid and inert waste. TTS will review all services to make sure that the existing business model of states funded and operated utility is the best value approach. To avoid limiting this review the department will challenge all the historical and social assumptions to provide defendable and un biased options for the best decision to be made whilst guaranteeing a sustainable future for the islands infrastructure.

To directly answer the question the answer is that this could affect all TTS workers and managers. Any savings planned will need to be utilised to support the aging infrastructure and long term maintenance needs of Islands critical assets.

2.8 Deputy T.M. Pitman of St. Helier of the Minister for Social Security regarding plans to privatise or outsource elements of service delivery:

Question

Answer

As stated by the Chief Minister on 16th June 2009, in response to an oral question from Deputy G.P. Southern of St. Helier, all organisations change and adapt as technological improvements, economic conditions and other innovative opportunities arise. This applies equally to the public sector which must change and adapt, particularly in the current economic conditions. All departments need to keep the provision of their services under constant review, which must include whether there are more commercial ways of working or opportunities for wider private sector involvement. As such opportunities arise Departments will be expected to implement them as a means of improving efficiency and keeping costs down.

However, the Social Security Department does not have any current plans to privatise or outsource any further services provided by the Department.

2.9 Deputy T.M. Pitman of St. Helier of the Minister for Economic Development regarding plans to privatise or outsource elements of service delivery:

Question

Answer

As stated by the Chief Minister on 16th June 2009, in response to an oral question from Deputy G.P. Southern of St. Helier, all organisations change and adapt as technological improvements, economic conditions and other innovative opportunities arise. This applies equally to the public sector which must change and adapt, particularly in the current economic conditions. All departments need to keep the provision of their services under constant review, which must include whether there are more commercial ways of working or opportunities for wider private sector involvement. As such opportunities arise Departments will be expected to implement them as a means of improving efficiency and keeping costs down.

The Economic Development Department as the States lead-department in terms of delivering productivity and support for business continues to explore how it can most cost-effectively deliver its broad range of services. For example, the Department grant-funds Jersey Finance Limited (JFL) to develop the interface with the finance sector and carry out promotional activity on a global basis that will raise the profile of Jersey as a transparent and effective global finance centre. In addition, EDD grant-funds the Jersey Consumer Council to deliver effective consumer representation.

Members will also be aware that the Department is evaluating with the JHA and others, a proposal for the potential introduction of a public-private partnership for the delivery of marketing and promotion of the Island as a visitor destination, along similar lines to JFL. This proposal is currently the subject of a review by the Economic Affairs Scrutiny Panel. A key element of the proposal is the delivery of a more effective and productive organisation grant- funded by the Economic Development Department, with an increased contribution from the private sector.

2.10 Deputy T.M. Pitman of St. Helier of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding plans to privatise or outsource elements of service delivery:

Question

Answer

As stated by the Chief Minister on 16th June 2009, in response to an oral question from Deputy G.P. Southern of St. Helier, all organisations change and adapt as technological improvements, economic conditions and other innovative opportunities arise. This applies equally to the public sector which must change and adapt, particularly in the current economic conditions. All departments need to keep the provision of their services under constant review, which must include whether there are more commercial ways of working or opportunities for wider private sector involvement. As such opportunities arise, Departments will be expected to implement them as a means of improving efficiency and keeping costs down.

In the past, the Chief Minister has informed States members of a good example of this in the recent exercise tendering for the improvement and upgrading of the States website in his own department. As a result, a consortium of private companies successfully bid for, and are now undertaking, not only the development but also future provision of web facilities.

The Health and Social Services Department has a number of long standing partnership arrangements with both the charitable and private sectors here in Jersey. My Department disburses over £10M per year to the grant aided (charitable) sector, with Family Nursing and Home Care Services being the largest recipient of funds from within this large sum of money. Two years ago, my Department also entered into a partnership agreement with a number of private nursing home providers which meant that Leoville and McKinstry wards could be closed and the residents thereby enjoy higher quality facilities and environments. It is envisaged that these partnerships will expand – again, building on good working relationships between the States, charitable and private agencies – rather than new services being created. However, my officers and I will continue to be alert to opportunities which new forms of organisation and service provision offer to patients and to clients.

At this stage, therefore, it is not envisaged that there will be any reduction or loss of staff within my Department as a result of new forms of public private partnership.

2.11 Deputy T.M. Pitman of St. Helier of the Minister for Housing regarding plans to privatise or outsource elements of service delivery:

Question

Following on from the Strategic Plan, what sector, if any, in his department's service delivery does the Minister plan to privatise or outsource and how many jobs will this effect; further still, what savings are planned?"

Answer

As stated by the Chief Minister on 16th June 2009, in response to an oral question from Deputy G.P. Southern of St. Helier, all organisations change and adapt as technological improvements, economic conditions and other innovative opportunities arise. This applies equally to the public sector which must change and adapt, particularly in the current economic conditions. All departments need to keep the provision of their services under constant review, which must include whether there are more commercial ways of working or opportunities for wider private sector involvement. As such opportunities arise Departments will be expected to implement them as a means of improving efficiency and keeping costs down.

Members are aware that next month the Review of Social Housing undertaken by Professor Christine Whitehead from the Cambridge Centre for Housing and Planning Research and London School of Economics will be circulated for consultation as a Green Paper. In that report Professor Whitehead does discuss options for the future status of the Housing Department. These options will be the subject of full consultation ahead of a debate in the New Year.

2.12 Deputy T.M. Pitman of St. Helier of the Chief Minister regarding plans to privatise or outsource elements of service delivery:

Question

Answer

As I stated on 16th June 2009, in response to an oral question from Deputy G.P. Southern of St. Helier, all organisations change and adapt as technological improvements, economic conditions and other innovative opportunities arise. This applies equally to the public sector which must change and adapt, particularly in the current economic conditions. All departments need to keep the provision of their services under constant review, which must include whether there are more commercial ways of working or opportunities for wider private sector involvement. As such opportunities arise Departments will be expected to implement them as a means of improving efficiency and keeping costs down.

Previously I have informed States members of a good example of this in the recent exercise tendering for the improvement and upgrading of the States website in my own department. As a result a consortium of private companies successfully bid for and are now undertaking not only the development but also future provision of web facilities.

There are no current plans to privatise or outsource any further parts of the Chief Minister’s Department’s services, although if opportunities arise to improve service or cost to the public they will be fully evaluated.

2.13 Deputy G.P. Southern of St. Helier of the Minister for Treasury and Resources regarding estimates for the downturn in the economy for 2009 and 2010:

Question

Will the Minister inform members what evidence he has to support his estimates for the downturn in the economy for 2009 and 2010 of 4% and 2% respectively?

Answer

The Minister has taken the advice of the Economic Adviser and the Fiscal Policy Panel (FPP) on the outlook for the Jersey economy. The Economic Adviser made an objective assessment of the economic outlook based on a quantitative assessment of the relationship between Jersey’s economic performance and key economic variables and a qualitative assessment of the outlook for the various sectors of our economy. The FPP also made a similar assessment in their annual report published in May this year.

2.14 Deputy G.P. Southern of St. Helier of the Minister for Education, Sport and Culture regarding the number of secondary teaching vacancies advertised by his department for September 2009:

Question

Will the Minister inform members of the number of secondary teaching vacancies advertised by his department for September 2009 listed by subject area along with the numbers of applicants for these posts? Will he further state whether applicants were fully qualified secondary teachers in the subjects required and whether applicants were locally qualified, UK graduates or other nationalities? How many vacancies remain unfilled?

Answer

The Department has advertised 18 vacancies either in the Jersey Evening Post or the Times Educational Supplement or both. The Department has also advertised two promoted posts internally giving a total of 20 posts.

The advertisements have attracted a total of 140 applications, all of which were from graduates, and some applicants may have applied for more than one post. 31 applicants were locally qualified (i.e. continuously resident in Jersey for a period of at least five years), one applicant was employed in a Jersey school on a J category contract, 87 applicants were from the UK, and 17 applicants were non-U.K. nationals.

11 of the 20 appointments were local appointments, eight were granted J category status, and one was granted a one year fixed term contract without a J category.

All with the exception of two local appointments were fully qualified secondary teachers in the subjects required. The two unqualified appointees were local graduates and will complete one year’s training to obtain Qualified Teacher Status on Island.

No vacancies remain unfilled for September 2009.

Subject area	No. of posts	No. of Applications	Locally qualified applicants (see note)	UK Graduate applicants	Other nationalities applicants
Science	4	33	3	25	-
Mathematics	5	31	2	35	5
English	3	20	6	7	7
History	1	1	1	-	1
Headteacher	1	14	1	13	-
Design Technology	1	24	8	12	4
Drama	1	5	2	3	-
Music	1	3	1	2	-
Learning Support	1	4	4	-	-
Modern Foreign Language	1	2	2	-	-
Girls PE	1	3	2	1	-

Note: This figure consists of the 31 applicants who have been continuously resident in Jersey for a period of at least five years, together with the one applicant employed in a Jersey school on a J category contract.

2.15 Deputy G.P. Southern of St. Helier of the Chief Minister regarding changes made to teachers’ pension terms and conditions for new entrants:

Question

Will the Minister inform members what changes have been made to teachers’ pension terms and conditions for new entrants and state how this differs from the UK equivalent?

Does the Minister agree with the statement of the Comptroller and Auditor General, supported by PAC, that

“terms and benefits must be broadly equivalent to those of the mainland in order to recruit staff.”?

Does the Minister anticipate recruitment difficulties given the recently negotiated reduced pension terms?

Answer

The Jersey Teachers’ Superannuation Fund introduced a new benefit structure in April 2007. The New Members part of the Scheme included numerous changes, some a betterment of terms, for instance the Death-in-Service lump sum was increased from once annual salary to twice annual salary. However, the main alteration was a decrease in the accrual rate from 60ths to 80ths (of final salary for each year of service). This differs from the UK equivalent which has retained accrual rates of 60ths.

In principle we do agree that “terms and benefits must be broadly equivalent to those of the mainland in order to recruit staff”. Nonetheless, since the 1987 restructure of the Public Employee Contributory Retirement Scheme (PECRS) the pension situation for all other States employees does not compare favourably with corresponding schemes in the UK. However, the Comptroller and Auditor General made the point that recent reforms in the UK mean the gap is closing.

The situation regarding any recruitment difficulties is being carefully monitored by ESC and at the present time difficulties are only experienced where there is a general shortage nationally. Whilst it is true to say that some potential UK recruits have withdrawn their interest in moving to Jersey as a teacher because of the pension issue, it is also true to say that this has not resulted in any vacancy not being filled.

2.16 Deputy G.P. Southern of St. Helier of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding the number of vacant nursing and social worker positions:

Question

Will the Minister inform members how many positions, and at what levels, are unfilled in the full complement of -

a) Hospital nurses

b) Social workers

What measures, if any, does the Minister have in place to remedy the position?

Answer

My answer to the Deputy naturally falls into two parts.

(a) Hospital Nurses

In providing the information to the Deputy, I have included in the figures those health practitioners who are called ‘Health Care Assistants’. This group of valuable practitioners is included within the Nurses and Midwives pay group.

As at 23rd June 2009, there are 54.99 FTE (Full Time Equivalent). This equates to 5.39% of the total Registered Nurse and HCA workforce.

As to remedial measures, I can advise the Deputy that 10 Registered Nurses have been appointed, but we are awaiting a starting date for them, which of course is subject to Police checks and health clearance.

