States Meeting Transcript - 04/12/2007

STATES OF JERSEY OFFICIAL REPORT

TUESDAY, 4th DECEMBER 2007

QUESTIONS......................................................................................7

1. Written Questions........................................................................7

1. TO THE MINISTER FOR HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES BY DEPUTY S.S.P.A. POWER OF ST. BRELADE REGARDING COST OF MRI SCANS:....................7
2. TO THE CHIEF MINISTER BY DEPUTY P.V.F. LE CLAIRE OF ST. HELIER REGARDING CLIMATE CHANGE:......................................................7
3. TO THE MINISTER FOR PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT BY DEPUTY P.V.F. LE CLAIRE OF ST. HELIER REGARDING SHARED EQUITY SCHEMES FOR JERSEY:...................................................................................10

4. TO THE MINISTER FOR HOUSING BY DEPUTY P.V.F. LE CLAIRE OF ST. HELIER REGARDING SHARED EQUITY SCHEMES FOR JERSEY:..............11
5. TO THE MINISTER FOR SOCIAL SECURITY BY DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST HELIER REGARDING THE PROMOTION OF INDEPENDENCE AS PART OF THE SOCIAL POLICY FRAMEWORK: ................................................11

6. TO THE MINISTER FOR HOUSING BY DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER REGARDING PROPORTION OF STATES SOCIAL RENTING TENANTS PAYING BY DIRECT DEBIT: ...........................................................12
7. TO THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES BY DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER REGARDING SPECIAL PAYMENTS FOR THOSE FALLING BETWEEN INCOME SUPPORT AND INCOME TAX THRESHOLDS:..12

8. TO THE CHAIRMAN, COMITÉ DES CONNÉTABLES BY DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER REGARDING THE ELECTORAL REGISTER: ......13
9. TO THE MINISTER FOR HOME AFFAIRS BY DEPUTY S.S.P.A. POWER OF ST BRELADE REGARDING THE DEPORTATION OF DRUG TRAFFICKING OFFENDERS: .............................................................................14

10. TO THE MINISTER FOR HOME AFFAIRS BY DEPUTY S.S.P.A. POWER OF ST. BRELADE REGARDING THE REMOVAL OF DAMAGED VEHICLES FROM THE SCENE OF ROAD TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS:............................................15

11. TO THE MINISTER FOR HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES BY DEPUTY G.C.L. BAUDAINS OF ST CLEMENT REGARDING THE PREVENTION OF INFLUENZA: ..............................................................................................16

12. TO THE MINISTER FOR PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT BY DEPUTY G.C.L. BAUDAINS OF ST CLEMENT REGARDING THE PERCENTAGE FOR ART POLICY:...................................................................................17

13. TO THE MINISTER FOR TRANSPORT AND TECHNICAL SERVICES BY DEPUTY S. PITMAN OF ST. HELIER REGARDING INCREASES IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT SERVICES SINCE LIBERATION STATION WAS OPENED:........20

2. Oral Questions...........................................................................20

2.1 Deputy G.P. Southern of St. Helier of the Minister for Economic Development regarding protection of the Island's skills and training base following the privatisation of Jersey Telecom: ...............................................................................21 Senator P.F.C. Ozouf (The Minister for Economic Development):............................21

1. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................21
2. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................21
3. Deputy J.A. Martin of St. Helier:.......................................................21
4. Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire of St. Helier : ..................................................21

2.2. Senator L. Norman of the Minister for Economic Development regarding the timetable for the introduction of Price Marking Regulations: .....................................22 Senator P.F.C. Ozouf (The Minister for Economic Development):............................22

1. Senator L. Norman: ....................................................................22
2. Deputy J.A. Martin:....................................................................22
3. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................23
4. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier of St. Saviour:...............................................23
5. Deputy J.A. Martin:....................................................................23

3. Deputy K.C. Lewis of St. Saviour of the Minister for Transport and Technical Services regarding consultation to review restart of the hopper bus service:......................24 Deputy G.W.J. de Faye of St. Helier (The Minister for Transport and Technical Services):...24

1. Deputy K.C. Lewis :....................................................................24
2. Deputy C.J. Scott Warr en of St. Saviour:...............................................24

3. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................25
4. Deputy C.J. Scott Warr en: ..............................................................25
5. Deputy J.B. Fox of St. Helier:..........................................................25

4. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier of the Minister for Home Affairs regarding succession planning within the departments under Home Affairs: ..................................26 Deputy A.D. Lewis of St. John (Assistant Minister for Home Affairs - rapporteur):..........26

1. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................26
2. Deputy J.B. Fox:........................................................................27
3. Deputy S. Power of St. Brelade : ........................................................27
4. Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire: ...............................................................27
5. Deputy J.J. Huet of St. Helier : ..........................................................28
6. Deputy S.C. Ferguson of St. Brelade : ..................................................28
7. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................28

5. Deputy K.C. Lewis of the Minister for Treasury and Resources regarding the cost of clothing a child:........................................................................29 Senator T.A. Le Sueur (The Minister for Treasury and Resources): ..........................29

1. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................29
2. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................29
3. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................29

6. Deputy J.G. Reed of St. Ouen of the Minister for Economic Development regarding number portability between mobile phone operators:...................................30 Senator P.F.C. Ozouf (The Minister for Economic Development):............................30

1. The Deputy of St. Ouen:................................................................30
2. Deputy J.A. Martin:....................................................................30
3. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................30
4. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................31
5. Deputy J.A. Martin:....................................................................31

7. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding vale for money in respect of nursing care purchased from the private sector:................31 Senator B.E. Shenton (The Minister for Health and Social Services):.........................31

1. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................31
2. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................32
3. Deputy A.E. Pryke of Trinity :..........................................................32
4. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................32

8. Deputy D.W. Mezbourian of St. Lawrence of the Chief Minister regarding the current industrial dispute involving ambulance crews:..........................................32 Senator F.H. Walker (The Chief Minister):...................................................32

1. Deputy D.W. Mezbourian :..............................................................32
2. Deputy D.W. Mezbourian :..............................................................33
3. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier...............................................................33

9. Deputy J.A. Martin of the Minister for Economic Development regarding the terms of reference for the review of the Jersey Competition Regulatory Authority: ..............33 Senator P.F.C. Ozouf (The Minister for Economic Development):............................33

1. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................33
2. Deputy S.C. Ferguson:..................................................................33
3. Deputy J.A. Martin:....................................................................34
4. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................34
5. Deputy J.A. Martin:....................................................................34
6. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................35

10. Deputy S. Power of the Minister for Economic Development regarding the Alber Pier parking facilities:.......................................................................35 Senator P.F.C. Ozouf (The Minister for Economic Development):............................35

Deputy A.J.H. Maclean of St. Helier (Assistant Minister, Economic Development -

Rapporteur):............................................................................35

1. Deputy S.Power:....................................................................36
2. Deputy S.Power:....................................................................36
3. Deputy S.Power:....................................................................36

11. The Deputy of St. Martin of the Minister for Treasury and Resources regarding Clos due Feuvre, St. Martin and access to Field 690A:...........................................36 Senator T.A. Le Sueur (Minister for Treasury and Resources): ...............................37 Deputy J.A.N. Le Fondré of St. Lawrence (Assistant Minister, Treasury and Resources - rapporteur):.............................................................................37

1. The Deputy of St. Martin : ...........................................................37
2. The Deputy of St. Martin : ...........................................................38

12. The Deputy of St. Martin of the Minister for Home Affairs regarding formal procedures to allay sense of grievance:.............................................................38 The Deputy of St. John (Assistant Minister, Home Affairs - rappoteur): ......................38

1. The Deputy of St. Martin : ...........................................................38
2. Deputy S.C. Ferguson:..............................................................39
3. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:...........................................................39
4. Deputy J.A. Martin: .................................................................39
5. The Deputy of St. Martin : ...........................................................40

13. Senator L. Norman of the Minister for Economic Development regarding the resolution of the fishing dispute with Guernsey:...................................................40

Senator P.F.C. Ozouf (The Minister for Economic Development):............................40

14. Deputy S. Power of the Minister for Economic Development regarding the number of people travelling to and from Heathrow on British Midland Airways:..................40 Senator P.F.C. Ozouf (The Minister for Economic Development):............................40 Deputy A.J.H. Maclean (Assistant Minister, Economic Development - rapporteur):..........41

1. The Deputy of St. Martin : ...........................................................41
2. Deputy S.Power:....................................................................41
3. The Deputy of St. John:..............................................................41
4. The Deputy of St. John:..............................................................42
5. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:...........................................................42
6. Deputy S.Power:....................................................................42

