States Meeting Transcript - 17/04/2007

STATES OF JERSEY OFFICIAL REPORT TUESDAY, 17th APRIL 2007

QUESTIONS......................................................................................8

1. Written Questions........................................................................8

1. SENATOR B.E. SHENTON OF THE MINISTER FOR PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT REGARDING THE DESIGNATION OF SITES OF SPECIAL INTEREST:..............................................................................8
2. SENATOR B.E. SHENTON OF THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES REGARDING THE AMOUNT RAISED IN 2006 THROUGH THE INCREASE IN ÎMPOTS DUTY ON BEER:...........................................12
3. SENATOR B.E. SHENTON OF THE MINISTER FOR SOCIAL SECURITY REGARDING THE TOTAL COST OF THE PROVISION OF FREE TELEVISION LICENCES FOR THE ELDERLY IN 2006: ...........................................12
4. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT REGARDING CHANGES TO GRANT AID TO THE DAIRY AND AGRIULTURAL INDUSTRIES:......................................................13
5. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES REGARDING TAX REVENUES IN 2006, FUTURE REVENUE EXPENDITURE ALLOCATIONS AND THE IMPACT OF REDUCTIONS IN REVENUE EXPENDITURE: ..........................................................14
6. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT REGARDING CHANGES IN SUPPORT TO THE TOURISM INDUSTRY: ...........................................................................15
7. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT REGARDING THE REALLOCATION OF FINANCIAL SUPPORT TO HIGH VALUE INDUSTRIES AND THE FINANCE INDUSTRY:................17

2. Oral Questions...........................................................................19

1. Deputy D.W. Mezbourian of St. Lawrence of the Minister for Planning and Environment regarding enforcement of conditions attached to planning consents: ....................19 Senator F.E. Cohen (The Minister for Planning and Environment):...........................19

1. Deputy D.W. Mezbourian :..............................................................19
2. Connétable G.W. Fisher of St. Lawrence:..............................................20
3. Deputy I.J. Gorst of St. Clement:.......................................................20
4. Deputy J.A.N. Le Fondré of St. Lawrence : .............................................20
5. Deputy C.H. Egré of St. Peter:..........................................................20

6. Deputy D.W. Mezbourian :..............................................................20

2. Deputy G.P. Southern of St. Helier of The Chief Minister regarding the 2007 pay offerto States' employees:......................................................................21 Senator F.H. Walker (The Chief Minister):...................................................21

1. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................21
2. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................21

Senator F.H. Walker :.........................................................................21

3. Deputy S. Pitman of St. Helier of the Minister for Transport and Technical Services regarding plans to amend the relevant speed limits Order in respect of Le Rue de Mont Séjour, St. Helier:......................................................................22 The Bailiff :...................................................................................22
4. Deputy K.C. Lewis of St. Saviour of the Minister for Planning and Environment regarding the prevention of unsightly fly posting on vacant buildings:..................22 Senator F.E. Cohen (The Minister for Planning and Environment):...........................22

1. Deputy D.W. Mezbourian :..............................................................22
2. Deputy J.B. Fox of St. Helier:..........................................................22

5. Deputy F.J. Hill of St. Martin of the Minister for Transport and Technical Services regarding the effective date for the Road Traffic (Amendment No. 4) (Jersey) Law 200-: .........................................................................................23 Deputy G.W.J. de Faye of St. Helier (The Minister for Transport and Technical Services):...23
6. Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire of St. Helier of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding time off in lieu of paid overtime for nurses:..................................23 Senator S. Syvret (The Minister for Health and Social Services):.............................23

1. Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire: ...............................................................23
2. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier of St. Saviour:...............................................24
3. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................24
4. The Connétable of St. Lawrence:.......................................................24
5. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................24
6. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................25

7. Deputy S.C. Ferguson of St. Brelade : ..................................................25
8. Deputy K.C. Lewis :....................................................................25

7. Deputy G.P. Southern of the Chief Minister regarding under-lying assumptions in respect of the Retail Price Index and pay settlements:..........................................26 Senator F.H. Walker (The Chief Minister):...................................................26

1. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................26
2. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................26
3. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................27
4. Senator B.E. Shenton:..................................................................27
5. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................27
6. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................27
7. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................28
8. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................28

8. Deputy J.A.N. Le Fondré of the Minister for Transport and Technical Services regarding the re-opening of road works on recently improved roads:..............................28 Deputy G.W.J. de Faye (The Minister for Transport and Technical Services): ................28

1. Deputy J.A.N. Le Fondré:..............................................................29
2. Deputy A.D. Lewis of St. John : ........................................................29
3. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................29
4. Connétable T.J. du Feu of St. Peter:....................................................29
5. Connétable M.K. Jackson of St. Brelade:...............................................30

9. Deputy K.C. Lewis of the Minister for Treasury and Resources regarding action to be taken against shops and businesses charging the equivalent of V.A.T. on top of G.S.T: 30 Senator T.A. Le Sueur (The Minister for Treasury and Resources): ..........................30

1. Deputy K.C. Lewis :....................................................................30
2. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................31
3. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................31
4. Deputy A. Breckon of St. Saviour:......................................................31
5. The Very Reverend R.F. Key, B.A., The Dean of Jersey:...............................31

6. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................31

10. Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire of the Minister for Transport and Technical Services regarding alternatives to the compost operation at La Collette:....................................32 Deputy G.W.J. de Faye (The Minister for Transport and Technical Services): ................32

1. Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire:............................................................32
2. Deputy J.B. Fox:....................................................................33
3. Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire:............................................................33
4. Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire:............................................................33

3. Questions to Ministers without Notice - Minister for Planning and Environment: ...33

1. The Connétable of St. Lawrence:.......................................................33 Senator F.E. Cohen (The Minister for Planning and Environment):...........................34

1. The Connétable of St. Lawrence:.......................................................34
   2. Senator B.E. Shenton:..................................................................34
   3. Deputy K.C. Lewis :....................................................................34
   4. Deputy C.J. Scott Warr en of St. Saviour:...............................................35
   5. Deputy A. Breckon:....................................................................35
   6. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................35
   7. Deputy D.W. Mezbourian :..............................................................35

3.7.1 Deputy D.W. Mezbourian :..............................................................35

8. Senator L. Norman: ....................................................................36

3.8.1 Senator L. Norman: ....................................................................36

9. Deputy J.B. Fox:........................................................................36
10. The Connétable of St. Lawrence:.......................................................36
11. Deputy I.J. Gorst : ......................................................................37
12. Deputy J.A.N. Le Fondré:..............................................................37 The Bailiff :...................................................................................37

4. Questions to Ministers without Notice - The Chief Minister:..........................37

1. The Deputy of St. Martin:..............................................................37 Senator F.H. Walker (The Chief Minister):...................................................38

1. The Deputy of St. Martin:..............................................................38
   2. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................38

4.2.1 Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................38

3. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................39

4.3.1 Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................39

4. Senator L. Norman: ....................................................................39

4.4.1 Senator L. Norman: ....................................................................39

5. Deputy K.C. Lewis :....................................................................39

4.5.1 Deputy K.C. Lewis :....................................................................40

6. Deputy R.C. Duhamel of St. Saviour:..................................................40
7. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................40