Further remedial actions which are intended to improve the recruitment and retention of our Nursing and Midwifery workforce include:

Development of relocation package for Nurses and Midwives equitable to packages available to other pay groups
A ‘Hard to Recruit Area’ policy developed locally that enables some negotiation for staff to relocate on an increment higher than the usual bottom increment of grade within the agreed States of Jersey Nurses and Midwives career framework. A more assertive approach is now taken to market Jersey and to identify Senior Nurse Managers as contact points so that those who are thinking of relocating to Jersey ‘have a friend on the phone’ here in Jersey, so to speak.
As has been well publicised, a range of ‘grow our own nurses initiatives’ have been put in place. These imaginative schemes seek to give career opportunities to indigenous Islanders and thereby reduce the reliance on recruiting nurses from other jurisdictions.
A radical overhaul of recruitment and other administrative procedures is underway aimed at streamlining and thereby reducing the gap between vacancy and a new nurse coming into post. The new vetting arrangements which are undertaken by the States of Jersey Police are being refashioned and should reduce the waiting time in this regard.

(b) Social Workers

I am very pleased to report that with regard to Social Services, the number of vacancies within social work has reduced considerably over recent months. The following table best describes the picture, given the various specialisms within social work itself. The vacancies should be seen in the context of there being 58 substantive posts in social work.

Table 1

Service Area	Number & nature of post/s	Action
Adult Social Work	2.5 Social Work posts	Posts have been advertised. Interviews mid July.
Children’s Executive Service	1 Residential/Secure Officer in Charge post	Due to be advertised in September
Children’s Service: Assessment and Child Protection	2 Social Work posts	Post offered, awaiting completion of police checks
Children’s Service: Special Needs	1 Social Work post	Recruitment nearing completion, successful candidate in post in 2/3 months.

Whilst the vacancy position has improved, there is no room for complacency and we must always be vigilant. It is well known that there is a dearth of Registered Social Workers within the United Kingdom – which remains the principal source of all our Social Worker recruitment in Jersey.

Clearly long term solutions are required to address this problem, which threatens to erode the capacity of the service to deliver its core statutory services. Measures continue to be put in place with the aim of improving recruitment and, crucially, ensuring that once recruited, staff are retained in post. These remedial measures include:

Re-evaluation of remuneration levels for all Registered Social Workers – which reflects the level of autonomy and decision making which Social Workers are accountable for now in the modern world.
The Directorate of Social Services uses a portion of its training budget each year to support and financially sponsor up to four indigenous Islanders to undertake the Open University Social Work Degree. Again, this is another example of Jersey ‘growing its own’.
If the States supports the Williamson Implementation Plan, then additional training funds – and other supportive resources – will be available which will improve the quality and well-being of existing Social Workers. It is well recognised that a Department of Social Services which is undergoing a huge and positive investment in itself attracts social workers to come and to take up roles within a service which is recognised as being on a path of improvement with resources available to back this up.

2.17 Deputy G.P. Southern of St. Helier of the Chief Minister regarding the recruitment of the new Deputy Chief Executive:

Question

Would the Chief Minister give precise details a) of the procedure followed in the recruitment of the new Deputy Chief Executive and b) of his job description?

Answer

a) The States, when setting the 2009 Business Plan, specifically provided additional resources to allow the recruitment of the Deputy Chief Executive, in order to bring together the Resources functions and to lead on change and efficiency across the public sector. The recruitment exercise then followed the process agreed under the aegis of the Appointment Commission. It was agreed that provided the suitable candidate fully met the job criteria the role should be filled by a local candidate with the appropriate knowledge and experience of the workings of the States of Jersey. In the first instance it was agreed that the job should be offered to internal candidates and only if no one of sufficient ability applied would it be advertised externally in Jersey and the UK. In the event there was a good choice of internal candidates who completed a number of assessed tasks and who were interviewed by a panel comprising, the Chief Minister, the Minister for Treasury and Resources, the Chief Executive, the Chairman of the Appointments Commission, and an external adviser. I am pleased to report that John Richardson met the required standard and was considered to be the best candidate in the process.

b) The job description is attached.

JOB DESCRIPTION

DEPARTMENT: Chief Minister’s Department

JOB TITLE: Deputy Chief Executive/Chief Officer – Resources

REPORTS TO: Chief Executive

1. JOB PURPOSE

To deputise, across the full range of his functions, for the Chief Executive as the provider of first line advice to the Chief Minister, ensuring that any such advice has been properly researched, is robust, and is in line with the States’ overall strategic aims.

To provide strategic leadership to the Resource functions of the States of Jersey, comprising the Human Resources Department, Information Services Department including Customer Services, Property Holdings and Procurement and the JDE function, ensuring that the work of the Resources functions is focussed on, and supports the work of, the States of Jersey.

To work across the States, with the CMB, to devise and lead OD programmes to maximise efficiency and effectiveness.

2. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTABILITIES

1. To support the Chief Executive in driving forward the corporate management agenda and the work of the Corporate Management Board. To deputise for the Chief Executive across the full range of his activities, and in his absence provide clear leadership to all Executive States Departments, and for specific delegated functions.

2. To bring together the corporate resource functions of HR, Property, Information Services, Procurement and the JDE function, to create a high performing Resources Directorate which provides high quality, efficient services to Departments. The allocation of JDE functions and resources between CMD and Treasury will be led by the DCE and agreed with the Chief Executive and Treasurer.

3 To provide strong leadership and direction to the Resources Directorate, supporting the professional Heads to ensure that the individual functions work in unison to drive forward the collective and corporate agendas. To ensure that proper processes are in place to review individual and departmental performance, objective setting and accountability for performance. To ensure that budget management processes are in place, aligning resource allocation with the finance available, savings or overspends are identified and appropriate action instigated.

4. To ensure that proper processes are in place to review and continuously improve individual and departmental performance, objective setting and accountability for performance.

5. To take the lead on driving organisational development and improvement to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of services across the States of Jersey, implementing systems to monitor the progress and effectiveness of any changes.

6. To take responsibility for specific, high profile, corporate initiatives as determined from time to time.

7. To utilise the resource function, including the JDE system and the development team, to ensure that there is an enterprise wide system designed to support Departments and maximise efficiency.

8. To work as a member of the Corporate Management Board under the authority and direction of the Chief Executive to the Council of Ministers. To act at all times to secure the best interests of the States and their services on behalf of the public.

3. DIMENSIONS

(2008 data)

	Financial	Staffing FTE
Human Resources	£4,255,300	55.00
ISD	£3,332,600	70.40
Customer Services	£244,400	11.7
Procurement	£318,000	5.00
Property Holdings	£3,140,500	52.75
JDE	(total sum to be agreed)

Capital:

ISD Department

2008 - 2012

£18,000,000

Property Holdings

2008 – 2012

£29,622,00

4. KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS

Educated to degree level with a Postgraduate management qualification
Substantial senior management experience of at least 10 years at a policy formulation level in a multi-disciplinary environment.
Knowledge and understanding of the States of Jersey and substantial experience of working in a political environment
Proven ability to drive performance in a multi-disciplinary team
Strong analytical skills and proven project management ability.
Significant negotiating, persuading and influencing skills
Proven ability to lead, motivate and develop teams during periods of change.

2.18 Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier of St. Saviour of the Minister for Social Security regarding employment trends and the collation of unemployment statistics:

Question

Given the difficulties in accurately keeping track of unemployment trends will the Minister be revising the way in which such statistics are collected and, if so, how?

Answer

As indicated in response to Question 4587 (16th June 2009) and as previously stated by the Chief Minister in response to Question 4555 (2nd June 2009), the Social Security Department is currently working closely with the Statistics Unit to produce a monthly publication on registered unemployment in the Island.

Current statistics on individuals who are registered as unemployed and actively seeking work include details of gender, age and duration of actively seeking work status. Reports are published monthly in the employment section of the Social Security website. The April report can be found at the following web address:

http://www.gov.je/NR/rdonlyres/A684CA8F-01A8-4BC4-93F6-FC9C4CED5831/0/ASWApr09.pdf

2.19 Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier of St. Saviour of the Chairman of the Privileges and Procedures Committee regarding cases placed before the Complaints Board:

Question

Will the Complaints Board be able to comment on whether alleged contraventions of Human Rights are a factor in cases placed before it?

Answer

PPC is currently awaiting the outcome of the recruitment process for additional members of the Complaints Panel. The interview process is being managed by a member of the Appointments Commission without the involvement of any members of PPC and I understand that the selection panel should be in a position to recommend nominations to the Committee within a week. At that stage PPC will lodge a proposition asking the States to approve the nominations put forward.

Once the Complaints Panel is fully reconstituted PPC will arrange a meeting with the Chairman, Deputy Chairmen and members to discuss the work of the complaints system. As the issue of human rights has been raised by States members I am happy to undertake to place this matter on the agenda for the meeting. I think it is nevertheless important to stress that the complaints system is a way for complainants who are aggrieved by a specific decision of a Minister, Department or person acting on their behalf to have the complaint reviewed and it would not therefore be possible for a Board to consider human rights matters unless they were directly relevant to a particular decision. In addition the only remedy that the Board can recommend, if it finds in favour of the complainant, is that the Minister should reconsider the original decision in the light of the Board’s findings. Although the current Chairman and Deputy Chairmen are legally qualified there is no statutory requirement for them to be lawyers and a Complaints Board is not a court. When PPC meets the members of the Complaints Panel it will be keen to discuss the extent to which the Panel should be alert to human rights issues that are raised by complainants even if it is only to know when further information or advice on matters raised should be sought. When PPC discussed this issue on 19th June 2009 it was interested to note the views of the UK Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration, Ann Abraham, who, in response to the inquiry launched in April 2008 by the UK Equality and Human Rights Commission, wrote in August 2008 that “Formal findings of human rights infringements are of course a matter for the courts. But Ombudsmen need to ask human rights questions, use human rights language and play their part in nudging public authorities towards the sort of human rights culture that the Government envisaged with the Human Rights Act in 1998.”[1]

http://www.ombudsman.org.uk/about_us/FOI/whats_available/documents/responses/human_rights_inquiry.html

2.20 Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier of St. Saviour of the Minister for Social Security regarding the status of the claim against the assets of Woolworths in Jersey by GMAC:

Question

Would the Minister explain the status of the claim against the assets of Woolworths in Jersey by GMAC for £164 million?

Answer

This is a judicial matter inasmuch as the claim is to be adjudicated upon by the Viscount in terms of an Act of the Royal Court dated 2nd March, 2009. The Deputy should therefore address his question to the Viscount (or, of course, to the claimant).

2.21 Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier of St. Saviour of the Minister for Treasury and Resources regarding the reform of the public sector:

Question

Would the Minister confirm whether the remit of one of his Assistant Ministers covers reform of the public sector and cost cutting and, if so, would he explain how this will come about?

Answer

Reform of the public sector and cost cutting does not come under the specific remit of either of the Assistant Ministers

2.22 Deputy M.R. Higgins of St. Helier of the Minister for Home Affairs regarding the Jersey Field Squadron:

Question

Following my earlier oral question would the Minister please provide the following detailed information on the Jersey Field Squadron:

How much is the Island's defence contribution to HM Government which covers the cost of the Jersey Field Squadron?

Answer

2007: Total £914,991

2008: Total £884,792

Question

What is the permanent staff of the Field Squadron, breaking it down into seconded regular army personnel and local personnel?

Answer

Two (2) Regular Soldiers (3 if no TA Officer Commanding available), two (2) Non-Regular Permanent Staff (NRPS) and four (4) States of Jersey civil servants. The Squadron uses the Transport and Technical Services department to maintain all its vehicles and as such pays for a civilian Transport and Technical Services department fitter on an hourly basis.

