Skip to main content

States Strategic Plan 2009-2014 (P.52/2009): comments

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

STATES STRATEGIC PLAN 2009 – 2014 (P.52/2009): COMMENTS

Presented to the States on 28th May 2009 by the Chairmen's Committee

STATES GREFFE

2009   Price code: A  P.52 Com.

COMMENTS

Introduction

Article (18)(2)(e) of the States of Jersey Law 2005 indicates that the Strategic Plan of the Council of Ministers will be lodged "for referral to one or more Scrutiny Panels".

Scrutiny of the States Strategic Plan 2009 – 2014

It will be noticeable to the States Assembly that no amendments to or comments on the draft Strategic Plan have been brought to the States by any of the individual Scrutiny Panels This is not due to the fact that Scrutiny members are fully supportive of the draft Plan nor to the fact that the Panels have not considered it; indeed all Panels have taken time to look at the Plan in an endeavour to fulfil their responsibilities.

Work has been undertaken on the draft Plan where it has been felt that some detail was apparent or available to scrutinize, however, the Chairmen's Committee believes that the draft Plan is written in such general terms and at such a high level that it does not lend itself to the purpose of scrutiny.

This is evidenced in particular by the work of the Corporate Affairs Scrutiny Panel. Notwithstanding  apparent  difficulties,  reviews  have  been  undertaken  into  the Economic Stimulus Plan which relates to Priority 1 of the Plan "to support the Island community  through  the  economic  downturn".  Priority 5  to  "promote  sustainable population  levels"  has  also  been  covered  by  the work  of  the  Corporate  Services Migration and Population Sub-Panel. Both these reviews will be covered by separate reports which will be presented to the States. However, it was apparent from Hearings that much detail remains to be decided or released, making scrutiny impracticable and impossible. This is not surprising given the indication from the Chief Minister that this Strategic Plan was intended to be broader and at a higher level that the previous Plan.

The Economic Affairs Scrutiny Panel also concurs with this view, and the Education and Home Affairs Scrutiny Panel has communicated much the same opinion to the Chief Minister, commenting that due to the Plan being written in general terms, it lacks a cutting edge and detail which is needed to be able to scrutinize. The Panel believes that the critical role for Scrutiny should be at the Business Planning stage.

The Environment Panel believes that the best way to proceed would be to involve continuing consultation on plans which are well advanced, such as the Energy Policy and Liquid Waste Strategy, while avoiding setting down guidelines for new policies that are too rigid and lack the flexibility to respond to developing financial pressures. If Departments continue on their present spending trajectories, it seems that there is a serious danger of building structural deficit into States budgets.

There is also a deep concern that, given the current unstable economic climate, setting high level vision across the board may not be appropriate. The Chief Minister, in a submission to the Corporate Services Scrutiny Panel, referred to the Strategic Plan being seen as a "live" document. However, once the Plan has been approved by the Assembly, there would seem to be little opportunity for change. Given the most frequently used word in recent reports of the Fiscal Policy Panel is "uncertainty", the Chairmen's Committee believes that the draft Plan does not take the changing world into account. If approved by the States, this Plan will be "set in stone" and not permit the Council of Ministers to respond in the way it should to real and changing world

Page - 2

P.52/2009 Com.

pressures,  in  a  timely  and  imaginative  manner  and  through  the  demonstration  of leadership qualities. The obligation to follow the Plan, if approved, will mean that there will be no ability to "think outside the box" in responding creatively to new challenges to help the Island weather the worst effects of global recession.

Conclusion

Ultimately, Scrutiny can offer no view as to whether the Plan itself should be rejected or  approved,  as  this  would  not  be  feasible  given  the  lack  of  detail  available  to scrutinize.

It does, however, look forward to the Annual Business Plans in which it is explained how each Department's work fits in with each priority and how progress will be made and monitored. Maybe in that way, Panels' involvement in the Strategic Plan will come at a point when more detailed and verifiable evidence is available for Panels and the public to assess delivery of the Strategic Plan.

Given these issues, the Committee believes that expectations for Panels' involvement in  scrutinizing  the  draft  Strategic  Plan  should  be  reduced,  given  the  lack  of information available to scrutinize. Indeed, it may well be preferable that the Strategic Plan  is  the  Council  of  Ministers'  "manifesto"  for  its  future  work  and  should  be presented to the States rather than debated.

Page - 3

P.52/2009 Com.