15. The Deputy of St. Ouen of the Minister for Treasury and Resources regarding pensioners monthly telephone rental: ..............................................................43 Senator T.A. Le Sueur (The Minister for Treasury and Resources): ..........................43

1. The Deputy of St. Ouen:.............................................................43
2. Deputy J.A. Martin: .................................................................43
3. Deputy G.P. Southern : ..............................................................44
4. Deputy G.P. Southern : ..............................................................44

3. Questions to Ministers Without Notice - The Minister for Social Security ............44

1. Deputy J.A. Martin:....................................................................44 Senator P.F. Routier (The Minister for Social Security): ......................................44

1. Deputy J.A. Martin:....................................................................45
   2. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................45

3.2.1 Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................45

3. Senator S. Syvret:......................................................................45

3.3.1 Senator S. Syvret:......................................................................46

4. Deputy C.F. Labey of Grouville :........................................................46
5. Deputy C.J. Scott Warr en: ..............................................................47

4. Questions to Ministers Without Notice - The Chief Minister..........................47

1. Deputy P.J.D. Ryan of St. Helier : ......................................................47 Senator F.H. Walker (The Chief Minister):...................................................47
2. Senator S. Syvret:......................................................................47
3. Senator T.J. Le Main: ..................................................................47
4. Deputy S.Power:.......................................................................48
5. Senator S. Syvret:......................................................................48

1. Senator S. Syvret:......................................................................48
2. Senator S. Syvret:......................................................................48

6. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................49
7. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................49
8. The Deputy of St. John:................................................................49
9. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................50
10. Deputy S.C. Ferguson:..................................................................50
11. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................50
12. Deputy J.A. Martin:....................................................................51
13. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................51

STATEMENTS ON A MATTER OF OFFICIAL RESPONSIBILITY........................51

5. Statement by the Chief Minister regarding the relocation of Mr. Andrew Williamson to the States Greffe Offices ..............................................................51

5.1 Senator F.H. Walker (The Chief Minister):.............................................51

5.1.1 Senator S. Syvret:......................................................................51

6. Statement by the Minister for Transport and Technical Services regarding the incinerator at Bellozanne................................................................52

6.1 Deputy G.W.J. de Faye (The Minister for Transport and Technical Services): ..........52

1. Deputy R.C. Duhamel of St. Saviour:..................................................53
2. Deputy R.C. Duhamel: .................................................................53
3. Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire: ...............................................................54
4. Deputy P.N. Troy ofSt.Brelade:.......................................................54
5. Deputy R.C. Duhamel: .................................................................55

PUBLIC BUSINESS.............................................................................55

7. Budget 2008 (P.164/2007)................................................................55

7.1 Senator T.A. Le Sueur (The Minister for Treasury and Resources): ....................56

LUNCHEON ADJOURNMENT PROPOSED..................................................64 The Bailiff :...................................................................................64

ADJOURNMENT................................................................................64

PUBLIC BUSINESS - continued................................................................64

7. Budget 2008 (P.164/2007) - continued..................................................64

1. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:.................................................................64 The Bailiff :...................................................................................67

2. Budget 2008 (P.164/2007): fourth amendment (P.164/2007) Amd.(4)..................67

1. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:.................................................................67
2. The Deputy of St. Ouen:................................................................67
3. Deputy P.J.D. Ryan:....................................................................68
4. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................68
5. Deputy A. Breckon of St. Saviour:......................................................70
6. Senator F.H. Walker :...................................................................70
7. Deputy C.J. Scott Warr en: ..............................................................71
8. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:.................................................................71 The Bailiff :...................................................................................73

3. Budget 2008 (P.164/2007): amendment (P.164/2007) Amd.............................73

Senator P.F.C. Ozouf :........................................................................74 Senator F.H. Walker :.........................................................................74 Deputy A.J.H. Maclean:......................................................................74 Deputy P.N. Troy : ............................................................................75 The Bailiff :...................................................................................75

1. Deputy A. Breckon:....................................................................75
2. Deputy J.A.N. Le Fondré:..............................................................77

2. Deputy C.J. Scott Warr en: ..............................................................77
3. Deputy G.W.J. de Faye:................................................................77
4. The Deputy of St. John:................................................................78
5. Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire: ...............................................................78
6. Senator T.J. Le Main: ..................................................................79
7. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................80

8. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:.................................................................81
9. Deputy J.A. Martin:....................................................................81
10. Deputy G.P. Southern : ..............................................................81
11. Deputy A. Breckon: .................................................................82 The Bailiff :...................................................................................83

4. Budget 2008 (P.164/2007): second amendment (P.164/2007) Amd.(2).................84

1. Deputy A. Breckon:....................................................................84
2. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:.................................................................86
3. Deputy A. Breckon:....................................................................87 The Bailiff :...................................................................................87

5. Budget 2008 (P.164/2007): third amendment (P.164/2007) Amd.(3)...................88

1. The Deputy of St. Ouen:................................................................88
2. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:.................................................................91
3. Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire: ...............................................................92
4. Senator P.F.C. Ozouf :..................................................................93
5. Deputy I.J. Gorst of St. Clement:.......................................................94
6. Deputy S.C. Ferguson:..................................................................94
7. The Deputy of St. Ouen:................................................................94 The Bailiff :...................................................................................96

6. Budget 2008 (P.164.2007) continued....................................................97

1. Deputy J.J. Huet:.......................................................................97
2. Deputy P.J.D. Ryan:....................................................................97
3. Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire: ...............................................................99

4. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:.................................................................99 The Bailiff :..................................................................................101 Senator M.E. Vibert :........................................................................102 The Bailiff :..................................................................................102

ADJOURNMENT..............................................................................102

The Roll was called and the Dean led the Assembly in Prayer.

QUESTIONS

1. Written Questions

1. TO THE MINISTER FOR HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES BY DEPUTY S.S.P.A. POWER OF ST. BRELADE REGARDING COST OF MRI SCANS:

Would the Minister explain to Members how the MRI scanner is funded and what proportion of a scan's charge is devoted to consultant/staff/premises costs? How much profit has been made from the 8,332 private scans charged at £650 per scan and what proportion has been set aside to fund a replacement MRI scanner?

Answer

The new MRI scanner, which will become operational later this month, was purchased with funds made available from the States of Jersey Capital Programme.

The cost to the public purse of an MRI scan is £176.00, which is calculated thus -

consultant = £27

other Staff = £58

non staff consumables = £30 premises / overheads = £61.

Over the past eight years, £1.6m has been generated from private scans. As with all private income, it is reinvested back into public health and social care.

Under the existing rules which govern how the States of Jersey's public capital is accounted for, there is no requirement – nor any accounting methodology - to use fees to accrue the resources necessary to replace the MRI scanner in future years.

2. TO THE CHIEF MINISTER BY DEPUTY P.V.F. LE CLAIRE OF ST. HELIER REGARDING CLIMATE CHANGE:

Question

Following recent publication of a new report by the official Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) -

1. what are the Island's current environmental commitments in terms of international agreements, how are they applied in Jersey and are they voluntary or legally binding?
2. What penalties, if any, could the Island face if it failed to maintain any of these agreements?
3. What are Jersey's current emissions by categoryasthey are contained and identified in these agreements for the last three years?
4. What targets, if any, are we legally bound to achieve in any of these categories?
5. What intentions doestheMinister have, if any, for committingJerseytocarbon reductions in the future?
6. Would the Minister consider an even greater cut than the United Kingdom's long termaimof a 60 per cent reduction in CO2 emissions by2050?

7. Does the UK's decision to set legally binding limits have any impact on Jersey and has the Department sought legal advice in this regard?
8. What proposals does the Minister have to respond to the quickening pace of global warming? Answer

1. Jersey  is  included  in a  number of Multi-Lateral Environmental  Agreements  by extension through the United Kingdom. The answer to this question has been restricted tothe agreement that relates to Climate Change since that appears to be the area of interest identified by this question.

The Kyoto Protocol is a protocol to the international Framework Convention on Climate Change with the objective of reducing Greenhouse gases that cause climate change. Of the 172 parties that have ratified the protocol, 36 countries (plus the EU as a party in its own right) are required to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to the levels specified for each of them in the treaty.

A request was made to the UK Government in December 2006 to extend ratification of the Kyoto Protocol to Jersey and this was confirmed in May 2007. Jersey is included in the UK ratification and so our emissions are counted as part of the UK's carbon budget' and the Island has not been allocated a specific carbon emissions budget. Thus, because Jersey does not have an allocated amount' instead being included in the UK's quota, we do not have a separate enforceable binding target on emissions.