Question

What is the cost of housing permanent members of the Field Squadron?

Answer

The Squadron uses States of Jersey property to house its permanent staff; less one property that has a long term private lease. The enduring revenue liability is limited to property maintenance, which is met from the stated Squadron budget, and charges normally associated with residential properties. The underlying cost per annum is detailed below.

For 2007:

£48319.15 (Including all maintenance and lease charges)

£9246.77 (less property maintenance charges for the States of Jersey property)

For 2008:

£76484.33 (Including all maintenance and lease charges – exceptional year as one property needed a new roof – note. commitment made to undertake work from existing funds as spend in 2008 reduced below level for 2007. This was an opportunity arising from cash savings associated with 7 soldiers deployed to Iraq)

£10883.28 (less property maintenance charges for the States of Jersey property)

Question

4. Would the Minister give the number of Island volunteer personnel on the books of the Squadron broken down by:

Answer

numbers recorded on the establishment for each year from the formation of the unit:

The Squadron’s current records date back to 1996; it must be noted that when a soldier is mobilised for full time service they are posted from the Squadron’s strength onto the Regular Army’s strength.

The figures as at December for each year are:

Ser	Year	December Manning Level	Average for the Year
(a)	(b)	(c)	(d)
1	1996	91	93
2	1997	87	85
3	1998	68	77
4	1999	63	66
5	2000	53	57
6	2001	56	55
7	2002	51	57
8	2003	44	42
9	2004	68	60
10	2005	71	72
11	2006	69	69
12	2007	76	72
13	2008	68	68

b numbers recorded on the establishment who were actually paid for attendance at training sessions from the year of its formation;

It is not possible to obtain detail as source data is no longer available because Ministry of Defence IT systems have changed over the years. It is important to consider that soldiers only get paid to attend training; there is no financial ‘retention’ element for a TA soldier, and the current policy is to discharge people who don't train. There is no benefit to artificially inflating recruited strength and as such it is fair to say all those who are currently on the Squadron strength are training, and in receipt of pay, or pending discharge.

c numbers of volunteers on establishment who attended annual camp for each year since its formation;

Sometimes referred to as ‘annual camps’, continuous training periods of between 8 - 15 days can refer to a variety of activities, including recruit training courses, career courses, annual training exercises and attachments to Regular Units. The Jersey Field Squadron term their training in whether or not their soldiers are trained to a level that allows them to deploy on Operations.

Year
2000	23
2001	25
2002	26
2003	26
2004	20
2005	37
2006	26
2007	34
2008	30

d numbers of volunteers on establishment who have served in Bosnia, Kosovo, Iraq or Afghanistan.

Question

Would the Minister give details of the equipment paid for by Jersey for use by the Squadron and its current location?

Answer

The list of equipment held by the Jersey Field Squadron RE (M) is contained in a “Restricted” document; however, the Deputy can view it at the TAC on Mount Bingham should he wish. The Jersey Field Squadron does not pay for equipment that it doesn’t have and it does not retain equipment that it doesn’t require. With the exception of 6 sets of webbing and 3 Land Rover trailers (for exclusive use of the Jersey Field Squadron RE (M)) which is strategically placed with the Squadron’s parent unit in Monmouth, to save on transport cost and excess baggage charges, all of the equipment that the Squadron has is held in Jersey.

3. Oral Questions

The Bailiff:

We come now to oral questions and the first question is in the name of Deputy Vallois of the Minister for Economic Development.

3.1 Deputy T.A. Vallois of the Minister for Economic Development regarding the breakdown of in Salary and Wages costs for Jersey Harbours:

Could the Minister provide a breakdown of the reduction of £782,500 in salary and wages as per 2008 financial accounts for Jersey Harbours when there was only a reduction in one full-time employee on their records since 2007 financial accounts?

Senator P.F. Routier (Assistant Minister for Economic Development - rapporteur):

I am not sure whether Members do have copies of the 2007 accounts in front of them but it would make it easier to explain the answer to this question. The harbour staff analysis is provided on page 153 of the 2008 accounts, which has been restated to exclude the part-year staff costs for the engineering staff which transferred from Harbours to Transport and Technical Services. This states an increase in Harbours staff costs of £249,000 from the 2007 to 2008 accounts. The 2007 comparative data included in note 3 to the 2007 accounts includes the partier costs for the engineering staff transferred from Harbours to T.T.S. (Transport and Technical Services). But aside of that, the F.T.E. (Full Time Equivalent) figure as at the end of the year does not include the staff who transferred across.

3.2 Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier of St. Saviour of the Minister for Treasury and Resources regarding the number of projects approved as part of the Fiscal Stimulus Package:

Would the Minister state how many projects have been approved as part of the Fiscal Stimulus Package and how many of these will address the issues raised by the recently announced redundancies in the finance sector?

Senator P.F.C. Ozouf (The Minister for Treasury and Resources):

I have given 21 projects an amber light so far and these will be given final go-ahead on a case by case basis once they have met all the necessary conditions. All the projects are designed to give and to protect all employment across the whole of the economy and manage to the extent that we can unemployment where there is. Money has been also made available this year to Jersey Finance with an additional £400,000. In addition, the Chief Minister’s International Finance Directorate has had a further £400,000. This is designed to help mitigate some of the impact of the global slowdown on unemployment by boosting our activities in financial services. I will be keeping a close eye on developments in the financial services industry and I am quite prepared to make more money available from the fiscal stimulus package as circumstances require.

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

When will the Minister bring to this House details of what these schemes are because at the moment no one in this House or out there knows what these schemes are?

Senator P.F.C. Ozouf:

The Scrutiny Panel who have been scrutinising, if I may say, extremely well in relation to the individual plans know what these schemes are. The individual departments know what these schemes are, and I think the Deputy too knows what these schemes are. This Assembly delegated responsibility to the Minister for Treasury and Resources to sign off schemes. Those schemes are now having an amber light and I will be rolling out the detail of them as and when final approvals are given.

3.2.2 Deputy G.P. Southern:

When does he expect final approval given and when does he expect to come this House and inform Members, as they have a right to know, what is being done, what is £44 million being spent on in our name?

Senator P.F.C. Ozouf:

The Deputy appears almost by his fairly aggressive questioning to be suggesting that there is something amiss here. This Assembly has given me delegated responsibility to make decisions on a timely basis - targeted and timely - when conditions arise. The Deputy if he would have been reading information will know that of the £40 million, I have allocated initially £8 million for skills and training, £1.4 million for supporting individuals, £1.4 million for support for business, £7.8 million of civil infrastructure work and £21 million for construction and maintenance.

3.2.3 Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:

Would the Minister identify the specific projects that will assist continuing employment in the finance sector as opposed to the very general statements he has made?

Senator P.F.C. Ozouf:

The Deputy is quite right and this is the second set of questions that I am answering in relation to - I think he dubbed it - white collar unemployment. I think the first thing to say is that the job losses that were announced last week by Lloyds Banking Group were not unexpected. Ministers had been briefed and continue to be briefed on the thinking that is within financial services. Obviously some of this information is commercially sensitive. In relation to Lloyds Banking Group it is clear that the reduction in staff is as a result of the moving of the call centre that was formerly part of HBOS to another place. Those job losses will not occur immediately but will occur as the bank develops and brings together the 2 organisations in the next 2 years. So the impact is not immediate. It is going to be throughout 2010 and 2011. The only way that we can deal with financial services downturn is by discussing with leading financial players what Jersey has to offer, encouraging them to base more activities in Jersey and to go out and win more business. That is why I answered in my question, while strictly not fiscal stimulus, the importance of putting money into Jersey finance and to the Chief Minister’s Department in terms of going out and doing more marketing.

3.2.4 Senator B.E. Shenton:

Can the Minister give an assurance that some of the money will find its way into private sector initiatives and will not just be distributed by civil servants to fund States departments?

Senator P.F.C. Ozouf:

I am happy to brief Senator Shenton. The money is not going in to increase the amount of public sector workers. All of these projects have to be managed by a department. For example, the housing projects are managed by Property Holdings and the Housing Department. That is not going into wage packets of public sector workers. It is going into the wage packets of the construction workers that will be working and all of the ancillary services providing to bring forward a housing project. The work in terms of the allocations of money in Economic Development is going into businesses in expanding, for example, their offshore networks programme, their inward investment promotion for bringing more businesses to Jersey, all of the small loans guarantee arrangement, the enterprise grants, the Business Angels. This is going directly into businesses and helping businesses fight the recession and keep themselves competitive.

3.2.5 Deputy G.P. Southern:

Will this House be informed of exactly what the measures proposed are before the money is spent and does the Minister consider this accords with his commitment to open government?

Senator P.F.C. Ozouf:

Open government means communicating and explaining to the Scrutiny Panel that has been scrutinising these. They have made it clear that they do not wish to have a veto. As and when decisions are made, they will be communicated and Members will be informed. But if the Deputy is asking effectively for a veto right - a calling mechanism - for individual projects because some of his pet projects might not meet the precise conditions of what we need for fiscal stimulus then I am afraid the answer is no. This Assembly has given me responsibility to sign off projects and that is exactly what I am doing with a very strict criteria within the Treasury to boost economic activity in this downturn and doing it fast.

3.3 Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire of St. Helier of the Minister for Home Affairs regarding the purpose of files kept on States Members:

Can I ask the Minister if he would inform Members of the precise purpose why files were kept on States Members and if it was merely for the purposes of administration in order that they would know who to call in the event of an issue, would the Minister state how much has the operation cost and why it was given an operational name?

Senator B.I. Le Marquand (The Minister for Home Affairs):

I think the essential part of the question which I understand from Deputy Le Claire is really a question as to whether the purpose of the files was purely to provide contact details. That does not appear to be so. I would have thought if you wanted contact details of a person you would not normally also have a full criminal check on them at the same time. In relation to the other aspects of the question, these are all matters which are currently under investigation and I am not going to speculate in relation to them until I see the result of the investigation.

3.3.1 Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire:

A supplementary if I could, Sir? Given that the Minister has known about this since April, I appreciate he is allowing for the investigation to take its course. Surely from the oversight procedure he must at least have some inkling as to what the cost of this has been. That would give Members an inkling as to what has been going on because contrary to suggestions that have been made by some Members, I also find it remarkable. Would he not agree that this premise that they were doing it to keep a record of people’s names is laughable because they could have gone to the front of the phonebook for that?

Senator B.I. Le Marquand:

Yes, I agree that to keep this for the purpose of keeping of names and contact addresses, that that suggestion is absolutely laughable. In relation to costing, I have slight difficulty in that, so far everybody who has spoken about this matter denies knowing about it. [Laughter] So it is difficult to work out costs on anything when everybody denies knowing about it.

3.3.2 Deputy P.J. Rondel of St. John:

Can the Minister confirm that the C.E.O. (Chief Executive Officer) of the States was fully aware of these files and, if so, will he be taking action to suspend any officers that may be ...

The Bailiff:

Deputy, I am going to disallow that question because it is a question that is going to be put in a few moments time.

The Deputy of St. John:

Cutting my legs off again, Sir.

The Connétable of Grouville:

[Telephone rings][Members: Oh!] I am relieved, Sir, it was the Deputy of St. Mary. I thought I was getting a reaction.

The Bailiff:

A customary fine to the Greffier, please, Deputy.

3.3.3 The Connétable of Grouville:

Since the one sure thing that is going to happen about these files is that eventually they will be leaked, would the Minister consider opening them up to the press and the public and letting us see exactly what is in there officially so that whatever action needs to be taken can be taken?

