States Meeting Transcript - 06/11/2007

STATES OF JERSEY OFFICIAL REPORT

TUESDAY, 6th NOVEMBER 2007

QUESTIONS......................................................................................6

1. Written Questions........................................................................6

1. TO THE MINISTER FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT BY DEPUTY S.S.P.A. POWER OF ST BRELADE REGARDING THE APPOINTMENT OF A LIAISON DIRECTOR TO THE CIVIL AVIATION AUTHORITY:...............................6
2. TO THE MINISTER FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT BY DEPUTY A. BRECKON OF ST. SAVIOUR REGARDING THE ADDITION OF VALUE ADDED TAX ON GOODS FROM THE U.K: ....................................................6
3. TO THE MINISTER FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT BY DEPUTY R.G. LE HÉRISSIER OF ST. SAVIOUR REGARDING THE RENTAL OF OFFICE ACCOMMODATION FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STAFF:..................8
4. TO THE MINISTER FOR CHIEF MINISTER BY DEPUTY R.G. LE HÉRISSIER OF ST. SAVIOUR REGARDING COST CUTTING MEASURES:.........................9
5. TO THE MINISTER FOR TRANSPORT AND TECHNICAL SERVICES BY DEPUTY R.G. LE HÉRISSIER OF ST. SAVIOUR REGARDING THE COST OF THE NEW BUS ARRIVAL TEXTING SYSTEM:............................................9
6. TO THE MINISTER FOR PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT BY DEPUTY I.J. GORST OF ST. CLEMENT REGARDING THE LOCATION OF AN ANIMAL CARCASS STORAGE FACILITY AT HOWARD DAVIS FARM:...................10
7. TO THE MINISTER FOR TRANSPORT AND TECHNICAL SERVICES BY DEPUTY I.J. GORST OF ST. CLEMENT REGARDING THE LOCATION OF AN ANIMAL CARCASS STORAGE FACILITY AT HOWARD DAVIS FARM:........11
8. TO THE MINISTER FOR EDUCATION, SPORT AND CULTURE BY SENATOR J.L. PERCHARD REGARDING THE NATIONAL GALLERY STEERING GROUP:13 Deputy I.J. Gorst of St. Clement:.............................................................14 Deputy G.W.J. de Faye of St. Helier:.........................................................14

2. Oral Questions...........................................................................14

2.1 Deputy F.J. Hill of St. Martin of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding the introduction of screening for prostate cancer:.......................................15 Senator B.E. Shenton (The Minister for Health and Social Services):.........................15

1. The Deputy of St. Martin:..............................................................15
2. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier of St. Saviour:...............................................15
3. Senator P.F.C. Ozouf :..................................................................16
4. Senator P.F.C. Ozouf :..................................................................16
5. Senator J.L. Perchard:..................................................................16
6. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................16
7. The Deputy of St. Martin:..............................................................16

2.2. Deputy S.C. Ferguson of St. Brelade of the Chief Minister regarding the annual report of States Employees' Remuneration for 2006: ............................................17

Senator F.H. Walker (The Chief Minister):...................................................17

1. Deputy S.C. Ferguson:..................................................................17
2. Deputy G.P. Southern of St. Helier:....................................................17
3. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................18
4. Senator S. Syvret:......................................................................18
5. Senator S. Syvret:......................................................................18
6. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................18
7. Deputy S.C. Ferguson:..................................................................18

3. Senator S. Syvret of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding the transportation of children in custodial care to Court:....................................18 Senator B.E. Shenton:........................................................................19

2.3.1 Senator S. Syvret:......................................................................19

4. Deputy K.C. Lewis of St. Saviour of the Minister for Economic Development regarding British Airways' decision not to allow surfboards and kayaks on board its passenger aircraft:.................................................................................19 Senator P.F.C. Ozouf :........................................................................19 Deputy A.J.H. Maclean of St. Helier (Assistant Minister for Economic Development - rapporteur):.............................................................................19

2.4.1 Deputy K.C. Lewis :....................................................................20

5. Deputy G.P. Southern of the Minister for Housing regarding the sums of rent involved in the 600 "zero tolerance" letters sent to tenants:.........................................20 Deputy J.A. Hilton of St. Helier (Assistant Minister for Housing):............................20

2.5.1 Deputy S.C. Ferguson:..................................................................20

6. Senator S. Syvret of the Minister for Home Affairs regarding the transportation of children in custodial care to court:......................................................21 Senator W. Kinnard (The Minister for Home Affairs):........................................21

1. Senator S. Syvret.......................................................................21
2. Senator S. Syvret:......................................................................21
3. Deputy J.B. Fox of St. Helier:..........................................................22
4. Senator S. Syvret:......................................................................22

7. Deputy S. Power of St. Brelade of the Minister for Economic Development regarding the number of Service Level Agreements in force at the airport:............................23 Deputy A.J.H. Maclean (Assistant Minister for Economic Development):....................23

1. Deputy S.Power:.......................................................................23 The Bailiff :...................................................................................24
2. Deputy S.Power:.......................................................................24

8. Deputy S. Power of the Assistant Minister for Economic Development regarding the grounds under which the Port of St. Helier could refuse a commercial vessel:..........24 Deputy A.J.H. Maclean:......................................................................24

2.8.1 Deputy S. Power:.......................................................................24

9. Deputy G.P. Southern of the Minister for Housing regarding how the threat to withdraw heating or hot water from tenants, contained in Housing Department "zero tolerance" letters, constitutes a "firm but fair policy" under Audit Commission good practice guidance:...............................................................................25 Deputy J.A. Hilton (Assistant Minister for Housing):.........................................25

1. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................25
2. Deputy S.C. Ferguson:..................................................................25
3. Deputy J.A. Martin of St. Helier:.......................................................25
4. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................26
5. Deputy K.C. Lewis :....................................................................26
6. Deputy G.C.L. Baudains of St. Clement : ...............................................26
7. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................26

10. Deputy S. Pitman of St. Helier of the Chief Minister regarding the future of the Housing Minister:................................................................................26 Senator F.H. Walker (The Chief Minister):...................................................27

1. Deputy J.A. Martin: .................................................................27
2. Deputy J.A. Martin: .................................................................27
3. Deputy G.P. Southern : ..............................................................27
4. Deputy S.Pitman:...................................................................28
5. Deputy S.C. Ferguson:..............................................................28
6. Deputy G.P. Southern : ..............................................................28
7. Deputy J.A. Martin: .................................................................29

11. Deputy G.C.L. Baudains of the Minister for Treasury and Resources regarding the compliance of the 0/10 proposals within the European Code:...........................29 Senator T.A. Le Sueur (The Minister for Treasury and Resources): ..........................29

1. Deputy G.P. Southern : ..............................................................29
2. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:...........................................................29
3. Senator S. Syvret:....................................................................30
4. Deputy G.C.L. Baudains: ............................................................30
5. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:...........................................................30
6. Deputy G.P. Southern : ..............................................................30
7. Deputy G.C.L. Baudains: ............................................................31

12. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding a programme for dealing with a possible flu pandemic: ..................................31 Senator B.E. Shenton (The Minister for Health and Social Services):.........................31

2.12.1 Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:...........................................................31

13. Connétable A.S. Crowcroft of St. Helier of the Minister for Education, Sport and Culture regarding the recent food poisoning outbreak at two local schools:.....................31 Senator M.E. Vibert (The Minister for Education, Sport and Culture):........................31

1. The Connétable of St. Helier:........................................................32
2. Deputy S.Power:....................................................................32
3. Deputy J.A. Martin: .................................................................32
4. Deputy G.P. Southern : ..............................................................32

14. Deputy K.C. Lewis of the Assistant Minister for Economic Development regarding the safety of Q400/Dash 8 aircraft flying into Jersey on a daily basis:......................33 Deputy A.J.H. Maclean (Assistant Minister for Economic Development):....................33

2.14.1 Deputy K.C. Lewis : .................................................................33

15. The Connétable of St. Helier of the Minister for Education, Sport and Culture regarding the allocation of places at the new States-provided nursery at St. Peter 's School:.......33 Senator M.E. Vibert (The Minister for Education, Sport and Culture):........................33

1. Deputy I.J. Gorst :....................................................................33
2. Deputy I.J. Gorst :....................................................................34
3. Deputy D.W. Mezbourian of St. Lawrence:..........................................34
4. Deputy D.W. Mezbourian : ..........................................................34
5. The Connétable of St. Helier:........................................................34
6. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:...........................................................35
7. Deputy C.H. Egré of St. Peter : ......................................................35
8. The Deputy of St. Martin : ...........................................................35