Nevertheless, the Island reports annually to the UK Government (via the Department  for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs) which reviews our progress.

2. Although Jersey has obligations resulting from the extension ofthe Kyoto protocol, because there are no specific targets for Jersey there are no specific penalties that we would face as a result of the Convention. The commitments in international law lie with the United Kingdom as the state party. However, given that we report via the UK it is anticipated that should our emissions  begin to rise significantly our performance  would  be challenged as this would contribute unfavourably to the UK's overall reduction targets.
3. A breakdown of carbon emissions by categoryfrom 2001 are given below as collated by the Statistics Unit. Note - Emissions from electricity generated at the energyfromwaste plant at Bellozanne are not included.

Total

Electricity  Household road

Generation and business transport

2001 34,799 17,072 59,718 2002 34,256 13,687 58,266 2003 33,576 2,392 57,159 2004 32,523 6,299 57,676 2005 32,074 2,606 54,675 2006 31,921 3,781 57,059

4. I refer the Deputy to the answer given in part (b).

All less All electricity generation

111,588 94,516 106,209 92,523

93,127 90,735 96,498 90,199 89,354 86,748 92,761 88,980

5. Despite the lack of binding targets on the Island in respect of greenhouse gas emissions we recognise that Jersey has an important role to play in demonstrating global environmental responsibility. Therefore, I have set out a proposed approach in the Energy Policy Green Paper Fuel for Thought?' that is currently out for public consultation. Following the consultation process a White Paperwillbe formulated with firm proposals which the States will be asked to support.

The proposals in the Energy Policy Green Paper aim to achieve secure, affordable and sustainable' energy for Jersey into the future. I would refer the Deputy to Chapter 4 which proposes an Energy Hierarchy'. The first and most important step of the hierarchy is to reduce energy use whilst the second step is to use low carbon fuels. Achieving the aims of both levels will contribute to a reduction in emissions as a result of energy use in Jersey.

The policy puts forward a policy and legislative framework to achieve these aims, including:

• Increasing the performance of the built environment comprising the domestic, governmental and industrial sectors to reach a target of a 20% reduction in energy use (Chapter 5);
• Reducing reliance on fossil fuel powered transport in parallel with the aims of the Integrated Travel and Transport Plan (Chapter 6);
• Implementing sustainable energy choices at the utility scale (Chapter 7) and at the community level via microgeneration (Chapter 10) and further exploiting energy recovery from waste (Chapter 8)

6. Jersey already performs well in terms of carbon emissions when measured against the agreed baseline 1990 performance. Since 1990, the Island's emissions have fallen by 32% as a result of the switch from on-island oil-fired electricity generation to imported nuclear-generated electricity from France. However, we know that Jersey must demonstrate a global commitment to best practice and the proposals put forward in the Energy Policy Green Paper are that we reduce carbon emissions by 64% on the baseline year by 2050 - which is slightly ahead ofthe UK target of 60%.
7. The legally binding targets to which the Deputy refers are not applicable to Jersey but I reiterate that the intention is that they will be surpassed following the success ofthe policies and legislative improvements put forward in the Energy Policy Green Paper. As UK legislation does not extend to Jersey, except on the explicit request of the Island authorities, the Department has not considered it necessary toseek legal advice as tothe enforceability ofthe UK's targets. The Island has had an exchange of correspondence withthe UK in preparation for the extension ofthe Kyoto treaty which gives assurance that binding targets will not be extended to Jersey.
8. Climate Change presents a variety of challenges to the Island as well as some opportunities. The Energy Policy Green Paper explores manyof these in Part 4 – Planning and Adapting for Climate Change'. It is intended that Jersey will play its part to reduce the on-Island contributions to greenhouse gases through the measures I have described above.

However, the Island must also prepare for the effects of climate change and in particular the green paper highlights the need for preparation by those industries most likely to be first affected by climate change (agriculture, fisheries and to some extent, tourism – Chapter 11). In addition, there will be impacts of a changing climate on local biodiversity and resources and it is highlighted in the consultation paper that this must form part of future planning.

The Energy Policy Green Paper also identifies some of the opportunities presented by climate change. An example would be in the expansion of the compliance market or possibilities in international carbon trading arising from the Island's expertise in the financial sector.

3. TO THE MINISTER FOR PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT BY DEPUTY P.V.F. LE CLAIRE OF ST. HELIER REGARDING SHARED EQUITY SCHEMES FOR JERSEY:

Question

In relation to the proposals on shared equity being brought forward in conjunction with the Minister for Housing, would the Minister advise –

1. what progress, if any, has been made in bringing forwardfordebate a shared equity schemeor schemes for Jersey?
2. whether any difficulties have been identified and, if so, when does the Minister expect that they will be resolved?
3. what work has been done, if any, in comparing existing U.K. schemes with the proposals for Jersey?
4. whether legal advice has been sought on the proposals and, if so, what legal difficulties, ifany, have been identified?

Answer

1. I can confirm that significant progress has been made in recent weeks towards bringing forward a proposition relating to shared equity' homes.

It is important that I first clarify the Deputy 's use of the term shared equity', which can mean different things to different people. For most it suggests a form of partial or shared ownership with only part of the property being sold and the remainder held by a landlord who receives rent from the occupier on the retained share. Many of the schemes in the UK are based on this model. However, the Law Officers' Department has advised that it is likely to prove difficult in Jersey to raise a secured loan on a shared ownership property, making it difficult or impossible to operate this model.

Fortunately, there is another option available to meet the aim of providing affordable homes for first time buyers. In the Social Housing Property Plan P6.2007 approved by this Assembly on 17th July this year, the Housing Minister brought forward a deferred payment scheme for States Tenants to enable them to buy former States rental homes, with up to 25% of the first time buyer value being deferred until the next onward conveyance. This scheme is similar to a scheme operating in the UK and known commonly as HomeBuy'.

The potential to replicate this model on rezoned sites is currently being examined closely by my officers, in collaboration with the Housing Department. Any proposal for such a scheme would need to be put out to consultation under Article 3(3) of the Planning and Building Law 2002, before being brought to the States for approval, as it involves an amendment to the Island Plan;

2. as indicated in my answer topart(a),workisongoing and I expectthe outstanding issues to be resolved in the near future;

3. a number ofUK schemes were set out in the aforementioned Social Housing PropertyPlan and have been subsequently discussed between the Housing and Planning Departments. However, as I mentioned in my response to the first partofthis question, these are not necessarily suitable for application in Jersey;
4. advice of the Law Officers' Department has been sought on specific aspects of these proposals and outstanding matters are currently being addressed as a priority consideration.

4. TO THE MINISTER FOR HOUSING BY DEPUTY P.V.F. LE CLAIRE OF ST. HELIER REGARDING SHARED EQUITY SCHEMES FOR JERSEY:

Question

In relation to the proposals on shared equity being brought forward in conjunction with the Minister for Planning and Environment would the Minister advise members whether it is proposed that the schemes which will be introduced will allow for private sector tenants to have access to them?

Answer

The Minister for Planning and Environment has already dealt with the issue of the terminology being used so I will not reiterate that point, save to confirm that we are proposing that in the interests of clarity the Jersey scheme be known as Jersey Homebuy'. That scheme will operate in relation to the development of rezoned sites and therefore, yes it will be accessible to all first time buyers who meet the criteria for affordable housing.

5. TO THE MINISTER FOR SOCIAL SECURITY BY DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST HELIER REGARDING THE PROMOTION OF INDEPENDENCE AS PART OF THE SOCIAL POLICY FRAMEWORK:

Question

Given that the first Key Principle of the Social Policy Framework is that of Promoting Independence', and that the Framework also states that all major policy initiatives should be assessed against the Aim and Key Principles of the Framework, what assessment, if any, has been made of the Minister's decision to take control of rental payments to the Housing Department away from tenants and how does this decision rate in terms of Promoting Independence'?

Answer

The principles of The Income Support system were developed some time before the publication of the Social Policy Framework in May 2007 but the aims and principles of the Framework are very closely aligned to the aims and principles of Income Support.

Rent abatement currently provides a benefit to tenants of the Housing Department by reducing the amount of rent that they pay. All tenants receiving rent abatement currently pay a discounted rent and are not in "control" of their full rental payment.