Senator B.I. Le Marquand:

I do not accept that the contents of these files will be leaked. They are being kept securely by the States of Jersey Police. It would be totally inappropriate to open matters up which could include very sensitive information resulting from information provided from the U.K. (United Kingdom) and other security services.

3.3.4 Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire:

I understand the Minister’s difficulty in that nobody is admitting knowledge of these files. I would like to ask him if I could then how much has the inquiry cost so far into trying to find out who does not know about it?

Senator B.I. Le Marquand:

It has not cost anything so far because it is only just about to begin. I have had to go through various processes prior to moving towards an inquiry. There were difficult issues as to precisely what form the inquiry would make because there are a number of different aspects which need to be inquired into.

3.4 Deputy G.P. Southern of the Minister for Education, Sport and Culture regarding the local graduate training initiative for secondary teachers:

Will the Minister state whether the local graduate training initiative for secondary teachers is validated by the U.K. authorities and, if this is not the case, advise whether it, therefore, restricts graduates to teaching only in Jersey?

Deputy J.G. Reed of St. Ouen (The Minister for Education, Sport and Culture):

The graduate teacher training programme has been developed in conjunction with the Institute of Education at London University and mirrors that offered in the U.K. The word of the Jersey Qualified Teacher Status is designed to enable locally qualified graduates to teach in Jersey secondary schools and 2 senior and very experienced lecturers from Goldsmith College, University of London, will oversee delivery of the programme. Due to English law, locally qualified teachers trained in this way are not able to automatically teach in the U.K. as graduates who wish to attain English qualified teacher status must undertake training in English maintained schools. It is for this reason that the U.K. authorities are unable to validate this initiative. It is, however, possible for those achieving the Jersey Qualified Teacher Status to access conversion training in the U.K. if individuals choose to teach elsewhere.

3.4.1 Deputy G.P. Southern:

I thank the Minister for his answer. Is it also true that compared with the U.K. we are training our graduates, as it were, at less cost in that they only receive a grant and not, as in the U.K., payment on the teaching assistance rate?

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

I cannot directly answer that particular question. All I will say is that this particular initiative is designed to enable local qualified graduates with commitments, whether it be family or otherwise, to remain in the Island and achieve the teacher training status which otherwise they would not be able to do.

3.4.2 Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:

Given the vast number, for example, of Commonwealth teachers who teach all over the U.K., particularly in places like London, would the Minister outline what would make the Jersey qualification applicable in the U.K.? What would make it applicable and is currently missing at the moment?

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

As I have already said, the qualification mirrors that offered in the U.K. The only stumbling block is English law which does not acknowledge any other training apart from training provided within their school system.

3.4.3 Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:

But how does English law then allow for Commonwealth teachers to operate and to be recruited in vast numbers?

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

I presume that they undertake a teacher training programme such as we are offering within our Island.

3.4.4 Deputy M. Tadier of St. Brelade:

The Minister said that the qualification obtained in Jersey would not automatically qualify someone to teach in the U.K. Does he mean that it would not qualify someone, full stop, because it seems that the word “automatically” is superfluous there? But, more importantly, when he talks about a conversion course being available in the U.K., is he simply talking about the P.G.C.E. (Postgraduate Certificate in Education) which is in itself in its own right a one year course? If not, is the conversion course also a year long?

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

First of all I want to make one thing very clear. This scheme is primarily designed to train local people to access local jobs. With that in mind, it is acknowledged that in some instances teachers who qualify under the Jersey Qualified Teacher Status may choose to teach elsewhere at some time in the future. There is a conversion programme that is provided within the U.K. and I am led to believe the time for this conversion period is approximately one school term.

3.4.5 Deputy M. Tadier:

Just to clarify then, is the Minister saying that the qualification has been deliberately set up to keep graduates in Jersey to teach?

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

Not at all.

Deputy M. Tadier:

Which is fine if that is the case. It is fine if that is the case.

3.4.6 The Deputy of St. Ouen:

I do not know how much clearer I need to make the answer. This is designed primarily to enable local graduates to access local jobs in a properly managed and beneficial way. If the idea is for local graduates that want to train in England, I would suggest that they would go to England to take and undertake similar training that is provided within the U.K.

3.4.7 Deputy G.P. Southern:

Can the Minister assure Members that he has clearly informed all participants on this course that they are receiving an inferior qualification and the not the equivalent of a D.Ed. (Diploma in Education) or Cert.Ed. (Certificate in Education) in the U.K. and do not qualify to teach in the U.K. as of right?

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

I absolutely am frustrated by the question of Deputy Southern.

Deputy G.P. Southern:

Has he informed all Members?

The Deputy of St. Ouen:

Because this ... I am not giving way. This is designed specifically to help not hinder local graduates to access local jobs within our secondary schools. [Approbation] It is not designed to support local people to train elsewhere. We have other mechanisms in place to allow that. Regarding the first question that the Deputy posed, all applicants being considered for this year’s course understand that this is a Jersey qualification.

3.5 Deputy D.J. De Sousa of St. Helier of the Minister for Housing regarding rent rebate:

Can the Minister inform the Assembly what policies and procedures were in place to monitor the rent rebate from the time of its introduction in 1991 and the reason for the increase in the rent rebate subsidy cost from £1 million to £24 million over the intervening period?

Senator T.J. Le Main (The Minister for Housing):

Rent rebate was implemented in 1991 following a decision by this Assembly of the States. Rent rebate in common with the rent abatement scheme already in place for States tenants required applicants to reapply annually and to provide full details of family composition and income. Applications were also reassessed whenever there was a material change in the applicant’s circumstances or when there was a change of address. All properties in which rent rebate was claimed were inspected to ensure they met the needs of the applicant and that the rent charge was not excessive. In calculating the level of subsidy to be provided, rent rebate rentals were capped at the level of fair rents set for States rental accommodation. The Housing Committee reviewed the parameters of the scheme annually, and the costs and associated statistics were published as part of the States accounts and annual performance report. At no time did rent rebate cost £24 million. The figure is in fact the total cost of all rent subsidy payments in 2007 - the last year of operation - is made up of £9 million rent rebate and £15 million rent abatement, specifically for States rental tenants. Rent rebate costs increased from £1 million to £9 million as a result of the numbers of claimants which rose from 381 at the end of 1991 to 2,025 at the end of 2007.

3.5.1 Senator B.E. Shenton:

I have a number of people that praise me that the rent rebate system is a fantastic system and they could not do without it. Unfortunately, all these people that do praise it are very wealthy landlords. [Approbation] Does the Minister believe that the rent rebate system does keep rents artificially high on the Island?

Senator T.J. Le Main:

There is no rent rebate since 2007. It is finished. A rental component is administered by Social Security in the low income scheme.

3.5.2 Deputy S. Pitman of St. Helier:

Could the Minister explain then how much of the £24 million is going on trusts each year?

Senator T.J. Le Main:

On what?

Deputy S. Pitman:

Is going towards housing trusts each year.

Senator T.J. Le Main:

No, I have not got that figure with me but, as I say, the housing trusts were treated similarly to States tenants.

Deputy S. Pitman:

Could he endeavour to provide that information to States Members as soon as possible?

Senator T.J. Le Main:

No problem at all. I can extricate that information and pass it around to States Members if they so wish.

3.5.3 Deputy J.A. Martin of St. Helier:

Yes, a follow on from Deputy Pitman. The increase from the few hundred to the 2,025 people are in fact about ... 1,900 are in housing trust. The rent rebate scheme was introduced, would the Minister not agree, in the first place so that social housing could stop being provided by the States and there was a guaranteed income of rental for housing trust? Now the reason Housing have stopped building ... and on a final comment, what does he think of the Minister for Treasury and Resources’ comment last week when he said tenants will soon have to start approaching their landlords and say: “Sorry, mate, we are not getting rises this year so you cannot put the rent up.”

Senator T.J. Le Main:

I cannot comment on what has alleged to have been said by the Minister for Treasury and Resources. All I can say is this scheme has been finished now for 2 years and everything that has happened in the past is in the past. The annual accounts were presented to this Assembly with performance statistics, as I say, on an annual basis. If Members had a worry or a concern at that time, they should have raised it then; not now that the scheme is finished and done by and now operating within a component of the low income scheme.

3.5.4 Deputy G.P. Southern:

Will the Minister bring to the House figures which show the reduction in the equivalent scheme in income support that will take place when transition support is removed in 2010?

Senator T.J. Le Main:

No, I am not prepared to do that. I have got plenty of work in my department. As I say, we are now virtually a social landlord, the Housing Department, and I am not prepared to spend time and effort doing that when my staff are fully busy at the present time. If the Deputy seeks further information on a housing component at the moment then he should direct himself to Employment and Social Security.

Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire:

I think I had better go to Social Security, Sir.

3.5.5 The Deputy of St. Mary:

Rent abatement, Minister, £15 million. Can you explain the connection between ...

The Bailiff:

Through the Chair, please, Deputy.

The Deputy of St. Mary:

Sorry, Sir. Yes, would the Minister like to explain this rent abatement £15 million figure and, in particular, the connection between that £15 million and low incomes because presumably there is a connection?

Senator T.J. Le Main:

I am not going to explain any further. Low income is now the place to seek the information - Social Security - on those sorts of questions. The Housing Department in 2007 is virtually now a social landlord. If the Deputy wants any information then he should direct himself to Employment and Social Security who administer the housing component on behalf of this Assembly.

3.5.6 Deputy D.J. De Sousa:

Can the Minister inform the House if there are any existing plans to build trust housing and, if so, if his department is going to help to fund this?

Senator T.J. Le Main:

I cannot advise this Assembly if the trust are going to build further houses. They are committed that when they have excess funds and built up funds within ... once they have had letters of comfort on some of the developments that have been given by the States, that once the mortgages have been paid off they are directed under the agreements that they should increase their portfolio of properties for social renting if there is a need. Otherwise, any surplus monies will come back to the States coffers. But I know that there are certainly one or 2 - particularly one social landlord within housing trust - who are very keen to increase their portfolio for rental. But I must advise this Assembly that I will not condone any increase in the portfolio of social rented housing when there is no need for it and which could cost the taxpayer any moneys in supporting. At this present time, I do not sign any letters of comfort unless there are exceptional cases and I work with the Minister for Treasury and Resources on that basis.

The Bailiff:

We come next to a question by Deputy Trevor Pitman of the Chief Minister. Perhaps I could just remind Members of the Standing Order about names.

3.6 Deputy T.M. Pitman of St. Helier of the Chief Minister regarding the involvement of the Chief Executive Officer in the establishment of ‘Operation Blast’:

Noted, Sir. I am sure it was not aimed at me just.

The Bailiff:

It was aimed at all Members, Deputy.

Deputy T.M. Pitman:

Indeed, Sir. Would the Chief Minister advise whether there is any evidence to suggest that the Chief Executive Officer was involved in the establishment of Operation Blast and, if so, will he as a neutral act be suspended while this matter is investigated?

Senator T.A. Le Sueur (The Chief Minister):

I have seen no evidence whatsoever substantiating an allegation that the Chief Executive Officer was involved in the establishment of Operation Blast. Accordingly, I see no reason to suspend the officer concerned.

3.6.1 Deputy T.M. Pitman:

A supplementary, Sir. Could the Chief Minister clarify for the House whether the Chief Executive Officer is named in the memo from the Chief of Police?

Senator T.A. Le Sueur:

I hesitate to answer this because I am aware that there is an inquiry or investigation going on about this matter which the Minister for Home Affairs referred to in an earlier answer. Part of that investigation requires a duty of confidentiality on all sides. I think on that basis I am going to be very circumspect in my answer. I am aware of a document circulating which does contain the name of the Chief Executive Officer.