4.7.1 Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................41

8. Deputy J.B. Fox:........................................................................41

The Bailiff :...................................................................................41

STATEMENTS ON A MATTER OF OFFICIAL RESPONSIBILITY........................41

5. The Minister for Education, Sport and Culture regarding the future of Fort Regent41

5.1 Senator M.E. Vibert (The Minister for Education, Sport and Culture):..................41

1. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................42
2. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................42

3. Deputy S.C. Ferguson:..................................................................42

6. The Chairman of the Privileges and Procedures Committee regarding the arrangement of Public Business in the Assembly ......................................43

6.1 Connétable D.F. Gray of St. Clement (Chairman of the Privileges and Procedures Committee): ............................................................................43

PUBLIC BUSINESS.............................................................................43

7. Draft Goods and Services Tax (Jersey) Law 200- (P.37/2007) .........................43

Senator T.A. Le Sueur (The Minister for Treasury and Resources): ..........................43 The Bailiff :...................................................................................44

1. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:.................................................................44
2. Deputy P.J.D. Ryan of St. Helier : ......................................................46
3. Deputy A. Breckon:....................................................................48
4. Deputy C.J. Scott Warr en: ..............................................................48
5. Deputy J.B. Fox:........................................................................49
6. Connétable A.S. Crowcroft of St. Helier:...............................................49
7. Senator S. Syvret:......................................................................50
8. Senator P.F. Routier: ...................................................................51
9. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................51
10. Senator M.E. Vibert :....................................................................53
11. Senator B.E. Shenton:..................................................................53
12. Senator L. Norman: ....................................................................53

13. Deputy J.J. Huet of St. Helier : ..........................................................54
14. Deputy S. Power of St. Brelade : ........................................................54
15. Senator F.H. Walker :...................................................................54
16. Deputy S.C. Ferguson:..................................................................57
17. The Deputy of St. John:................................................................57

LUNCHEON ADJOURNMENT PROPOSED..................................................58 The Bailiff :...................................................................................58

LUNCHEON ADJOURNMENT................................................................58

PUBLIC BUSINESS (continued) .............................................................58

18. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:.................................................................58 The Bailiff :...................................................................................60
19. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:.................................................................62 The Bailiff :...................................................................................62
20. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:.................................................................62 The Bailiff :...................................................................................62
21. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:.................................................................62 The Bailiff :...................................................................................62

1. Deputy P.J.D. Ryan:.................................................................62
2. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:..............................................................64
3. Senator S. Syvret:....................................................................65
4. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:...........................................................65
5. Deputy G.P. Southern : ..............................................................66
6. Senator M.E. Vibert :................................................................66
7. Deputy P.N. Troy ofSt.Brelade:....................................................66
8. Deputy K.C. Lewis : .................................................................66

9. Deputy J.G. Reed of St. Ouen : ......................................................66
10. Senator P.F. Routier:...............................................................67 Senator S. Syvret:............................................................................67
11. Deputy P.J.D. Ryan: ...............................................................67 The Bailiff :...................................................................................67 The Bailiff :...................................................................................69

22. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:.................................................................69 The Bailiff :...................................................................................70

1. Deputy P.J.D. Ryan:.................................................................70
2. Deputy G.P. Southern : ..............................................................70
3. Deputy P.N. Troy :...................................................................70
4. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:..............................................................70 The Bailiff :...................................................................................71

23. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:.................................................................71

1. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:...........................................................71
2. Deputy J.B. Fox:....................................................................71
3. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:..............................................................71 The Bailiff :...................................................................................71

24. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:.................................................................71

1. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:...........................................................72
2. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:..............................................................72 Mr. W.J. Bailhache Q.C., H.M. Attorney General:............................................72 Deputy G.P. Southern :........................................................................72 H.M. Attorney General:......................................................................72 The Bailiff :...................................................................................72

25. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:.................................................................72 The Bailiff :...................................................................................73

1. Deputy S.C. Ferguson:..............................................................73
2. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:..............................................................73 The Bailiff :...................................................................................73

26. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:.................................................................73 The Bailiff :...................................................................................73
27. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:.................................................................73 The Bailiff :...................................................................................73

1. Deputy P.J.D. Ryan:.................................................................74 The Bailiff :...................................................................................74
2. Deputy J.G.Reed:...................................................................74
3. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:..............................................................74 The Bailiff :...................................................................................74

28. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:.................................................................75 The Bailiff :...................................................................................75

1. Deputy P.J.D. Ryan:.................................................................75
2. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:..............................................................76
3. Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire:............................................................76
4. Deputy P.N. Troy :...................................................................76
5. Deputy C.J. Scott Warr en:...........................................................76
6. Deputy P.J.D. Ryan:.................................................................77 The Bailiff :...................................................................................77
7. Connétable D.J. Murphy of Grouville :...............................................78
8. Deputy A.E. Pryke of Trinity : .......................................................79
9. Deputy S.Power:....................................................................79
10. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:............................................................79

The Bailiff :...................................................................................80

29. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:.................................................................80

1. Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire:............................................................80
2. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:...........................................................81
3. Deputy P.J.D. Ryan:.................................................................81 The Bailiff :...................................................................................81
4. Deputy P.N. Troy :...................................................................82
5. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:..............................................................82 The Bailiff :...................................................................................82

30. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:.................................................................82

1. Deputy P.J.D. Ryan:.................................................................82
2. Deputy P.N. Troy :...................................................................84
3. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:...........................................................84
4. Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire:............................................................84 Senator T.A. Le Sueur:.......................................................................85 Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire: .....................................................................85 The Bailiff :...................................................................................85 Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire: .....................................................................85
5. Deputy J.B. Fox:....................................................................85
6. Senator F.H. Walker :................................................................86
7. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:..............................................................87 The Bailiff :...................................................................................87

31. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:.................................................................87

1. Deputy P.J.D. Ryan:.................................................................87
2. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:..............................................................88 The Bailiff :...................................................................................88

32. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:.................................................................90

1. Deputy S.Power:....................................................................90
2. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:..............................................................90 The Bailiff :...................................................................................91

33. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:.................................................................91 The Bailiff :...................................................................................91
34. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:.................................................................91 The Bailiff :...................................................................................91
35. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:.................................................................91 The Bailiff :...................................................................................91
36. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:.................................................................91 The Bailiff :...................................................................................91

1. Deputy P.J.D. Ryan:.................................................................92 H.M. Attorney General:......................................................................92 Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire: .....................................................................94 H.M. Attorney General:......................................................................94 Deputy G.W.J. de Faye:......................................................................94 H.M. Attorney General:......................................................................95
2. Deputy J.B. Fox:....................................................................95
3. Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire:............................................................95
4. Senator W. Kinnard:.................................................................96
5. Deputy G.W.J. de Faye: .............................................................96
6. Deputy P.J.D. Ryan:.................................................................97 The Bailiff :...................................................................................98
7. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:..............................................................99 The Bailiff :...................................................................................99

37. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:.................................................................99 The Bailiff :...................................................................................99