16. The Deputy of St. Martin of the President of the Chairman's Committee regarding the

lodging of the revised Draft Code of Practice for Scrutiny Panels and the Public

Accounts Committee: ..................................................................36 Deputy S.C. Ferguson (President of the Chairman's Committee):............................36 2.16.1 The Deputy of St. Martin : ...........................................................36

17. Deputy S. Pitman of the Chief Minister regarding the role of the Corporate Management Board: ..................................................................................37 Senator F.H. Walker :.........................................................................37

2.17.1 Deputy S. Pitman:...................................................................37

3. Questions to Ministers without notice - Minister for Health and Social Services: ....37

1. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................37 Senator B.E. Shenton (The Minister for Health and Social Services):.........................38

1. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................38
   2. Deputy J.A. Martin:....................................................................38
   3. Deputy D.W. Mezbourian :..............................................................38
   4. Deputy A.E. Pryke of Trinity :..........................................................38
   5. Deputy C.J. Scott Warr en of St. Saviour:...............................................39
   6. The Deputy of St. Martin:..............................................................39
   7. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................39
   8. Deputy J.A. Hilton:.....................................................................39

3.8.1 Deputy J.A. Hilton:.....................................................................39

9. Deputy K.C. Lewis :....................................................................40
10. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................40
11. The Deputy of Trinity :..................................................................40

3.11.1 The Deputy of Trinity : ..............................................................40

12. The Deputy of St. Martin:..............................................................41
13. The Deputy of Trinity :..................................................................41

4. Questions to Ministers without notice - The Chief Minister: ..........................41

1. Deputy S.Power:.......................................................................41 Senator F.H. Walker (The Chief Minister):...................................................41
2. Deputy I.J. Gorst : ......................................................................41
3. Deputy K.C. Lewis :....................................................................42

4.3.1 Deputy K.C. Lewis :....................................................................42

4. Connétable M.K. Jackson of St. Brelade:...............................................42
5. Deputy S.Power:.......................................................................42
6. Deputy D.W. Mezbourian :..............................................................43
7. Deputy A. Breckon:....................................................................43

4.7.1 Deputy A. Breckon:....................................................................44

8. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................44

4.8.1 Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................44

9. Deputy J.A. Hilton:.....................................................................44
10. Senator L. Norman: ....................................................................44
11. Deputy C.J. Scott Warr en: ..............................................................45
12. Deputy J. Gallichan of St. Mary:........................................................45
13. Deputy J.B. Fox:........................................................................45

PUBLIC BUSINESS.............................................................................46

5. Goods and Services Tax: petition (P.125/2007).........................................46

5.1 The Connétable of St. Helier:...........................................................46

1. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:.................................................................49
2. Deputy J.J. Huet:.......................................................................54
3. Senator B.E. Shenton:..................................................................55
4. Deputy G.W.J. de Faye:................................................................56
5. Deputy R.C. Duhamel of St. Saviour:..................................................56

Deputy S.C. Ferguson:........................................................................56 LUNCHEON ADJOURNMENT................................................................57

PUBLIC BUSINESS (continued)................................................................57

6. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................57
7. Deputy S.Power:.......................................................................59
8. Deputy A. Breckon:....................................................................60
9. Deputy A.D. Lewis of St. John : ........................................................66
10. The Connétable of St. Brelade:......................................................68
11. Deputy J.A.N. Le Fondre of St. Lawrence:..........................................69
12. The Deputy of Trinity : ..............................................................71
13. Senator P.F. Routier:................................................................72
14. Deputy P.V.F Le Claire:.............................................................74
15. Deputy J.A. Martin: .................................................................76
16. Deputy C.J. Scott Warr en:...........................................................78
17. Senator F.H. Walker :................................................................79
18. Deputy J.A. Martin: .................................................................82
19. Deputy S.C. Ferguson:..............................................................82
20. Deputy S.Pitman:...................................................................83
21. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:...........................................................83
22. Senator S. Syvret:....................................................................85 The Greffier of the States (in the Chair):......................................................88

ADJOURNMENT................................................................................88

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

QUESTIONS

1. Written Questions

1. TO THE MINISTER FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT BY DEPUTY S.S.P.A. POWER OF ST BRELADE REGARDING THE APPOINTMENT OF A LIAISON DIRECTOR TO THE CIVIL AVIATION AUTHORITY:

Question

Has a former senior engineer at the States of Jersey Airport now been appointed Liaison Director to the Civil Aviation Authority on behalf of Jersey, and if so, will the Minister advise members why the postholder is unable to be based at the Economic Development Department?

Would the Minister further advise at which department this post is now based, how much notice they were given, and whether other departments had been unwilling to accommodate this post?

Answer

The Minister can confirm that former Airport Chief Electronics Engineer has been redeployed and appointed to the role of Director of Civil Aviation (or D.C.A.).

Under international safety regulations, Jersey, like all other Crown Dependencies and U.K. Overseas Territories is required to separate the functions of aviation operation (such as at the Airport) and safety regulation. It is worth noting that the Isle of Man already have a D.C.A. in post, and have had since May this year.

This separation of functions  further demands that the office of D.C.A.  is accommodated  in a department other than the department responsible for the operation of the Airport.

For that reason the appointment of the D.C.A. was made independent of the Airport by the States Human Resources department to Home Affairs which has assumed responsibility for the D.C.A.

The D.C.A. was appointed on the basis of his 20 years' experience in aviation which has included intimate involvement in aviation law and the airspace for which the Airport is responsible, making him the pre-eminent candidate for the position.

2. TO THE MINISTER FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT BY DEPUTY A. BRECKON OF ST. SAVIOUR REGARDING THE ADDITION OF VALUE ADDED TAX ON GOODS FROM THE U.K:

Question

Is the Minister aware of any practice of traders charging prices equivalent to United Kingdom (U.K.) Value Added Tax (V.A.T.) inclusive prices to Jersey consumers and, if so, what steps, if any, has he taken to publicise and discourage this practice?

What steps, if any, will he be taking to address the significant price differences between Jersey and the U.K. of many basic goods and services and could he explain if / how sums equivalent to U.K. V.A.T. will be identified in receipts to Jersey consumers in any price marking legislation?

Yes, I am aware of certain traders charging the same prices in Jersey for their goods as they do on high streets in the U.K. and have expressed concern on many occasions in the past.

Before responding to the next part of the question I would like to quote from the constitution of the Jersey Consumer Council of which Deputy Breckon is Chairman.

"The functions of the Council shall be – to seek information, investigate, highlight and publicise anomalies and irregularities in consumer affairs and to encourage good trading practice by local business"

I understand from this extract that publicising such information to enable informed confident consumers about such pricing and indeed discouraging it is the job of the Consumer Council, not me as Minister for Economic Development.

In my view credit needs to be given to the Jersey Evening Post "Fair Play" journalists who have achieved a great deal to highlight to consumers those traders who do remove the VAT element. This has been done at no cost to the taxpayer. They launched their "NO V.A.T." poster campaign and as many as thirty retailers have proved that they remove the V.A.T. equivalent element from their prices and are guaranteed lower than the U.K. high street.

Regarding what the Deputy refers to as significant price differences between Jersey and the U.K., I think that it is worth mentioning that, apart from the traders who have participated in the J.E.P. "NO V.A.T." initiative, significant large stores in Jersey have a policy of charging lower prices than their U.K. stores for most goods. In addition, one of our largest department stores displays a bold statement at every entrance which indicates that all prices charged, apart from books, are lower than those for the same goods in the U.K. However, it is a fact that food prices in many cases are higher than the U.K. and one of the reasons for this is that, in Jersey, we do not enjoy the same level of competition in food retail or indeed the trade in low cost clothing. As was reported in last week's Competition Commission Report competition reduces prices and I have asked the J.C.R.A. to review the case of the introduction of a third supermarket group to Jersey to improve competition.

On the question of V.A.T. and price marking legislation, there is no legal basis for trying to do what the Deputy is suggesting. V.A.T. is a U.K. tax collected from U.K. retailers by the U.K. government. It does not exist in Jersey so would be impossible to either assess or make reference to it in local receipts. Jersey businesses are free to set the prices of their goods and services. This is why in a free open market, competition is of crucial importance in helping to drive prices down. It is also crucial that in making purchasing decisions, consumers are given clear, accurate and unambiguous price information before they purchase. I welcomed the thorough investigation into price marking recently carried out by Deputy Southern 's Scrutiny Panel which stated that consumers have a right to know the total price they have to pay for goods. The Panel then went on to recommend that prices are marked and displayed inclusive of G.S.T. which as many members will know, I have been supporting for some time.

