Medium Term Financial Plan 2016 – 2019 (P.72/2015): sixth amendment.

STATES OF JERSEY

r

MEDIUM TERM FINANCIAL PLAN 2016 – 2019 (P.72/2015):

SIXTH AMENDMENT

Lodged au Greffe on 21st September 2015 by Deputy J.A. Martin of St. Helier

STATES GREFFE

2015   Price code: B  P.72 Amd.(6)

MEDIUM TERM FINANCIAL PLAN 2016 – 2019 (P.72/2015): SIXTH AMENDMENT

____________

PAGE 2, PARAGRAPH (b)(I) –

After the words "as set out in Summary Table C" insert the words "except that the net revenue  expenditure  of  the  Chief  Minister's  Department  and  the  Treasury  and Resources Department should be reduced in 2016 in the sum of £90,000 and £67,000 respectively and the net revenue expenditure of the Social Security Department be increased by £157,000 to fund the continued provision of means-tested free television licences for the over-75s.

DEPUTY J.A. MARTIN OF ST. HELIER

REPORT

This is a very easy amendment which I hope will be supported. It transfers money that is being spent by 2 departments to support 2 Ministers and their Assistant Ministers: monies which have never been agreed by the States as they do not appear in the MTFP or the States Accounts.

I think this money will be better spent on the means-tested TV Licence benefit for over-75s  which  the  Minister  for  Social  Security  is  trying  to  stop.  The  current eligibility criteria are incomes below £16,070 for a single person and £26,170 for a couple. At Appendix 2 you will see the current full rate of a States of Jersey Pension is £197.40 per week for a single person, and at Appendix 3 the current cost for a one- bedroom flat at Andium rental prices, but these only go up to 80% or current market rent, and the intention is to increase all these rents to 90% of the market rent. The single  full  pension  does  not  cover  most  of  the  rental  properties  in  the  Andium portfolio. Why then would we take a very good means-tested benefit away from many of the most vulnerable in our Island?

I think this benefit has been targeted because it was easy to take it away. The Minister has not looked at other solutions: she says it is because more people are living longer and the cost of the benefit will keep increasing. Has there been any discussion of staggering the age to receive this benefit? No, this has not happened. Many of the over-75s  and  upwards  are  still  very  active,  but  there  are  also  many  that  are housebound and the TV is their lifeline; there has not even been a discussion or a proposal to target this benefit to people with a disability. NO – it was just easy for the Minister or the Department to propose that this benefit is taken away. I have put more than needed into the Social Security budget over the lifetime of the MTFP, as the Minister says in P.104/2015 that the cost of this benefit, as it is now, will be under £100,000 a year, I put in more to account for growth over these years. This will also enable the Minister time to really look at the impact of taking this benefit away or possibly delivering it as a better targeted benefit. Now I'll go on to explain why this money should be moved:

I asked a written question (8789 attached at Appendix 1 is the full reply) in the States which was submitted for the meeting on 12th May, but was deferred until 14th July 2015.

I was contacted by the Treasury by telephone and was asked if I would allow the answer to the question to be pushed back. There were 2 explanations for this: first, the majority  of  the  staff  were  working  on  the  MTFP, second,  they  do  not  hold  this information and would take some time to find out the costs I required in the question. I was very surprised as to the second part of the explanation, as after 10 years of Ministerial  Government  I  would  expect  this  to  be  in  calculations  for  spending somewhere in each Department's budget. The Public and other States Members need to know the cost for Ministerial Government: we know the cost of Scrutiny and its support and that monies have been returned to the centre from this budget in most years.

I agreed to be helpful and the reply came at our last States Sitting in July. Please note the  comment  at  the  end  of  the  question  under  "Notes Secretarial/administrative support and direct officer support:". In the fourth line, which starts –

"However, I can confirm that the Treasury and Resources Minister and the Chief Minister both have dedicated PAs (who also work for the relevant Assistant Minister and Assistant Chief Ministers) and their costs amount to an average of £67,000 per year for the Treasury Minister and c. £90,000 for the Chief Minister".

(These are the monies I want moved.)

The reply then goes on to say "As the organisation becomes more flexible and departments work more closely together, these kinds of estimations will become even more difficult.". What we keep being told is that as departments merge or work together costs will go down, but how do we and the taxpayer measure this, as we do not have a start figure? I do not say there is not a cost to Ministerial Government, but it must be Transparent, Open and Accountable.

I am also lodging a separate proposition which asks the Council of Ministers to provide, in addition to the Medium Term Financial Plan covering the years 2017 to 2019, breakdowns and estimates for the financial costs of the dedicated support for Ministers and Assistant Ministers by individual Department and as a total.

1240/5(8789)

WRITTEN QUESTION TO THE CHIEF MINISTER BY DEPUTY J.A. MARTIN OF ST. HELIER

ANSWER TO BE TABLED ON TUESDAY 14th July 2015

Question

Can the Chief Minister –

1  outline the portfolio of each Minister and how this is supported by Assistant

Ministers?

