Scrutiny and Public Accounts Committee Legacy Report: November 2011 – November 2014.

STATES OF JERSEY

SCRUTINY AND PUBLIC ACCOUNTS COMMITTEE LEGACY REPORT: NOVEMBER 2011 – NOVEMBER 2014

Presented to the States on 22nd September 2014 by the Chairmen's Committee

STATES GREFFE

2014   Price code: D  R.138

REPORT

CONTENTS

Page

1.  Chairmen's Committee ................................................................................  3

1. Introduction ..........................................................................................  3 Primary recommendation .....................................................................  3
2. Main issues during 2011 – 2014 ..........................................................  4

1. Amendments made to States of Jersey Law with regard to

Scrutiny ........................................................................................  4

2. Overview of Ministers' accountability to Scrutiny ......................  4
3. Overview of Accounting Officers' accountability to the Public Accounts Committee ...................................................................  8
4. Training .......................................................................................  8
5. Protocols for working practices of Panels and PAC ....................  9
6. Public engagement .......................................................................  9
7. Internal communication ...............................................................  11
8. Other ............................................................................................  12

2. Corporate Services Scrutiny Panel ...............................................................  13

3. Economic Affairs Scrutiny Panel .................................................................  19
4. Education and Home Affairs Scrutiny Panel ...............................................  23
5. Environment Scrutiny Panel ........................................................................  28
6. Health, Social Security and Housing Scrutiny Panel ...................................  32
7. Public Accounts Committee.........................................................................  37
8. Appendices ...................................................................................................  41

1. CHAIRMEN'S COMMITTEE

1. Introduction

It has been practice in previous terms of office for the Chairmen's Committee, each Scrutiny Panel and the PAC to produce internal legacy reports for their successor Panels and Committees. These largely advised on work which had been undertaken throughout the term of office, information regarding any work which was outstanding or which the Committee or Panel believed may need consideration in the next term of office, working practices and any other matters the Panels/Committees expected to be of use to their successors.

The Chairmen's Committee believes that the work of Scrutiny in holding Ministers to account  should  be  of  importance,  not  only  to  States  Members,  but  also  to  the electorate they serve. Although Scrutiny's work is largely dependent on the number, type and timing of the policies and legislation being produced by Ministers, Scrutiny does its work on behalf of the Public. With this in mind, it has decided to put this legacy report in the public domain by presenting it to the States.

One of the major issues which has faced Scrutiny during the term of office has been the inability of Ministers to meet target deadlines in producing policy and legislation. This has had a detrimental effect on the Panels in terms of planning and prioritising workloads.  It  has  also  resulted  in  an  excessive  amount  of  work  being  lodged "au Greffe" for debate in the run-up to the last summer recess of the term of office, not permitting time for any Scrutiny. This is unacceptable.

Primary recommendation

The Ministerial Legislative and Policy programme and meeting of target deadlines must be reviewed and revised at the start of the next term of office to ensure that there is not a repeat of the excessive number of propositions brought at the end of the term of office, thereby not permitting time for scrutiny.

2. Main issues during 2011 – 2014

1. Amendments made to States of Jersey Law 2005 with regard to Scrutiny During 2014, the States of Jersey Law 2005 was amended to state –

"Standing  Orders  made  under  paragraph (i)  shall  make  provision  for scrutiny, which shall include provision for the agreement of a code of practice for  engagement,  for  the  purposes  of  scrutiny,  between  elected  members conducting scrutiny and Ministers and Assistant Ministers."

This provided the possibility for the Scrutiny function in the future to be revised by bringing an amendment to Standing Orders, as opposed to being obliged to amend primary legislation, which can be cumbersome and time-consuming.

A Code of Practice exists, as adopted by the States, as amended, on 28th April 2009. However, work has been undertaken on revising this to better reflect the matters specifically pertaining to the engagement for the purposes of Scrutiny between those elected Members conducting Scrutiny and Ministers and Assistant Ministers. There remain a number of matters which will require consideration with the Chief Minister, Council of Ministers and the Law Officers' Department, in the short term, in order to progress this, namely –

1. Departmental Officials being required to attend on Scrutiny Panels;
2. Revision  of  section  on  legal  advice  to simplify  and  make  more concise;
3. Sanctions.

Recommendations for Codes of Practice

2. Overview of Ministers' accountability to Scrutiny

The table below shows the level to which each Minister has been held to account during this term of office through full reviews culminating in Scrutiny Reports. This list does not include the raft of other work which has been undertaken in presenting Comments and/or Amendments to propositions to the States. The decision of a Panel

to undertake a full review is often determined by the work-stream of the individual Minister, whether Departments can meet target deadlines, and the workload of the Panel. Scrutiny Panels have had to carry out a large volume of work on some complex and technical subjects. On average, a Scrutiny review can take about 3–4 months or longer,  from  start  to  finish,  due  to  the  amount  of  information  available  and  the importance of exploring every aspect of the topic.

Below is a list of all full Scrutiny Reports produced during this term of office, which shows how each Minister's work portfolio has been scrutinised through full reviews. The year given is the year the report was completed, although work may have been ongoing during the previous year in the case of 2013 and 2014. For more detailed information  on  Panel/PAC  Reports,  Amendments  and  Comments,  please  see  the relevant Panel/Committee page.

It is not always necessary or appropriate for Panels to produce a full Scrutiny Report. Amendments to propositions can be brought which are usually lodged when evidence has revealed that a lodged proposition is flawed in some way and an Amendment will force a debate in the States Assembly. Comments on a proposition can be made instead of, or with a report, usually when either the Panel, from its findings, agrees with a proposition, the Minister has already made changes during scrutiny of the policy or legislation, or to raise awareness to the States of the work the Panel has undertaken.

Amendments and Comments

3. Overview of Accounting Officers' accountability to the Public Accounts Committee

The PAC differs in several ways from the Scrutiny Panels. Not only does it have non- States Members appointed to it, but it also considers the work of Accounting Officers, and  not  usually  of  Ministers, and  looks  retrospectively  at  States  expenditure  and corporate governance. As with Scrutiny Panels, the PAC may make recommendations for action.

4. Training

Although  an  overarching  induction  and  training  programme  was  arranged  by  the States Greffe, a special training programme for Scrutiny was organised as follows –

1. All newly elected Members received an induction presentation on Scrutiny with  the  opportunity  of  open  discussion  and  questions.  This  took  place immediately after the elections.
2. All Members elected to Scrutiny Panels and the Public Accounts Committee were  invited  to a  general  training  session  on  the  principles  and  working practices of Scrutiny. This was led by external providers who had previously trained in Jersey and who have knowledge of other jurisdictions.
3. Introduction  to questioning  training.  One  of  the  most  important  parts  of Scrutiny is to ask effective and appropriately probing questions at Scrutiny

2 To be presented subsequent to presentation of this legacy report  Hearings. The first training session was held fairly early in the term of office by an external provider who has run training courses for Select Committees.

4. More detailed questioning training, including practice sessions, were led by the above training provider.
5. Refresher questioning training was provided by H.M. Solicitor General. One short hour theory session was followed by a morning's practical session.