Additional information

Since January 2005, the Consumer Council has received a total of £225,000 pounds grant of which £90,000 was specifically for a " Price Watch" initiative. I have looked at the Partnership Agreement with Economic Development which was signed by Deputy Breckon in April 2005 and I shall quote the objectives:-

• to generate greater public interest and awareness in the prices of goods and services
• to research, publish and make more general price comparison information readily available
• to encourage community debate about prices of goods and services
• to develop a positive and effective communication strategy
• to make more links with the wider community
• to  establish  and  develop  an  active  database  of  those  who  are  price  conscious  in  the community
• to ensure value for money from the Price Watch campaign.

I believe the Deputy should be seriously considering whether the Price Watch campaign has and continues to deliver value for money to the Jersey taxpayer.

3. TO  THE MINISTER  FOR ECONOMIC  DEVELOPMENT BY DEPUTY  R.G. LE HÉRISSIER  OF ST.  SAVIOUR  REGARDING  THE  RENTAL  OF OFFICE ACCOMMODATION FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STAFF:

Question

Would the Minister advise members of the annual rental of the former Tourism Office and specify the annual rental of the properties to which the Economic Development Department staff have now relocated?

Answer

The rent paid for premises used by the Economic Development Department is:

Notes:

The rent payable for Liberation Place (used primarily by Jersey Tourism) has been pegged to the existing level by way of a 21 year contract lease, subject to review at a level of 2.5% per annum after 3 and 6 years and with an option to break the lease after 9 years. Members can find further details in P.22/2005. It will be noted that the rent paid for the "old" Weighbridge offices was some £5,800 less than the future rent for Liberation Place agreed by the States in P22. This is the result of internal negotiations the result of which was to hold down the rent until the move to Liberation Place was effected.

The Bath Street lease expires in February 2012, but contains a break clause in March 2009.

4. TO THE MINISTER FORCHIEFMINISTERBYDEPUTYR.G.LEHÉRISSIEROF ST. SAVIOUR REGARDING COST CUTTING MEASURES:

Question

Would the Chief Minister specify the work carried out by the three Assistant Ministers who were tasked to identify cost cutting measures and advise what savings, if any, have resulted to date, and in what areas, from their activities?

Answer

I would refer the Deputy to my answer to his similar question on 9th October 2007 which set out the current position.

The Assistant Ministers commenced their review earlier this year. Since then they have had a number of meetings with officers and reviewed a significant amount of detailed information relating to particular departments. This was done to familiarise themselves with spending patterns in order to identify possible areas for detailed examination. This included consideration in detail of budget against actual figures for a particular department, with subsequent follow up. They have also reviewed detailed information on staffing numbers and costs and have started considering the structures of certain departments.

However, the Assistant Ministers found that they did not have adequate resources, which, coupled with constraints on their time due to the demands of their official roles and responsibilities, meant that they were unable to progress as quickly as they would have liked. As was stated during the debate on the Annual Business Plan, this is in the process of being addressed with the setting up of a single group to look into States expenditure in conjunction with the Public Accounts Committee. The Assistant Ministers will join this new process with a number of ideas and suggestions - not least of which are some suggested by the Deputy himself a few weeks ago.

The Assistant Ministers made it very clear at the commencement of their review that they did not expect to identify specific future savings or produce reports for some considerable time, and certainly would not be in time for the 2008 Business Plan.

5. TO THE MINISTER FOR TRANSPORT AND TECHNICAL SERVICES BY DEPUTY R.G. LE HÉRISSIER OF ST. SAVIOUR REGARDING THE COST OF THE NEW BUS ARRIVAL TEXTING SYSTEM:

Question

Further to the Minister's response to a written question on 11th September 2007 relating to the cost of the new system for texting bus arrival times, would he advise Members of the total cost, including the provision of G.P.S. equipment?

Answer

As stated in my answer to the Deputy on 11th September 2007, the S.M.S. text messaging system is an added benefit from the installation of the Real Time Passenger Information system (R.T.P.I.) which will allow a dynamic stand allocation system to operate to make maximum use of the bus stands at Liberation Station. The total set-up cost of the R.T.P.I., including the provision of GPS equipment on all the vehicles, is £441,138 of which £38,350 (as previously advised) relates exclusively to the S.M.S. text messaging system.

6. TO THE MINISTER FOR PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT BY DEPUTY I.J. GORST OF ST. CLEMENT REGARDING THE LOCATION OF AN ANIMAL CARCASS STORAGE FACILITY AT HOWARD DAVIS FARM:

Question

Would the Minister –

1. inform members whether Planning permission has been granted to the Transport and Technical Services Department for the siting and operation ofthe animal carcass storage facility which they are currently operating at Howard Davis Farm next to Acorn Enterprises, and if so, would he advise when permission was granted and what public consultation process, if any, was followed?
2. Would the Minister inform members whether an environmental impact assessment was undertaken prior to the commencement of the process and, if so, what were its findings?
3. If it is the case that Planning permission has not been granted, would the Minister advise members whetherhe is content that such a sensitive process should be undertaken at this or any site without planning permission, and if so, why?

Answer:

1. I can confirm that an application for conversion of the former bulb treatment shed into an animal cremation hall was registered by the Planning Department on 21 January 2003.

This application was widely consulted, and included the then P.S.D.- Highways, Health

Protection and the Environmental Services Unit. The application preceded the implementation of the new Planning and Building Law, so would not have been subject to the public consultation requirements of the current legislation. The application was, however, advertised in the J.E.P.

I can further confirm that the Planning Application was approved on 23 June 2003 by the

Planning Sub-Committee.

Agreement of the permit was based, in part, on that the specifications in the original

Environmental Impact Assessment are met'. This assessment included the inclusion of an overnight storage facility within purpose provided freezers in case of delivery or plant problems'.

I understand that the shed is currently being used to freeze and store animal by products.

These are held until a sufficient batch is collected for shipment to an approved facility in the U.K. for disposal.

Although the Planning Consent for the cremator included a requirement for storage it did not

cover the storage of animal by-products prior to shipment off-island. However, as discussed below, planning consent would not be required for this part of the process.

2. An Environmental Impact Assessment ofthe cremator facility was undertaken by Faber Maunsell. This assessed the potential environmental impact during construction and operation of the facility, and proposed mitigation measures to remove or reduce such potential impacts.

The Environmental Impact Assessment was extensively commented on by the then

Environmental Services Unit who requested more detail on the disposal of ash waste and wash-down water. Health Protection were also consulted and produced 32 detailed technical requirements involving air pollution, odour and noise issues.

The permission was granted in 2003 and was based on the most appropriate cremator

available at that time. It is now planned to install a more up-to-date cremator. The new design has again been extensively commented upon by the relevant bodies above.

Although the Environmental Impact Assessment for the cremator included a requirement for

storage it did not cover the storage of animal by-products prior to shipment off-Island.

3. I can confirm that planning permission was granted for the conversion of the former bulb treatment shed into an animal cremation hall with overnight storage facility. This facility has yet to be built.

Both the present temporary storage of frozen animal waste products and the previous storage

of bulbs can be classed as agricultural related storage use. There is thus no material change of use at the site.

Further, the knacker's yard had to move from its old location within the abattoir in order so

that the abattoir could become EU compliant. EU regulations prevent the siting of an abattoir operating alongside a knacker's yard.

Further, this is only a temporary use and the storage issue will be resolved when the cremator

is installed shortly. Until the new cremator is installed there is no facility on the Island to deal with animal by-products.

In summary, planning permission is not required, given that the site is still being used for

agriculture and there is no material change of use.

It is also noted that the freezing of animal by-products is potentially less environmentally

damaging than their incineration that is covered by the full environmental impact assessment and that this is a temporary measure until such time as the new cremator is installed.

7. TO THE MINISTER FOR TRANSPORT AND TECHNICAL SERVICES BY DEPUTY I.J. GORST OF ST. CLEMENT REGARDING THE LOCATION OF AN ANIMAL CARCASS STORAGE FACILITY AT HOWARD DAVIS FARM:

Question

Would the Minister advise –

1. whether the positioning ofboth the animal incineration unit and the animal carcass storage facilities within the confines of Howard Davis farm are in breach ofthe Davis Family Trust Covenant and if not, would he adviseonwhat criteria or legal advicethat opinion is based?