The Income Support system requires that payments of Income Support should be made in the best interests of the claimant's household. As existing Housing Department tenants are accustomed to paying a discounted rent under the present system and the provision of housing is a basic necessity of life, it is considered reasonable to make direct payments to the Housing Department, in respect of rental for Housing tenants. Tenants remain responsible for any balance of rental payment, depending on their household circumstances and income.

Over 3,500 households have been informed of the new arrangements and have been given the opportunity to comment on the on the amount of benefit that will be paid direct to housing.

Approximately 10 individuals have responded to the Department requesting some alteration in the proposed arrangements. These requests will be dealt with on an individual basis.

The principle of promoting independence, as set out in the Social Policy Framework relates to providing individuals with tools and skills to enable them to make choices during their lifetimes to help them achieve independence. These include helping individuals make healthy lifestyle choices and encouraging people to undertake education and training so that they can find employment at a level to provide financial independence.

The direct payment of rent is more closely aligned with the other two principles within the Social Policy Framework, namely "supporting those at risk" and "protecting those in need". By ensuring that families who need support are provided with decent accommodation and are less likely to face the problems associated with rent arrears, Income Support will play an important role in helping families, so that they can become independent in the future.

6. TO THE MINISTER FOR HOUSING BY DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER REGARDING PROPORTION OF STATES SOCIAL RENTING TENANTS PAYING BY DIRECT DEBIT:

Question

Will the Minister inform members what proportion of States social renting tenants currently have agreed to have their rents paid directly from their income source (employer, Social Security or welfare departments) and what proportion does he anticipate will do so under the Income Support Scheme?

Answer

The Housing Department presently operates the rent abatement scheme which provides rental assistance for 71% of its own tenants. Rent abatement is paid internally from source and credited against each individual rent account. This 71% of tenants then have their net rent to pay (after abatement has been paid) and 7% of tenants have elected to pay their net rent by way of wage deduction or direct from the Social Security or Parish Welfare Departments. Therefore, at least 71% of tenants pay either their entire rent or part of it direct from one of the sources mentioned.

Under the Income Support scheme it is the total rent rather than the net rent (after abatement) which will be charged and we anticipate that due to the transitional arrangements put in place for Income Support the numbers of States Tenants receiving a rental subsidy will not change. It is likely therefore that 29% of tenants (those presently paying maximum rent) will continue to pay by their normal method, and of the 71% remaining they will continue to pay at least a proportion of their rent from source albeit that the source will have changed from the Housing Department to the Social Security Department.

7. TO THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES BY DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER REGARDING SPECIAL PAYMENTS FOR THOSE FALLING BETWEEN INCOME SUPPORT AND INCOME TAX THRESHOLDS: Question

1. Will the Minister estimate how many households/individuals fall into the gap' identified between Income Support and Income Tax thresholds and who will able toreceive the type of special payment announced in the Assembly at the last meeting?
2. Will the Minister explain when and how such numbers were identified and when and how the sums of money required were calculated?
3. Will the Minister advise members how this policy creates and supports independence' in line with the first key principle ofthe Social Policy Framework and is not simply a quick fix' which is identified as a fault of current social policy in the Framework?

Answer

1. It is not possible to accurately estimate at present how many households will neither receive income support nor pay income tax. Indications are, however, that it is likely to be less than half a household income quintile i.e. less than 3,500 households. A detailed scheme is being developed, including the criteria to receive the special payment. This scheme will be brought to the Assembly for approval.
2. As stated above, such numbers have not been accurately identified as yet, but based on it being less than the 3,500 households the sum ofmoney required for the refunds could be in the region of £300,000.
3. The prime purpose of this policy was to avoid a tax giveaway of over £2mto the highest earners in society, incur more than £0.5m in administration, and increase businesses costs and complexity, in order to provide only £300,000 in benefit to some ofthe less well off, through the zero rating of food. Accordingly its prime purpose was not to create and support independence'. Its purpose was simply to provide a simpler and fairer solution to the effect of imposing GST on food on the same basis as the U.K.

8. TO THE CHAIRMAN, COMITÉ DES CONNÉTABLES BY DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER REGARDING THE ELECTORAL REGISTER: Question

Given that the St. Helier electoral register for the coming election for Connétable contains only around 14,000 names, will the Chairman advise the Assembly what actions, if any the Connétable s will be taking to ensure improved registers in all parishes in time for the October/November 2008 elections?

Answer

The Public Elections (Jersey) Law 2002 requires the Connétable to write to every unit of dwelling accommodation each year to ascertain the names of those who are eligible under the law to be registered to vote in public elections. If no response is received, a further two reminders are sent to the address. The Connétable s will be undertaking this exercise in spring 2008 and envisage that publicity will be undertaken at this time to remind all persons of the autumn 2008 elections.

The number of persons registered will vary on a daily basis as a person has a duty to register once they satisfy the eligibility criteria. New 3-year registers started in July 2006 and we expect the numbers registered to gradually increase during the life of the registers.

The Judicial Greffe advertises, four times a year in accordance with the law, the requirement for people to register as electors. A high profile campaign was funded by the States during the summer 2005 to encourage more persons to register prior to the elections and this helped to boost the number on the registers. I do not know if the States intend to repeat this exercise in 2008.

9. TO THE MINISTER FOR HOME AFFAIRS BY DEPUTY S.S.P.A. POWER OF ST BRELADE REGARDING THE DEPORTATION OF DRUG TRAFFICKING OFFENDERS:

Question

1. Following the recent Criminal Justice policy debate, will the Minister clarify for members whether a drugs offender or drug trafficker, having been arrested on arrival in Jersey and sentenced to lengthy custodial sentence in Jersey, is also deemed to have committed an offence at the airport or port outside the Island that the he or she departed from?
2. Would the Minister inform members why any such drug trafficker/offender cannot be deported back to that departing airport or port before the end of any sentence imposed in Jersey and then banned from entering Jersey again for that undischarged portion of his or her sentence?

Answer

1. If a person imports controlled drugs into Jersey, they have committed one, or probably more than one, offence in the Island. As they would have exported the drugs from another jurisdiction they would, probably also have committed one or more than one offence in the other jurisdiction.
2. There are a number of points raised in part (b) of the question which I will deal with in turn.

Deportation of foreign nationals

Persons who are not British nationals and who are convicted for serious offences can be, and quite often are, recommended by the courts for deportation at the end of their sentences. The Lieutenant Governor is responsible for ordering the deportations and he will usually follow the court's recommendation though he is not obliged to do so. This is provided for under the Immigration Act 1971, as extended to Jersey.

Deportation before the end of the sentence

Persons recommended by the courts for deportation can be deported before the end of their sentence where arrangements are made for them to serve part of their sentence in the United Kingdom. In these circumstances the Lieutenant Governor will order the deportation immediately prior to the persons removal from the Island.

Although Jersey does not yet have a repatriation of offenders law, the United Kingdom Prison Services treat us as if we did in relation to prisoners from the UK. This means that if a prisoner from the UK (principally England and Wales) requests to transfer to a prison in that jurisdiction and if they can provide supporting evidence of a link and confirmation that they would receive visits from close family if they were transferred then the Prison Service of England and Wales will accept them at zero cost.

We also have an agreement that England and Wales will take any of our prisoners, even if they do not wish to be transferred. This option will incur significant cost to Jersey.

Deportation of British Nationals

British Nationals cannot be deported under Immigration legislation, and there is no other legislation that allows any person, including British nationals, to be forcibly removed from the Island and banned from returning.

Sending persons back for prosecution

The answer to this is given in section 9.41 of the CJP which succinctly explains the position.

".. the legal position appears to be that there is no existing legal power for the States of Jersey Police or Customs and Immigration to return suspects to their point of departure. Furthermore, to create such a power might cause legal difficulties with the Common Travel Area (CTA) concept. Since most drug importations originate from the U.K., it is doubtful whether any controls that might be possible would be effective. British nationals arriving from and returning to the U.K. could subsequently arrive from abroad (i.e. outside the CTA) but could not be returned abroad. It could also be argued that law enforcement agencies have a duty to detect and prosecute crime where it occurs. Returning suspects to their point of departure goes against this principle and could cause political difficulties with neighbouring jurisdictions. The international legal position in which Jersey exists prohibits –

the introduction of immigration or border controls in relation to U.K., EEA and certain Commonwealth citizens;

taking measures which would amount to control over the rights of such citizens to come and live in the Island;

the Island from treating U.K. citizens differently from citizens of other EU states and EEA citizens – in relation to their rights to establish themselves in the Island, and;

taking actions which might not be consistent with the U.K. Immigration Act as extended to Jersey, Article 4 of Protocol 3 and European Court judgments relating thereto."