Recommendations for training

5. Protocols for working practices of Panels and PAC

At  the  general  training  session,  the  attendees  drew  up  a  draft  Statement  of Intent/Purpose and intended standardised working practices of Scrutiny for the term of office. Subsequently, a Code for the Conduct of Scrutiny Hearings and Filming of Scrutiny Hearings was agreed (attached in the Appendix). These have been effective and have been abided by throughout the term of office. In the interests of good communication across the States, the President and Chairmen's Committee gave a presentation to all States Members, and subsequently to the Corporate Management Board, on these issues early in the term of office.

Recommendations for protocols

The next Chairmen's Committee should reconsider the Statement of Intent/Purpose and protocols, and agree standardised working practices at the outset for its term of office. These should be included as Appendices to the Scrutiny "working practice" Code which will be presented to the States.

6. Public engagement

1. Scrutiny Matters Newsletter

The  Chairmen's  Committee  continued  to  produce  a  bi-annual  production  of  a newsletter delivered Island-wide . It is beneficial, has enabled Scrutiny to put the message out to the Public about its work, and is considered to be a sound use of public money.

In 2014, the last year of the 3 year term of office, the Committee agreed to one newsletter,  given  that  most  Panels  were  aiming  to  conclude  review  work  by  the summer  recess  and  that,  with  there  being  elections  in  October,  it  would  be inappropriate to produce an Autumn edition.

During 2013 the newsletter was printed by an on-Island company, which brought this area of the production of the newsletter to the Island, making it a totally on-Island venture.

2. Podcasting/web-streaming

With  the  importance  of  public  engagement  in  terms  of  Scrutiny,  the  Committee undertook work during 2012 to consider the use of web-streaming of Scrutiny and PAC Hearings. It became clear that, although web-streaming was the ideal option, it would  be  extremely  costly  to  the  public  purse,  and  consequently  the  Committee decided against it.

As a midway step, podcasts of Panel and PAC Hearings were made available on the website and continue to be uploaded on www.scrutiny.gov.je.

3. Twitter

A Twitter account was set up to be used for the purposes of advertising scrutiny events such as Hearings, publication of reports and so on, and has been found to be an effective avenue of communication about Scrutiny "events".

4. Citizenship Programme

Le Rocquier School was the only school to take up the offer to run the Citizenship Programme during 2013. This programme requires intensive resourcing on the part of States Members and teachers, is time-consuming to organise; and it is difficult to identify suitable dates due to the constraints of the school curriculum and States Members' availability. However, it has always proved a successful event with positive outcomes, and gives an opportunity for our Island's young people to interact directly with politicians, both Scrutiny and Ministers or Assistant Ministers.

5. Surveys

In 2014, the Committee received a presentation from Jersey Post about the possibility of a survey of the Public in respect of the newsletter and Scrutiny in general, but it was too  close  to  the  production  date  of  the  newsletter  and  wasn't  a  viable  option. Information on this has been retained separately for the future Chairmen's Committee if required.

6. Filming of Scrutiny meetings/Hearings by members of the Public

The working practices agreed at the start of the term of office made it clear that all Scrutiny meetings would be held in private and all Hearings in public. It was also agreed that only the "mainstream" media would be permitted to film, and then only for the first 5 minutes of the Hearing. The Chairmen's Committee is delighted that this working  arrangement  has  been  maintained  throughout  the  3 year  term,  and  a standardised arrangement across the Panels and PAC has been recognised as good practice.

Recommendations for public engagement

7. Internal communication

1. President and Chief Minister meetings

At the start of this term of office, the President and Chief Minister agreed to meet on a regular basis whenever possible after each Chairmen's Committee meeting. This has provided  a  manageable  way  of  sharing  information,  seeking  to  resolve  possible difficulties before they occur, and keeping open the lines of communication between Scrutiny and the Executive.

There have been 2 occasions when the Chairmen's Committee has attended on the full Council of Ministers.

2. Inclusive Scrutiny Meetings

At the start of the term of office, the Chairmen's Committee agreed that all Scrutiny Members  should  have  an  opportunity  to  meet  on  a  quarterly  basis.  These  were organised during a States lunch recess and there were 5 in total.

The Committee found that meeting during a States recess became unmanageable, and the numbers of members attending dropped over the course of time until no further meetings were arranged.

3. Departmental Work Programming Templates

Towards  the  end  of  2012,  one  of  the  Scrutiny  Panels  created  a  template  for Departments to complete to detail their individual work-streams with target deadlines. As  this  was  considered  useful  by  Scrutiny,  all  Departments  were  requested  to complete and update the standardised template. They have been particularly useful to inform Panels in preparation for quarterly Hearings, as well as to monitor progress with policy and legislative developments.

Recommendations for internal communication

The Chairmen's Committee should insist that use of these templates by Departments is continued and that they are updated regularly. This should be included in the joint Code of Practice between Scrutiny and Ministers.

8. Other

1. Role of Chairmen's Committee in oversight of Scrutiny and PAC

Although  the  terms  of  reference  for  the  Chairmen's  Committee  are  clear  within Standing  Orders,  the  Committee  would  like  to  ensure  that  the  new  Chairmen's Committee recognises that it has overarching management of the budget allocated to the  Scrutiny  and  PAC  function.  In  the  event  of  unresolvable  complications,  the Committee has the power to cease a Panel's access to the budget if required.

2. Provision of legal advice to Scrutiny/PAC

The  Committee  recommends  that  the  next  Chairmen's  Committee  invites H.M. Attorney General to one of its early meetings or to an early training session to be fully appraised of all areas of this important matter.

3. Trial of shared electronic document access

A trial took place over the summer recess 2014 with the Corporate Services Scrutiny Panel's review into the Budget 2015, of shared document access. Scrutiny and PAC work  generates  volumes  of  paper,  which  to  date  have  been  circulated  to  Panel/ Committee Members in hard copy. This, on occasions has been unmanageable. The trial permitted access to an electronic version of the Review Folders on a read-only basis.  Following  the  Budget  2015  review,  an  evaluation  was  undertaken  by  the Scrutiny  Officer  and  Panel  Members  and  a  recommendation  that  this  be  made available to all Panels and the PAC.

2. CORPORATE SERVICES SCRUTINY PANEL

Remit

There shall be a scrutiny panel which is assigned the topics of corporate services, corporate  policies  and  external  relations'  (Standing  Order 135(1)(a)).  The  Panel's remit covers the Chief Minister and the Ministers for External Relations and Treasury and Resources (Code of Practice 4.2). Following the decision of the States Assembly during the 2011 to 2014 Session to move responsibility for financial services from the Minister for Economic Development to the Chief Minister, that area will also fall within the Corporate Services Panel's remit in the 2014 to 2018 Session

Membership

Senator S.C. Ferguson (Chairman)

Deputy J.G. Reed of St. Ouen (Vice-Chairman)

Connétable D.J. Murphy of Grouville (passed away on 25th July 2013) Deputy S. Power of St. Brelade (resigned from the Panel on 8th October 2013) Deputy R.J. Rondel of St. Helier

Connétable D.W. Mezbourian of St. Lawrence (appointed to the Panel on

8th October 2013)

Introduction

1. The Corporate Services Panel has reviewed the work it has undertaken since its establishment by the States in November 2011 and agreed to provide a report to its successor Panel established by the States in its next Session to assist in developing its own work programme.
2. The report sets out –
   1. the work undertaken by the Panel during the Session 2011 to 2014;
   2. methods of working used by the Panel; and
   3. suggestions for issues that a successor Panel may wish to consider in developing its work programme.
3. As of 17th September 2014, the Panel had met 195 times (including electronic meetings) since its first meeting on 30th November 2011. Details of minutes can be found on the Panel's web-pages.