1. Deputy P.J.D. Ryan:................................................................100
2. Deputy C.J. Scott Warr en:..........................................................100 H.M. Attorney General:.....................................................................100
3. Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire:...........................................................101 H.M. Attorney General:.....................................................................101
4. Senator L. Norman:................................................................101
5. Deputy K.C. Lewis : ................................................................102
6. The Deputy of St. John:............................................................102 H.M. Attorney General:.....................................................................102
7. Senator S. Syvret:..................................................................102
8. Deputy P.J.D. Ryan:................................................................103 The Bailiff :..................................................................................103

ADJOURNMENT PROPOSED................................................................105 Senator M.E. Vibert :........................................................................105 Senator T.A. Le Sueur:......................................................................105 The Bailiff :..................................................................................105

ADJOURNMENT..............................................................................106

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

QUESTIONS

1. Written Questions

1. SENATOR B.E. SHENTON OF THE MINISTER FOR PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT REGARDING THE DESIGNATION OF SITES OF SPECIAL INTEREST:

Question

Would the Minister advise members whether the various Planning restrictions placed by the Planning and Environment Department, particularly those relating to properties designated as Sites of Special Interest such as the Le Seelleur offices and workshop in Oxford Road, are human rights compliant?

Answer

1. The Minister for Planning and Environment is required under Article 51 of the Planning and Building (Jersey) Law 2002 ("the Planning Law") to maintain a List of Sites ofSpecial Interest. The List must include each building or place that the Minister is satisfied has public importance by reason of -

1. its special zoological, ecological, botanical or geological interest; or
2. the special archaeological, architectural, artistic, historical, scientific or traditional interest that attaches to the building or place.

2. The Minister is also empowered under Article 53 of the Planning Lawtoinclude a building or place provisionally in theListof Sites of Special Interest.
3. The effect of including a building or place on the List is to restrict certain operations and activities that may be undertaken or carried on in relation to that building or place. The restrictions are as follows:

• No operation or change of use which adversely affects the special interest of the site may be undertaken or made without the Minister's permission (which may be given subject to conditions).
• The following activities (unless any of them is specified as a permitted activity in the entry on the List relating to the site) may only be carried on with the Minister's permission, namely -

1. the useor operation of a devicedesignedoradaptedtodetector locate metal or minerals in the ground;
2. an activity which might injure or deface the site or a part of the site; or
3. certain specialised activities in relation to a site having a special interest which is zoological, ecological, botanical or geological.

4. Self-evidently, the inclusion of a building or place on the List of Sites of Special Interest operates to curtail the peaceful enjoyment by the person having possession of it. Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the European Convention on Human Rights is therefore engaged. It provides that -

"Every natural or legal person is entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions. No-one shall be deprived of his possessions except in the public interest and subject to the conditions provided for by law and by the general principles of international law.

The preceding provisions shall not, however, in any way impair the right of a State to enforce such laws as it deems necessary to control the use of property in accordance with the general interest or to secure the payment of taxes or other contributions or penalties."

5. According to the case law of the European Court of Human Rights[1], this provision comprises three distinct rules. The first rule, set out in the first sentence of the first paragraph, is of a general nature and enunciates the principle of peaceful enjoyment of property. The second rule, contained in the second sentence ofthe same paragraph, covers deprivation of possessions and makes it subject to certain conditions. The third rule, stated in the second paragraph, recognises that contracting States are entitled, amongst other things, to control the use of property in accordance with the general interest.
6. In relation, therefore, to the Senator's question, whilst the inclusion of a building or place on the List of Sites of Special Interest does indeed interfere with the right ofan owner or occupier tothequiet enjoyment ofhisorher possessions, Article 1 ofProtocolNo. 1 allows the state to interfere with that right by imposing controls on the use of property in accordance with the general interest'.
7. However, any interference must be shown to strike a fair balance between the rights of the owner or occupier and the general interest. This has been interpreted by the European Court of Human Rights as meaning that the interference must serve a legitimate aim, must not be arbitrary and must be rationally related and proportionate to the aim.

Legitimate aim

8. The provisions ofthe Planning Law requiring the Minister to maintain a List of Sites of Special Interest are designed to secure the fulfilment of Jersey's international obligations under -

1. the Council of Europe Convention for the Protection of the Architectural Heritage of Europe (Granada, 1985 – "the Granada Convention"); and
2. the European Convention onthe Protection ofthe Archaeological Heritage (revised) (Valetta, 16.I 1992).

9. Jersey is a party toboth Conventions. TheGranada Convention isof particular significance in the context of Sites of Special Interest. It defines the architectural heritage very broadly (article 1),to include places of conspicuous historical, archaeological, artistic, scientific, social or technical interest', comprising monuments' (buildings including fixtures and fittings, and structures), groups of urban or rural buildings', and sites' that are partially built on. Of particular importance to planning are the Convention's requirements for -

• inventories for protection the of architectural heritage and records of threats to it (article 2)

• measures for statutory protection of the architectural heritage (article 3)
• the control of threats to monuments buildings and sites (article 4)
• provisions to prevent removal or part removal of buildings except under special controls for their relocation (article 5)
• the public funding fiscal measures and encouragement of private initiatives to maintain the architectural heritage (article 6)
• general enhancement of the environment surrounding protected monuments (article 7)
• research and to take special account of historic conservation in anti-pollution policies (article 8)
• enforcement measures to control and where appropriate reverse infringements of conservation policy (article 9)
• conservation, promotion and enhancement of the architectural heritage as an essential town and country planning objective and a major feature of cultural, environmental and planning policies and development control; promote restoration and maintenance of the architectural heritage, foster appropriate use and traditional craftsmanship (article 10)
• use of protected properties in the light of the needs of contemporary life and adaptation when appropriate of old buildings for new uses (article 11)
• balancing public access with architectural conservation (article 12)
• effective co-operation at all levels between conservation, cultural, environmental and planning activities (article 13)
• appropriate machinery for the supply of information, consultation and co-operation between the State, the regional and local authorities, cultural institutions and associations, and the public; and to foster the development of sponsorship and of non- profit-making associations working in this field (article 14)
• public policies for disseminating information and fostering increased awareness and education and demonstrating the role of architectural heritage in wider culture (article 15)
• promotion of training in craft skills (article 16).

10. The case of Beyeler -v- Italy (Application 3320/96, 5th January 2000,ECHR) makes it clear that the general interest' includes environmental and planning control and protection of heritage property.
11. The Granada Convention puts beyond any doubt listed building control as a matter within the general interest.

Interference must not be arbitrary/ must be rationally related and proportionate to the aim

12. Article 52 of the Planning Law requires the Minister to give at least 28 days notice ofan intention to include a building or place ontheListof Sites of Special Interest. The Minister

must take into account any representations made to him. In the case of No 1 Oxford Road (Le Seelleur offices and workshop) to which the Senator refers, no such representations were received in response to the service of the Minister's Notice of Intention to include the building in the List of Sites of Special Interest.