3.6.2 Senator B.E. Shenton:

Does the Chief Minister believe that where States Members make allegations against individuals that are not substantiated that they should in fact apologise to the individuals concerned? [Approbation]

Senator T.A. Le Sueur:

Yes, I could have added in my answer that I regard it as totally unacceptable that these implications and inferences should be made without any evidence whatsoever and I deplore them.

3.6.3 The Deputy of St. John:

Has the Chief Minister, given his earlier reply, made inquiries with the Police Chief as to whom the senior officers within States employment may have been ... let me think. How can I put it without bringing names out? Can he confirm that he has made contact with the Police Chief and been told who the senior officers are that were involved ... who know about Operation Blast, is probably the easiest way?

Senator T.A. Le Sueur:

The conduct of this investigation is being handled by the Minister for Home Affairs. I have every confidence in that Minister, to whom I have spoken. I have every confidence that that Minister will perform that duty in a thorough and conscientious way and make all inquiries required.

3.6.4 Deputy F.J. Hill of St. Martin:

I did not quite catch the Chief Minister’s answer. But could I just ask the Chief Minister, has he asked the Chief Executive Officer whether he was involved at any time with Operation Blast or anything connected with the case we are talking about?

Senator T.A. Le Sueur:

Yes, the Chief Executive Officer has made it quite clear to me, and I have said in my answer that there has been no evidence whatsoever that the Chief Executive Officer has been involved in any way in the establishment of Operation Blast.

The Deputy of St. Martin:

Can I just press then that the Chief Minister has asked him? That is the question I am getting at there.

Senator T.A. Le Sueur:

I did not need to ask because I was told by the Chief Executive Officer that he was not in any way involved.

3.6.5 Deputy M.R. Higgins of St. Helier:

Has the Chief Minister discussed this matter with the Minister for Home Affairs and is he aware of the contents of the Chief Police Officer’s memo? And ... in fact I will leave it at that.

Senator T.A. Le Sueur:

Yes, I have already made it clear that I have discussed the matter with the Minister for Home Affairs and, yes, I am aware of the document issued by the Chief Officer of Police.

3.6.6 Deputy M. Tadier:

I believe the Chief Minister may have clarified but if he can do so again. Initially when asked whether the Chief Executive Officer had spoken of his involvement, the Chief Minister said that the Chief Executive Officer said there was no evidence of his involvement which is maybe true but that is not what he was asked. Could the Chief Minister confirm categorically once again that the Chief Executive Officer has said that he was not involved in these files and their setting up?

Senator T.A. Le Sueur:

I do not know how much clearer I can make it to the Member concerned or to Members generally. The Chief Executive Officer has made it quite clear that he has not been involved in the establishment of Operation Blast.

3.6.7 Deputy T.M. Pitman:

I think everyone in this House would adhere to the belief that innocent until proven guilty. However, the Chief Police Officer also maintains that he is innocent. Should this evidence arise - I go back to my first question - will the Chief Minister suspend the C.E.O. if evidence does arise?

Senator T.A. Le Sueur:

That is a hypothetical question but clearly should such evidence arise then I shall have to consider the position very seriously indeed and it may well involve suspension. Being a hypothetical question, I can only give a hypothetical answer.

The Deputy of St. John:

On a point of order, Sir, if I may. Originally I asked the Minister for Home Affairs the original question and it was disallowed. Given that the Chief Minister is hiding behind the work of Home Affairs in his original reply, should my original question not be answered by the Minister for Home Affairs, because I think there is somewhat of a cover up, for want of a better word, going on between the Ministers themselves.

The Bailiff:

The short answer to your question is no, Deputy. You cannot ask a question of the Minister for Home Affairs when the Chief Minister is being questioned by a Member. We come now to the next question which is in the name of Deputy Trevor Pitman of the Minister for Economic Development.

3.7 Deputy T.M. Pitman of the Minister for Economic Development regarding anti-social behaviour involving cars and motorbikes on the road along Albert Quay:

Following on from my question of 16th June regarding spiralling antisocial behaviour involving cars and motorbikes on the road along the Albert Quay, would the Minister advise the Assembly whether this matter has been referred to the police or harbour authorities for further action to be taken?

Senator P.F. Routier (Assistant Minister for Economic Development - rapporteur):

Jersey Harbours has been working closely with the police to try and contain this growing problem. The police have increased their patrols in this area during the peak periods. The police patrol units also respond to additional requests by the department security team to assist in moving the people and their cars away from the area. As a matter of routine, Jersey Harbours supplies copies of incident reports within the port area to assist the police in allocating their resources.

3.7.1 Deputy T.M. Pitman:

A supplementary, Sir. Is the Assistant Minister aware that the police do indeed come but the vehicles leave and are back within 10 minutes? My point is that the police have recently been given the registration of 40 vehicles and yet very little is happening. Can he give the residents any reassurance that something will finally be done?

Senator P.F. Routier:

Yes, I am certainly aware that it is a persistent problem that people are moved off the area and do come back again. As I say in my earlier answer, we do give regular information to the police. I will speak to the Minister for Home Affairs to see if anything can be done to ensure things are followed up.

3.8 The Deputy of St. Mary of the Minister for Planning and Environment regarding the possible breach of the Construction Environmental Action Plan in relation to the Energy from Waste Plant:

When the contractors working on the incinerator sliced into toxic ash pits supposedly sealed for ever just weeks into the construction phase, did they breach the Construction Environmental Action Plan and, if so, what action has the Minister taken or does he propose to take?

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

The Construction Environment Management Plan outlines the specific measures that will be taken to control and manage environmental issues on the site. It covers topics such as noise, air quality, water resources and ecology. The plan requires the contractor to take all reasonable actions to minimise risks of spills, leaks or other fugitive emissions to ground and, in the event of a leak or spill, to take all reasonable steps to minimise the area of exposed ground and carry out remedial clean up activities. The contractors are also required to report and record any pollution incidents within 24 hours. The Planning and Environment Department is satisfied that the actions taken by T.T.S. and their contractors accorded with the plan. They reported the incident in a timely and appropriate manner, immediately minimised contact between the waters from the pit and the surrounding ground and undertook all necessary remedial actions including replacing and resealing the damaged liner. Penetrating the liner was a highly regrettable incident but I am advised that in view of the circumstances I have outlined, further action would not be appropriate.

3.8.1 The Deputy of St. Mary:

The Minister appears moderately concerned about this issue but it worries me because within weeks of starting work a site that should have been marked out and should have been safe was sliced into. I would like to have the Minister’s comments on whether he thinks any action perhaps should be taken about the water that enters the excavation pit on high tides being pumped out over the steel girders, over the steel piles, into a hole and then on out to sea. That is getting around the discharge permit. I wonder if he has any comments on whether that requires action from his department.

Senator F.E. Cohen:

I am not aware of the specific circumstances the Deputy has outlined. I will investigate the matter and if I find that there is any truth in the matters raised by the Deputy, I will certainly deal with those in the appropriate manner.

The Bailiff:

We come next to a question by the Deputy of St. Martin. Deputy, I notice and perhaps Members will notice that the Minister is going to make a statement later on. I wonder, because there are a large number of questions, whether you might wish to withdraw your question and put your question to the Minister after she has made her statement.

The Deputy of St. Martin:

If it might help because we may get to some of the others as well but I will be prepared to do that.

The Bailiff:

Very well. Thank you very much. That is withdrawn. We come next then to a question by the Deputy of St. Mary of the Minister for Treasury and Resources.

3.9 The Deputy of St. Mary of the Minister for Treasury and Resources regarding the use of agricultural land for allotments:

Given that the availability of suitable land for allotments is likely to be limited and in light of the Minister for Economic Development’s support for the concept of allotments and their importance to the community, would the Minister commit to not marketing or disposing of any agricultural land for 6 months in order that the Allotment Working Group’s report can be considered before any such disposal?

Senator P.F.C. Ozouf (The Minister for Treasury and Resources):

Sir, can I ask Deputy Le Fondré to be rapporteur for this question?

Deputy J.A.N. Le Fondré of St. Lawrence (Assistant Minister for Treasury and Resources - rapporteur):

I cannot commit to not disposing of any agricultural land but where there is a possibility that the land may be suitable for allotments, any sale will be delayed pending direction from the Allotment Working Group which is led by Economic Development.

The Deputy of St. Mary:

Can I ask how you will assess whether ...

The Bailiff:

Through the Chair, please, Deputy.

3.9.1 The Deputy of St. Mary:

Sorry. Can I ask the Assistant Minister how such suitability would be assessed in the absence of ... or whether he would communicate with the Allotment Working Group for each site or whether he proposes to take these decisions on his own?

Deputy J.A.N. Le Fondré:

Firstly, the assessment for suitability, I believe from discussions between my department and Planning and Environment Department, is that the land should be close to the main areas of population and not to take land that is better used for agricultural purposes. Yes, we have to an extent already reviewed certain areas of land because there are only a certain limited number of fields that we are considering for disposal and those have previously been approved by this Assembly. Of those sites, certainly 2 or 3 of them are basically considered too small for allotments in any case. They would not be suitable.

3.9.2 Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:

It is well known that one of the impediments has been provision of parking space. While I am glad to see the Assistant Minister ploughing on, I would like to rake over the old issue of whether it is conditional that there be many parking spaces in order to proceed with allotments?

Deputy J.A.N. Le Fondré:

I think to an extent that is something we would have to be guided by the Allotment Working Group and obviously in their discussions with Planning. If I am informed that land is suitable for allotment then it is suitable for allotments but I have to be guided by the working group.

3.9.3 The Deputy of St. John:

For some months people have been calling out for ... longer than months - years - for allotments. Could the Assistant Minister inform the House when we will get a response to this because I am aware of people in my Parish and over the border who require allotments and yet we in this House are dragging our heels? We need a finite date when these allotments will become available, if any.

Deputy J.A.N. Le Fondré:

I hate to say this but I think he is asking the wrong politician. The Allotment Working Group is being led by Economic Development. I would have to say speaking personally I believe the first time I was asked a question on the matter was certainly during this session and I believe it was January. So from our point of view we have not been dragging our feet.

3.9.4 The Deputy of St. Mary:

I am a little bit concerned when the Minister talks about 2 or 3 sites that are too small. Is the Minister committed to the importance of allotments in general and will he commit to proper consultation before disposing of any sites, regardless of their size?

Deputy J.A.N. Le Fondré:

Firstly, I have previously indicated, yes, I am committed to the principle of allotments. In fact I think that was a written answer to Deputy Power I believe in January or February. But the advice that we have received that of the sites that we are presently considering to dispose, I can give you a breakdown. There is one in St. Brelade which would appear to be suitable. There is one in St. Helier which meets the outline criteria but it has quite difficult access which probably touches on Deputy Le Hérissier’s comments about vehicle and parking. There are some in either Trinity or St. Martin, depending where the boundary is, which would probably not be acceptable from a visual point of view from a planning perspective and there are sites that are considered too remote. The other sites, to quote, are small: “2 fields which would not be suitable for allotment. A third needs further consideration.” So the point, I think from a preliminary analysis if the preliminary analysis in conjunction with the Allotment Working Group is that the sites are not suitable then we consider carrying on with disposal. If they are considered potentially suitable for allotments then obviously we will wait on the findings of the Allotment Working Group. But, as I said, that is a matter I believe ... that is being led by the Minister for Economic Development.