Work undertaken

4. The Panel conducted the following reviews in the period 2011 to 2014 –

5. In addition, the Panel lodged the following Amendments –

• Medium  Term  Financial  Plan  2013 – 2015  (P.69/2012):  ninth amendment, Lodged on 23rd October 2012
• Draft  Public  Finances  (Amendment  No. 4)  (Jersey)  Law  201- (P.73/2013): amendment, Lodged on 27th August 2013

6. The Panel also presented the following comments –

• Social Housing Schemes: funding (P.40/2012) – comments, Presented on 25th May 2012
• Medium Term Financial Plan 2013 – 2015 (P.69/2012): ninth amendment (P.69/2012 Amd.(9)) – amendment (P.69/2012 Amd.(9)Amd.) – comments, Presented on 6th November 2012
• Draft  Budget  Statement  2013  (P.102/2012):  comments,  Presented  on 3rd December 2012
• Draft Public Finances (Amendment of Law No. 1) (Jersey) Regulations 201- (P.133/2013): comments, Presented on 20th January 2014

7. The Panel has fulfilled the 4 main roles of scrutiny (Code of Practice 7.9) by undertaking work on –

1. Policy:  Population  and  Migration  (including  Interim  Population Policy);  Tourism  Development  Fund;  Starter  Home  Deposit  Loan Scheme.
2. Legislation: Minister for External Relations; Public Finances Law Amendments; Implementation of European Union legislation; Public Sector Pension Reform; Draft Charities Law.
3. Annual Business Plan and Budget: Medium Term Financial Plan; Draft 2013 Budget; Draft 2014 Budget; Draft 2015 Budget.
4. Matters of public interest: Population and Migration; Starter Home Deposit Loan Scheme.

Methods of working

8. Sub-Panels – For the most part, the Panel worked as a Panel. Sub-Panels were established for the review of the Tourism Development Fund and the MTFP. In the latter case, this was part of a cross-Scrutiny approach to the MTFP and the Sub-Panel incorporated membership of each of the Scrutiny Panels. The Panel would underline this cross-Panel approach was successful and would recommend consideration be given to its use again in the future.
9. Quarterly Public Hearings with Ministers – The Panel invited the Chief Minister and Minister for Treasury and Resources on a regular basis to discuss topical  issues  arising  in their  respective  departments.  When  the  States Assembly  appointed  a  Minister  for  External  Relations,  quarterly  Public Hearings were also held with that Minister.
10. Advisers – The Panel appointed expert advisers to assist with the majority of its reviews. In addition to providing briefing notes on evidence received and assisting  with  question  plans,  advisers  have  been  able  to meet  with departmental  officers  on  a  number  of  occasions  to discuss  important background to the reviews being undertaken by the Panel or Sub-Panel.
11. Briefings – The Panel has invited Members of the Executive to give informal briefings on a particular subject for background information at the start of a review. Briefings received included ones on the States of Jersey Development Company;  the  Modernisation  Programme;  and  the  work  of  the  Channel Islands Brussels Office.

Suggestions for future work

12. This section identifies possible areas for future work by a successor Panel, including forthcoming legislation. In addition to a general suggestion that consideration be given to the recommendations made by the Panel in the reports listed above, the Panel would highlight the following –

• Public  Sector  Pensions:  When  the  Panel  undertook  its  review  of proposed  reforms  to  public  sector  pension  provision,  it  had  been anticipated that the States Assembly would have debated both the primary Law  and  the  secondary  Regulations  before  September  2014.  The Regulations were not ultimately brought forward in accordance with that timetable, and the Panel was therefore unable to complete its review as anticipated. There is therefore likely to be some scope for work to be undertaken on the Regulations by the Panel's successor. For the purposes of this review, the Panel engaged BWCI Consulting Limited to review the proposed reforms, and the Panel recommends that consideration be given to their re-appointment in the event of further work being undertaken. The Panel  asked  BWCI  Consulting  Limited  to  provide  a  brief  report  in September 2014 which could provide the platform on which the next Panel could undertake a review of the Draft Regulations.
• Modernisation Programme: The Panel was regularly updated on the Modernisation Programme during its lifetime, but no formal review was undertaken, in part because the proposed reforms had not reached a stage

where a review would be feasible. That is likely to occur during the 2014 to 2018 Session, however, and the Panel therefore recommends that consideration  be  given  to  undertaking  a  review  in  respect  of  the Modernisation Programme.

• States of Jersey Development Company (SoJDC): The Panel received briefings  on  the  work  of  the  SoJDC,  including  from  the  Managing Director, during its lifetime. This occurred most particularly when the Assembly  was  due  to  debate  whether  development  of  the  Esplanade Quarter should be deferred until further information had been provided to the Assembly. No review was undertaken, and the question ultimately became  moot  following  RBC's  decision  to  proceed  with  the  rival development  at  the  end  of  Kensington  Place.  Nevertheless,  the  Panel recommends  that  consideration  be  given  to  undertaking  a  review  in relation to SoJDC, in part to follow up the work undertaken by this Panel, but also to follow up the various Scrutiny Reviews which have been undertaken since 2005.
• MTFP  and  Draft  Budget:  The  Panel  established  a  mechanism  and process  by  which  the  MTFP  and  Draft  Budgets  produced  during  its lifetime could be reviewed, including the use of a cross-Panel Sub-Panel for reviewing the MTFP. The Panel would suggest using that model as a basis for future reviews of the MTFP and Draft Budget.
• Population and Migration: At the time when the Sub-Panel undertook its review of the Control of Housing and Work (Jersey) Law 201-, it was advised by the Chief Minister's Department that a post-implementation review of the Law would be carried out by the end of July 2014. As such, the Sub-Panel committed to undertaking a review of this work to ensure that  the  recommendations  proposed  during  its  review  had  been  duly considered by the Department. However, at the time of writing the legacy report, the post-implementation review had not yet been published by the Department and, as a result, the Panel did not get the opportunity to consider this work.
• Charities  (Jersey)  Law  201-:  The  intention  of  the  Chief  Minister's Department was to introduce the new Charities Law in 2 phases – the first phase introduced the primary legislation; and the second phase would establish Regulatory Standards for charities in Jersey. The Panel made a number of recommendations in respect of Phase 2 in its review of the draft Law. Therefore, there is likely to be some scope for work to be undertaken on Regulatory Standards as well as the Regulations introduced under both phases of the Law's development.
• Utilities: Aside from the work undertaken in respect of the SoJDC (see above), the Panel undertook little work in respect of utilities and States- owned companies. This is therefore an area where there has been less Scrutiny in recent years, and which may therefore benefit from some consideration  during  the  2014  to  2018  Session.  Within  this  area, consideration  should  be  given  to  work  in  respect  of  Andium  Homes which, following the incorporation of the Department of Housing, falls partially within the Panel's remit as a States-owned company.