10. TO THE MINISTER FOR HOME AFFAIRS BY DEPUTY S.S.P.A. POWER OFST. BRELADE REGARDING THE REMOVAL OF DAMAGED VEHICLES FROMTHE SCENE OF ROAD TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS:

Question

Following the recent advertisement placed in the Jersey Gazette for interested parties to tender for the removal of damaged vehicles from the scene of road traffic accidents for and on behalf of the States of Jersey Police, can the Minister confirm that a fair and equitable process based on cost, efficiency, experience, availability, qualification and suitability of the recovery vehicles will be undertaken to assess tenders submitted?

Answer

Following a full and comprehensive review of the States of Jersey Police (SoJP) vehicle recovery practices by a senior UK police officer from Sussex police, a number of recommendations were made including: devising a contractual agreement with recovery operators based on best practice in the UK. Superintendent Morrison of the Sussex police Roads Policing Unit, also recommended the SoJP rota should consist of up to a maximum of three operators. The number of service providers who might tender is not restricted by the recommended maximum number of operators.

The States of Jersey Police has developed a Service Level Agreement' to be used as the basis of any contractual arrangements between SOJP and prospective vehicle recovery companies. This is based on the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) specification which encompasses all of the above criteria mentioned in the question except for experience; it is not wished to discourage new businesses so previous experience has not been made a pre-requisite.

The processes in place to select vehicle recovery operators for its police vehicle recovery rota are robust and will provide the States with an efficient service and  value for  money. The States Director of Procurement has been consulted throughout the tendering process.

11. TO THE MINISTER FOR HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES BY DEPUTY G.C.L. BAUDAINS OF ST CLEMENT REGARDING THE PREVENTION OF INFLUENZA: Question

1. Inviewofrecent media coverage relating to influenza prevention andtreatmentthat some may have found confusing would the Minister clarify the situation by informing members whether –

1. Tamiflu and Relenza are antivirals, not vaccines, and need to be taken within 48 hours of the start of the illness to be of any use?
2. Tamiflu and Relenza are primarily for use against Influenza type A and B, and whether their efficacy against avian flu has been quantified?
3. a vaccine to protect against avian flu is currently available?

2. Given that drugs which fight the influenza virus, such as Tamiflu and Relenza, need to be taken at the onset of symptoms in ordertobeeffective, would theMinisteragreeto implement Dr. Laver's (the flu vaccine co-founder) advice and make the anti-virals available over the counter' in the event of a major outbreak locally, thereby saving valuable time otherwise lost whilst patients wait for a doctor's appointment to get a prescription?

Answer

It strikes me that there may be some confusion in the minds of the lay public about the three different types of flu which have been topical in recent times: seasonal flu, avian flu and pandemic flu. I have added definitions at the end of this answer for ease of reference.

1. (i) I can confirm that Tamiflu and Relenza are antiviral drugs and not vaccines. These drugs must be taken within 48 hours ofthe onset of flu symptoms if they are to have an effect. The Medical Officer of Health, Dr Geller, has advised me that for antiviral drugs to be optimally effective, for treating pandemic flu, she would like to see patients taking Tamiflu within hours and the sooner the better.

2. Avian influenza is a type A influenza virus (H5N1). Tamiflu and Relenza are considered effective if given early. They reduce the severityof the illness and can prevent death in this, the most severe formof flu ever seen in man. We have stockpiled Tamiflu for use against pandemic flu which is likely to be a variant of the H5N1 avian flu virus.
3. A human vaccine has been manufactured which protects against avian flu. The potential of this vaccine to save lives, however, is that it is predicted to offer some protection against any H5 variety of flu. The World Health Organisation is currently on pandemic alert as bird flu has passed into humans and they predict it is only a matteroftime before this H5N1 virus variety can pass between people easily through coughs, sneezes and secretions, thus causing a worldwide flu pandemic.

2. Dr. Laver made his comments in the lightof a seasonal flu outbreak in Australia. Our stockof Tamiflu is largely reserved for treating the more severe - pandemic flu. There remain some concerns about inappropriate useand side effects if available over the counter. I would alsobe concerned about drug resistance and therefore that the drugs could become less effective for when we really need them: in a pandemic.

NB In answering the above questions, I have restricted my answers to the role of Tamiflu in the event of a flu pandemic. There are three types of flu that people frequently refer to. Each of these have different implications for individuals, populations and health care planning -

1. Seasonal Flu - we seethiseverywinter.Itcancause varying degreesof illness in either a few individuals or in large numbers depending on the year. Currently we help to protect ourselves against this with the annual season-specific influenza jab for peopleover65and those with a chronic health problem.
2. Avian Flu - this is a flu that affects birds. There are many different types but at the moment people usually use this term to refer to the H5NI strain that is affecting birds around the world and that can be highly pathogenic to poultry. It is rarely transmitted to man with just some 300 cases noted in the last 10 years. However when man acquires this infection he develops a severe illness and this is what makes this type of flu a matterof particular concern.
3. Pandemic Flu -this is a severe flu due to a new virus to which no one has immunity and which can spread rapidly from person to person- hence the term pandemic - an epidemic that effects the whole world. There have been three pandemics in the last 100 years in 1918, 1957 and 1968. We are therefore due another one at any time. While we cannot be certain which viral strain will causethis pandemic, H5N1 avian flu looks likely. Experts predict that if it is an H5N1 derived strain that it will cause a more severe illness and higher death rate than that seen during the last three pandemics.

12. TO THE MINISTER FOR PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT BY DEPUTY G.C.L. BAUDAINS OF ST CLEMENT REGARDING THE PERCENTAGE FOR ART POLICY:

Question

With regard to the Percentage for Art' policy would the Minister –

1. advise why it was necessary to advertise for personnel to administer this, and what precisely the person engaged will do;
2. confirm that the situation as per the 2002 Island Plan still pertains, namely that the Percentage for Art contribution is entirely voluntary;
3. inform members whether the contributions are mainly for on-site works integral to the development and that the contributions, when offered, will not exceed 0.75% of construction cost;

4. assure members that, despite the reference to strong encouragement' on page 1 of the Interim Supplementary Planning Guidance Advice Note 3 of December 2006, no pressure will be applied to developers;
5. advise whether he intends to undertake further consultation and debate on this new initiative before its full implementation to ascertain whether, given the Island's financial position, the public may prefer this new levy to fund basic infrastructure rather than art?

Answer

1. To help realise the provision of public art through the planning process in Jersey, there is a need to secure the provision of professional advice, both to the Minister for Planning and Environment and tothe development industry aboutthe application of funds generated by a Percentage for Art policy and the procurement of public art.

The main role of this service provider will be to -

1. provide advice to the Minister for Planning andEnvironmentand his department about the application of funds generated by the Percentage for Art policy in respect of individual planning applications specifically in relation tothe critical appraisal of public art proposals - including public art briefs; selection and commission processes; form and nature ofthe public art; and methodologies for procurement, project management and integration/ installation;
2. liaise with the Department for Education, Sport and Culture's Percentage for Art Panel, to facilitate the provision of advice to the Minister for Planning and Environment about the application of funds generated by the Percentage for Art policy from a local cultural development perspective, in respect of individual planning applications;
3. provide advice tothe development industry about all aspects of the procurement of public art – to include advice about; the development of a public art brief for a site; the selection and commissioning ofan artist; the integration and/or installation of public art into a development project; and public art project management and maintenance, as appropriate;
4. provide advice to the Minister for Planning and Environment relative to the satisfactory discharging of any conditions or obligations related to Percentage for Art.

It is envisaged that these services would be provided on a retained consultancy basis, to be funded from Percentage for Art contributions from the development industry.

2. Percentage for Art is an internationally recognised funding mechanism where developers are  encouragedto allocate a percentage of the capital costs of any new building(s), refurbishment or landscaping scheme towards the provision of public art. The policy framework for the operation of this mechanism is provided by Policy BE12 ofthe2002 Island Plan which states that -

The Planning and Environment Committee will seek to negotiate the voluntary allocation of an appropriate percentage of design and development costs to the provision of public art. Agreements will be sought where it is considered that;

• both the scale and location of a new development are appropriate for the inclusion of public art; and
• the provision of public art would enhance the public's enjoyment of the building or space.

The policy clearly states that any allocation of development costs towards the provision of public art is through the negotiation of a voluntary allocation. This approach is re-iterated in the supplementary planning guidance (SPG: Planning Advice Note 3: Percentage for Art (December 2006)) which supports this policy and which states that -

In development schemes, where it is felt that the inclusion of art will be of public benefit, a contribution to public art of up to 0.75 percent of the total construction cost of the development will be encouraged.