2  itemise the annual cost of each Ministerial Department, including support of

the Assistant Minister(s) to take into account the cost of:

• office space (rental)
• secretarial/administrative support
• direct  officer  support  (giving  the  number  and  grades  of  the  officers involved)
• IT support
• telephone costs
• travel costs?

3  provide the whole budget for supporting Ministerial Government expressed in

the same way as the allocation to Scrutiny is shown in the States Assembly accounts and indicate  whether this  budget can be identified  in  the  States accounts and, if so, how?

4. advise when, and how, this budget was agreed and whether itis inflated in accordance with the cost of living each year and whether there have been any over or under-spends to date?
5. provide the budgets and manpower figures specifically relating to supporting Ministers  from  December  2011  until  the  election  of  the  new  Council  of Ministers in November 2014 to give a full 3-year account of the cost of supporting ministerial government?

Answer

1. In accordance with Article 30A of the States of Jersey Law 2005, the Chief Minister is required to establish, maintain and publish a list of Ministers and Assistant Ministers and the functions exercisable by each of them and by the Chief Minister personally.' The most recent published list is contained inR.19/2014.
2. Estimated costs for each Minister for 2014 are shown in the table below. These figures have been calculated by Departments solely for the purpose of answering this question and are approximate.

Notes

• Secretarial/administrative support and direct officer support: Departments vary in how  Ministers  are  supported  and  their  PAs  perform  a  range  of  tasks. PAs/secretaries  often  manage  the  administration  of  the  Minister,  Assistant Minister and Chief Officer, and also perform other work for the department, as required. Likewise, officers undertake a range of functions and provide a varying level of specific support for individual Ministers and Assistant Ministers as the work demands. However, I can confirm that the Treasury and Resources Minister and Chief Minister both have dedicated PAs (who also work for the relevant Assistant Minister and Assistant Chief Ministers) and their costs amount to an average of £67,000 per year for the Treasury Minister and c. £90,000 for the Chief Minister. As the organisation becomes more flexible and departments work more closely together, these kinds of estimations will become even more difficult. For instance, the new Community and Constitutional Affairs department is made up of a variety of officers and administration staff who support a number of ministers and assistant ministers (Chief Minister, Housing Minister, Home Affairs Minister and  Assistant  Minister,  the  chair  of  the  Legislation  Advisory  Panel,  and  an Assistant  Chief  Minister)  and  discharge  a  range  of  policy  and  operational functions.  This  makes  it  difficult  to  separate  out  the  percentage  of  support provided  by  specific  staff  members  to  individual  Ministers  and  Assistant Ministers, compared with their departmental work.
• Travel cost: Data for 2014 has not yet been published. Where updated information is not available, 2013 data from R.158/2014 is used as an indication of cost and/or taken from reports published to the States Assembly.
• Office space costs: Shown as notional rental values. Most departments do not rent office space.

3. The budget  for  supporting  Ministerial  Government  is not  separately identifiable within the States' Financial Report and Accounts, and as noted above, itis not readily possible to separate work undertaken on behalf of a Minster and work undertaken on behalf of a Department, and indeed, they are ultimately one and the same thing, i.e. the cost of ministerial government is the cost of government.
4. This cost is not managed by departments as a separately identifiable budget. As such itis not subject to specific over or underspends. Pay and non-pay inflation will have been allocated in accordance with arrangements across all departmental expenditure.
5. As  outlined  above,  budgets  and  manpower  figures  are  not  specifically identified for supporting Ministers so itis not possible to give a meaningful answer to this question. As an example, where the costs of secretarial and administrative support have been given these relate in most cases to a fraction of an employee's time. The table shown in the answer to question 1 is also shown for 2013 and 2012 to allow the Deputy to approximate a cost.

APPENDIX 2

Extract from: http://www.gov.je/Benefits/PensionsRetirement/Pages/HowPensionWorks.aspx#anchor-0

Sent: 31 July 2015 16:39 To: Judith Martin Subject: Re: Housing

Dear Judy

We have reviewed this case and will do what we can to assist [name redacted] as soon as we can.

Unfortunately Le Squez Phase 3 only offers 4 x 2 bed houses, the rest are 4 beds and we are relying on all these units to assist us in decanting Phase 4 tenants, who as you know have to move in order to allow us to move on with the final phase of the

Le Squez regeneration.

Phase 4 may offer more opportunities, but that is of course some way off so I would hope we would be in a position to help [name redacted] with other turnover in the area before then. The Allocations Team are aware of her predicament.

In regards to the rents, please find below a scale which shows the range of rents across the 1, 2 and 3 bed properties.

If you have any further queries please come back to me. Regards

Client Engagement & Communications Director www.andiumhomes.je

Andium Homes Limited

PO Box 587 | St Helier | Jersey | JE4 8XT

Andium Homes Limited is Registered in Jersey British Channel Islands Nº 115713