• Long-Term Plan: The Panel received briefings on the development of a long-term planning framework. This work is due to be progressed by the next Council of Ministers and is therefore a topic which the successor Panel should consider examining.
• Fort Regent: During 2014 quarterly Public Hearings with the Minister for Treasury  and  Resources,  the  Panel  was  advised  of  the  work  being undertaken by Jersey Property Holdings in relation to Fort Regent. This work was not due to reach fruition until the constitution of the new States Assembly,  and  the  Panel  therefore  recommends  that  consideration  be given to undertaking a review of the subject. This might require cross- Panel work, given that the topic would potentially impact on the remit of more than one Panel.
• Hospital Employment Appointment Process: The Panel, alongside the Health,  Social  Security  and  Housing  Scrutiny  Panel,  received  a  topic proposal that a review be undertaken in respect of the overall appointment process at the Hospital and patient safety at the Hospital. Given that the former matter fell within the Corporate Services remit, it was agreed that a recommendation be left for the successor Panel to consider undertaking a review of the matter.

Further suggestions

13. In addition to the above, the Panel would also highlight the following –

• Meetings were held by the Panel on an annual basis with the Fiscal Policy Panel (FPP), most often during the period when the FPP was preparing its annual report. These were generally held at the invitation of the FPP itself. However, they proved useful in enhancing the Panel's understanding of the economic context, particularly in respect of the Panel's Draft Budget reviews,  and  the  Panel  recommends  that  its  successor  endeavour  to maintain the practice. Indeed, the Panel would recommend that meetings be  held  more  regularly  (e.g. on  each  occasion  that the  FPP  visits the Island) if possible.
• Early  in  its  lifetime,  the  Panel  undertook  a  visit  to  the  Houses  of Parliament at Westminster in order to learn about the work of Select Committees. The visit included time spent with a member of the Treasury Select Committee. The Panel found the visit to be useful and recommends that its successor undertake a similar visit as part of its induction and training.
• The Panel recommends that further efforts should be made to ensure that a proper  indication  of  departmental  work  programmes  is  provided  by Ministers,  with  the  general  principle  being  that  there  should  be no surprises'. The Panel considers that the provision of better information on forward work programmes would facilitate the Panel's own planning, and the liaison between the Executive and Scrutiny.

• On  several  occasions,  Public  Hearings  which  had been  arranged  with Ministers and for which the dates had been in the diary for some time, had to be re-arranged due to the unavailability of the Minister in question. The Panel recommends that its successor take a firm line in such instances in order to ensure that the Public Hearings are not taken for granted and are considered in the appropriate light.
• The Panel would recommend the use of expert advisers for reviews, when appropriate. The Panel's successor might wish to consider whether, in cases where a topic is revisited, the appointment of different advisers would provide some freshness of approach to the topic in question.
• The Panel found the provision of questioning training to be of benefit, and would  recommend  that  its  successor  take  advantage  of  such  training (including follow-up training).

3. ECONOMIC AFFAIRS SCRUTINY PANEL

Remit

Standing Order 135(1)(a) – Scrutiny panels: establishment and constitution –

(1)  There shall be –

(b)  a scrutiny panel which is assigned the topics of economic affairs and economic development ("economic affairs").

The  Panel's  remit  duly  covers  the  Economic  Development  Department  (Code  of Practice 4.2).

Membership

Deputy S.G. Luce of St. Martin , Chairman

Connétable  M.J. Paddock  of   St. Ouen ,  Vice-Chairman  (appointed  29th

January 2014)

Connétable S.W. Pallett of St. Brelade (appointed Vice-Chairman, resigned

from the position 29th January 2014)

Connétable J.E. Le Maistre of Grouville (appointed to the Panel 22nd October

2013).

Introduction

1. The Economic Affairs Scrutiny Panel has reviewed the work it has undertaken since its establishment by the States on 24th November 2011, and agreed to provide a report to its successor Panel established by the States in its next Session to assist in developing its own work programme.
2. The report sets out –

• the work undertaken by the Panel during the Session 2011 to 2014
• methods of working used by the Panel
• suggestions for issues that a successor Panel may wish to consider in developing its work programme

3. The Panel met officially for the first time on 8th December 2011, continuing to work through into September 2014, having held 101 meetings during that time. Minutes are available on the Panel's web-pages, or through the Scrutiny Office.

Work undertaken

4. The Panel conducted the following reviews in the period 2011 to 2014 –

Additional Pre-Review Work –

• Draft  Aquatic  Resources  (Jersey)  Law  201-  (P.114/2013):  comments, Presented to the States 12th February 2014
• Enterprise  Strategy  2013/  Enterprise  Action  Plan:  See  summary correspondence from Panel to Minister dated 4th December 2013

5. The Panel has fulfilled the 4 main roles of Scrutiny (Code of Practice 7.9) by undertaking work on –

1. Policy:  Retail,  Digital  Skills,  Tourism  Shadow  Board,  Jersey Innovation Fund, Aircraft Registry
2. Legislation:  Intellectual  Property,  Draft  Financial  Services Ombudsman
3. Annual Business Plan and Budget: Medium Term Financial Plan
4. Matters of public interest: Incorporation of Ports of Jersey, Retail Policy.

Methods of working

6. Economic  Development  Department:  Work-Stream  Document –  The Panel worked with EDD from an early stage to establish a no-surprises' approach toits work programming – to the potential benefit of both the Panel and  the  Minister.  One  measure  introduced  was  a  working  document incorporating all work-streams of the Department, with an associated outline of the timetabling/progress position of each entry. This document was updated regularly at the request of the Panel, most usually and helpfully in advance of quarterly Public Hearings.

