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
RELOCATION OF JERSEY DAIRY: INVESTIGATION INTO ALTERNATIVE SITES (P.5/2007) – COMMENTS
Presented to the States on 29th January 2007 by the Economic Affairs Scrutiny Panel
STATES GREFFE
COMMENTS
The proposition identifies the Howard Davis Farm site as green agricultural land', when in fact is part of the Built-Up Area and might best be described as a brown field' site.
The proposition states that all Howard Davis Farm should only be considered when all "other alternative options have been exhausted".
The truth is that it is simply not possible to find a comparable site, and certainly not one as eminently suitable for this use.
The Sub-Panel cannot identify another 7.5 vergée site in the Built-Up Area, under States ownership, that is not suitable for housing use. It will certainly not be possible to find a site with such significant marriage value' with the Royal Jersey Agricultural and Horticultural Society, centrally positioned and suitable for this use. It is hoped that the educational element proposed by the Sub-Panel would also be in accordance with the wishes of T.B. Davis.
The Davis family have agreed to permit the partial abrogation of the covenant. Their initial objections were based on a misunderstanding regarding the ownership of Jersey Dairy, and the terms by which the dairy was to obtain the land.
The Sub-Panel therefore considers that there is no likelihood of finding a more suitable site.
There is also serious danger in further procrastination. The dairy industry is in a precarious position, both through internal inefficiencies and a crisis of confidence. The next signal that the States gives to the industry will determine its future. If the crisis of confidence is allowed to continue then there will be an exodus of farmers from the industry.
Milk prices to the public are artificially high and payments to farmers in many cases insufficient for producers to continue in the industry in the long term. This is due in a large part to the outdated and inefficient nature of the Five Oaks dairy facility.
Relocation to Howard Davis Farm, carried out as soon as possible, would be of benefit not only to the industry but also to every person in Jersey who considers the price of milk to be too high.
It must also be considered that the milk importation ban might not be permanent. Sooner or later Jersey Dairy might have to face competition from imported milk. If the dairy has not been given an opportunity to increase its efficiency and lower the price to consumers due to interminable delays then we might see the end of a viable milk production industry in the Island if a proportion of customers chose not to pay the 30-40p price difference.
The Sub-Panel is fully supportive of the partial abrogation of the covenant and the move of Jersey Dairy to Howard Davis Farm under a lease agreement, as detailed in its comments on P.170/2006.