2. if both these facilities are in breach ofthe covenant will he undertaketo immediately stop any further processes or activities and actively look for an alternative site?
3. what consultation, if any, has takenplace with Acorn Enterprisesoverthe compatibility of these operations and its sheltered work and training of people with disabilities on the adjacent site?

Answer

1. The Minister is not currently in a position to advise definitively onthis matter and is in the process of seeking further information.

The Agriculture and Fisheries Committee on 14th February 2002 considered changing the use of the disused bulb treatment plant at Howard Davis Farm for the construction and operation of a new animal carcass cremator. The shed in question had become available due to the Committee deciding to cease treating daffodil bulbs. A planning application was submitted to the Planning and Environment Committee on 14th January 2003.

At that time, it was not considered to be a breach of the covenant as the Agriculture and Fisheries Committee provided many services to the agricultural industry which included testing, training and operational support. This particular change of use from bulb treatment to animal cremator was considered to be a change from one operation in support of the industry to another. That criteria formed the basis for the current change of use.

2. There is no prevailing evidence to indicate that either ofthe facilities are in breach ofthe covenant.

The planning application was submitted by the Agriculture and Fisheries Committee, who at the time administered the Howard Davis Farm, providing training, research and development and numerous services to the agriculture, horticulture and fishing industries.

It is the intention of Transport and Technical Services to re-locate the cremator as soon as possible. Bellozanne is the preferred location, but land will not be available for approximately two years.

In the meantime it is essential that the Island has a modern and regulatory compliant facility to deal with animal waste derived from farms, abattoir, knacker's yard and other dead animals as they arise. It would be irresponsible to delay the construction of his plant any longer in the face of potential outbreaks of Foot and Mouth, Blue Tongue and Avian influenza, for example. Presently, all Jersey's animal by-products are shipped to the UK for incineration and in the event of a notifiable disease outbreak on the Island, the UK Government would almost certainly stop export of these materials, leaving the Island with a very serious animal waste disposal problem.

3. Before the application was made a thorough consultation process took place, with an open public meeting at Trinity Parish Hall on 27th May, followed by an Environmental Impact Assessment undertaken by external consultants. This provided an opportunity for local people to listen to a presentation on the proposal and allow questions to be put to the department of Agriculture & Fisheries. The main issues raised were in relation to air quality, traffic and cost implications.

Acorn Industries were aware of the project and it is understood that they did not raise any concerns directly to the department in relation to the planning application or at the Parish Hall meeting. As far as it can be ascertained, Acorn Industries did not raise a formal objection to the application under the planning process.

8. TO THE MINISTER FOR EDUCATION, SPORT AND CULTURE BY SENATOR J.L. PERCHARD REGARDING THE NATIONAL GALLERY STEERING GROUP: Question

Would the Minister advise members –

1. Who the members of the National Gallery Steering group are?
2. Who appointed the members of the National Gallery Steering group?
3. What the terms of reference of the National Gallery Steering group are?
4. Who was responsible for drafting of the terms of reference for the National Gallery Steering group?
5. What support, if any, is being given by States departments or bodies owned or controlled by the States to the National Gallery Steering group?
6. Which, if any outside consultants are advising the National Gallery Steering group or States departments over the proposal to develop a National Gallery on the Weighbridge site, the total estimated cost of all consultancy work in this regard and the mechanism in place for their funding?
7. Will the Minister make available any minutesofthe National Gallery Steering group as an appendix to the answer to this question?

Answer

1. The current members of the National Gallery Steering Group are: the Chairman of the Jersey Heritage Trust Jurat John de Veulle OBE, the Deputy of Grouville , the Connétable of St Helier, the Director ofthe Jersey Heritage Trust Mr Jon Carter, Mrs Melissa Bonn, Mrs Susie Pinel, Mr Jonathan Voak, Mr Robert Tilling, RI, MBE, Mr Ray Banks FRSA, the Curator of Art of the Jersey Heritage Trust Ms Louise Downie and the Cultural Development Officer Mr Rod McLoughlin. Thegroup is chaired by the Bailiff , Sir Philip Bailhache .
2. The members of the Steering Group were invited to join by the Jersey Heritage Trust.
3. The Steering Group was established, following a meeting ofthe Jersey Heritage Trust in December 1999, "to produce a detailed feasibility study, project definition statement and outline architect's brief, identifying among other things a site and sources of funding".
4. The terms of reference above were drafted by the Jersey Heritage Trust which, as I have indicated, established the group. They follow a recommendation in the culture report of 2000 commissioned by the then Finance and Economics Committee.

5. Administrative support is provided within the Bailiff 's Chambers. The Cultural DevelopmentOfficerofthe Education, Sportand Culture Department wasinvitedontothe group this year to assist in the development of a strategy document for the group, as I recognise that if the matter were to be advanced it would be for me, as Minister for Education, Sport and Culture, to bring forward any such proposals. This work, which is currently in progress, includes obtaining the views of the Economic Development Department, the Economics Unit.
6. Hopkins Architects are advising the National Gallery Steering Group on design matters. They are producing the following: a feasibility studyreport, an initial specification for the building, a three dimensional model, and perspective drawings to illustrate the urban design and architectural concept. This is under a fixed £30,000 contract with the Planning and Environment Department which is being funded though percentage for art contributions. The Economic Development Department has commissioned a report from Locum Consulting which is involved in a number ofother projects related to the visitor economy. The question of the desirability of a gallery in this context featured in the Locum Destination Audit published in November 2006. The cost ofthe Locum report on the National Gallery is £7,500 which is being shared between the Economic Development Department and the Waterfront Enterprise Board.
7. As I have previously indicated, I intend to make public the strategy document when it is complete. I am advised that the Minister for Economic Development will also publish, with an accompanying note, the Locum Consulting report. The minutes oftheNational Gallery Steering Group, which date back more than seven years, are confidential to the group and it would be a matterofapproachingthe Chairman toseekthe views of the group about releasing them.

Deputy I.J. Gorst of St. Clement :

If I might, while I thank the Minister for Transport and Technical Services for his answer to my written question number 7, in answer paragraph A he says that he is not in a position to definitively advise me on a certain matter and that he is seeking further information. Could I ask him to confirm that he will, once he has received that further information or clarification, make it public, please?

Deputy G.W.J. de Faye of St. Helier :

Unless I am advised that the information is confidential, I will happily make it public.

The Bailiff :

Very well. Well, now we come to oral questions ..

2. Oral Questions

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

May I ask leave of the Assembly, Sir, to put over my oral question this morning until the next session. I have spoken to the Greffier and the Minister for Economic Development.

The Bailiff :

I understand, Deputy , there are personal reasons. I am sure those are acceptable to the Assembly. Very well, Deputy Le Claire's questions will be left over until the next meeting. Deputy of St. Martin has a question for the Minister for Health and Social Services.

2.1 Deputy F.J. Hill of St. Martin of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding the introduction of screening for prostate cancer:

While the Health and Social Services is to be complimented on its breast-screening programme for women, would the Minister advise whether there are any plans to introduce prostate cancer screening for men?

Senator B.E. Shenton (The Minister for Health and Social Services):

I am glad the Deputy has raised this important issue. It is a controversial and a rather complex topic. Prostate cancer is the commonest cancer in men. It would be great if there was a good screening programme and if treatment choices were more clear-cut. Unfortunately there are no tests which are available for screening men who have no symptoms. There is a test called "prostate specific antigen", P.S.A., but unfortunately it has a 75 per cent false positive rate in asymptomatic men. When offering any screening test to a population of men with no symptoms, it is important that there are more advantages than disadvantages. The sort of harmful consequences screening can cause include unnecessary operations and needless anxiety, for instance, from a positive result when it turns out that there is in fact no cancer. We are guided by the U.K.'s (United Kingdom) National Screening Committee in these matters. This group of national experts keeps all the

evidence under constant review and does not recommend a screening programme based on the P.S.A. test. Instead it recommends that men thinking about having a P.S.A. test should first have the opportunity to consider all the pros and cons, including the limitations of the P.S.A. test, before making a personal informed choice whether to go ahead and have it.

The Bailiff :

Minister, I am sorry, your time is expired now. Is there any supplementary question? Deputy of St. Martin?