3.10 Senator P.F.C. Ozouf of the Chairman of the Economic Affairs Scrutiny Panel regarding the progress of a Depositor Protection Scheme:

Mindful of the urgency of having a depositor protection scheme to protect individual’s deposits and the significant efforts taken to bring legislation to the Assembly as soon as possible, could the Chairman confirm that his panel will complete its report on the draft legislation and not delay the debate on 14th July 2009?

Deputy M.R. Higgins (Chairman, Economic Affairs Scrutiny Panel):

As someone who has a particular interest in deposit compensation schemes, the Minister can rest assured that I and the other members of the Economic Affairs Scrutiny Panel will work as fast as possible in our scrutiny of the proposed legislation but there is no possibility that we can complete our work by 14th July to enable it to be debated on that date. The panel will be working on it throughout the summer recess to enable it to be brought to the Assembly as soon as possible.

3.10.1 Senator P.F.C. Ozouf:

I am deeply disappointed to hear what the Deputy says. Is the Deputy not aware that the advice that Ministers have and the information from the regulatory bodies and the international advisers to Jersey say that this scheme cannot wait and should be passed by this Assembly in July and not wait until September?

Deputy M.R. Higgins:

In answer to the Minister, no, we have not been given that information by anybody. In fact what I can tell this House is that since February, the Economic Affairs Scrutiny Panel has been seeking information from Economic Development and repeatedly - in fact 2 or 3 times a month - seeking the Oxera Report and the background information on this. We finally received the Oxera Report, which the legislation is supposed to be based on, on 1st June. We also received on Friday, 4 volumes of information relating to deposit protection that we have been seeking. We cannot start our scrutiny until we have this information. So all I can say is the panel is going to review it as fast as they can with the information we have. You can rest assured it will be a thorough but very quick investigation.

3.10.2 Deputy T.M. Pitman:

Would the Deputy just clarify for the House - and he has probably indicated an answer already - whether he is happy with the co-operation he has received from the Ministers on this important issue?

Deputy M.R. Higgins:

I might say I am extremely disappointed. In fact the Economic Affairs Scrutiny Panel believes it has been misled on occasion by the Economic Development Department. We have gone to quarterly meetings with the Minister and the officers and asked them for the Oxera Report and other information and we were led to believe there was absolutely nothing. In March we found out the department was consulting on a draft law. We were not given that in March. I received a copy from someone in the industry. That was the first indication that we had that they were ... sorry, not the first indication but an indication that they were consulting on something. The panel would have worked in co-operation with Economic Development and the Minister for Treasury and Resources going forward from February. We even set aside time to hold Scrutiny hearings. When information was not forthcoming, we went on to other projects which we have been working on. Now that we have just almost completed one, we are commencing work on Thursday. We will be interviewing the Minister and going forward from that time.

3.10.3 The Deputy of St. Mary:

There is a more fundamental problem here. My understanding is that this law is now on draft 18; it is somewhere in the high teens anyway. Would the chairman agree that it would have been absurd to start scrutinising drafts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8, or even to have scrutinised all the drafts, one after the other?

Deputy M.R. Higgins:

Again, I believe that because these things are constantly evolving, it is a waste of the committee’s time to go through each draft in turn so, no, I do not think it would be appropriate to go through each of them. But I think having the Oxera report, I know that the department was given an interim report in February of this year which basically contains ... in fact the May report contains virtually the same information. If that had been provided to us, then the panel could have been far better prepared and informed to be able to proceed with this particular inquiry.

3.10.4 Senator A. Breckon:

I wonder if the chairman of the Economic Affairs Scrutiny Panel can say whether he is aware of any consultation that was taken on with the general public to establish if they thought it was a good idea that the Strategic Reserve, their reserve, was used for a commercial guarantee and transactions.

Deputy M.R. Higgins:

I can confirm there was no public consultation. The only consultation that has taken place was with the Jersey Bankers’ Association and through Jersey Finance. There has not been a public consultation exercise. I might add, the £100 million that is allocated from the Strategic Reserve does give me concern, and members of my committee concern; it is one of the things we want to review. I might also add, there are other aspects of the scheme which give us concern. For example, it only applies to individuals, so no small businesses covered by the scheme. For example, pension funds which obviously in a time when we have an ageing population and we want to encourage people to save, their money will not be covered by the fund. As I say, not all of these depositor schemes are funded by government. I know it is partly funded by the banks but there is a considerable liability to the public purse in the worst scenario.

3.10.5 Senator S.C. Ferguson:

This particular scheme is talking in terms of £100 million from the Strategic Reserve which equates to just over £1,000 for every person, every man, woman and child in the Island, and would the Chairman agree that, with such large sums involved, it is absolutely essential to scrutinise it correctly? [Approbation]

Deputy M.R. Higgins:

I could not agree more with the Senator’s comments. It must be scrutinised and scrutinised in detail.

3.10.6 Senator P.F.C. Ozouf:

The Deputy said that he was not aware of the concern among industry and from Ministers’ advisers of the fact that this scheme or the non bringing into force of this scheme will have potentially severe issues for financial services. If he would be willing to meet with advisers and understand the importance of bringing this scheme into force, would he do so and would he not potentially agree that the legislation could pass on 14th July and if he is concerned about it, he brings forward amendments in September or in October? Would he confirm also that the current situation means that Jersey is the only jurisdiction, including the Isle of Man, the U.K., Switzerland, Singapore and the whole of the E.U. (European Union) that does not have depositor compensation? Is he happy to block that arrangement for Jersey?

Deputy M.R. Higgins:

First of all, I would say that as the Minister himself has told us, and the Chief Minister, we do have a depositor protection scheme in the Island because he gave a political guarantee to the public of this Island [Approbation] that all retail deposits would be covered to an unlimited extent. Now, in fact, the guarantee that he has given, if it is worth any value, is worth more than the proposed guarantee scheme. I must also say that, no, there is not sufficient time to be able to go through the law and to be satisfied ourselves before 14th July for it to go through. I would also point out too, I have been pressing Ministers about depositor protection schemes since I came into this House and the point [Interruption] ... what have I done? We have been waiting and, in fact, I am quite happy to circulate to the House, this is a copy of all the requests and so on and conversations that we have had on depositor compensation and I will ask the usher to distribute it to Members. So, as far as I am concerned, there is no delay on the part of the Scrutiny Panel. We will go through it as quickly as possible and make sure the scheme is the best for this Island and the people of this Island. [Approbation]

3.10.7 Deputy E.J. Noel of St. Lawrence:

Just really a matter for clarification from the Deputy, he mentioned that Scrutiny could not start until they had the information. Am I right in hearing that the Scrutiny Panel has not started the scrutiny yet and they intend to do so this Thursday?

Deputy M.R. Higgins:

The Scrutiny Panel has been requesting information, and to be able to review something of this complexity - it is a complex scheme - we require the information. Four of these files were received on Friday. This is the information we need to go through to be able to scrutinise it properly, so it is not a question of our delay. We will start this Thursday and work through the summer recess to get the scrutiny finished so we can get this legislation on the books; something I have longed for.

3.11 The Deputy of St. John of the Minister for Social Security regarding doctors’ home visits to patients with flu symptoms:

Given that doctors are being asked to visit patients at home if they have flu symptoms, will the Minister advise whether it is necessary for doctors to have to produce triplicate versions of signed paperwork in order to claim their fees and, if so, will he undertake to implement a simpler approach so as to minimise their already large workload?

Deputy I.J. Gorst of St. Clement (The Minister for Social Security):

I am pleased to confirm that no G.P. (General Practitioner) has to produce a triplicate version of any paperwork to obtain the special medical benefit that has been approved by the States to do with home visits connected with the flu pandemic. G.P.s complete one copy of a one-page form. This can be sent directly to the department or, if they prefer, they could submit the details electronically on a spreadsheet. The G.P. records the name and Social Security number of the patient, the date and time of the visit and whether the visit was to check for flu or to treat someone displaced from the hospital. Officers are working very closely with the Deputy Medical Officer of Health and G.P.s to ensure that the payment of both medical benefit and sickness benefit will continue as smoothly as possible throughout the course of the pandemic.

3.11.1 Deputy G.P. Southern:

Will the Minister assure members of the public who are supported by income support that house visits by G.P.s for flu or other illnesses will all be supported either through a H.M.A. (Household Medical Account) clearly or through special payments?

Deputy I.J. Gorst:

This question is about the doctors’ visits for the flu pandemic. As the Deputy is aware, people in receipt of income support with H.M.A.s, yes, those will be charged to the H.M.A. Those other individuals who are in receipt of income support who are outside or do not have the H.M.A. provisions, there is facility for those payments to be met through the special payments provision.

3.11.2 The Deputy of St. John:

Given that doctors are currently working fully stretched, running their private practices and having to visit suspected flu patients, what standby arrangements are in place when one or more doctors fall ill? Have the G.P.s been contacted individually to get their views on the extra workload and, if so, who did the negotiations? Because the feedback I am receiving from many G.P.s, they have not been asked themselves to put all this additional time in and to arrange for backup in the event of the pandemic getting worse that they cannot get out to cover their general patient practice.

Deputy I.J. Gorst:

I thank the Deputy for his supplementary question because he raises a very important point. The scenario that he is outlining there is one which has moved from the containment phase to one where the pandemic is in, shall we say, unfortunately, full flow. Those provisions are within the remit of the Health and Social Services Department; they will have provisions in place. I cannot remember off the top of my head exactly whether it will be nurses visiting or people phoning a bank of nurses but we will move away from the general G.P. provision which is expected under this containment phase. There were a lot of questions that the Deputy asked, I am not sure if you are going to allow me time to answer them one by one, or if he wishes to propose them one by one.

The Bailiff:

This is not a debate, Minister, you must be very, very brief.

Deputy I.J. Gorst:

Well with regard to the negotiation, as the Deputy is aware, these regulations were drafted at very, very short notice. We consulted with the P.C.B.(?) of which G.P.s are a member; there were 2 members present. They agreed with these provisions, they agreed with the costs, so I do not believe that the Deputy is correct in his assertions.

3.11.3 Deputy S. Pitman:

The Minister is aware that a couple of months ago I came to him regarding a constituent who is now paying his doctor’s fees after his H.M.A. account has run out. He now says there are provisions within special payments to cover this. I asked the Minister 2 months ago, is he now telling me that this gentleman’s G.P. visits can be paid by special payments because I would appreciate an answer from the Minister?

Deputy I.J. Gorst:

It becomes very difficult for me and I do not believe it is appropriate for me to try and engage in debate about individual cases across this Chamber, because I am not aware of which particular case it is. There are many cases; there are many people that the department helps, and I stand by exactly what I said in answer to Deputy Southern.

3.11.4 Deputy J.A. Martin:

It is a 2-part, really. Could the Minister inform us how many numbers of home G.P. visits have been required because of flu-like symptoms? Could he undertake in this containment phase to work - I know he is and I am the Assistant Minister for Health - with the Medical Officer of Health to really get the message out there while we are in containment to not go to your G.P., to call them out? I have every sympathy with the G.P.s maybe extra workload, but they will be financially compensated but not by the person: by the taxpayer or by the contributions at Social Security. I am concerned I am getting a different message from the Deputy of St. John; there are many, many people who have a scare and are turning up at all the wrong places. They must know to phone their G.P. for a home visit and they must not be scared of the price. I would like a confirmation that the Minister for Social Security will make this a priority with the Medical Officer of Health to get this loud and clear to the public.