13. In determining whether to include a building or place on the List, the Minister must, as already mentioned, be satisfied that the building or place has public importance by reason of, amongst other things, the special archaeological, architectural, artistic, historical, scientific or traditional interest thatattachestothebuildingor place. Inrespectofeach Site of Special Interest,the Minister must specify the relevant special interest. The Minister has included No 1 Oxford Road (Le Seelleur offices and workshop) in the List of Sites of Special Interest on the basis of its architectural and historical interest.
14. In particular, and with specificregardtothecaseofNo 1 Oxford Road(LeSeelleuroffices and workshop) to which the Senator refers, account was taken of the fact that the workshops date back to 1845 (with later alterations) and are a relatively rare survival ofan historical industrial building on the edge ofthe Town Centre. The recommendation to retain the workshops on the Historic Buildings Register was made having taken into consideration that theworkshopsretaintheir historic form with onlyminor alterations. The buildings are of unusual construction with a mixture of granite and brick with timber boardedup floors containing extensive glazing. The interior ofthe building is unusual for its large open plan areas at first floor level supported by a mixture of structural cross walls and closely spaced piers at ground floor level. There are internal details of interest, such as heavily joisted flooring and brick piers formed with rounded corners. The open nature ofthe workshops with walls of glazing and natural light contribute significantly to the distinctive character and special interest of the building.
15. There is one further aspect of human rights compliance which is relevant to the Senator's question. That aspect relates to the rule of law.
16. When Ministers make decisions affecting the rights of individuals, they must doso in accordance with the law. This is reflected inthe requirement in Article 1 ofProtocol No. 1 that any deprivation of possessions be subject to the conditions provided for by law'and, furthermore, Article 6(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights stipulates that –

"In the determination of his civil rights and obligationseveryone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law."

17. What this means, in the contextof a decision by the Minister to include a building or place onthe List of Sites ofSpecialInterest, is that the legality of what theMinisterdoes must be subject to review by an independent and impartial tribunal.
18. In this respect, Article 118 ofthe Planning Law provides that a person aggrieved by the decision ofthe Minister may, within 28 days of being notified of it, appeal to the Royal Court which may confirm the decision ofthe Minister ororderthe Minister to remove the building or place from the List
19. The Minister must comply withany such order. Conclusion

20. The following statement was made when the draft Planning and Building (Jersey) Law200- [P50/2001] was lodged au Greffe:

In the view of the Planning and Environment Committee the provisions of the Draft Planning and Building (Jersey) Law 200- are compatible with the Convention Rights.

21. In my view the Law in its enacted form is likewise compatible with Convention rights as have been the procedures in relation to the designation ofthe Sites of Special Interest to which the Senator makes reference.

2. SENATOR B.E. SHENTON OF THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES REGARDING THE AMOUNT RAISED IN 2006 THROUGH THE INCREASE IN ÎMPOTS DUTY ON BEER:

Question

Would the Minister advise members of the amount raised in 2006 through the increase in Impôts duty on beer?

Answer

The amount raised in 2006 through the increase in Impôts duty on beer was £702,051.

The following additional information may also be of benefit to the Senator and other members:

In 2006 the total revenue yield from Impôts duty on beer was £5,086,874. This figure includes £315,553 additional revenue resulting from an amendment by Senator Vibert to the original budget proposals. Using the 2006 consumption figures the revenue yield would have been £4,384,823 at 2005 Impôts duty rates

The original proposals for the 2006 budget included a 3.6% increase in Impôts duty for all alcoholic beverages. Senator Vibert proposed an amendment to raise an extra £300,000 to be used for television licences for the elderly by an additional increase of the duty on beer.

Following States debate this proposal was agreed but with the additional increase to only apply to beer produced by large breweries. For the purposes of Impôts duty a large brewery is defined as one that produces in excess of 200,000 hectolitres (20 million litres) of beer per year.

The increase in the rate of duty for beer produced by large breweries was agreed at 10.7% with a 3.6% increase in the rate of duty for beer produced by small breweries.

3. SENATOR B.E. SHENTON OF THE MINISTER FOR SOCIAL SECURITY REGARDING THE TOTAL COST OF THE PROVISION OF FREE TELEVISION LICENCES FOR THE ELDERLY IN 2006:

Question

Would the Minister advise members of the total cost of the provision of free television licences for the elderly in 2006?

Answer

The 2006 expenditure for TV licences was £187,204, this is made up of benefit of £176,156 and administration and overhead costs of £11,048.

As Members will be aware this benefit was introduced in 2006. The 2006 costs were lower than provided for as take up by those who bought their licence in the first months of 2006 was relatively low. Applications only built up during the year as pensioners renewed their licence on the due date. Expenditure for a full year in 2007 will be higher, with the increased take-up.

4. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT REGARDING CHANGES TO GRANT AID TO THE DAIRY AND AGRIULTURAL INDUSTRIES:

Question

The document "2008 Business Plan: provisional cash limits – impacts on departments" shows a number of proposed changes for the dairy and agricultural industries.

1. Would the Minister inform members in detail what the "Business re-engineering" cut of £500,000 (35%) in grant aid to dairy and agriculture proposed for 2008 will mean?
2. Would he statewhatthe impact of the further Fundamental Spending Review reduction of 5 per cent industry support to dairy and agriculture will be?
3. What overall impact will such a cut, of the order of 16 per cent in one year, will haveon farmers? Will the Minister advise what impact this cut will have on both the department's commitment tothe McQueen Strategy for recovery of the Dairy Industry and to the Policy "Growing the Rural Economy"?
4. Will the Minister advise members why he has decided to reduce support for the Dairy and Agricultural industry by around 38 per cent from £4.5 million in 2007to £2.8 million by 2010? Would the Minister clarify how this supports the Strategic Plan aim of growing diversity in the economy'?

Answer

The question refers to a document that shows draft reallocations that are only indicative of how the Department might respond to funding allocations in 2008. The department is currently preparing the final 2008 budget which will be provided by the end of May. The department is considering options that will both achieve the 2% economic growth target and deliver our long standing commitments as set out in the Rural Economy Strategy.

The Rural Economy Strategy was agreed by the States in 2005. It changed the nature of support for the agricultural industries within a plan that anticipated a reducing budget. It is wholly consistent with the Economic Growth Plan as any budget reallocation will be judged and determined by the need to help businesses within the rural sector to move towards more productive and higher value operations. This will enable the industry to achieve the same or greater outputs with less government intervention - using help such as the Rural Initiative Scheme or elements of the Enterprise and Business Development Strategy. At the same time the need to underpin the rural economy with appropriate support is delivered, for example, by the new Single Area Payment. There has already been a positive response in the rural economy with business adapting to changing markets, diversifying and showing enterprise. This is reflected in the strong take-up of the Rural Initiative Scheme and also ultimately by the 2.3% real growth in GVA in Agriculture in 2005.

By focussing on grant aid the question fails to recognise the integrated nature of business support that exists within economic development. Rural businesses, including agriculture, can now also take advantage of elements of the Enterprise and Business Development Strategy such as  the  Jersey Export  Development  Initiative,  the  Inward  Investment  Initiative  and Business Advice services. The Enterprise and Business Development Strategy is designed to help achieve business creation and growth and increase, for example, international trade development within the rural sector.

5. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES REGARDING TAX REVENUES IN 2006, FUTURE REVENUE EXPENDITURE ALLOCATIONS AND THE IMPACT OF REDUCTIONS IN REVENUE EXPENDITURE:

Question

1. Would theMinister inform members of the reasons for the £21 million "windfall" increase in tax revenues between provisional and revised budget figures for 2006 for each revenue stream? Will he furtherstate whether this "windfall" is predicted to continue into the years 2007 – 2011 and, if so, explain why?
2. Would the Minister inform members why the revised inflation and pay assumptions show that both the Retail Price Index (RPI) and Public Sector Pay awards for 2008 and 2009 will decrease when the introduction of a 3 percentGoodsandServicesTaxwill have an impact on the spending of all Islanders? Would the Minister advise members whether the impact on the RPI ofthe introduction of GST will affect the March 2009 RPI figure and, if so, state whether this has been taken into account in the assumptions given that that figure is traditionally used in pay negotiations?
3. Would the Minister inform members whetherthe additional £1 million "funding from balances" indicated in his presentation (relating to the 2008 Business Plan) regarding 2007 spending pressures andthe£2.5m "funding from departments" will be dividedon a prorata basis between departments and, if not, on what basis?
4. In the light of the "windfall" from tax revenues highlighted in (a),does a further £2.5 million cut in departmental budgets for the current year remain appropriate?
5. Would theMinisterundertaketoinform members in detail whateach department's reduction in spending,as a result of the £2.5 m cutwill mean for the delivery of services in 2007, and further, would he place these service reductions in the context ofthe type and size of reductions that have already taken place, whether by efficiency savings or otherwise, in 2005 and 2006?

Answer

1. The reasons for the £21 million "windfall" income between provisional outturn and revised budget figures for 2006 are as follows:

Income Tax (£12 million) – There has been significant improvement in the tax revenues from

International Business Companies and a small increase on the forecast for employee earnings. There is a reasonable expectation that the improvement will be maintained for International Business Companies.

Impôts (£3 million) – There was a general increase on forecasts but £2 million of the £3

million increase is due to an accounting adjustment, accruing for importations which previously would have been accounted for in the following year. The £2m is therefore a one-off.

Stamp Duty (£4 million) – This has exceeded forecasts but does include a number of

significant transactions that might suggest the level of increase may not be repeated at quite the same level. House prices continue to increase which naturally increases the yield.

Other Income (£2 million) – This is made up of a number of small increases, including more

income tax surcharges and penalties than forecast despite the introduction of the new Income Tax Instalment System (ITIS).

2. The "all items" RPI is likely, for one year, to be affected by the introduction of GST. However the purpose ofthetax is totake money outofthe economy, and that will have a deflationary effect. I could not agree to the principle of putting these funds back into public sectorpayawardsorotherpublic expenditure, partly because this would negate the purpose of introducing GST, but also because it would cancel the deflationary effect. I have considered this initial impact on RPI when making the inflation assumptions underpinning our forecasts. I am committed toestablishing a clear message, ahead of the implementation ofGST,to all other employers such thatpay awards are not artificially inflated. This will be a part of the revised inflation strategy.
3. The additional £1 million funding from balances and the £2.5 million funding from departments will be allocated on a pro rata basis between departments in relation to their total staffing costs.
4. Throughout pay negotiations departments have been informed that they would need to absorb any pay increases in excess ofthe budgeted sums. The Council of Ministers has alreadyagreedtoproposethe allocation of£1 million from balances to ameliorate the impact of the additional cost on departments. Given the significant pressuresin2007 on the costs of supplementation and benefits I believe it is wholly appropriate that we continue to be rigorous and prudent to ensure that we are not in danger of living beyond our means in the future, or adding unnecessarily to inflationary pressures.
5. How departments choose to allocate absorption of the additional £2.5 million between their activities is a matter for them. I cannot say whether a particular department will need to make service cuts, or do things differently, or delay certain activities, but in terms of context the £2.5 million bears comparison withthe£20 million of efficiency savings already being delivered over the current five year period.

6. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT REGARDING CHANGES IN SUPPORT TO THE TOURISM INDUSTRY:

Question

The document "2008 Business Plan: provisional cash limits – impacts on departments" shows a number of proposed changes for the tourism industry.

1. Would the Minister inform members in detail what the "Business re-engineering" cut of £500,000ingrant aid totourismproposed for 2008,referredtoonpage26ofthedocument "2008 Business Plan: provisional cash limits – impacts on departments", will mean?
2. Will he also advise what impact the further Fundamental Spending Review reduction and efficiency savings cut of £230,000 support to the tourism industry will have?
3. What overall impact will such a cut, ofthe order of 12 per cent in one year, have on the Tourism industry?
4. Will the Minister advise members why he has decided to reduce support for the Tourism industry by around 30 per cent from £5.9 million in 2007 to £4.1million by 2010? Would the Minister clarify how this supports the Strategic Plan aim of growing diversity in the economy'?

Answer

The question refers to a document that shows draft reallocations that are only indicative of how the Department might respond to funding allocations in 2008. The department is currently preparing the final 2008 budget which will be provided by the end of May. The department is considering options that will both achieve the 2% economic growth target and deliver our long standing commitments.

In the past, the principal expenditure within the Tourism budget has been directed at marketing, p.r. and the provision of events. However the Tourism industry is undergoing an unprecedented level of change with more focus on higher spending shorter stay visitors, a trend wholly consistent with the recent Locum Report. This has led to the development of partnership arrangements with the industry which is encouraging a significantly increased level of joint marketing activity. The move to the new office building in September of this year should also facilitate increased commercial activity and specifically more retail sales, the profits of which are reinvested in marketing activities.

There is a significant level of diversity within the tourism industry which is consistent with the overall aims of the strategic plan.

Investment within the sector includes the support through the Tourism Development Fund which continues to help fund projects which are of strategic importance to the Island and for example support for the newly opened Heathrow route, which will support the tourism industry as well as business and the local population. The department is not only continuing to fully support the industry but is investing in the future by identifying and backing projects which have strong future potential. As with any existing sector the Economic Development Department is encouraging new and existing businesses to take full advantage of our new enterprise and business development products and services. If the tourism industry seizes this opportunity it will not only benefit individual businesses but also deliver greater economic benefit from the investment of public Funds. It should be remembered that the Economic Development Department is charged under the Public Finances (Jersey) Law with delivering best value from within its long term fixed cash limits.

7. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT REGARDING THE REALLOCATION OF FINANCIAL SUPPORT TO HIGH VALUE INDUSTRIES AND THE FINANCE INDUSTRY:

Question

1. Will the Minister advise members to which "high value" industries he will be transferring some £1.5 million of funding from Tourism and agricultural support in orderto diversify the economy in line with the Strategic objectives?
2. Will the Minister state whether the transfer of £750,000 of Tourism and Agricultural support funding into Finance Industry support over the 3-year period 2008 – 2010 will increase diversification of the economy and reduce the Island's dependence on that industry?
3. Will the Minister set out the impact such "business re-engineering" is expected to have on the demand for high skilled "licensed" or J-category employees in the period 2007 – 2010?