1. The Deputy of St. Martin :

Will the Minister not agree that surely one of the most important aspects in things like breast- screening is trying to identify things before they get too far? Surely would it not make sense to introduce something like prostate cancer testing, if nothing else, just to give those people the assurance that they do not have a problem? That is probably just as great as those people .. it is probably better than being told that it is too late.

Senator B.E. Shenton:

I think as I pointed out in my answer, the problem is there is not a suitable test available at the moment. The P.S.A. test which is the only one available gives out too many false positives and it can cause more harm than good to carry the treatment further on someone that does not in fact have the cancer at all.

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

If the test being used by people like G.P.s (general practitioner) is apparently potentially misleading, why is the Senator's department not counselling against the use of this test?

Senator B.E. Shenton:

Why are we not counselling? Where there is evidence that there may be prostate cancer or where there has been a history in the family of prostate cancer, or the individual has suffered prostate cancer in the past, the test is extremely useful and it is in these circumstances that it is used. It is not used as a general screening for healthy men because it gives off too many false results in this area.

3. Senator P.F.C. Ozouf :

Is the Minister suggesting that men over a certain age should not have the test? Because that seems to fly completely in the face of the work done by many notable individuals - many notable Islanders - on the importance of men over a certain age having a test. Is he saying that people over a certain age should not have a test as a general precaution?

Senator B.E. Shenton:

I do not think I mentioned age in my reply at all. I think the Senator is hearing voices. I have not got age in my answer.

4. Senator P.F.C. Ozouf :

Is the Minister aware that there is a general view held by a number of individuals and which has been promoted by the cancer awareness charities on prostate cancer testing, that men should go and have a P.S.A. test? Is he saying that they are wrong?

Senator B.E. Shenton:

What I am saying is that you should listen to medical advice and I would rather ask a doctor when I should go for a prostate test than ask a politician.

5. Senator J.L. Perchard:

Would the Minister confirm that for every hundred men who show positive P.S.A. results and will therefore have to have a biopsy operation which can be at times very dangerous, only 25 will show the positive signs of prostate cancer and that to undertake a complete screening programme of the male population, this is not specific enough and that while it is prudent to have a P.S.A. test, it is not prudent at this stage, because the results of the tests are so vague that the Minister ..

The Bailiff :

Come to the question, please.

Senator J.L. Perchard:

Would the Minister confirm that I have raised a valid point there, Sir?

Senator B.E. Shenton:

The Senator has raised a very valid point there. [Laughter]

6. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:

Following the very wise words of that well known sycophant, Senator Perchard, Sir, would the Minister now confirm that it is his department's line that men who are healthy - who think themselves healthy, in itself a questionable issue - should not, as Senator Ozouf has indicated, seek to have a P.S.A. test?

Senator B.E. Shenton:

Informed choice is the best way forward. Any man who wants to have this test can go and see his G.P. and ask about it. But he should only go ahead and have it with his eyes wide open and be aware of all the ins and outs of it and what happens when a P.S.A. test result shows up positive.

7. The Deputy of St. Martin :

Could I just ask for confirmation from the Minister, given the concern I think, it is generally expressed by men, not just in this Chamber but outside the Chamber as well, does the Minister not think it might be useful for maybe his Medical Officer of Health to produce a paper on it giving out the pros and cons of having this, if only just to give people reassurance?

Senator B.E. Shenton:

I believe that that is an excellent suggestion by the Deputy and I shall take it up with the Medical Officer of Health.

2.2. Deputy S.C. Ferguson of St. Brelade of the Chief Minister regarding the annual report of States Employees' Remuneration for 2006:

Can the Chief Minister explain why the annual report of States Employees' Remuneration for 2006 did not contain comparisons between States pay rates and private sector rates (and also between States rates and U.K. mainland public sector rates) as had been provided in the equivalent report for 2005, and will he confirm that the 2006 comparisons will be published?

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

The report provided by my department on States Employees' Remuneration at the time of the publication of the States Annual Report and Accounts for 2005 was presented to the States in May 2006. At that time we had recently received the results of a pay comparability survey carried out by Hay Consultants comparing States of Jersey salaries with those in the U.K. public and private sectors of employment and also the Jersey private sector. The data was current as at 1st January 2006 and we wished to share it with States Members. When we presented in May 2007 a similar report to accompany the Annual Report and Accounts for 2006 no further salary comparability information was available. Such surveys are not done every year but normally (and this is established practice) about every 4 years. This is because salary comparisons tend to change slowly over time and also because surveys of this nature are expensive. When a further survey is conducted, the results will be shared with States Members. In the meantime I have received no evidence to suggest that the differentials have materially changed.

1. Deputy S.C. Ferguson:

Yes, but given that, for example, a police constable in the London Met with 2 years' experience and including London weighting of £6,219, receives £31,206 annually compared with the equivalent rate for a Jersey constable of £37,858, does the Chief Minister not think that a more detailed review of salary levels in the States is not absolutely essential?

Senator F.H. Walker :

The detailed review was, as I have indicated in my answer, undertaken. The differentials in pay between, for example, police officers in Jersey and those in the U.K. have been established now for many, many years, long before I think any of us were in the States. It is not something that you can go about dismantling. What is far more relevant is the comparison in pay between the public sector in Jersey and the private sector in Jersey and recent information has made it very clear that there is no great differential between public sector pay and private sector pay except at the lower end in the public sector where it is considerably higher and the higher end of the public sector where it is considerably lower.

2. Deputy G.P. Southern of St. Helier :

Is it the Chief Minister's intention to reduce differentials between States pay and private sector pay in the U.K. and locally by simply not accommodating any figures in the new pay rises, the new monies put aside for pay rises for 2008-2009 and having all States workers absorb the cost of 3 per cent G.S.T. (Goods and Services Tax)?

Senator F.H. Walker :

As I made it clear in an interview with the Jersey Evening Post it is not my practice to comment on how negotiations with any public sector pay group are going to be conducted, nor to make any observation whatsoever on the likely outcome.

3. Deputy G.P. Southern :

Does the Chief Minister accept that if he holds to the sums that he has set aside for the 2008-2009 pay awards there will be a reduction in differentials?

Senator F.H. Walker :

No, Sir, I do not accept that there will necessarily be a change in differentials.

4. Senator S. Syvret:

Does the Chief Minister accept that the production of a properly calculated purchasing power parity study would enable much more ready and accurate comparison of pay rates between here and various areas of the United Kingdom?

Senator F.H. Walker :

This is something that has been discussed on many occasions over the years and I will accept that a P.P.P (purchasing power parity) as it is called is a desirable instrument. However, the most recent advice from our highly regarded statistical unit is that with all the other information they are now providing to Members and to the public, a P.P.P. is something that is somewhat lower down the pecking order, not least because it is an extremely complex and expensive piece of information to evaluate.

5. Senator S. Syvret:

Does the Chief Minister accept that in all likelihood the P.P.P., were it ever to be undertaken, would show that the purchasing power of a pound in Jersey would in fact be substantially lower than the U.K. average?

Senator F.H. Walker :

It would be lower. I do not accept that it would be substantially lower. But I would also make the point that household earnings in Jersey are substantially higher than they are in the U.K.

6. Deputy G.P. Southern :

Does the Minister expect States workers to absorb the cost of G.S.T. in the 2008-2009 pay awards?

Senator F.H. Walker :

The Deputy is again asking me to comment on how negotiations are going to be conducted and their possible outcome. I am afraid I am simply not going to do that.

7. Deputy S.C. Ferguson:

Given that 50 per cent of States expenditure is in human resources, does the Chief Minister not consider that a root and branch' review is required to ensure that job descriptions match job abilities and that salaries and wages are fair for the work that is performed?

Senator F.H. Walker :

The salary levels and differentials are a constant source of review by the States Employment Board and by the Corporate Management Board. I think Members might also be surprised to learn how many public sector employees we have lost to the private sector in Jersey over the last year, particularly because of salary differentials which are higher in the private sector.

3. Senator S. Syvret of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding the transportation of children in custodial care to Court:

Will the Minister inform the Assembly whether children in custodial care are transported from Les Chenes/Greenfields to court in the same vehicle as adult prisoners from H.M.P. (Her Majesty's Prison) La Moye and if so does he consider that this practice is compatible with the Children (Jersey) Law 2002, in particular Articles 19 and 35?