Deputy I.J. Gorst:

I thank the Assistant Minister for her question. I do not have the figures of the number of visits which have taken place but I can hopefully get those and supply them to the Assistant Minister. She is absolutely right. The reason that my department went into overdrive and produced these regulations was to meet that exact need. In the containment phase it is absolutely imperative that if people feel that they have flu-like symptoms that they phone their G.P. and that the G.P. visits them at home. We believed that this was so important that the contributors to the health insurance would meet that cost and would pay for G.P.s to be able to deliver this service. The Deputy of St. John is right that once we have gone through the containment phase, a number of people we will expect to be ill and unavailable for work. That will be a situation which the entire community has to consider and react to. We, however, hope that at that point it will only continue for a short number of weeks but I would reiterate wholeheartedly the message of the Assistant Minister: it is imperative that people who feel they might have these symptoms, they phone their doctor and they ask for a home visit so that the virus can be contained. It is absolutely imperative that we do that until the injection is secured on-Island.

3.11.5 The Deputy of St. John:

Is the Minister aware that G.P.s are in fact taking a pay cut by not being able to attend their patients at their surgery fully, given the time they are having to spend visiting patients at their homes?

Deputy I.J. Gorst:

I really do not necessarily understand the Deputy’s mathematics there because what we are paying is a part-payment for a normal home visit based upon the cost of the current home visits. I am not certain if the Deputy is suggesting that doctors, when they perform a home visit, run at a loss. I am certain that members of the public would not believe that. However, if that is the case, that is an issue which needs to be addressed separately from these specific provisions.

3.12 The Deputy of St. John of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding the recovery of the costs of non-natives being cared for in nursing homes/hospitals at the taxpayer’s expense:

I am given to understand that this is to be answered by the Minister for Health and Social Services. Given that presently no agreement exists with other jurisdictions to recoup the costs of non-natives with as little as 5 years’ residency being cared for in nursing homes and hospitals at the taxpayer’s expense, if the person has no means of payment, what action, if any, is the Minister taking to put in place a reciprocal agreement with other countries?

Deputy A.E. Pryke of Trinity (The Minister for Health and Social Services):

I will ask my Assistant Minister to answer.

Deputy E.J. Noel (Assistant Minister for Health and Social Services - rapporteur):

I thank the Deputy of St. John for this question as it gives us an opportunity to clarify matters, therefore, if I may take this question in 2 parts. With regard to the nursing home care it is important to remember that the reciprocal health agreement with the U.K. covered hospital and G.P. medical services only. It did not cover personal care services provided in residential care homes. As such, the ending of the agreement has had no direct impact on individuals in care homes. Jersey does not meet the care costs of Jersey-born individuals now living elsewhere in the same way other countries do not provide support for individuals born in countries who have chosen to settle in Jersey. This, in the broadest sense, could be seen as a global unofficial reciprocal agreement.

3.12.1 The Deputy of St. John:

Given the Assistant Minister’s reply, and as Jersey residents in general who live abroad would be paying for their own medical needs because they would be generally well educated and carrying out their work where they would have been able to put money aside, can it be right that Jersey taxpayers are having to pick up bills, as explained earlier, for quite a number of people who have just recently moved to the Island, and “recently” being 5 or 7 years? Can the Assistant Minister give a reason and will he explain why no negotiations are put in place ...

The Bailiff:

Would you be kind enough to show respect to the Assembly by addressing the Assembly without your hands in your pockets?

The Deputy of St. John:

Sorry, Sir, I was trying to get my handkerchief out. You have now thrown me [Laughter] yet again, for the second time this morning.

The Bailiff:

I am sorry to have interrupted you, Deputy, I should perhaps have waited until you had finished your question. I must say on that subject, perhaps I could take the opportunity of saying that I think this is really a matter for the Chamber rather than for the Chair. I think my successor would welcome some advice from the Chairman of the P.P.C. as to Members’ comportment when they are addressing the Assembly. But, in the meantime, the default rule is no hands in pockets, please, Deputy. [Laughter]

The Deputy of St. John:

You are cutting me off at the knees, again. I think I will call it a day, this morning, and sit down.

The Bailiff:

Have you put your question, or are you abandoning it in mid-flow?

The Deputy of St. John:

No, I have put enough of the question to have an answer, Sir.

The Bailiff:

Good. Assistant Minister?

Deputy E.J. Noel:

I dispute what the Deputy of St. John said because on a personal level I have 2 members of my family that have retired overseas, unfortunately, and they are not in the situation that the Deputy has described; they are in a similar situation that he believes that those people in Jersey are settled. So I do not think it is true to say that when Jersey residents do move abroad that they are necessarily contributing significantly to the economy of the country that they go to. With regards to the 5-year rules, that is really something that the Social Security Department deals with, not a Health and Social Services issue, but I could say that the work that we are doing currently in health tourism is much broader than the commonly-known definition of health tourism which is people specifically coming to Jersey to gain access to our hospital services. We are taking a quite broad definition of that and are bringing policies and procedures in place to deal with that and these should be in situ by September.

3.12.2 Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:

Would the Assistant Minister confirm that one of the reasons why residential care is becoming such a big issue is the enormous costs attached to it? Of course, we have had in the background this intended solution of an insurance scheme for years and years as a talking point but not as a realisation point. Could the Assistant Minister tell us when, in co-operation with his Social Security counterparts, will this be put in place?

Deputy E.J. Noel:

I agree with the Deputy of St. Saviour. The introduction of some type of payment mechanism to cover for our elderly care is really a question for the Social Security Department. Naturally, the Health Department will be working closely with them to ensure that it is the best possible solution. Thank you.

3.13 Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier of the Chairman of the Privileges and Procedures Committee regarding Operation Blast:

Would the chairman explain why the committee has issued no formal statement in relation to Operation Blast?

The Connétable of St. Mary (Chairman, Privileges and Procedures Committee):

The Committee has not made a formal statement to the Assembly because, as yet, the issues arising from the statement made by the Minister for Home Affairs concerning Operation Blast do not appear to fall within its terms of reference. Nevertheless, Members will be aware that I wrote to all States Members on 22nd June to clarify P.P.C.’s position. For the avoidance of doubt, the Committee fully accepts that the statement raised by the Minister for Home Affairs raises issues of significant concern to the States Assembly, although it also notes that several Members have been reported as saying that the concern regarding Operation Blast has been blown out of proportion. Clearly the Minister for Home Affairs has taken this issue seriously and that is why he has taken the action that he has. P.P.C. also acknowledges that a report and proposition calling for a Committee of Inquiry has been lodged for debate in September. That proposition will no doubt be given careful consideration by the Assembly. Members will be aware that P.P.C.’s terms of reference are set out in Standing Order 128. They may also know that several references have been made to possible breaches of parliamentary privileges arising from the existence of Operation Blast. Had the States been faced with such a potential breach, it would have been quite appropriate for P.P.C. to make a statement advising what action P.P.C. would be taking under paragraph (f) of its terms of reference. However, it is quite clear that parliamentary privilege is not relevant to Operation Blast, as the files have no bearing on any proceedings of the States as such. None of P.P.C.’s remaining terms of reference would empower the Committee to get involved in this matter. Indeed, the more relevant issues arising from the statement of the Minister for Home Affairs appear to fall squarely within his own remit and the Minister has already indicated that he is taking appropriate action. All the feedback P.P.C. has had to date indicates that States Members are very satisfied with the Minister’s handling of this matter and the Committee is confident that the Minister will make the results of his inquiries known to the States as and when it is appropriate for him to do so. P.P.C. will be monitoring developments closely in the intervening period and it reserves the right to consider taking substantive action in the event that further revelations raise issues that do fall within its terms of reference. Thank you.

3.13.1 Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:

I wonder if the chairman could identify whether the decision she has outlined was a unanimous decision and, if not, what the vote was in regard to that decision.

The Connétable of St. Mary:

I asked for the matter to be considered at the meeting of P.P.C. the Friday following the declaration was made by the Minister for Home Affairs. There was some discussion about whether a statement should be made but the matter was acknowledged by the majority to be more appropriately dealt with by a letter, as there was no follow-up information and advice that could be given following a statement.

Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:

What is the definition of a majority?

The Connétable of St. Mary:

More than half. [Laughter]

3.13.2 Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire:

I wonder if the chairman would be able to tell us what her opinion will be if it is later revealed that these files have also contained information on States Members’ families.

The Connétable of St. Mary:

I believe that would fall squarely within the remit of the Minister for Home Affairs to deal with. If there are potential breaches in either regulatory powers, perhaps, or data protection, for example, that would be a matter to be pursued in a different dimension, I believe.

3.13.3 Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:

I wonder if the chairman could define or could acknowledge whether she sees the role of P.P.C. to be the defence, albeit constructively, of Members’ interests when faced with pressures from other quarters. How would she define that role I regard to the role that P.P.C. appears to be playing?

The Connétable of St. Mary:

I would refer the Deputy to the terms of reference which have been set out for P.P.C. by this House in Standing Orders. They are very clear: we must defend the privileges of the States. There are others issues which are not relevant to this particular Operation Blast but certainly I do believe that P.P.C. is acting wholly according to its terms of reference in this matter.

3.14 Deputy S. Pitman of the Minister for Social Security regarding recipients of Long Term Incapacity Allowance:

Would the Minister advise Members whether 89 recipients of Long-Term Incapacity Allowance, considered unable to work by the Medical Board, are not receiving their incapacity pension, and if so, explain why?

Deputy I.J. Gorst (The Minister for Social Security):

As the Deputy did not specify which 89 recipients she is referring to, it has been difficult for me to answer the question specifically. However, in general terms, L.T.I.A. (Long-Term Incapacity Allowance) is a benefit paid to working-aged individuals who have a long-term loss of faculty. The benefit is a variable amount depending on the severity of the condition. Individuals are able to work and claim this benefit at the same time. A Medical Board examines the individual and decides the level of benefit payable. The Medical Board do not take any account of the ability of the individual to work; they just consider the extent of the loss of faculty. Incapacity pension is a benefit paid to adults still below pension age who have a serious long-term condition which means that they are very unlikely to return to employment before they reach pension age. It is impossible for an individual to receive L.T.I.A. and incapacity pension at the same time.

3.14.1 Deputy S. Pitman:

May I just point out to the Minister that on the assessment forms of the Medical Board the recipients are informed by the Medical Board whether or not they can work? There are boxes they tick “yes” or “no” and so he is wrong on that issue. I refer to a written question I asked several weeks ago and where it was pointed out to me that there are currently 98 individuals claiming L.T.I.A. with 100 per cent award but only 9 of them receiving incapacity pension. It does say in the leaflets on the incapacity benefits: “If the Medical Board agrees that your loss of faculty is such that you will probably not return to work, you will be given a form to complete for incapacity pension.” The question I ask is at what point does the Medical Board determine whether a recipient of L.T.I.A. will receive this pension?

Deputy I.J. Gorst:

I am sorry that the Deputy thinks that I was wrong. I was not wrong; I was quite clear in the way I answered the question. However, she is right, the current form does ask that question of the Medical Board and as I have been reviewing this particular area in light of some of the questions that the Deputy has raised, I have asked for that particular form to be clarified because, as I quite clearly said, the Medical Board and the law allows the Medical Board to take consideration for the loss of faculty, not the ability to work or not. This benefit was introduced so that recipients could receive some benefit and work at the same time. I am not wrong, but then neither is the Deputy, in that regard. She also makes some comments in regard to a written answer that I gave some months ago. I hope that I was clear in my initial answer but perhaps not. If one is receiving L.T.I.A., one is not also able to receive incapacity pension. Therefore, it is not a matter of mathematics: 98 minus the 9 making 89 but it is 98 plus the 9, so these are different groups. I am sorry, there were quite a lot of questions, I am not sure if I have answered them all.