Answer

1. The States of Jersey agreed policy framework for sustainable economic growth is published within the Strategic Plan 2005-2010. This, coupled with the Economic Growth Plan, set a target of 2% real economic growth across all sectors. In addition, it must be delivered within the agreed constraint in growth in the working population of 1% averaged over the period of the Plan and not result in the introduction of inflation above target. This presents significant challenges. The financial services sector will continue tobe a key element of Jersey's long term economic prosperity and the States will support growth in its products and services offered from the Island. However, in addition, a key to economic success and social stability lies in the diversity of our economic base and the industries represented in the Island.

As Minister for Economic Development, I am charged with developing strategies that will deliver our over-arching aim of economic growth, with sustainable inflation, coupled with economic diversification and the creation of jobs. This will not be an easy task and will take time to deliver. The agreed 2% economic growth could, in all probability, be achieved within the finance and related industries alone. However, the growth target will be measured across all sectors and analysed accordingly. My Department will, in its drive for economic growth, remain within the agreed States of Jersey Migration Policy of a maximum of 1% growth of the working population averaged over the life of the growth plan.

To assist in achieving these targets an Enterprise and Business Development Strategy has been developed, the aim of which is to stimulate business start-ups, support growth within new and existing organisations and encourage diversity across all sectors of the economy. This is a bold and ambitious strategy that will deliver diversification and restructuring in the economy. It will be funded by rigorous prioritisation of expenditure within the existing Economic Development budget, supplemented by additional funds awarded to the Department. The result will be a new range of products and services being promoted coupled with a new Business Development Centre for all business enquiries. This new approach to business development will aim to attract high value, low footprint business to Jersey. For example, businesses that currently trade with and manage intellectual property could, if encouraged to operate in Jersey, create a new industry within our existing economy creating new and exciting new job opportunities for our workforce.

The Enterprise and Business Development Strategy was launched in October 2006 and is already proving highly successful. It includes a portfolio of new demand-led initiatives, a new approach to inward investment and the opening of a new Business Development Centre that will provide a customer facing support service. The Strategy will be implemented over the next few years with its products and services, such as the new approach to inward investment, being phased in during 2008.

The annual cost of delivering all the services within the Enterprise and Business Strategy in 2008 will require additional funding of £1.5 million.

2. My answer tothe first part of your question identifies the importance of the growth of theFinance Industry in meeting our overall targets for economic growth whilst remaining within the agreed constraint in growth in the working population of 1% averaged over the next 5 years. Recent statistics have demonstrated the success of this strategy to date with buoyant growth in government receipts from this sector, growth in predominantly locally qualified employment and the growth in optimism within the finance industry of the prospects for the coming years.

However, the market for international financial services is increasingly competitive and complex and it is necessary to have sufficient resources focused on identifying international trends and market opportunities as well as detailed opportunities to obtain competitive advantage. All of our

competitors, and our Crown Dependency competitors in particular, are regularly announcing regulatory, legislative and international marketing initiatives in order to steal an advantage over our industry. We need to remain vigilant and responsive but also proactive.

The "Finance Industry" is already increasingly diversified and one of the strengths of Jersey's Finance Industry is its high level of adaptability and professionalism across a wide range of businesses. The additional funds are required to maintain and where possible improve this position. Specifically, the funds are being used to ensure Jersey Finance Limited, the representative trade body for the Finance Industry, is able to operate effectively and to support and represent the growing complexity and diversity of the Island's Finance Industry. We are seeking to continue to diversify Finance Industry revenues across many fronts including product and service offerings, market access, and inward investment. This will allow us to benefit from new areas of growth. Flows of business are often "controlled" by key individuals in other jurisdictions, but these are ever changing and it is important to build relationships with new individuals, firms and jurisdictions at the strategic level, to complement the more targeted activities of individual firms. Many other jurisdictions employ full time representative offices in key jurisdictions such as the City of London.

The allocation is therefore a measured response to these demands and increases total spend in 2008 on the Finance Industry (which generates 50% of Island GVA) to c. £1.15m, compared to the £11.9m spend on the other sectors.

3. The aim for the whole island should beto move and develop further into the most highly skilled, productive, small island state economy in the world. An island where all can profit and share from the proceeds of growth in terms of jobs, salaries and well funded front line services.

The Housing Law and Regulation of Undertakings and Development Law have a very clear and strong preference toward the employment of local people, and provide a high degree of protection by allowing non-local or j' employment only where a local person is not available. In this way, numbers are very strictly controlled, and only granted in the best interests of the Island, having regard to the need to balance economic growth with demand on resources, in particular housing.

This policy has resulted in 84% of the workforce being locally qualified, and restricted j' category numbers to 3% of the workforce. As at December 2006 the total workforce was 51,780 (6,560 public sector) of which 900 were private sector j cats and 710 public sector j cats. (Source Stats unit taken from manpower returns.) This diligence will continue, with developments in productivity and skills very much coming from the existing local workforce and no substantive change in the current position, whereby the significant and vast majority of the workforce are local.

At the same time, as the economy develops, and productivity improves, some small shifts are likely, with marginal increases in js' at the expense of lower skilled non-locals. This is important because j' posts, often senior managerial or highly technical posts, go hand in hand with productive internal investment and skills transfers to local employees, and to that extent, are a positive indicator of a buoyant and developing economy and local workforce. The extent of any such changes should be kept in strict context however, as they have been extremely small, and will remain so.

Between 2001 – 2006 j' employees increased from 2% to 3% of the private sector workforce, while non-local employees decreased from 14% to 13% of the private sector workforce. Over the same period, local employee numbers have remained consistent at 84% of the private sector workforce, and this is expected to continue over the coming years.

The position will continue to be carefully managed within the context of the Economic Growth Plan, 1% average annual working population growth over the life of the Strategic Plan, and the need to balance economic growth with demand on resources.

Overall there is a careful balance between growing the economy (with corresponding small numbers of Js and non qualified persons needed) and the stated aim to tightly control (to the extent we are able to) the working population. One lesson from the past is clear: Jersey closed for business would be as disastrous for the island in the early 21st century as it was in the latter part of the 20th century.

2. Oral Questions

1. Deputy D.W. Mezbourian of St. Lawrence of the Minister for Planning and Environment regarding enforcement of conditions attached to planning consents:

Will the Minister advise Members what steps his department takes to ensure compliance with conditions attached to planning consents, and would he further state how often in the last 5 years formal action by way of the service of an enforcement notice has been taken following a breach of conditions?

Senator F.E. Cohen (The Minister for Planning and Environment):

The Planning Department monitors conditions in 3 ways. First, the case officer for the application will visit the site during construction to check that the development is in line with the permission granted. Secondly, the site will be visited probably on several occasions by building control surveyors, who will also address any deviance from the approved plans. Thirdly, we will respond to requests from neighbours and members of the public where it appears that conditions are not being adhered to. Planning conditions are made known to those who commented on the application, and our enforcement is made much more effective by their continued vigilance. In the vast majority of these cases, formal enforcement action is not required, this is because the developer will either alter the work to comply with the permit or he will seek approval for the amendment. Enforcement notices are only necessary and are only justifiable if the request to alter the work is subsequently denied and the developer refuses to go back to the original approval. These cases are rare. A total of 49 enforcement notices were served against unauthorised developments between 2001 and 2005. Of these, 35 related to cases where works had been carried out without any permission at all and 14 related to cases which did not comply with the planning permit, either through a breach of conditions or a failure to adhere to the approved plans.

