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
INVESTMENT APPRAISAL BOARD: 2 WEEK NOTICE PERIOD (P.25/2019) – AMENDMENT
Lodged au Greffe on 14th March 2019 by Deputy J.M. Maçon of St. Saviour
STATES GREFFE
2019 P.25 Amd.
INVESTMENT APPRAISAL BOARD: 2 WEEK NOTICE PERIOD (P.25/2019) – AMENDMENT
____________
PAGE 2 –
For the words "Privileges and Procedures Committee, following consultation with the Council of Ministers, to bring forward amendments to the Standing Orders of the States of Jersey, for consideration by the Assembly no later than 4th June 2019," substitute the words "Council of Ministers to consult States Members on the appropriateness of"; and for the words "until there has been a 2 week notification period, similar to that relating to property transactions" substitute the words "for a period of time, or other appropriate safeguards that provide for democratic oversight of such expenditure allocations".
DEPUTY J.M. MAÇON OF ST. SAVIOUR
Note: After this amendment, the proposition would read as follows –
THE STATES are asked to decide whether they are of opinion
to request the Council of Ministers to consult States Members on the appropriateness of introducing a mechanism whereby the Minister for Treasury and Resources does not implement any recommendations made by the Investment Appraisal Board, or by any other bodies for allocating money not otherwise allocated to a specific head of expenditure, for a period of time, or other appropriate safeguards that provide for democratic oversight of such expenditure allocations.
Page - 2
P.25/2019 Amd.
REPORT
After receiving a briefing from Treasury officers, whom I thank for their time, there are some technical questions which might make it unwise for the Assembly to agree to my original proposition. For example, there may be a need for emergency expenditure where a 2-week delay would be problematic. There are also some issues around confidentiality of commercial contracts which conflict with the transparency I am calling for, although in principle, public expenditure ought to be as transparent as possible, and this should apply to one-off' contingency spending as much as to ongoing costs. I think there is a problem with the process. Should there be more oversight by the Council of Ministers – even if funding decisions are on the agenda for noting? My original proposal is more prescriptive than this amendment, which simply calls for a consultation. I have put it forward following feedback from the Department so the Assembly can express its view and make a choice.
Financial and manpower implications
There are no additional financial or manpower implications arising from this amendment.
Page - 3
P.25/2019 Amd.