Skip to main content

Whistleblowing – introduction of legislation.

This content has been automatically generated from the original PDF and some formatting may have been lost. Let us know if you find any major problems.

Text in this format is not official and should not be relied upon to extract citations or propose amendments. Please see the PDF for the official version of the document.

STATES OF JERSEY

WHISTLEBLOWING – INTRODUCTION OF LEGISLATION

Lodged au Greffe on 27th June 2023 by Deputy C.S. Alves of St. Helier Central Earliest date for debate: 18th July 2023

STATES GREFFE

2023  P.47

PROPOSITION

THE STATES are asked to decide whether they are of opinion

to agree that Whistleblowing legislation should be introduced, and to request the Chief Minister, in consultation with the Council of Ministers, to bring forward the necessary legislation for approval by the Assembly prior to the end of June 2024.

DEPUTY C.S. ALVES OF ST. HELIER CENTRAL

REPORT

During my last term in office, I completed the Professional Development Certificate in Parliamentary Governance course provided by McGill university. One of the modules in this course asked participants to undertake a critical examination of the right to information legislation in their jurisdiction.

Looking through other models and comparing Jersey's legal framework to international and regional laws and standards, it is clear we have a robust information legalisation currently in place. There was one area, however, that Jersey unfortunately fails to meet at all, in that there is currently no specific legal protection and compensation for whistle- blowers.  Although  policies are  in  place  for  Government  as  a  whole  and  local organisations can choose to put a whistleblowing procedure in place internally (and are encouraged and recommended to do so by the Jersey Financial Services Commission, who also have a special whistleblowing hotline) there are no legal measures in place to protect and compensate whistle-blowers, for example from loss of employment, after a disclosure, unlike in the UK, and this has caused great concern.

The UK introduced legal protection for workers making a protected disclosure in 1999 with  the  Public  Interest  Disclosure  Act  (PIDA).  This  was  amended  with  further additions in 2013.

Protected disclosures can be made if a worker wants to disclose evidence of actions that are:

  1. criminal
  2. harmful
  3. show evidence of failure,
  4. endangering health and safety
  5. a miscarriage of justice
  6. causing damage to the environment

Oben Law. a Jersey-based law firm, published an article on their website entitled "Whistle-blowing in Jersey: a need for statutory protection?" which outlines why there is a need for whistling blowing legalisation and quotes some of the real life impacts on those who have been whistle blowers and not having this legalisation in place. The report states:

"..two whistle-blowers have said their lives have now been ruined as a consequence of blowing the whistle. Jonathan Sugarman, a former risk manager at the Dublin branch of UniCredit appeared before the Oireachtas Finance Committee on 13 April 2017. In his opening remarks he said he has been "totally unemployable" for ten years for attempting to bring the truth to light. He also said that "Official Ireland has absolutely and  completely  destroyed  the  lives  of  every  single  whistle-blower  who  has  come forward, from whatever walk of life they've come".

Nicholas Wilson (the whistle-blower in the HSBC case), commenting on a recent whistle-blowing case stated, "it's hell, especially if you are whistle-blowing against banks and I've been insulted, patronised, mainly by the media, I have to say, shut down, censored" he went on to state: "it has destroyed my life, I haven't worked properly since I blew the whistle."

Page - 3

P.47/2023

Given the publicity surrounding the negativity faced by whistle-blowers, and indeed these two prominent whistle-blowers stating categorically that blowing the whistle has destroyed their lives, what would motivate an individual to blow the whistle when faced with loss of income and loss of reputation?"

The need for openness and transparency is clear and something we should all be encouraging; this legislation would be a big step in the right direction to ensure that there is strong protection to whistleblowing employees and encourage openness and transparency without fear of reprisal.

Financial and manpower implications

There will be substantial manpower implications arising from this proposition, in relation to policy work and Legislative Drafting requirements. As this is an in principle proposition it is not possible to put a figure on these requirements at this time, as the relevant teams will need to scope the project accordingly.