7. Structured  Attendance  at  Economic  Development  Ministerial  Team meetings – An additional measure within the no-surprises' approach was the agreement that the Panel (or Chairman) accompanied by the Scrutiny Officer would on occasion attend Economic Development Ministerial Team meetings. They were initially to be held monthly, but developed to occur on a more needs arising' basis, and as such became highly irregular. Such meetings, when  they  occurred,  provided  an  insight  into  ongoing  ED  work  and  an opportunity to exchange progress reports and address any difficulties arising. The Panel would recommend continuing with these meetings, but to try to ensure that they are held on a regular basis.
8. Briefings –  The Panel  has  regularly  invited/received  officials  from  the Executive to give informal briefings on a particular subject for background information  at  the  start  of  a  review,  updates  to completed  reviews  or significant developments/progress reports on areas of potential review within its remit (e.g. sea routes). The Panel has also received similar briefings from stakeholder  organisations,  both  public  (e.g. JIF  Board  Chairman,  Digital Jersey, Jersey Business, Jersey Post) and private sector (e.g. Jersey Chamber of Commerce).
9. Quarterly  Public  Hearings  with  the  Minister  for  Economic Development – The Panel invited the Minister for Economic Development on a regular basis to answer questions on topical issues arising in the Department.
10. Advisers– The Panel has been selective in its engagement of advisers. It agreed to appoint expert advisers to assist with 3 of its reviews, those of a particularly technical nature. For 2 of those reviews, Intellectual Property and Financial Services Ombudsman, the advisers' primary role was to produce desktop analysis of particularly technically challenging legislation, and the Panel regards these circumstances as demonstrating when such assistance is invaluable.
11. Sub-Panel – The Panel has found limited need for the use of Sub-Panels in its term of office, the only example being the Digital Skills review that touched on  both  industry  and  educational  matters.  The  Digital  Skills  Sub-Panel's membership was Connétable S.W. Pallett of St. Brelade (Chairman), Deputy J.M. Maçon  of   St. Saviour ,   Connétable  D.W. Mezbourian  of   St. Lawrence , and Connétable J. Gallichan of St. Mary . The Panel had expected to lead a Sub-Panel in relation to Licensing Law/Alcohol Strategy, but the necessary draft Law or draft Strategy, though much discussed, failed to materialise.

Suggestions for future work

12. This section identifies possible areas for future work by a successor Panel. These suggestions are primarily legacies of the work undertaken by the Panel over  the  course  of  the  last  3 years,  and  the  expected  delivery  of  certain projects by the Minister for Economic Development that are due to cross over into the next term of the States of Jersey.

1. Incorporation of Ports of Jersey:

Further to its Comments paper relating to P.70/2012, the Panel has undertaken significant background work, which remains ongoing, in anticipation of a major Review of plans to incorporate the Ports of

Jersey.  Following  a  public  consultation  undertaken  throughout  the summer of 2014 by EDD/PoJ, the Panel has received the summary of responses and all individual responses. These, and the context of the Panel's previous background work, might help shape a review of the incorporation legislation and associated issues, which it is anticipated will  be  lodged  as  a  priority  by  the  Minister  for  Economic Development in late 2014/early 2015.

2. Tourism:

Work  implementing  the  recommendation  of  the  Tourism  Shadow Board  to  effectively  close  down  Jersey  Tourism  and  establish  an independent,  grant-funded  tourism  promotion  organisation,  Visit Jersey', is ongoing. It is expected that significant momentum might be achieved in late 2014/early 2015 by ED, following the appointment of a project co-ordinator. This matter might therefore be a priority of the new Panel (see also quarterly Hearing, 8th September 2014).

3. Jersey Aircraft Registry (JAR):

The Panel recommends follow-up to its work since 2012 on a planned Aircraft Registry, particularly the expected establishment of the JAR, and development of the detailed operational business case in the last quarter  of  2014,  subsequent  to  the  presentation  of  R.115/2014 – Financial Case for the Jersey Aircraft Registry on 7th August 2014 (see also quarterly Hearing, 8th September 2014).

Further suggestions

1. Licensing Law (final quarter 2014)
2. Financial Services Ombudsman Regulations (final quarter 2014)
3. Enterprise Strategy/Economic Growth and Diversification Strategy – updates
4. Additional follow-up to Panel Reviews, notably Retail Policy (2014), Jersey Innovation Fund (2013).

Other matters

13. In addition to the work topics outlined above, the Panel would highlight the transfer of the remit for financial services legislation and associated matters from the Minister for Economic Development to the Chief Minister/Minister for Treasury  and  Resources.  Whilst, for continuity,  the  Economic  Affairs Panel maintained responsibility for the duration of this term, itis expected that the Scrutiny remit might appropriately be taken on by the Corporate Services Scrutiny Panel.

4. EDUCATION AND HOME AFFAIRS SCRUTINY PANEL

Remit

There shall be an Education and Home Affairs Scrutiny Panel which is assigned the topics of Education, Sport and Culture and Home Affairs' (Standing Order 135(1)(a)). The Panel's remit covers the policies and work of the Minister for Education, Sport and Culture and the Minister for Home Affairs (Code of Practice 4.2).

Membership

Connétable  S.W. Pallett  of   St. Brelade ,  Chairman,  22nd  January  2014  to

Election 2014.

Connétable M.P.S. Le Troquer of St. Martin , Vice-Chairman, 22nd January

2014 to Election 2014.

Connétable S.A. Rennard of St. Saviour , 18th February 2014 to Election 2014. ***************************************************************

Deputy J.M. Maçon of St. Saviour , Chairman, 22nd November 2011 to 22nd

January 2014

Note:  The Chairman resigned due to the workload he was experiencing with other

commitments. At that point, the Panel was dissolved.

Connétable M.P.S. Le Troquer, Vice-Chairman, 22nd November 2011 to 22nd

January 2014

Connétable S.W. Pallett of St. Brelade , 22nd November 2011 to 14th January

2013

Deputy M. Tadier of St. Brelade , 15th January 2013 to 22nd January 2014 Deputy G.P. Southern of St. Helier , 4th June 2013 to 22nd January 2014.

Introduction

1. The Education and Home Affairs Scrutiny Panel has reviewed the work it has undertaken  since  its  establishment  by  the  States  in November  2011,  and agreed to provide a report to its successor Panel established by the States in its next Session to assist in developing its own work programme.
2. The report sets out –

1. the work undertaken by the Panel during the Session 2011 – 2014;
2. methods of working used by the Panel;
3. suggestions for issues that a successor Panel may wish to consider in developing its work programme.

3. The Panel met 66 times between 28th November 2011 and 28th July 2014. Details of minutes can be found on the Panel's web-pages.

Work undertaken

4. The Panel conducted the following reviews in the period 2011 to 2014 –

5. Numerous subject areas were examined by the Panel, with various amounts of work completed to provide the Panel with information to decide if a review was  necessary  or  not.  In  some  cases,  this  was  examination  of  a  few documents, in others considerably more was done, including visits or briefings from the Minister and senior staff of the department. The following topics did not require a scrutiny review –

Armed Forces Covenant

Budget 2014

Care Inspectorate Report

Child Care Registration

Criminal Justice Young Offenders Customs

Cycle Helmets

Higher Education Fees

Improving Standards of Achievement Intellectual property Rights

Maths DfESC Report

Police Force Jersey Law

PPaCE Codes

Prison

Probation Service

Rehabilitation of Offenders

Secondary Education Exam results

Sex Offenders Law

Skills Strategy

Social Inclusion

Socio-Economic Status

Sports Strategy

Starting-Pistol Incident

Unlawful Public Entertainments Regulations Wheel Clamping.