In general, and in common with best practice elsewhere this is likely to be applied to development projects of a more significant scale. On this basis, the following development thresholds will be used to determine where Percentage for Art will be strongly encouraged as an element of a development project.

• residential development of 5 or more dwellings;
• residential development of 0.25ha (0.6 acres or 1.4 vergees) or more;
• non-residential development of 500sq.m or more;
• non-residential development on a site of 1ha (2.5 acres or 5.6 vergees) or more.

3. As stated in the supplementary planning guidance, it is envisaged that the majority of Percentage for Art contributions will be on-site and integral to the development ofthat site.

Developers will be encouraged to provide up to 0.75% of the total construction cost of a development, where it is of a significant scale, for public art: this relates to the physical

cost of developing the site and includes the cost of building and the provision of infrastructure. This figure or level of contribution is not, however, prescriptive and the level of contribution will be determined on a site by site basis through negotiation and agreement.

Because the notion of Percentage for Art is based on the voluntary principle, it is clearly up to the developer as to whether any public art budget exceeds the value of 0.75% of construction costs.

In discussing the level of contribution towards public art as part of a development project regard may be had to the extent of other costs that might be associated with infrastructure that is essential to the development.

4. see response to (b) above;
5. Percentage for Art is an internationally recognised funding mechanism where developers are encouraged to allocate a percentage of the capital costs of any new building(s), refurbishment or landscaping scheme towards the provision of public art: it is based on a voluntary allocation of funds and is only encouraged for developments of a certain scale and cannot, thus, be considered to be a levy.

As stated above, the Minister will have regard to the level of infrastructure that is required to be provided as an integral element of a development as part of the negotiations and discussion about any contribution towards public art. It is not, therefore, a question of infrastructure or art': developments which do not provide the requisite level of basic infrastructure required to sustain them will not be approved, irrespective of whether they include public art.

The policy framework to enable the provision of public art is provided by Policy BE12 of the 2002 Island Plan which was the subject of extensive consultation and which was approved by the States.

The supplementary planning guidance which supports this policy was adopted in December 2006 following a consultation process which was open to the public and which engaged stakeholders from both the Island's art community and the development industry, as well as States Members, including the Environment Scrutiny Panel.

On the basis of the fact that the policy and guidance has already been through a process of consultation, scrutiny and review, the Minister does not intend to hold any further consultation on the mechanism presently but is issuing new guidance which will provide more information about the operation of the mechanism for the development industry.

The operation and effectiveness of the policy and guidance will, however, be monitored and assessed over time.

13. TO THE MINISTER FOR TRANSPORT AND TECHNICAL SERVICES BY DEPUTY S. PITMAN OF ST. HELIER REGARDING INCREASES IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT SERVICES SINCE LIBERATION STATION WAS OPENED:

Question

Would the Minister inform States members whether or not public transport services have increased since the opening of the new Liberation Bus Station, and if so, state what new services have been put in place?

Answer

No new services have been put in place since the opening of Liberation Station. The opening coincided with the start of the winter timetable although the Island Explorer routes were maintained through until the end of the school half term holidays (3rd November 2007). Passenger numbers continue to show increases over the same period last year – for the first three weeks of service from the new facility, there were over 10% more passengers compared to last year. However, as mentioned above, the Island Explorer was still running at this time and probably accounts for some of this increase.

There will be enhanced Sunday services running on the four Sundays leading up to Christmas in December to support the Fete de Noue festivities. These will provide a circular route to cover St. Ouen , St. Mary and St. Lawrence and another to cover St. John and Trinity .

2. Oral Questions The Bailiff :

2.1 Deputy G.P. Southern of St. Helier of the Minister for Economic Development regarding protection of the Island's skills and training base following the privatisation of Jersey Telecom:

With respect to the telecommunications industry, could the Minister inform Members whether he will use the provisions of the Regulations of Undertakings Law to protect the Island's skills and training base following the privatisation of Jersey Telecom?

Senator P.F.C. Ozouf (The Minister for Economic Development):

Ensuring local people have jobs and receive training is always a key consideration when applying the Regulations of Undertakings Law whether in respect of Jersey Telecom, any other telecommunications company or, indeed, any other business. This was clearly set out in the report and proposition lodged by the Treasury and Resources Minister in respect of the sale of Jersey Telecom.

1. Deputy G.P. Southern :

Could the Minister explain to Members how he proposes to use R.U.D.L. (Regulations of Undertakings Law)?

Senator P.F.C. Ozouf :

I can explain how we currently use R.U.D.L. in respect of all businesses in the Island. As the Deputy will know, when considering staff applications and staff changes, numbers and dealing with 3-year job licences, one is always looking for employers to show that they are training their staff, that they are minimising the applications for incoming new workers. Jersey Telecom will be dealt with in no different circumstances than any other industry or any other businesses applying to the department.

2. Deputy G.P. Southern :

So any company making a bid for Jersey Telecom, following privatisation, would be aware that there would be these conditions attached, that they must maintain the skills base and the apprenticeship schemes that they already run for technical operatives?

Senator P.F.C. Ozouf :

Jersey Telecom will not be, and is currently not, treated any different to any other organisation. The new telco companies were treated in exactly the same way in respect of the requirements of employing local people and we demand, and indeed are, raising the bar in terms of skills. At the launch yesterday of the Skills Executive with my colleagues, the Minister for Education and Social Security, clearly indicates that we are looking for all companies in Jersey and Jersey Telecom to train their staff to maintain a high skilled, productive based work force.

3. Deputy J.A. Martin of St. Helier :

Could the Minister inform the House how many staff under the Regulations of Undertakings Law the other 2 operators with telecoms have; broken down into front office staff and skilled telecommunications staff?

Senator P.F.C. Ozouf :

The Deputy will be aware that I never discuss, by matter of convention and indeed for confidentiality reasons, the Regulation of Undertakings licences of other entities. I am happy to be scrutinised by the panel in private session but I am afraid I am not prepared to reveal the individual job licences for any organisation in the Island including Jersey Telecom.

4. Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire of St. Helier :

I noted this week that there was some suggestion that the tourism employees might have to reapply for their jobs when that transfers over into a different structure. Is that going to have any bearing on the way that Jersey Telecom will also operate in the future?

Senator P.F.C. Ozouf :

With respect, I do not think that has anything to do with the issue of Jersey Telecom at all. In respect of Jersey Tourism let me, for the avoidance of doubt, say that I think the Jersey Tourism staff do an absolutely great job and we are going to be working with those staff and the industry to find a better way to deal with the marketing of Jersey. This has nothing to do with Jersey Telecom.

2.2. Senator L. Norman of the Minister for Economic Development regarding the timetable for the introduction of Price Marking Regulations:

Would the Minister inform the Assembly of his proposed timetable for the introduction of Price Marking Regulations and will he confirm that he plans to have the regulations in place with effect from 1st May 2008?

Senator P.F.C. Ozouf (The Minister for Economic Development):

Members will recall that the decision was made on 7th November 2007 and the States voted in large majority to impose G.S.T. (Goods and Services Tax) inclusive price marking. Retailers now have the clarity on what price marking system will be in use in dealing with consumers. If inclusive pricing controls are not in place when G.S.T. begins in May 2008 there is, in my opinion, potential for chaos. Senator Norman gave some excellent examples of the problems of when there would not be inclusive and exclusive prices in the recent debate. I therefore propose to consult on the regulations in early January and then lodge those regulations in the earliest possible course in January or February of next year, with a commencement date for inclusive pricing on 1st May 2008. Of course, any Member is free to lodge amendments and so it will ultimately be this Assembly to decide exactly the date of implementation, but I will be proposing 1st May 2008.

1. Senator L. Norman:

Does the Minister accept that implementation of the regulations and the introduction of G.S.T. have to be simultaneous to avoid confusion and complications?

Senator P.F.C. Ozouf :

That has been my position right the way through this difficult debate and I think that Members themselves have come to their own conclusions about the importance of inclusive versus exclusive pricing. I think the Scrutiny Panel report was very clear in relation to the issue of chaos and certainly it will be for this Assembly to decide whether or not inclusive pricing is to happen on 1st May but that is what I will propose.

2. Deputy J.A. Martin:

The Minister has just said it is for any Member of this House to bring amendments. I am sure that I was assured by the Minister on the price marking debate that they would be bringing amendments on inclusive pricing but that the amount of G.S.T. would be shown on a till receipt. Is he going to honour this promise?

