States of Jersey Complaints Board: findings – complaint against a decision of the Minister for Planning and Environment (R.144/2013) and response of the Minister (R.154/2013) – correspondence from the Deputy Chairman of the Board.

STATES OF JERSEY

STATES OF JERSEY COMPLAINTS BOARD: FINDINGS – COMPLAINT AGAINST A DECISION OF THE MINISTER FOR PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT (R.144/2013) AND RESPONSE OF THE MINISTER (R.154/2013) – CORRESPONDENCE FROM THE DEPUTY CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD

Presented to the States on 11th February 2014 by the Privileges and Procedures Committee

STATES GREFFE

2014   Price code: A  R.15

2 FOREWORD

Article 9(9) of the Administrative Decisions (Review) (Jersey) Law 1982 requires the Privileges and Procedures Committee [PPC] to present to the States the findings of every Complaints Board hearing and any other information or report that it receives in this regard.

On 19th November 2013, PPC presented to the States the findings of a Complaints Board held on 23rd October 2013 to review a decision of the Minister for Planning and  Environment  (R.144/2013).  Following  the  Minister's  reconsideration  of  the decision  as  required  by  the  Board,  the  Committee  presented  the  response  of  the Minister to the States (R.154/2013).

The Committee has since received correspondence from the Deputy Chairman of the Board regarding the response of the Minister for Planning and Environment. The correspondence is being presented to the States in accordance with Article 9(9) and the Committee will consider the matters raised in early course.

Deputy M. Tadier of St. Brelade

Vice-Chairman, Privileges and Procedures Committee

R.15/2014

3

LETTER FROM THE DEPUTY CHAIRMAN OF THE STATES OF JERSEY COMPLAINTS BOARD

Dear Chairman and Members of the Privileges and Procedures Committee Administrative Decision – Mr. Manning vs Planning and Environment

As you are aware, a Board which comprised Christine Vibert , Deputy Chairman and Messrs.  Geoffrey  Crill  and  John  Mills,  presented  its  findings  from  the  hearing convened on 23rd October 2013 to your Committee in November 2013. This was subsequently presented as a formal report (R.144/2013 refers)

The  Minister  for  Planning  and  Environment  responded  on  18th  December  2013 (R.154/2013 refers). Mr. Manning is dissatisfied with this response and has requested that the Board make a further comment on the matter in accordance with Article 8 of the Administrative Decisions (Review) (Jersey) Law 1982.

The Minister's response acknowledges that the Board had suggested that Mr. Manning be invited to submit an application or consent for a non-agricultural storage use on the site,  but  he  insinuates  that  this  suggestion  implies  that  such  an  application  will undoubtedly be approved. The Board is a properly constituted body with a duty to look  at  matters  dispassionately  and  it  would  never  assume  to  predetermine  the outcome of a review. The Board wishes to make it clear that it did not recommend that Mr. Manning's  application  be  rubber  stamped'  and  is  unsure  how  this  could  be construed  from  paragraph 6.9  of  its  findings.  Quite  the  contrary,  the  Board  was recommending that the Department revert to its own proper process for consideration of applications, rather than follow the ad hoc unaccountable process which it had appeared to adopt in dealing with Mr. Manning's case. The recommendation was that Mr. Manning be invited to re-apply for change of use and that the correct processes should be applied on this occasion in determining this application.

The Board is concerned that the Minister rejected the comments made concerning the application of the so-called 8 year rule'. The Board requested that the Minister offer guidance on the rule in future, because even if there was no result for Mr. Manning, the 8 year rule certainly needs clarification within the law.

The  Board  recognizes  that  it  can  only  make  recommendations  to  Ministers  and Departments and these are not binding. It is nonetheless disappointing for the Board to have its findings insufficiently considered or implemented. The Board requests that the Committee considers what action it might wish to take if Ministers persist in ignoring Board findings, leaving the public with little or no recourse. This has the potential to seriously undermine the Panel's role.

Christine Vibert

Deputy Chairman

States of Jersey Complaints Board

R.15/2014