6. The Panel has fulfilled the 4 main roles of Scrutiny (Code of Practice 7.9) by undertaking work on –

1. Policy:  Introduction  of  Tasers  in Jersey,  Jersey  Music  Service: introduction  of  user  pays'  charges  (P.36/2013) –  comments, Trackers;
2. Legislation: Draft Passports and Explosives Laws,  Draft States of Jersey Police Force Law 201- (P.182/2011): comments;
3. Annual  Business  Plan  and  Budget:  Now  the  Medium  Term Financial Plan relating to ESC and HA Departments;
4. Matters  of  public  interest:  Relocation  of  Police  Headquarters, Camera Surveillance, Introduction of Tasers in Jersey, Trackers.

Methods of working

7. Quarterly Public Hearings with the Minister for Education, Sport and Culture and the Minister for Home Affairs – Every 3 months, the Panel invited the Ministers to a Public Hearing to ask questions on topical issues arising in the respective departments.
8. Advisers –  The Panel appointed expert advisers to assist with its reviews where necessary. In addition to providing briefing notes on evidence received and  assisting  with  question  plans,  advisers  have  been  able  to meet  with departmental officers on a number of occasions to discuss the background to the reviews being undertaken by the Panel.
9. Briefings –  The Panel  has  invited  Ministers  and  senior  staff  members  to provide private briefings on subjects of interest to afford the Panel background information. This assisted in deciding whether a review was necessary or provided direct information from the Department at the start of a review.
10. Public Engagement – The Panel used various elements of public engagement in all reviews, from advertising in the media for a general response from the Public to targeted requests aimed at specific groups of stakeholders.
11. Visits –  The  Panel  undertook  visits  only  where  value  could  be  added  to reviews, or the consideration of a review, by such a visit.

12. Documentation – Documentation is the mainstay of information obtained and provides the basis for questioning  at hearings, references for inclusion in reports and evidence upon which the recommendations of the Panel are based.
13. Public Hearings – Hearings where the Public and media are invited have been the main method of obtaining or challenging evidence with Ministers and other stakeholders.
14. Comments/Amendments – The Panel has noted that it has been useful to have maintained a working relationship' with the Minister and senior staff of both departments within the Panel's remit. Early discussion on new policy or legislation  being  proposed  by  the  Minister  has  produced  movement,  or perhaps agreement on the part of the Minister. This has negated the need for a full review to be undertaken, saving both public argument and the unnecessary spending of public money. The States have been notified of matters dealt with in such a manner by Comments or Amendments as necessary.
15. Background work – The Panel has received nominations for reviews from the Public and its own members. This creates varying degrees of work to establish if –

• there are concerns that warrant further investigation and
• a review would add value to the process overall and
• the subject is within the remit of the Panel.

This work may require examination of documentation, briefings from relevant individuals, a visit or other research. It has to be extensive enough for the Panel to understand the issues sufficiently to decide if the matter needs formal examination within a review.

16. Report – At the conclusion of a review, the Panel publishes a report listing the key findings and recommendations based on the evidence obtained during the review. (Comments or an Amendment may suffice.)

Suggestions for future work

17. This section identifies possible areas for future work by a successor Panel, including  forthcoming  legislation.  These  suggestions  are  based  upon  the Strategic  Plan  Initiatives  2009 – 2014  and  the  departmental  objectives approved in the 2011 States Business Plan, and derived from the experience of the Panel over the last 3 years –

1. ESC Review of Secondary Education: The Panel is aware that the outgoing Director of Education is undertaking a review into secondary education. This is an emotive subject which has a system that is now almost  unique  to Jersey.  Whatever  the  review  suggests  will  be controversial  for  some.  This  is an  area  that  may  benefit  from  a Scrutiny Review, although it may be appropriate to wait and see what the Minister for ESC chooses to do about the review first.

2. Youth Service: Following the CSR cuts, the Youth Service had to make serious changes, and for a time it looked like frontline services would  be  lost.  Additional  support  from  the  Parishes  and  private donations saved the day. The following points have been brought to the attention of the Panel –

1. 10% was taken by the CSR from the total YS budget, yet 45% of the YS budget comes from voluntary sources.
2. This important service is reliant on voluntary contributions.
3. Permanent staff salaries account for the largest part of the YS budget and are funded therefore by voluntary contributions.
4. All  Parishes  benefit  in one  way  or  another  from  the  YS service. However, there is no common funding from Parishes.
5. Schools are funded on a per head basis. The YS is flat rate.
6. The media have reported some tragic incidents during 2013 and  2014  relating  to mental  health  issues  of  the  Island's youth. Nothing has been done to increase the YS counselling service.
7. The Minister has no statutory requirements to fund the YS. Therefore there is in nothing in place to protect this service. A Minister could reduce or even simply shut the service down to save money.

Initial  enquiries  with  the  Minister  suggest  that  there  may  be disagreement with some or all of the above concerns. (See quarterly Public Hearing 30th June 2014, pages 8–17).

3. Highlands College: During the review into the Trackers Apprentice Programme, the Panel uncovered evidence of questions as to whether Highlands was large enough to deliver the diversity and quality of courses it aspires to provide, that the campus is physically suitable and that the College is funded adequately to provide a modern training and education facility of the standard expected of a modern training provider. The Panel considers that a review may be appropriate to examine the funding and future needs of the campus.

5. ENVIRONMENT SCRUTINY PANEL

Remit

There shall be a scrutiny panel which is assigned the topics of environment and technical services ("environment");' (Standing Order 135(1)(d)). The Panel's remit covers the Departments of the Environment and Transport and Technical Services (Code of Practice 4.2).

Membership

Deputy J.H. Young of St. Brelade (Chairman)

Deputy S.G. Luce of St. Martin (Vice-Chairman)

Connétable P.J. Rondel of St. John

Deputy J.M. Le Bailly of St. Mary (appointed to the Panel 21st January 2014).

Introduction

1. The Environment Panel has reviewed the work it has undertaken since its establishment by the States in December 2011, and agreed to provide a report to its successor Panel established by the States in its next Session to assist in developing its own work programme.
2. The report sets out –
   1. the work undertaken by the Panel during the session 2011 – 2014
   2. methods of working used by the Panel
   3. suggestions for issues that a successor Panel may wish to consider in developing its work programme.
3. The Panel met 70 times between December 2011 and September 2014. Details of minutes can be found on the Panel's web-pages.

Work undertaken

4. The Panel conducted the following reviews in the period 2012 to 2014 –

5. The Panel has fulfilled the 4 main roles of scrutiny (Code of Practice 7.9) by undertaking work on –

1. Policy: Ash Disposal; Energy Policy; Waste Water Strategy.
2. Legislation: Draft Aquatic Resources Law; compulsory wearing of cycle helmets.
3. Annual Business Plan and Budget: Medium Term Financial Plan: the Panel reviewed aspects of the Medium Term Financial Plan in 2012,  as  part  of  an  overall  review  carried  out  by  the  Corporate Services (MTFP) Sub-Panel.
4. Matters  of  public  interest:  Green  Street  Police  HQ:  Traffic  and Parking; taxi regulation; compulsory wearing of cycle helmets; radon.