Senator B.E. Shenton:

When a young person is presented to the Royal Court for a secure accommodation order, he or she is escorted between Greenfields and the court in an unmarked car by a member of the childcare staff because this is a civil matter. In the case of a young person who is subject to custodial remand at Greenfields transportation is the responsibility of the Minister for Home Affairs as this is a criminal matter. I understand that the Minister for Home Affairs will be providing the Assembly with details of the type of transport used. I believe that the current arrangements are compliant with the Children (Jersey) Law 2002, however, in order to fully ensure that this is the case legal advice has been sought on compatibility with Article 19 and Article 35 of the Law.

2.3.1 Senator S. Syvret:

Does the Minister accept the fact that children under custodial orders have in fact been transported in the same vehicle as adult prisoners to the courts?

Senator B.E. Shenton:

I understand that this is the case and I must admit that personally I was very surprised and that is why we are seeking legal advice on the matter.

4. Deputy K.C. Lewis of St. Saviour of the Minister for Economic Development regarding British Airways' decision not to allow surfboards and kayaks on board its passenger aircraft:

Further to news that from the 6th November 2007 British Airways will no longer accept surf boards and kayaks on board its passenger aircraft, what steps, if any, is the Minister taking to reverse this decision?

The Bailiff :

May I ask that you put the question as approved, please, Deputy ?

Deputy K.C. Lewis :

Further to news that from the 6th November 2007 British Airways will no longer accept surf boards and kayaks on board its passenger aircraft, what steps, if any, is the Minister taking to request that the airline reverse this decision?

Senator P.F.C. Ozouf :

May I ask my Assistant Minister to rapporteur for this question and 7, 8 and 15 as they all relate to Harbours and Airport matters?

The Bailiff :

Yes. Assistant Minister?

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

rapporteur):

Following the announcement I immediately asked the Airport Director to seek further information from British Airways on the matter. British Airways have advised that while its network-wide decision stands, it will continue to accept such items as those noted by Deputy Lewis for groups booked to travel through some of the airline's travel agent partners which specialise in sporting tours providing that prior notice is received. Prior notice will allow British Airways to put alternative arrangements in place to handle such items for groups. Research shows that only a very small but of course very important number of customers choose to travel with larger items and British Airways will track these numbers over the course of the next few weeks. The airline states this process will help find a solution that will allow customers to travel with larger items of sports equipment through British Airways or British Airways' partners. It is worth restating that this disappointing change to baggage policy is not unique to Jersey but applies across the whole British Airways network.

2.4.1 Deputy K.C. Lewis :

As the Assistant Minister is no doubt aware, Sir, Jersey has a long history of sporting excellence with surfers competing at international level in all parts of the world and this will also cause problems for sporting enthusiasts coming to the Island. If other airlines were to follow suit, this would be disastrous for sports in Jersey. Does the Minister not agree?

Deputy A.J.H. Maclean:

We clearly recognise the value of event-led tourism and sporting activities and in that regard the restriction on carrying of larger items of sporting equipment is disappointing and clearly will have an effect on sporting activities of that nature. So clearly we are keeping a very close eye on developments.  Currently other airlines  have not followed suit and so there are a number of opportunities. As far as groups are concerned, as I have already mentioned, British Airways have stated that providing bookings are made through travel agents that group activities will be allowed to carry their necessary larger items.

5. Deputy G.P. Southern of the Minister for Housing regarding the sums of rent involved in the 600 "zero tolerance" letters sent to tenants:

Will the Assistant Minister detail for Members the sums involved in the 600 "zero tolerance" letters sent to tenants in terms of the rent owed by monthly bands over a period of 0-24 months and in bands of £200 from £0-£2,000? Will he or she further state how many of the 600 letters were sent to pensioners?

Deputy J.A. Hilton of St. Helier (Assistant Minister for Housing):

The letter referred to is the second in a series of letters sent to advise tenants who fall into arrears that the matter requires their immediate attention. An initial letter is generated after the rent account falls into arrears of one week. The letter in question is sent out a week later if no communication has been elicited. Early intervention is imperative to prevent tenants accruing unmanageable arrears. These particular letters have only been used since January 2007 so there is no 24-month period to review. A manual exercise has been undertaken to show the information requested for the month of October 2007 as follows: £0-£200, 4 letters; £200-£400, 10 letters; £400-£600, 2 letters; £600-£800, 1 letter; £800-£1,000, 1 letter; £1,400-£1,600, 1 letter; £1,800- £2,000, 1 letter. During October in excess of 200 letters were automatically generated by our in- house computer system but only 20 letters to which this question refers were sent to tenants. None of those 20 letters sent out during October were received by pensioners. It is clear that October 2007 has seen a continued monthly reduction in the issue of this letter. This, I believe, is an indication of the success of "zero tolerance" policy. The policy has seen a reduction in arrears of £326,000 so far in 2007 releasing valuable funds that can be reinvested into the housing stock and so improve the quality of life of all our tenants. Sir, I would like to explain to the House that this particular question just for the month of October took 2 officers 2½ hours to answer and this is the reason why I have only answered the question for the month of October 2007.

Deputy G.P. Southern :

I thank the Assistant Minister for her answer.

2.5.1 Deputy S.C. Ferguson:

Would the Assistant Minister please come back to the House and tell us exactly what the total of the outstanding arrears is? Would she not confirm that it is somewhat unusual to allow rents to accrue to the point of £2,000?

Deputy J.A. Hilton:

I can answer the Deputy 's question today. The level of arrears at 1st October 2007 is £790,000. As I explained before, the arrears reduction in the last 10 months has been £326,000. The level of arrears obviously in December 2006 was £1,117,000. The level of debt that she points to - the £1,800-£2,000 - it is not a question of this debt just becoming aware to the Housing Department, we are continuously engaging with those 2 tenants in an effort to reduce those arrears

6. Senator S. Syvret of the Minister for Home Affairs regarding the transportation of children in custodial care to court:

Will the Minister inform the Assembly whether children in custodial care are transported from Les Chenes/Greenfields to court in the same vehicle as adult prisoners from H.M.P. La Moye and if so does she consider this practice to be acceptable?

Senator W. Kinnard (The Minister for Home Affairs):

The States of Jersey Police provide transportation for persons in custody who are due to attend the Island's courts. This will include adults and children. Every effort is made to avoid transporting adults and children together and in the majority of cases transportation will take place for adults first and then for children if necessary. However, from time to time, it is unavoidable and both adults and children are carried in the same vehicle. The States of Jersey police have only one vehicle specifically designed for the carriage of remand or convicted persons of any age and this is designed in such a way that each person transported is placed in an individual cubicle within the vehicle. If it is necessary to transport both adults and children together, whenever possible, the children are placed into the vehicle first individually before any adults are loaded. At no time are children or adults able to mix freely within the vehicle. Members have already heard from the Minister for Health that he will be seeking legal advice on the transport arrangements for children and young people to the courts.

1. Senator S. Syvret

Given that the Minister has admitted that this abusive practice takes place, could she say whether risk assessments have been conducted in respect of these transport arrangements? Does she accept that no respectable child welfare authority would suggest that it is ever appropriate to transport child prisoners in the same vehicle as adult prisoners?

Senator W. Kinnard:

As I have mentioned, the Minister for Health will be seeking some legal advice on the issue. But I think we must put this matter in context, Sir. It is clearly unacceptable in a situation as pertains in the United Kingdom where if children were transported with adults they would be transported in a vehicle for several hours, possibly over several hundreds of miles as the dedicated secure youth facility may be some distance from the court where the young person has to appear. In Jersey the maximum period of time we are talking about is approximately some 20 minutes in terms of the journey time. As I have indicated, Sir, the vehicle is partitioned. But, having said that, advice is being sought and obviously I will be in consultation with the Minister for Health once he has received that.

2. Senator S. Syvret:

Does the Minister accept that there are young adults - children - who have been transported in this manner and who have found the experience emotionally and psychologically harmful to them? I have spoken to such people and I am happy to put them in touch with the Minister if she does not accept my word.

Senator W. Kinnard:

I would be more than content to hear from individuals if that is the case. As I have indicated, Sir, it is a situation also of resourcing in a small island and the fact that if one is going to have a situation of limited resources, Sir. I, myself personally would prefer to see those resources spent on things like education, facilities and programmes than spent on a dedicated perhaps police van of the type used transport people to and from court. But, as I have said, Sir, if legal advice is to indicate otherwise then I will have further discussions with the Minister for Health.