Senator P.F.C. Ozouf :

I would say 2 things to the Deputy . First of all, it is absolutely clear that I will consult with the Scrutiny Panel on the detail of the regulations - that is the first thing. As soon as we have a draft of those regulations I will certainly communicate with the Scrutiny Panel. In respect of this issue of a till receipt, we have been doing some further research and looking at the arrangements of till receipts and the rights of having a till receipt in other jurisdictions. I am happy to share that position and share that research with the Scrutiny Panel. My position remains that it is desirable to have a till receipt with the G.S.T. broken down in that. How we achieve that is why we have to have some discussions. It is not as easy as I thought it was going to be.

3. Deputy G.P. Southern :

Will the Minister commit himself to bringing such an amendment to introduce a till receipt showing the amount of G.S.T. paid and in what timescale will he do so, and is he aware that in order to do so he has to amend the G.S.T. law itself?

Senator P.F.C. Ozouf :

I will be progressing the issue of the price marking legislation, and it is for the Treasury Minister to propose amendments to the G.S.T. law. We will work together in the earliest possible course to provide a solution. What is clear, and I am sure that the Scrutiny Panel and other Members will agree, is that good practice is available from other jurisdictions where till receipts are generally available but not on a 100 per cent basis, particularly for small purchases. It is that area that we need to continue to discuss and I am happy to engage with both the Corporate Affairs Scrutiny Panel and the Economic Affairs Scrutiny Panel, and with the Treasury Minister to find an acceptable solution which is in the interests of consumers.

Deputy G.P. Southern : In what timescale?

Senator P.F.C. Ozouf :

The timescale is absolutely clear. G.S.T. will commence on 1st May 2008. My position is that inclusive pricing should also happen on 1st May 2008 subject to States' approval so it must be dealt with in the earliest possible course early next year to give retailers and consumers certainty.

Deputy G.P. Southern : And receipting?

Senator P.F.C. Ozouf :

I cannot go any further except to say that my position on receipts is the same as the Scrutiny Panel's. If we can achieve it within the laws that we have then we will achieve it and we need to take best practice from other jurisdictions. I do not think there is much between us in what we are trying to achieve.

4. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier of St. Saviour :

Has the Minister reached a tentative conclusion in respect of labelling very small imported items like newspapers?

Senator P.F.C. Ozouf :

There are discussions going on with retailers both with my Trading Standards officials and indeed Treasury officials in respect of our implementation of inclusive pricing. I have further meetings with retailers this week. The Chief Trading Standards Officer met the Chamber of Commerce at the end of last week and we seek to try and avoid any difficulties with retailers and some pragmatic solutions will have to be taken.

5. Deputy J.A. Martin:

Is the Minister telling the House he is bringing a proposition before 1st May 2008, that we will have to decide when G.S.T. comes in on 1st May 2008 that it will be compulsory that all retailers are up and running with inclusive pricing, albeit that it needs to be a States' debate? I think a lot of retailers out there will be very scared at the moment because they have been given an assurance they would have a year to comply.

Senator P.F.C. Ozouf :

This Assembly considered a proposition by Senator Norman in respect of inclusive pricing. This Assembly then considered the inclusive pricing bill and has effectively set a clear signal that we are moving towards inclusive pricing. I believe that I need to bring regulations to confirm the position of inclusive pricing and I think that I need to take the clear view of the Assembly that that should be in place at 1st May 2008. In respect of retailers and their views, we need to give retailers certainty. Retailers need to buy one system that they can then use for a period of years. Those systems, we are clearly saying, should be on an inclusive pricing basis.

3. Deputy K.C. Lewis of St. Saviour of the Minister for Transport and Technical Services regarding consultation to review restart of the hopper bus service:

Now that the new transportation centre is fully operational, will the Minister be consulting with his States and Parish colleagues regarding the possible recommencement of the hopper bus service and if not, why not?

Deputy G.W.J. de Faye of St. Helier (The Minister for Transport and Technical Services): The response to the Deputy is that, of course, I am very happy to consult with any Members and discuss the issue of the hopper bus. However, the view of the department as a whole, and this is a view that was expressed principally under the former committee, is that the hopper bus did not directly solve transport management issues around town. It was a very expensive service to run and was very much a non-viable, heavily subsidised operation. An analysis of what performance it was providing showed that while it was indeed carrying members of the public around town on a fixed route it was not doing what most of our public services are trying to resolve, and that is stop people using their cars. It was realistically providing services to people around town who otherwise might have walked or taken a bicycle. Therefore, while I am happy to discuss it, obviously it is not the highest priority among the public bus transport issues.

1. Deputy K.C. Lewis :

A supplementary, Sir? Following the recent decision to implement G.S.T. the people of Jersey have been encouraged to shop around. Without the hopper bus service this will be impossible for a large number of young mothers and senior citizens. Does the Minister not agree?

Deputy G.W.J. de Faye:

I am perfectly happy to support the concept of shoppers being able to shop around. However, that does not imply, I believe, that I should provide necessarily personal services to shoppers to facilitate their shopping around all the various retail outlets of St. Helier and the new retail outlets that will be created at the waterfront. I think that there are alternative and far more practical solutions to transport around the inner confines of the St. Helier ring road than a fixed route hopper bus, and indeed if we were to bring a hopper bus back I think it would be far better addressing the geography of St. Helier which is a flat bowl surrounded by significant hillside. To my knowledge, and as a result of my own experience living at the top of the hill up Queens Road, a hopper bus service would provide far more value to the residents of St. Helier if it was routed so that it would take people to the top of the hill saving them the walk up the hill, and for those who live half way up the hill they would at least have the opportunity to walk downhill rather than uphill.

2. Deputy C.J. Scott Warr en of St. Saviour :

Does the Minister accept that the hopper bus service experiment was a very much welcomed service for shoppers? Some just used it to return with heavy bags to their homes. Some people did use the hopper bus service as a means of getting out of town for an hour and the social benefit of that service was immense. I would like to know if the Minister really does realise the value of that regular service.

Deputy G.W.J. de Faye:

I really do realise the value of that service but I also do realise the cost of that service. I am extremely sympathetic with shoppers in St. Helier , particularly the elderly. I do understand that the hopper service was seen as a very valuable, additional service to elderly shoppers but then so would be a butler, so would be a chauffeur driven limousine and so would be numerous other things that would be seen as absolutely wonderful accoutrement. The trouble is all this stuff comes with added expense and we have to fit it into our priorities, and as the Chamber well knows you have not given me anymore money lately and that is the seat of the problem.

3. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:

Would the Minister not concede that the service could well be recast to link parts of town like, for example, St. Saviour s Road which are a long way from his much welcomed bus station? Would he not concede that if he was to do a proper route recasting, which has yet to be properly done, that there could be money and that in a sense he has ended up with enormous financial obligations like the Albert Pier parking situation, and so forth and so on; the running round of the number 19 to Elizabeth Terminal largely empty, which are really taking away funds which he could devote to a recasting of this service?

Deputy G.W.J. de Faye:

I do not disagree with the Deputy 's analysis. Quite clearly a brand new bus station such as Liberation Station costs a lot of money to fit out and will cost significant sums to run. Circumstances have conspired to ensure that plans of relocating the Connex canteen and rest facilities were not able to go to La Collette so there is additional expense incurred at Albert Pier. There is no question that with the benefit of hindsight it may well be that one would have preferred to devote the money to more services. I would say that I think if we look at Liberation Station and contrast that to the pretty meagre facilities that were on offer down the Weighbridge it really is about time, and I think Liberation Station reflects a change of attitude - I certainly hope it does - that we treat it, those of us who rely on buses, with a bit more care and attention. I certainly have no wish to diminish that but, as I remind Members, it costs money to run these services. I can only work within the Budget I have. With reference to the number 19, that does provide a quasi-shuttle service, admittedly not round the worthy Deputy 's end of town where his constituents are but it certainly serves the La Pouquelaye area very well, and I know a lot of elderly people do use it a lot and, indeed, I have seen passengers down at the Elizabeth Terminal as well, just to affirm to the Deputy it is not a lost affair down there.

4. Deputy C.J. Scott Warr en:

Does the Minister accept that the hopper bus service was not only used by the elderly? I knew people who ran a guest house and had to get a lot of shopping in and they used to take the hopper bus back, and they certainly are not elderly.