Methods of working

6. Co-option – The Panel considered co-opting another member for the purposes of the radon review, but unavoidable delays to the timing of the review caused the additional member to withdraw. Consequently, all Panel reviews have been conducted by the full Panel.
7. Quarterly Public Hearings – The Panel invited the Ministers for Planning and Environment and Transport and Technical Services to answer questions on topical issues arising in the respective departments on a regular basis.
8. Advisers – The Panel appointed expert advisers to assist with the majority of its reviews.  In  addition  to  providing  technical  reports,  briefing  notes  on evidence received and assisting with question plans, advisers have been able to meet  with  departmental  officers  on  a  number  of  occasions  to discuss important background to the reviews being undertaken by the Panel.
9. Briefings – The Panel has invited Members of the Executive to give informal briefings on particular subjects, both for background information at the start of a review, and on important topics which the Panel was monitoring but not currently reviewing, to establish whether it wanted to undertake a review into the matter.

Suggestions for future work

10. This section identifies possible areas for future work by a successor Panel, including  forthcoming  legislation.  These  suggestions  are  made  following consideration of the States Strategic Plan, departmental business plans and the Panel's  experience  of  departmental  priorities  and  initiatives  over  the  past 3 years.

• Radon:  the  Panel's  review  of  radon  (presented  to  the  States  on  8th September  2014)  drew  attention  to  a  lack  of  co-ordination  and commitment  amongst  States  departments  in  addressing  the  recognised problem  of  high  levels  of  radon  in  the  Island,  and  the  potential

consequences  for  public  health.  The  Panel  believes  that  the recommendations in its report (S.R.11/2014) may need to be followed up by a successor Panel to ensure that appropriate action is taken.

• Heritage protection: due to other commitments, the outgoing Panel was unable  to  carry  out  a  review  of  heritage  protection  during  its  term. Members consider that a review would be beneficial to examine the policy and practice of the Planning Department in implementing development control policies of the Island Plan, and consider the practical effect of the new system for identifying and listing heritage sites and properties under the Planning and Building (Jersey) Law 2002, following the White Paper consultation carried out in 2010. Specific concerns include: aspects of development  control  policies  and  their  implementation  in  respect  of historic buildings, including consideration of their appropriateness and practicality  and  property  restrictions;  potential  conflicts  between restrictions on historic buildings compared with other planning policies and  building  bye-law  requirements;  existing  and  proposed  restrictions applied  to  listed  buildings  in  respect  of  options  for  their  repair, refurbishment, redevelopment or change of use, and whether these are fair and reasonable; and the availability and use of grants or incentives to assist owners of listed buildings, compared with other jurisdictions.
• Energy  Efficiency  Scheme:  this  subject  was  opened  up  during  the Panel's review of the draft Energy Policy of the Minister for Planning and Environment, and subsequently discussed at a number of public hearings. The Panel has some concerns about the eligibility criteria for grants under the  existing  scheme,  and  whether  these  have  been  applied  fairly  and consistently across all applications and properties that have benefited from improvement works. Anecdotal evidence suggests that some owners who have  benefited  under  the scheme  may  be  independently  wealthy.  The Panel  considers  that  this  may  require  investigation,  and  that  plans  to extend  the  scheme  to  the  able  to  pay'  sector  may  need  a  different approach to ensure that the use of public funds does not result in direct financial  benefit  to  property  owners,  rather  than  the  environmental benefits intended through reduction in energy use. The Panel has also requested that as this involves grants being made from public funds, full details of the internal audit report into the scheme should be made public.
• Taxi  regulation:  during  its  tenure,  the  Panel  discussed  the  need  for improvements to the Island's taxi service on a number of occasions with the Minister for Transport and Technical Services, as well as participating in consultation carried out by the department in respect of the White Paper Taxi  Regulatory  Reform –  Recommendations'.  Members  were  led  to believe that some reforms would be introduced during the term of office of the current States. However, following a private briefing on 30th May 2014  where  the  Panel  received  a  confidential  paper  on  taxi  strategy implementation, it became apparent that this was not going to happen, leading  to  concerns  that  long-awaited  improvements  may  not  be forthcoming. The Panel considers that as a matter of importance to the public,  if  proposals  to  improve  the  taxi  service  are  not  followed  up promptly by the department, a Scrutiny review may be appropriate to

ascertain what has happened to the proposals and when the necessary improvements will be introduced.

• Crematorium  emissions:  correspondence  on  this  matter  from  the Minister for Health and Social Services in March 2014 confirmed that emissions from the Crematorium were unabated, and that there were no plans to address this for the existing Crematorium. While it was argued that this put Jersey in a similar position to many UK authorities with unabated  crematoria,  the  Panel  maintained  its  view  that  permitting unabated emissions of toxic substances such as mercury was unacceptable for a wealthy Island, and that the matter should not be allowed to drop. It was  noted  that  the  issue  was  potentially  complicated  by  commercial initiatives to introduce alternatives to cremation or burial for the disposal of human remains, a matter which would require changes to the law and was being addressed by the Minister for Planning and Environment.

6. HEALTH, SOCIAL SECURITY AND HOUSING SCRUTINY PANEL

Remit

The Panel's remit covers the Departments of the Ministers for Health and Social Services, Social Security and Housing (Code of Practice 4.2). In 2014, the Chairmen's Committee agreed that the scrutiny of the Housing Department should be transferred to the Environment and Transport and Technical Services Scrutiny Panel after the elections, subject to adoption of the proposition by the States.

Membership:

Deputy K.L. Moore of St. Peter (Chairman) Deputy J.A. Hilton of St. Helier (Vice-Chairman) Deputy J.G. Reed of St. Ouen .

Introduction

1. The Health, Social Security and Housing Scrutiny Panel has reviewed the work it has undertaken since its establishment by the States in December 2011, and agreed to provide a report to its successor Panel established by the States in its next Session to assist in developing its own work programme.
2. The report sets out –
   1. the work undertaken by the Panel during the session 2011 – 2014
   2. methods of working used by the Panel
   3. suggestions for issues that a successor Panel may wish to consider in developing its work programme.
3. The Panel met 217 times between 2nd December 2011 and 4th September 2014. Details of minutes can be found on the Panel's web-pages.

Work undertaken

4. The Panel conducted the following reviews in the period 2011 to 2014 –

Amendments

The Panel brought various amendments to propositions throughout its term of office. These are as follows –

• The Panel lodged an amendment to the Strategic Plan (P.28/2012) in April 2012 to include "Promoting Family and Community Values" which was accepted by the Assembly.
• The Panel lodged 3 amendments to the Proposition P.82/2012 "Health and Social Services: A New Way Forward" in October 2012 –

• regarding the proposals to be brought forward by the end of 2014 for a "new" Hospital, the Panel called for an amendment to include full details  of  all  manpower  and  resource  implications  necessary  to implement the proposals – supported by the Council of Ministers and accepted;
• for the development of a new primary care model, the Panel called for an amendment to bring forward proposals by the end of 2013 as opposed to 2014 as stated in the proposition – this was not supported by the Council of Ministers and was withdrawn during the debate. However, a compromise was reached, by which the Chief Minister assured the Panel and States Assembly that the Council of Ministers would complete the work on the new primary care model by the end of September 2014.