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

The Minister might not be able to answer this immediately, but if she could come back to the House. In light of the question that has been raised has any consideration been given as to the timings of transport with the courts to see whether the child could be deferred to a later time than the general transportation of prisoners from the prison?

Senator W. Kinnard:

As I mentioned in my answer, every effort is made to try to ensure that children are not transported at the same time as adults. But on occasions I have to admit that it has happened.

4. Senator S. Syvret:

For this reason and a variety of others, I long ago came to the conclusion that the States of Jersey has, in effect, committed many criminal offences against children including during my time as Minister for Health and Social Services ..

The Bailiff :

Senator, no speeches, please.

Senator S. Syvret:

I am going to seek an interview with the police in which I will put all of these offences I believe my department committed to them with a view to them being investigated for prosecution ..

The Bailiff :

Senator, is this a supplementary question?

Senator S. Syvret:

It is a supplementary question, Sir.

The Bailiff :

Well, ask it, please.

Senator S. Syvret:

Will the Minister for Home Affairs and the Minister for Education, Sport and Culture join with me in doing this?

Senator W. Kinnard:

I have no hesitation of reporting to the police or to any other relevant authority such as the Williamson inquiry any matters that are of deep concern to me and clearly if there are any matters that are of a criminal nature I have no hesitation whatsoever in reporting those to the States of Jersey Police for further investigation.

The Bailiff :

We come next to a question by Deputy Power of the Minister for Economic Development or Assistant Minister.

7. Deputy S. Power of St. Brelade of the Minister for Economic Development regarding the number of Service Level Agreements in force at the airport:

The Assistant Minister recently stressed the importance of service level agreements at the harbour. Can the Assistant Minister confirm the number of service level agreements in force at the airport?

Deputy A.J.H. Maclean (Assistant Minister for Economic Development):

The dynamics of the airport are entirely different to the harbour. The airport is competing in a highly competitive market where 11 airlines served 35 scheduled destinations during 2007. A total of 60 destinations were served in total during 2007 if we include tour operator services. In such a competitive market government intervention by regulating operators with instruments such as service level agreement would undoubtedly lead to a loss of airlines and routes and ultimately see airfares rise. I can therefore confirm to the Deputy that there are no service level agreements between the airport and airlines currently in operation.

1. Deputy S. Power:

If I may be allowed to ask a supplementary question? Is the Assistant Minister aware that in October 2006 the Industry Sub-Committee of the Institute of Directors issued a small paper saying that the history of service level agreements  insofar as they benefit competition and economic growth is not good? That is because they are driven by conflicting interests, vested interests and vocal minorities. Is the Minister also aware that they say that service level agreements are both anti-competitive and focused on passengers and that they have failed to encourage growth due to the need to subsidise weatherproofing and winter services? Can the Assistant..

Deputy A.J.H. Maclean:

I think, Sir, that is the reason why we do not have service level agreements at the airport.

Deputy S. Power:

My question was related to the harbour.

Deputy A.J.H. Maclean:

I was under the impression I was answering a question relating to service level agreements at the airport.

Deputy S. Power:

My supplementary question was related to service level agreement insofar as they exist at the harbour.

The Bailiff :

The Deputy is entitled to ask about the harbour even if he has been talking about the airport before that.

Deputy A.J.H. Maclean:

That is fine, Sir. I am very happy to move from planes to boats. Sir, with regard to service level agreements at the harbour, as I mentioned at the beginning, the market is entirely different, the dynamics of the market are entirely different. We have large numbers of aircraft and routes flying out of the Island at the airport, however at the harbour we do not have that luxury. We have 2 primary routes, we have one operator on the northern route and 2 operators on the southern route. It is not only important, it is essential that the Island is able to protect these vital lifelines and as such we believe that the use of service level agreements are appropriate.

Final supplementary, Deputy , please.

2. Deputy S. Power:

Is the Assistant Minister aware that service level agreements originated in the U.K. armed forces to cover internal standards and conditions between 2 sections of the armed forces, for example, in supplies? Is he also aware that service level agreements were used when the 2 parties do not have recourse to compete or to sue each other? So my question is that service level agreements, whether at the airport or the harbour, are not appropriate in Jersey.

Deputy A.J.H. Maclean:

That is a fascinating piece of information that the Deputy has given us. Frankly, Sir, the use of service level agreements has to be proportional. I have stated previously that service level agreements or the use of them as far as the Island is concerned are somewhat limited. We have limited powers in terms of enforcing the service level agreements. They are intended to provide protection to consumers and they are intended to provide some degree of protection to our lifeline routes. There are limitations for service level agreements and that is one of the reasons that we are bringing in December to this Assembly a Harbours (Administration) (Jersey) Law which seeks to improve that situation.

8. Deputy S. Power of the Assistant Minister for Economic Development regarding the grounds under which the Port of St. Helier could refuse a commercial vessel:

Under what grounds can the Port of St. Helier, being an open port under United Nations International Maritime Organisation regulations, refuse a commercial vessel, (which can prove it is not carrying any dangerous or prohibited material and for which there is an available slot time and port capacity) the right to use and discharge or load at the port?

Deputy A.J.H. Maclean:

I will answer that question if I may in 2 parts. Firstly, it is not strictly accurate to refer to the Port of St. Helier as an open port under the United Nations International Maritime Organisation regulations. The notion of open port status is not enshrined in statute nor is it believed to be expressly imposed by way of international obligation. However, the Port of St. Helier seeks to adhere to the Port Marine safety code. This code incorporates an open port duty. By adhering to the best practice of the code harbour authorities provide mariners with safe access to and from the port. Sir, the second part of the Deputy 's question concerns the ability to restrict or refuse usage of the port by a commercial vessel. Under current legislation a commercial vessel is only likely to be refused entry to the port under one or more of the following: policing, safety, control and administration of harbour and territorial waters.

2.8.1 Deputy S. Power:

I feel this is a jousting competition. Sir, can the Assistant Minister confirm what process there is to refuse entry if there is a free berth and the ship and its operation complies with international maritime requirements of safety and security?

Deputy A.J.H. Maclean:

I do feel that I had answered that question. The only grounds under which a commercial vessel is likely to be refused entry is under policing, safety, control and administration of the harbour. There are no other grounds under which we would consider refusing entry to the ports for a commercial vessel.

9. Deputy G.P. Southern of the Minister for Housing regarding how the threat to withdraw heating or hot water from tenants, contained in Housing Department "zero tolerance" letters, constitutes a "firm but fair policy" under Audit Commission good practice guidance:

Will the Assistant Minister advise how she considers that the threat to withdraw heating or hot water from tenants, contained in Housing Department "zero tolerance" letters, and sanctioned by the Minister, constitutes a "firm but fair policy" under Audit Commission Good Practice Guidance, as suggested by the Minister in his response to my question of 23rd October 2007?

Deputy J.A. Hilton (Assistant Minister for Housing):

The Audit Commission briefing Housing Association Rent Income recognises the absolute importance of prevention, of early intervention and of firm but fair policies for further action in dealing with rent arrears. It is therefore reasonable to describe the initial letter sent to those tenants who fall into arrears of a week or more as early intervention. This early intervention and the offer of a suitable rent arrears management scheme extend that fair policy. There is a clear need, however, to balance this approach as recognised by the Audit Commission and where necessary a firm approach is required. That firm approach is reflected in the letter in question which is despatched to those tenants who fail to acknowledge the first letter of early intervention and who allow their rent accounts to accrue unmanageable arrears. It must be stressed that every assistance is offered to those tenants who fall into rent arrears and evidence of this is that no such disconnections have been necessary.

1. Deputy G.P. Southern :

Is the Assistant Minister aware that no other housing authority or utility company in the U.K. ever makes such a threat to vulnerable clients?

Deputy J.A. Hilton: No, Sir, I am not aware.

2. Deputy S.C. Ferguson:

Does the existence of outstanding arrears at the beginning of the year of about £1 million not suggest that the Housing Department has only just been paying attention to this and that it is really trying to catch up very fast and really sort of catching up with its mistakes in the past?

Deputy J.A. Hilton:

The Housing Department are taking a much firmer line on arrears. I cannot really answer for what happened before because I have only been there this year and last year. But certainly the policy now is early intervention and the success of this policy is reflected in the fact that we have reduced arrears in the space of 10 months by £320,000-odd.