3.14.2 Deputy G.P. Southern:

Surely the point is that once in receipt of an incapacity pension, one no longer has to go for regular medical checks to make sure that you are still ill. Will the Minister review all cases of 100 per cent incapacity to examine whether it is appropriate to place some or all of these people on an incapacity pension with their agreement accepting that they will work again but excusing them from the need to travel to receive Medical Board at regular intervals?

Deputy I.J. Gorst:

While I acknowledge - and Deputy Pitman herself raised this issue - there is also a need for clarification in the leaflet regarding this benefit and that I have asked my department to do as well. However, the assertion that everybody on 100 per cent L.T.I.A. should move on to a pension, I refute that. The pension is based on ...

Deputy G.P. Southern:

There was no assertion, Minister. There was a question. The question: will you review to see whether it is appropriate?

Deputy I.J. Gorst:

Of course, I am always prepared to review. However, I should say that my department is overworked, as I am sure the Deputy would admit. However, I must make it absolutely clear that the invalidity pension is based on previous contributions and therefore it may not be of benefit to the individual to move from 100 per cent L.T.I.A. to an incapacity pension because they may be worse off. Therefore, I am not sure whether the Deputy is suggesting I move all those people on the 100 per cent to incapacity pension therefore making them worse off. We and my department try to encourage that people have the best and most appropriate benefit for them at the maximum rate to which they are entitled, not moving them to benefits which may be less beneficial to them.

3.14.3 Deputy S. Pitman:

Firstly, could the Minister answer Deputy Southern’s questions: will he endeavour to review as to when these people who are on 100 per cent L.T.I.A. ... when is it appropriate for somebody to receive a pension? Also, I refer him to one of his own constituents which he met with myself in January who has been trying to get an answer out of him since then and I have myself. Could he answer regarding Mr. R, if he has forgotten, when is he going to give this gentleman an answer as to if he will be receiving a pension, because he has worked for many years, made his full contributions, please could he tell me when he is going to give this gentleman an answer?

Deputy I.J. Gorst:

The Deputy insists on trying to raise individual cases. It is not appropriate for me in order to defend myself to get into the details of an individual. It is not appropriate for my department to do so either and I will refuse to be drawn into that ...

Deputy S. Pitman:

I think he is obliged to his constituents to answer.

The Bailiff:

Wait a moment, Deputy, if the Minister is going to give way, you may interrupt but if he is not, you cannot.

Deputy I.J. Gorst:

As I tried to indicate in my answer to Deputy Southern, it is not as straightforward as saying that everybody with 100 per cent L.T.I.A. should move on to incapacity pension. I am prepared, as I committed to review these cases, it might be appropriate for someone who was on, say, 80 or 85 per cent L.T.I.A. who had a very good contribution record and perhaps had a dependency to move to an incapacity pension, if their contribution record was not up-to-date, if they were reasonably young, is it appropriate for the department to be moving people into a pension situation which is going to leave them on pension for 20 years until they reach pension age and then continue after that?

Deputy S. Pitman:

May I ask when the Minister is going to give Mr. R an answer?

The Bailiff:

I am sorry, Deputy, no, you have had your final supplementary and I think the Minister has made his position clear. May I ask you, Deputy, whether your following question is for the Attorney General personally or is to be answered by the Solicitor General?

Deputy S. Pitman:

The Attorney General has expressed that he wishes to answer the question at the next sitting but I understand he has briefed the Solicitor General. I leave it entirely up to the Solicitor General if he wishes to answer the question.

The Bailiff:

Well I think it is really a matter for you. If you are content to have an answer from the Solicitor General, we can proceed.

Deputy S. Pitman:

Yes. Thank you.

The Bailiff:

Very well, then put your question, please.

3.15 Deputy S. Pitman of H.M. Solicitor General regarding when H.M. Attorney General was first informed about Operation Blast

Would H.M. Solicitor General inform Members when, and how, the Attorney General was first informed about Operation Blast?

Mr. T.J. Le Cocq Q.C., H.M. Solicitor General:

I am not sure if the question has changed a little bit in form. I am answering the question as written and not the question as recently stated which appeared to be directed to me personally.

The Bailiff:

I think, as I understand it, you are answering the question on behalf of the Attorney General.

The Solicitor General:

The Attorney General is currently away from the Island appearing in the Privy Council and accordingly is unable to answer this question. He asked the Deputy to defer the question to the next sitting so that he could answer it but the Deputy has declined to do so. As the question is directed to the Attorney General personally and is about his state of knowledge, I cannot answer it for him. He has, however, copied to me an email that he sent to the Deputy as part of an exchange about whether or not the Deputy would agree to defer this question. In it, among other things, he said: “So let me be clear, neither the present Solicitor General nor I participated in any way in setting up of files by the police in Operation Blast. We were not aware of their existence or proposed existence before or during the time when they were set up and maintained. We were not consulted about them and during that time gave no permission or consent in relation to them and were not asked to do so. We were wholly unaware of them, in my case, until 4th April this year when the S.G. (Solicitor General) mentioned it to me.” He also said this in his email that the former Solicitor General was out of the Island and that he had no reason to believe she knew anything about it either. I do not think I can assist the Assembly any more on the Attorney General’s statement.

The Bailiff:

Yes, Deputy Le Claire.

3.15.1 Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire:

Could I ask the Solicitor General when the Attorney General was first told of Operation Blast, in what manner was he told by the Solicitor General of the operation and what was the reason why the Attorney General was told at the time he was told?

The Solicitor General:

The question is directed to the Attorney General’s state of knowledge. The answer is that he was told about it by me on 4th April. I am, however, not at liberty to go any further into the matter than that because obviously anything I know about the matter is subject to legal privilege and I cannot discuss that in these circumstances.

Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire:

I understand. Thank you.

The Bailiff:

I have seen other supplementary questions but may I just advise Members who are in the precinct that we will proceed to the ballot at 11.15 a.m. when the Question Time comes to an end and perhaps they would be kind enough to return to their seats if they wish to participate in the ballot. Deputy Tadier.

3.15.2 Deputy M. Tadier:

Operation Blast, it would seem, should be very easy to resolve because it seems that nobody set the files up and nobody knows anything about them, so it should be an open and shut case. But the question I would ask if the Solicitor General is in a position to answer, is he aware if any socially or politically prominent non-States Members have also had files on them?

The Solicitor General:

I have no information about that. Even if I had information, I would not be at liberty to reveal it to the Assembly for the reason I have previously articulated: that of legal professional privilege.

3.15.3 Deputy S. Pitman:

If such files were set up in the interests of national security for the Island, who would authorise this?

The Solicitor General:

I am afraid I do not know the answer to that which is, after all, a hypothetical question. What I can say to the Assembly is that neither the Attorney General nor the Solicitor General have any authority in connection with the setting up of police files.

3.16 Deputy G.P. Southern of the Chief Minister regarding the justification of a pay freeze for nurses and other public sector workers:

In the light of the continuation of the bonus culture in banking in the U.K. and Jersey, how does the Minister justify a pay freeze for nurses and other public sector workers?

Senator T.A. Le Sueur (The Chief Minister):

I have no evidence to confirm that there is an ongoing bonus culture in banking but, in any event, the Council of Ministers’ reasons for a pay freeze in the public sector this year are twofold. Firstly, given that budget deficits are forecasted for States finances over the next few years, even after the Island comes out of recession, increased taxes and/or cuts in services will be inevitable. If a pay increase is awarded to public sector staff in these circumstances, this will simply exacerbate the extent of those tax increases and/or those cuts in services. Secondly, employees in the private sector in the Island are being faced with the prospect of job cuts and/or pay freezes. It cannot be fair to expect those very employees to help fund, through their taxes, pay increases for public employees who enjoy much greater job security. In my view, comparisons with the banking sector need to be treated with considerable caution given, for example, a very recent announcement by Lloyds TSB and HBOS that over 180 jobs in Jersey alone are to be lost over the next 2 years.

3.16.1 Deputy C.F. Labey of Grouville:

Is it appropriate that senior executives of Jersey Telecom, a company wholly owned by the States, should receive sizeable bonuses in these economic times?

Senator T.A. Le Sueur:

I do not want to go into individual cases. There may be instances where part of a remuneration package involves a performance bonus based on the profitability of a company. If that is a contractual arrangement, then that contractual arrangement needs to be honoured.

3.16.2 The Deputy of St. John:

Can the Minister clarify something: given that we have a number of States - and I am thinking here of the Jersey Electricity Company of which we are major shareholders, Water Board, et cetera, and Jersey Telecom - will these companies have to fall into line and take no pay increase this coming year? If not, why not?

Senator T.A. Le Sueur:

The Deputy tries to mix up different social relations. Companies set up by the States and owned by the States and run at arm’s length are in a different situation from so-called ‘quangos’ which are totally under States control. In any event, the pay policy which was set out by myself on behalf of the States Employment Board relates to employees of the States directly. Certainly as a matter of good policy, I would expect other organisations which state an interest to have similar sorts of principles, but where they are independently directed it must be for the boards of those companies to make those decisions for themselves in the light of the current economic circumstances.

The Bailiff:

I am afraid that concludes the time set aside for oral questions and we proceed now to the ballot for the appointment of members of the Bailiff’s Panel. I ask the ushers to circulate the ballot papers. Members are reminded that they can vote for up to 5 candidates.

Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire:

I beg your pardon, but given that we are going to be debating probably today the Committee of Inquiry proposition, I had a question for debate today that has fallen away now and I wonder if I could request for the Minister for Health and Social Services to respond to this question by email ahead of this debate to all States Members so we can be aware of that answer, because I do believe it is material. Thank you.

The Bailiff:

I am sure the Minister for Health and Social Services will take that into account. I ask the usher and Deputy Viscount to collect the votes. If all Members have put their ballot papers in the urns, I will ask the Solicitor General and Deputy Viscount, please, to act as scrutineers. I assume Members would wish to proceed with questions without notice. Very well, the first question period is of the Minister for Transport and Technical Services and I invite questions. The Constable of St. Ouen.

4. Questions to Ministers Without Notice - The Minister for Transport and Technical Services

4.1 Connétable K.P. Vibert of St. Ouen:

In view of the fact that I fell foul of the system for asking my question to the Minister for Economic Development, I will now head in the same direction with the Minister for Transport and Technical Services who I know has been involved, or his department has been involved, for some time with the issue of Grève de Lecq. I would ask the Minister to inform the Assembly what work has been undertaken since 2002 on the potential danger to the public from the rock face at Grève de Lecq and if the answer to that is: “Very little”, what work is envisaged in the future?

Connétable M.K. Jackson of St. Brelade (The Minister for Transport and Technical Services):

As a result of a recent meeting of the Royal Court, the department has been stimulated by activities of late to move into action, shall we say, in conjunction with the Economic Development Department who have responsibility for the area. I am able to say that this morning the experts in this rock face work have been looking at the issue down there and agreement has been made on the level of risk which is at present there. It has been decided that the area ought to be closed off to the public but it is within the risk assessment to allow the passage of vehicles down there. So the effect of that will be that there will be signage put up to prevent the public access but allow those who sign a disclaimer to access the area through a gate, so that means that boat owners will be able to continue to park their vehicles there. I would say that the department is keen to get this matter closed off in conjunction with the Economic Development Department and I am sure that the present flurry of activity will ensure that takes place.

4.2 The Connétable of St. Mary:

In the spirit of trying to ensure that people are able to leave their cars at home wherever possible, will the Minister undertake to review whether there is adequate motorcycle parking provisions in St. Helier? Thank you.