• Regarding the proposals for a sustainable funding mechanism, the Panel called for an amendment to bring forward the proposals before the end of September 2014, as opposed to "by the end of 2014" as mentioned in the proposition –  this  was  supported  by  the  Council  of  Ministers  and accepted.
• The Panel also lodged an amendment to the Reform of Social Housing (P.33/2013) on 16th April 2013.

Other matters

On 4th June 2013, P.72/2013 "Hospital Outpatients: re-introduction of prescriptions charges"  was  lodged  by  the  Minister  for  Health  and  Social  Services.  The  Panel undertook a review into P.72/2013 and shared with the Department the 4 proposed amendments it planned to undertake. On 5th September 2014, the Minister for Health and Social Services withdrew P.72/2013 and the Panel understand this was withdrawn as a result of its inquiries. The Panel is delighted that Scrutiny was able to identify areas that needed further clarification before the matter was implemented.

5. The Panel has fulfilled the 4 main roles of Scrutiny (Code of Practice 7.9) by undertaking work on –

1. Policy: Housing Transformation Programme, Health White Paper, the Redesign of Health and Social Services.
2. Legislation: Long-Term Care Scheme, Regulation of Care (Jersey) Law  201-,  Employment  (Amendment  No. 8)  (Jersey)  Law  201- (family-friendly), Discrimination (Jersey) Law 201-.
3. Annual Business Plan and Budget: Review of the Medium Term Financial Plan for each of the 3 Departments.
4. Matters of public interest: Respite Care for Children and Young Adults, Draft Discrimination (Jersey) Law 201-, Health White Paper, the  Redesign  of  Health  and  Social  Services,  Employment (Amendment No. 8) (Jersey) Law 201- (family-friendly), Long-Term Care  Scheme,  Child  and  Adolescent  Mental  Health  Services (CAMHS), Housing Transformation Programme.

Methods of working

6. Sub-Panels – The Panel found that the creation of Sub-Panels has assisted in developing its work programme, enabling the skills and expertise of other Members to be incorporated in the Panel's work. The Housing Transformation Programme was conducted in this manner.
7. Co-option – The Panel found that co-opting other States Members onto its Panel has been very effective, especially when a topic comes under the same remit  as  another  Panel.  For  example,  the  Panel  co-opted  Senator S.C. Ferguson from the Corporate Services Panel to undertake the review into the redesign of Health and Social Services, which included looking at the financial aspects of the proposals.
8. Quarterly  Public  Hearings  with  the  Minister  for  Health  and  Social Services, Minister for Housing and Minister for Social Security – The Panel invited the Ministers on a regular basis to ask questions on topical issues arising in the respective departments.
9. Advisers – The Panel appointed expert advisers to assist with the majority of its reviews. In addition to providing briefing notes on evidence received and assisting  with  question  plans,  advisers  have  been  able  to meet  with

departmental  officers  on  a  number  of  occasions  to  discuss  important background to the reviews being undertaken by the Panel or Sub-Panel. The Panel also used expert advisers to undertake desktop reviews, issuing Panel comments to accompany the adviser's report.

10. Briefings – The Panel has invited members of the Executive to give informal briefings on a particular subject for background information at the start of a review. For example, the Minister for Health and Social Services gave the Panel a briefing on the new Hospital and what the 10 year plan would entail to assist  it  with  its  understanding  of  the  subject.  This  briefing  was  jointly presented by the Treasurer, who gave insight into the financial side of the Hospital build and how costs were established. The Panel has also had private briefings  which  have  helped  establish  the  foundation  for  a  review,  in particular CAMHS.

Suggestions for future work

11. This section identifies possible areas for future work by a successor Panel, including  forthcoming  legislation.  These  suggestions  are  drawn  from  the Strategic  Plan  Initiatives  2009 – 2014  and  the  departmental  objectives approved in the 2014 States Business Plan.

• Respite  Care  for  Adults:  When  the  Panel  undertook  its  review  into Respite Care for Children and Young Adults, it seemed the next step would be to undertake a follow-up review to see what was being done to care for adults needing respite. The Panel has met with Mrs. L. Bratch, who represents the Special Needs Advisory Panel (SNAP), informing her it would put this review on its legacy report.
• Patient Safety in the Hospital: The Panel has received correspondence from a member of the Public stating concerns around patient safety in the Hospital, with patients being put at harm. The Panel believes that this should be investigated further.
• Continuation of Redesign of Health and Social Services – community and hospital services: The Panel presented its report of the Health White Paper in 2012, and following on from this work presented its report of the redesign of health and social services in 2014. The redesign programme is a 10 year programme, and the Panel hopes its successor Panel will follow on  from  its  review  and  monitor  the  implementation  of  its  accepted recommendations. The Council of Ministers plans to lodge proposals for the new Hospital in 2015 via a Full Business Case, which will be an important part of any review which is undertaken in the future.
• Sex Discrimination: The Discrimination Law was debated and approved by the States on 14th May 2013. The Panel undertook a desktop review of the Law and presented its report to inform the States debate. The Minister for  Social  Security  plans  to  introduce  Regulations  under  the  Law,  to address discrimination on the grounds of sex, age and disability. The sex discrimination Regulations are due to be lodged in January 2015, and the Panel believes these should be scrutinised by its successor Panel as a continuation of its work.

Further suggestions

• The Panel would recommend its successor Panel to continuously follow up and monitor the implementation of accepted recommendations from past reviews.

Other matters

12. In addition to the work topics outlined above, the Panel would highlight the issue  of  following  up  the  findings  and  recommendations  made  within  its CAMHS  report,  as  they  are  linked  specifically  to the  Department's  own review into mental health which is due to conclude in July 2015.

7. PUBLIC ACCOUNTS COMMITTEE

Remit

The terms of reference for the Public Accounts Committee are found at Standing Order 132.

Although  the  emerging  convention  is  for  the  majority  of  the  Committee's  work programme to be based on reports published by the Comptroller and Auditor General (C&AG), Standing Order 132(1)(c) provides scope for the Committee to select review topics unilaterally.

Membership

Between November 2011 and November 2014, the Committee was constituted in accordance with Standing Order 131. Its membership was as follows –

Title  Name

Deputy  T.A.  Vallois Senator  S.C.  Ferguson Deputy  S.C.  Pitman Deputy  R.J.  Rondel Mr  A.  Fearn

Mr  C.  Evans Mr  S.  Haigh Mr  J.F.  Mills

Mr  I.  Ridgeway Deputy  G.C.L.  Baudains Mr  R.J.  Parker

Role  Date Appointed  Date Resigned Chairman  22/11/2011  End of Term Vice-Chairman  24/11/2011  End of Term States Member  24/11/2011  25/09/2012 States Member  24/11/2011  End of Term Non-States  17/01/2012  26/06/2012 Non-States  17/01/2012  26/06/2012 Non-States  17/01/2012  19/02/2013 Non-States  11/09/2012  End of Term Non-States  11/09/2012  End of Term States Member  25/09/2012  End of Term Non-States  04/06/2013  End of Term