1. Deputy D.W. Mezbourian :

Will the Minister advise how many enforcement officers he has within his Department, and whether he considers the resources that are applied to this are sufficient?

Senator F.E. Cohen:

We have 2 enforcement officers, they are both excellent officers but they are significantly overworked. We are under-resourced; we could do with more enforcement officers, more planning officers, more development control officers and more building control officers, but I am afraid we have to make do with what we have. The system could be significantly improved, and in relation to a particular significant application of which many Members have an interest, I will be developing a far better system to ensure the conditions are properly implemented.

2. Connétable G.W. Fisher of St. Lawrence :

As a follow-on to the question, and the particular site that the Minister mentioned, we are told that there will be something like 60 conditions attached. It is extremely important that we do ensure that those conditions are adhered to and that the conditions are properly policed and enforced, and listening to the Minister's reply I can only assume that he is going to try to do that. Does he feel confident he can, in fact, police and enforce all 60 of those conditions?

Senator F.E. Cohen:

The number 60 was an approximate number, so I had better make that clear for a start. The particular application - being the Bel Royal site - is a very complicated application. The conditions are equally complex, and it is absolutely essential that we put in place a mechanism to ensure that each and every one of those conditions is properly implemented before the houses are sold or occupied, and I will be seeking to put in place an appropriate mechanism. I will take personal charge of the implementation of that mechanism, and I will also undertake to consult with the Connétable before I finalise the mechanism.

3. Deputy I.J. Gorst of St. Clement :

Has the Minister considered incorporating the Australian approach to planning whereby building control and planning are brought forward together thus alleviating some of the problems that he may be encountering in his enforcement department?

Senator F.E. Cohen:

I think that this system, with which I am quite familiar, would not be particularly applicable to Jersey, particularly as we have such an under-resourced department and it will require such significant change. I think in the long term it may be a relevant aspiration, but in the short term it would be undeliverable.

4. Deputy J.A.N. Le Fondré of St. Lawrence :

The Minister referred to approximately 60 conditions, I think it was, on the Goose Green Marsh development. Could he confirm that at the time of the email he circulated to all States Members that those conditions were still being drafted and had therefore not been finalised? And could he also confirm whether those conditions are still in the process of being drafted?

Senator F.E. Cohen:

I can confirm that the conditions are still being drafted. I can also confirm that I will be taking advice from the Law Officers on a number of the conditions, and I have not finalised my view on one or 2 conditions.

5. Deputy C.H. Egré of St. Peter :

Would the Minster confirm that in a development close to Goose Green Marsh - namely the L'ermitage development - that there were certain conditions that were enforced on the developer which were not in fact adhered to? Would he make sure that these are reviewed and, in the case of the other development, to ensure that public have the confidence in the current system, that any changes in conditions will be notified to the public and will be enforced very highly and the very use of it?

Senator F.E. Cohen:

I can, and I would also add that I am certainly not claiming that in the past that the department has always been successful in imposing the implementation of permit conditions, but I can assure the House again that in relation to the Bel Royal site that I will personally take charge of this issue.

6. Deputy D.W. Mezbourian :

I regard it as highly unsatisfactory that we have to rely on the general public to give assistance to the Planning Department by making sure that conditions on planning consents are enforced, and as we know the public are not able to venture on to many sites. Therefore, we do have to rely on the 2 enforcement officers that the Minister has referred to, and he has told the House that he is looking at this issue as one to be addressed. I would like to ask the Minster to advise us which priority he is giving this within his department?

Senator F.E. Cohen:

I am not entirely sure what the Deputy is getting at, but if it is in relation to the Bel Royal development, my proposal in relation to that would be that we develop some form of mechanism where before the development is either signed-off or before the houses are allowed to be sold, that all the conditions are properly examined and tested to make sure that they have been complied with. As far as relying on the public is concerned, I agree it is not a satisfactory situation to rely on the public, but we do not entirely rely on the public. However, objectors do tend to have a particular interest in developments against which they have objected, and they do tend to keep a pretty vigilant eye on them, so it is a 3-pronged approach I would say.

2. Deputy G.P. Southern of St. Helier of The Chief Minister regarding the 2007 pay offer to States' employees:

Would the Chief Minister inform Members when, and by whom, the decision was taken to set the 2007 pay offer to States' employees at the level of R.P.I. (Retail Price Index) and when this offer was notified to States' employees and to Ministers?

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

Decisions on pay awards are made by the States Employment Board under the Employment of States of Jersey Employees (Jersey) Law 2005. The decision to offer the public sector pay groups an award based on the Retail Price Index as at March 2007 for the pay year 2007/2008 as part of a 2-year agreement was made by the States Employment Board on 25th January 2007, after consultation with the Council of Ministers. It was made as part of the continuing negotiations and confirmed to the Transport and General Workers' Union on Thursday, 1st January 2007. It was communicated progressively thereafter as part of the negotiations with other public sector pay groups.

1. Deputy G.P. Southern :

Could the Chief Minister inform Members at which meeting of the Council of Ministers was the pay offer discussed?

Senator F.H. Walker :

I have not got that date, but it would have been the first meeting after the States Employment Board's meeting earlier in January, but I think the point of the question is, "Was there consultation with the Council of Ministers?" The answer is, "Yes".

2. Deputy G.P. Southern :

Did that consultation take place at a meeting of the Council of Ministers?

Senator F.H. Walker : Yes, it did.

3. Deputy S. Pitman of St. Helier of the Minister for Transport and Technical Services regardingplanstoamendthe relevant speed limits Order in respectofLeRuedeMont Séjour, St. Helier :

May I withdraw this question, as the Minister has endeavoured to answer this through written correspondence?

The Bailiff :

Very well, question 3 is withdrawn.

4. Deputy K.C. Lewis of St. Saviour of the Minister for Planning and Environment regarding the prevention of unsightly fly posting on vacant buildings:

What action, if any, is the Minister taking to stop unsightly fly posting on vacant buildings in the Island?

Senator F.E. Cohen (The Minister for Planning and Environment):

Fly posting is illegal under the Planning and Building (Jersey) Law 2002, and is subject to enforcement action. Article 78 and 79 set out powers to enforce removal or obliteration of illegal advertisements and fines can be imposed on offenders. However, as it is recognised in other jurisdictions, it can be extremely difficult in practice to identify the individuals responsible for organising or undertaking fly posting. It should be recognised that prosecution is a lengthy and potentially expensive process and it is not always feasible or appropriate. The enforcement team, as I have said earlier, is very small and this area of enforcement needs to be weighed and prioritised against many other issues. I am happy to inform the House that entirely by coincidence I have been actively involved for some time in discussions with Mr. Anthony Lewis of the Jersey Evening Post, and Mr. Mike Waddington of Naish Waddington Architects, with a view to designing a number of free-standing structures for the town. The purpose would be to actively encourage fly posting on these structures while discouraging it elsewhere. These discussions are at an early stage and I would be very happy to invite the Deputy to join me in establishing this proposal.

1. Deputy D.W. Mezbourian :

Does the Minister rely in these cases on the public to advise his department when these notices are posted unauthorised?

