Skip to main content

Strategic Plan 2006 to 2011 (P.40-2006) - 18th amendments

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

r

STRATEGIC PLAN 2006 TO 2011 (P.40/2006): EIGHTEENTH AMENDMENTS

Lodged au Greffe on 6th June 2006 by the Chairmen's Committee

STATES GREFFE

STRATEGIC PLAN 2006 TO 2011 (P.40/2006): EIGHTEENTH AMENDMENTS ____________

  1. After the words "to approve" insert the words", in principle,";
  2. After the word"Appendix", insert the words ", the resource implications ofeachofthose initiatives to be assessed for the purpose ofscrutiny prior to implementation";
  3. Number the proposition "(a)", and insert a new paragraph (b) as follows –

" ( b ) t o charge the Council of Ministers to prepare and present to the States, within a period of 2 months, a report setting out the projected financial and manpower consequences of the initiatives for each of the years covered by the Strategic Plan 2006 to 2011."

CHAIRMEN'S COMMITTEE

REPORT

Introduction

This amendment is in the name of the Chairmen's Committee and is based on the consensual viewpoint that emerged from two meetings which were held for all members connected with scrutiny and other non executive members.

There are serious reservations about the structure of the Strategic Plan. It is felt that the Plan, as it currently exists, seeks the endorsement of a large number of actions which lack any detail of manpower or financial implications and are presented without prioritisation.

Amendment (a)

Given this lack of relevant detail, the amendment seeks to include the words "in principle" to ensure that the initiatives within the plan will be developed and returned in a more complete state to the States for subsequent approval or not as the case may be.

It would appear that this situation is accepted by the Chief Minister who, in his statement to the House on 16th May, stated that "by agreeing a Strategic Plan the States will be instructing a Minister to develop a policy for presentation to the States who will then decide what the policy should be."

Amendment (b)

Agenda item A2, Council of Ministers 9th March 2006 noted "It is difficult to predict what Scrutiny will wish to examine as the Plan does not contain the policy detail which would normally be its remit to examine". Policy detail will normally include resource implications. Any endorsement therefore, of the Plan by the States Assembly must be subject to the proviso that the resource implications of each project be available for scrutiny purposes prior to implementation.

Amendment (c)

The underlying principle behind strategic planning is that it takes a longer view than the normal business planning process. The Strategic Plan is designed to run over a five year period, whereas the States business planning process runs on an annual cycle. The Strategic Plan should provide the framework in which annual resource choices can be made. To accomplish this, it is essential that the Strategic Plan includes a good indication of the resource implications of its different themes over the lifetime of the plan. Many of the proposals in the Strategic Plan are extremely wide ranging and have the potential to absorb unlimited budgets if not curtailed.

It is accepted that the States will make the final decision on each annual business plan. However, unless members have a clear understanding of the prioritisation of the Strategic Plan initiatives and the relative costs of their implementation, they will be unable to make an informed decision within the annual cycle.

The  amendment requires the  Council  of Ministers  to  present  financial  and  manpower  consequences of  the Strategic Plan initiatives over the five year lifetime of the plan, to the States within 2  months.This will allow the business plan for 2007, due for debate in September, to be discussed with a fuller understanding of how this fits into the longer term.

Financial and manpower implications

If this proposition is adopted there will be a requirement for the report referred to in paragraph  (c) to be prepared but it is not possible to assess the exact resource implication of this. It is anticipated that much of the information should already have been calculated as the Plan contains a statement on page  17 that it is"fully funded from existing spending limits". If this amendment is adopted there will be significant benefit in the longer term as all members will be able to assess the resource implications of all initiatives before they are implemented and these will also be made available for the purposes of scrutiny.

Related Publications

Propositions

Amendments

Comments

Votes

Vote: Rejected 19 June 2006
Vote: Rejected 19 June 2006

Minutes

Hansard