Deputy G.W.J. de Faye:

I accept that the hopper bus service was well used but I think that States Members must understand it is part of my role to get value for money out of public transport systems and the hopper bus service was conducted with a very low fare and came at a reasonably high cost. One simply has to put that in context with other services. I have made it very clear that I think the level of service that we currently provide the Island is the bare minimum and that we should take every step to improve it, but where is the money? What have States Members done to allow me to proceed? In fact, all my department has been faced with over the last couple of years is consistent cuts to provide money to other projects that States have approved.

5. Deputy J.B. Fox of St. Helier :

As far as hopper buses, community buses, call them whatever you like, Pioneer - before it was bought out - came up with a shamrock route that went all the way to St. Saviour s and covered the top of Mont Conchon, and was really a service that I perceived was for the people and stopped off

in Halkett Place, right into the centre - did not require any depots - and was able to bring people in. Certainly, this was part of the last election campaign and Deputies such as myself are asking people would they use such a service and would it save them bringing cars in, et cetera. The vast majority of them said yes, they would, it would release them from being trapped. Can I ask the Minister if he would kindly arrange for a meeting and allow not just the St. Helier Deputies but the Deputies in

the urban areas that are affected, if we could sit around the table and discuss this further? I appreciate the limitations as to his financial budgets at the moment but I think the Council of Ministers, in particular, would want to hear of something that is practical that provides long term support for the parishioners, et cetera, and that is the question I would ask.

Deputy G.W.J. de Faye:

I am happy to reiterate the very first thing I said, which is I am only too pleased to discuss the hopper bus service around St. Helier or any other aspects of the Draft Integrated Travel and Transport Strategy with Members. I would suggest that we wait until the Integrated Travel and Transport Strategy is published, which is due reasonably imminently, and following on from that I think I would be only too happy to hold a meeting at which everybody can voice their concerns and opinions, and I would be happy to have a meeting specifically on the hopper bus if Members would value that.

4. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier of the Minister for Home Affairs regarding succession planning within the departments under Home Affairs:

Does the Minister have a formal policy regarding succession planning within the department for which she is responsible?

Deputy A.D. Lewis of St. John (Assistant Minister for Home Affairs - rapporteur):

I can assure the Deputy that the policy of the department is that every division of Home Affairs must have a succession plan. Each department within Home Affairs deals differently with succession planning and it is the responsibility of the head of department to implement a succession planning process within the department. All operational services within Home Affairs have staff development processes in place so that staff can become eligible for senior positions. Members will appreciate, however, that individual services are different, have different training needs and development needs. Moreover, ours are small unitary services by U.K. standards. Consequently, factors such as the age profile of senior staff and resourcing assume great significance when assessing eligibility. As all divisions are essential services and, in many cases, require highly specialist staff, it is therefore essential that only the most qualified and experienced candidates form part of any succession planning.

1. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:

I wonder if the rapporteur could indicate what was achieved in terms of succession planning in the police service during the current chief's first contract and what additional work has been achieved in terms of succession planning in the addition that was made to that contract largely, of course, to achieve that particular aim?

The Deputy of St. John :

Much progress has been made on this very point. In fact, this year we have appointed a superintendent where the post was previously held by somebody from the U.K. and that was very much a local candidate. The other candidates for that position were all local candidates. That lays the foundations for future succession within that particular division of Home Affairs. I would, however, stress that with the issue of the chief officer of the States of Jersey Police, as indeed is the case in most forces in the U.K., it is not policy to necessarily recruit locally for that post. In fact, in the U.K. it is deemed as illegal to do so and there is a good reason for doing that. However, there are senior officers living in the U.K. working for U.K. forces that are originally from Jersey and clearly they will be targeted as part of the succession plan.

2. Deputy J.B. Fox:

Would the Assistant Minister recognise that the way he portrays his communication on this subject, if I was a police officer looking to be a future chief officer in the States of Jersey Police, I do not think I would bother because there are too many negatives and I would be required to spend considerable amounts of time out of the Island away from my family and, when it is quite clear from the words that are being said, that there is no intention of succession planning for a deputy chief officer or a chief officer? Could he give me some reassurance that is not the case?

The Deputy of St. John :

In the case of the deputy chief officer that is certainly not the case, not at all. In fact, I did indicate that by the fact that we have in recent times appointed a superintendent from the force locally. However, it is normal practice that that person should be at least in post for 2 years in that rank before progressing to the next rank, and that would be the same in many other industries and public sector jobs as well. With the chief officer's position, as I said, there are opportunities for local candidates who have got the right experience. They would have to have gone to senior command school, for example, and there is nobody in the force currently who has done that; that opportunity does exist. I do think, and it is general policy at the moment across most U.K. forces - in fact enshrined in law - that you do not appoint somebody to that top position from the local force. I do not believe it is best practice. I would strongly encourage many people from the Island to seek experience outside the Island. Indeed, many of our officers do, both through secondment, short term and long term, and end up coming back to the force most enriched by the experience and offering much greater managerial capacity to do the jobs that come up.

3. Deputy S. Power of St. Brelade :

Could the Assistant Minister confirm the status of the selection process for the succession of the governor at La Moye Prison and would he acknowledge to the Assembly the gratitude of his department to the professional and hard work of the outgoing governor?

The Deputy of St. John :

In answer to the last part of the Deputy 's question, absolutely and my Minister has said as much so far. We are indebted to him for bringing the prison further forward and managing a couple of projects that have been going on there to the benefit of that service recently. As far as the rest of the issue is concerned, I assume that the Deputy is concerned about succession planning in regard to that post. As Members will realise it is a highly specialist post. It is unlikely that people would have been working in another prison in Jersey because we clearly only have one and it is very refreshing to have people in that particular capacity coming in from much more demanding facilities in the U.K. to help run that prison. However, there is no reason why, in the future, senior officers in that prison should not be considered for the governor's job and local applicants were invited on this occasion and considered.

4. Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire:

I would like to challenge the logic of the chief officer of the police force with the Assistant Minister. Surely if one looks at the logic of the United Kingdom in not appointing a local officer, one is looking in the context of the United Kingdom. Jersey is not in the United Kingdom. Is the Chief Minister saying in future we should adopt policies whereby heads of departments, for example the Attorney General or other people in positions of authority in law, should come from outside of this jurisdiction?

The Deputy of St. John :

Thank you for the promotion, firstly, Deputy . No, I have to disagree with the Deputy . There is very good reason for that type of practice occurring in law enforcement circles and it is not peculiar to the U.K. whatsoever. It is peculiar particularly to small jurisdictions where clearly by having somebody from outside it avoids any possible accusations of .. I hate to use the word "corruption" but that is one of the reasons why it is not occurring in other countries because you simply do not have somebody that is too close to the people heading up that position. We have that already in Jersey through the Honorary Police Service. That service is very close to the public and that works extremely well. I think the chief officer distancing himself to a certain extent from that is invaluable. If you want community policing, if you want the service to be close to the people, the honorary service do that very well and the lower ranks do that very well. I think it is very important at a senior level that there is never an opportunity to have a finger pointed at that candidate for being in any way inward looking.

5. Deputy J.J. Huet of St. Helier :

Is the Assistant Minister aware that, in polite words, it is called knowing where the bodies are buried?

The Deputy of St. John :

Perhaps I could take the Deputy off line on that one and have it explained to me because I really do not understand the question.

Deputy J.J. Huet:

What it means bluntly is if you have always lived in Jersey and you have always been in the police force you know where the bodies are buried so that is why you have somebody from outside the Island to be the head of the police.

The Deputy of St. John :

I think the analogy has some legs and yes, that is my understanding, that having that oversight from somebody who has no axes to grind, has no history necessarily in the Island, I think has some benefit. Clearly, by having somebody else that is senior in the ranks as a deputy or superintendent has its benefits too and that is the aim of the succession plan.

6. Deputy S.C. Ferguson of St. Brelade :

Yes, but would it not be better in the context of police officers and chief of police to look for people with relevant experience to work in the Island? I really am a little confused as to why a central city experience or Northern Ireland experience is relevant to policing in Jersey. Surely one of the more shire type of approach is more appropriate?

The Deputy of St. John :

When you are commanding over 250 men and women, whether it be in Jersey, the Isle of Man, Guernsey or anywhere in the U.K., the management process is the same. What we endeavour to do is select the best candidate for the job. That person would need to have gone to senior command school, would have had managerial responsibility at various levels before succeeding to a chief constable position. The object of succession planning is to appoint the best person, man or woman, to the post. That is done by an independent selection process so that we endeavour to get the best person for the job regardless of where they come from. However, it is at the moment, in our minds, desirable to have that post filled from outside the Island but it is not enshrined in law in Jersey.