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

Would the Assistant Minister not accept, while I fully agree that they need to collect rents, rent arrears is also a moving target depending on what day they do the computer run as rents are due on a Monday and some people do pay their rents on time but they are monthly in arrears instead of in advance as the department likes? Secondly, Sir, the letters: can she say they are fair when there is only 40 per cent of their tenants they can cut their heating supply off? The other 60 per cent pay directly to the utility. This is why I do not think the letters can be fair and just.

Deputy J.A. Hilton:

It is a fact that as the Deputy points out, some of our tenants pay for their heating, television aerials and suchlike within their rent, but we can only deal with each case as it comes up. I would like to reiterate, nobody has been disconnected; we do not disconnect vulnerable people.

4. Deputy G.P. Southern :

Will the Assistant Minister intervene with her Minister to ensure that the phrase "We will cut your heating or hot water off" is removed from these letters because it is an idle and unnecessary threat to her tenants?

Deputy J.A. Hilton:

As I explained in my previous answer, that phrase appears in the second letter that goes out to clients who have ignored the first letter. So, no, I would say no, we have no intentions of removing that sentence at the present time.

5. Deputy K.C. Lewis :

Is the Assistant Minister aware that people who fall into rent arrears are refused essential maintenance by the Housing Department? I have no sympathy whatsoever with the "will not pays" but the "cannot pays" are becoming an increasing worry. Only last week I visited a lady cooking a meal by candlelight. This has since been repaired. Can the Minister comment, please?

Deputy J.A. Hilton:

I am not aware of the particular case that the Deputy is referring to and obviously I am concerned to hear that he knows of a client of the Housing Department who is cooking by candlelight and I would appreciate very much if after the Assembly today that he gives me the details so I can look into the case again. But, can I say, as I have stated before, the second letters that are generated are individually gone through by our very experienced Housing officers who then make a decision based on the knowledge that they have of those clients whether those letters are sent out?

6. Deputy G.C.L. Baudains of St. Clement :

Could the Assistant Minister confirm that being the landlord of last resort somewhat ties the department's hands in so much as if one has a tenant who is reluctant to pay rent the only sanction open to the department is to evict that person or family meaning that immediately the department has to rehouse them? So sometimes it is better to leave them where they are and try to manage the rent problem.

Deputy J.A. Hilton:

Yes, Sir, the Deputy is quite right. The Housing Department is considered the housing of last choice and we do run into difficulties at times. But as I have tried to say before, we will engage with clients to try and address the problems of rent arrears and it is only when we have exhausted all possibilities - usually over a very long period of time - that the Minister and myself will then sit down and consider whether eviction proceedings are the last remaining choice.

The Bailiff :

Final supplementary, Deputy Southern .

7. Deputy G.P. Southern :

Is the Assistant Minister aware of the practice under her zero tolerance policy of repeatedly phoning tenants at their place of work and will she insist that this practice ceases in her offices?

Deputy J.A. Hilton:

I am not aware that any Housing officer has repeatedly been phoning our clients at work. I will take this matter up with the department when I visit it later in the week.

10. Deputy S. Pitman of St. Helier of the Chief Minister regarding the future of the Housing Minister:

Following the Minister for Housing's admission that he was responsible for the loss of £1.5 million of public money relating to the sale of First Time Buyer homes at Le Squez, would the Chief Minister advise Members whether he will be calling for the resignation of the Minister for Housing?

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

I will not be calling for the Minister for Housing's resignation for a number of very good reasons. First, when the decision was taken quite properly to sell the homes at Le Squez, Senator Le Main was not the Minister for Housing and as I have always made clear, I have no authority to take action against a Minister for actions taken  before the introduction of Ministerial government. Secondly, the Housing Committee of the day acted quite properly and according to normal practice when agreeing the sale price. The issue arose entirely as a result of the unforeseen delay in installing the drainage systems over which the Housing Committee had no control and during which the value of the properties increased significantly. Thirdly, it was Senator Le Main himself who, when he became aware of the matter earlier this year, personally drew attention to it and took successful steps to rectify the problem. Fourthly, I believe the Minister for Housing is doing an excellent job, particularly on behalf of States' tenants and those on lower incomes seeking to own their own home.

1. Deputy J.A. Martin:

I must ask the Chief Minister to reconsider what he has said. I need an answer to 2 questions. Is it £2.4 million that the Housing Department have lost or £1.5 million because it has moved from July to a few weeks ago? Can he confirm that it was not the Minister for Housing who informed the States; it was letters sent out by the new Chief Officer and basically he inherited a problem that he said it was very unfortunate to inherit and it was an officer before him who had caused the problem? If the Minister is not to answer, somebody has got to answer for £2.4 million or £1.5 million of public money. It is not good enough to say that it will not happen again and it certainly is not good enough to say: "I am sorry."

Senator F.H. Walker :

It was never a loss of £2.4 million and that figure was never officially released. I do not know where it arose from. Well, it may have been Deputy Martin's own calculation but it certainly was not a correct figure and the actual figure is considerably less. Indeed, with the actions taken by the Housing Minister and his department subsequently, with the change of design and the new negotiations that have taken place, the States and the public are likely to emerge from the overall scheme with a profit not a loss.

2. Deputy J.A. Martin:

Just a supplementary. If the Minister or any other States Members wish to see, I have an email from the Chief Officer of the Housing Department who told me in July when they wrote to the tenants, if they did not do something they were losing £2.4 million. Anyone can see the email if they want to. It was £2.4 million.

Senator F.H. Walker :

I stand corrected in that respect but I think the crucial phrase is if we do not do something and, of course, the current Chief Officer of Housing and the Minister have done something and they have pulled the issue back in the best interests of the public.

3. Deputy G.P. Southern :

Is the Chief Minister aware that the Housing Minister has accepted total responsibility for this debacle and does he not accept that responsibility should be in some way censured?

Senator F.H. Walker :

I have already made it clear in my answer. He was not the Housing Minister at the time. Ministerial government did not exist. I was not Chief Minister and I have no powers to act against anyone in the States, Minister or otherwise, who took actions before Ministerial government was introduced.

4. Deputy S. Pitman:

May I remind the Chief Minister that at the time those who put the deposit down for these houses, the Housing Minister was President for Housing. The Chief Minister can strongly advocate the dismissal of the former Health Minister who had an indisputable record because he spoke to certain Members in a disrespectful manner but cannot do this for a Housing Minister who has taken responsibility for a loss of £1.5 million of taxpayers' money. Dismiss the former Health Minister or dismiss the Housing Minister. What decision does the Chief Minister think our taxpayers would take?

Senator F.H. Walker :

I do not think the Deputy is listening to the answers. That was obviously a prepared question. I do not think she is listening to the answers I have given, that because of the actions of the Housing Minister the change to the scheme and the changes to the agreements that were introduced when he became aware that there was an issue, the States have now changed the position completely and at the end of the day on the completed scheme we are likely to see a profit to the public not a loss.

5. Deputy S.C. Ferguson:

Given that the same Housing Minister presided over the sale of Le Coie to the Housing Trust, a development which cost £24 million to produce and was sold for £12 million to the Housing Trust, will he not reconsider his decision?

Senator F.H. Walker :

As I recall, and I am not sure of my facts because I have not researched the Le Coie issue - it was not part of the original question - I believe the agreement on Le Coie was the subject of a States' decision but I think that should be double-checked.

6. Deputy G.P. Southern :

Given the present evidence of incompetence on the part of the Minister for Housing, will the Chief Minister reconsider his decision to appoint the said Minister for Housing?

The Bailiff :

I did not think the Chief Minister did appoint the Minister for Housing.

Deputy G.P. Southern :

That is relevant because one of the answers we have received is that all this happened before he was Chief Minister. He did, however, appoint this particular Minister as Chief Minister.

Senator F.H. Walker :

The States appointed the Housing Minister, not me. It was on my recommendation and I stand by that recommendation. The fact is that the Housing Minister, when he was President of the Housing Committee, followed well-established normal practice. Because of the delay beyond his control, because market values rose considerably during that delay beyond his control, he has taken action and he has turned the situation around. I do not know how many times I have to repeat that. Clearly, as I have said, some of the questioners, at least, are not listening to the answers.

The Bailiff :

A final supplementary.

7. Deputy J.A. Martin:

Previously the Chief Minister said that now we have turned it around hopefully we will see a profit at the end of the whole of the refurbishment of Le Squez and not a loss. Well, the people of the Island have owned this piece of land for over 40 years and if we cannot make a profit - and I would say a very large profit - the whole Ministry should resign.

Senator F.H. Walker :