Senator F.E. Cohen:

I am not really sure of the answer to that. I would imagine that fly posting enforcement is not something that is highly prioritised, and I am certainly not aware of any prosecution myself, but I will certainly look into how information has been delivered to the department or whether the department goes out to try and identify fly posting.

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

Appreciating the Minister's difficulties in enforcing such items, has he had any consultation with the Parish of St. Helier and with the Roads Committee, or any other department within the Parish, because they too are particularly concerned with the amount of fly posting, and I wondered if the Minister would take on board to seek consultation with the Parish - indeed with Chamber of Commerce and I.O.D. (Institute of Directors) and any other - because the effect on St. Helier is getting worse. If one looks at the fly posting concerned there are a minimal set number of establishments that are affected who are obviously concentrated on having these posters distributed, and I am sure they would be able to identify very quickly who is responsible and maybe action could be taken in that way. Would the Minister take that on board and see if we cannot progress this further?

Senator F.E. Cohen:

Yes, I most certainly will, and just to clarify, it is the intention to actively involve the Connétable and the Parish in the proposals to develop structures that encourage fly posting and discourage them elsewhere in the town.

5. Deputy F.J. Hill of St. Martin of the Minister for Transport and Technical Services regarding the effective date for the Road Traffic (Amendment No. 4) (Jersey) Law 200-: Would the Minister inform Members when the Road Traffic (Amendment No. 4) (Jersey) Law 200- approved on 26th September 2006 under P.88/2006 was submitted to Privy Council, and when it is anticipated that the amendment will take effect?

Deputy G.W.J. de Faye of St. Helier (The Minister for Transport and Technical Services): The Law was submitted to the Privy Council on 28th September 2006, that is 2 days after the States approved it. As the Deputy is well aware the time normally taken for approval by Privy Council is about 6 months, but depending on the workload this can be less and it can be more. Clearly in this case it is more. But I am aware that the Attorney General has recently inquired as to whether this item will be considered at the next session, which is scheduled for 2nd May; and I understand that it will be. The amendment will therefore take effect 7 days after it is registered in the Royal Court following the Privy Council approval.

6. Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire of St. Helier of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding time off in lieu of paid overtime for nurses:

Has the Minister yet investigated the issue I raised in questions in the Assembly on 27th March 2007 about whether nurses are having to take time off in lieu instead of receiving paid overtime, and if so, would he provide details of the position for Members please?

Senator S. Syvret (The Minister for Health and Social Services):

Nurses and midwives are paid overtime when their hours of work are in excess of 37.5 per week. These rates currently stand at time and a half for Monday to Saturday and double time for Sundays and bank holidays. Part-time workers will receive plain time for additional hours up to 37.5 per week; hours in excess of 37.5 per week are paid at normal overtime rates. This is in keeping with the States of Jersey Nurses and Midwives Joint Executive Terms and Conditions handbook. There is a requirement that any overtime is approved by the senior nurse on duty, and once approved there is no restriction on offering overtime rates when the need arises based on fluctuating service demand. As a flexible and supportive employer there may be occasions where nurses and midwives would prefer to take that time in lieu for extra hours worked instead of the money, as it may suit her personal situation better.

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

Given that I did explain to the Minister in my previous question that it was reported to me that nurses were unwillingly working - well, not unwillingly; they were working willingly, but they were being forced to work longer hours and then being made to take time off in lieu. What I am trying to say to the Minister is there has been an incidence of staff reporting that to me. Given the answer that he has just given us he sets out quite clearly the structure that operates within the Health Service, but he does not identify the fact that there is and have been occasions - and nor has he identified if it is to his knowledge - that nurses are, not to their preference, working longer hours than they wish to and then being forced to take time off in lieu rather than being paid the overtime. Would the Minister not undertake to investigate with the nurses themselves to see whether or not, aside from the policy he stated this morning, there are incidents occurring?

Senator S. Syvret:

Again, the Deputy is correct; this is the same assertion he made last time. And I have examined the matter and I would have to ask him, through you, Sir, to produce the evidence that he relies upon in making that assertion, because the terms and conditions are absolutely plain; no nurse is required to take time off in lieu instead of paid for overtime they have worked. And if any such incident has occurred it is not in keeping with the terms and conditions, and I would ask, Sir, the Deputy to produce the evidence to me and I will certainly look into it.

Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire:

I will be happy to produce that in private to the Minister for Health, Sir, rather than naming the individual in the public forum.

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

I wonder if I could ask the Minister, as a percentage of overtime worked, to what extent is the Health Service currently using bank nurses as opposed to using nurses currently in employment performing overtime?

Senator S. Syvret:

In terms of bank nurses; we have more registered nurses now working on the bank than ever before and more health care assistants. The total complement of nurses, including day surgery and new postings, is approximately 29 short of the total number we would wish to have. Therefore we are using bank and agency nurses to some extent, but we have had an improvement in recruiting nurses recently because of conditions in the United Kingdom, so that factor is reducing.

3. Deputy G.P. Southern :

Would the Minister agree to bring figures to the House showing the comparisons between 2005 and 2006 of the rates at which bank and agency nurses are employed, and also the amounts of overtime done and T.O.I.L. (time off in lieu) taken?

Senator S. Syvret:

Certainly, I am happy to do that, and I do not think the figures would reveal anything that would come as a surprise to us. We know that there has been a shortage of nurses for a variety of reasons, and there will have been significant amounts of overtime worked in the years 2005 and 2006, and a significant amount of use of bank and agency staff, but I am happy to ask for the precise figures to be produced.

4. The Connétable of St. Lawrence :

Will the Minister confirm that it is the case that agency nurses are brought in when existing staff nurses are very happy to work overtime but are not asked to do so?

Senator S. Syvret:

Well, I am not aware of that because bringing in agency staff is expensive and it is preferable to us to employ regular staff, but the Connétable has to understand that there are clinical governance restrictions in some cases on the amount of hours that nurses can work without taking sufficient periods of time off work. These are clearly established clinical governance requirements for patient safety and it may be that nurses are being required to take that time off according to the standards that are necessary.

5. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:

Approximately 15 months ago when there were nurse protests about the implementation of the Job Families Agreement we were assured by the Health Minister and the Chief Minister that this was but a blip and that the Job Families Agreement was well on-track. Would the Health Minister confirm that the Job Families Agreement is indeed, as he said 15 months ago, well on-track and it is indeed contributing to an uplifting of morale among the nursing staff?

Senator S. Syvret:

Times change; it is said a week is a long time in politics and 15 months is a very long time. I would have to say that I think time has demonstrated there to be some issues and some flaws of the Job Families Agreement which we are co-operatively and constructively working with the staff at the moment to resolve and those discussions are ongoing.

6. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:

Could the Minister identify those issues because on the one hand we were sold a project which was apparently going to bring a labour relations paradise; we now find it is the cause of major problems?

Senator S. Syvret:

The Job Families Agreement itself is a very, very substantial and complex document and I could not stand here without notice and give a precise description of each of the details that may have been problematic in the policy. I have said that there are some issues, some problems that have been identified and we are working co-operatively with staff to resolve those.

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

There was also, with regard to this, meant to be a programme of assessing the utilisation of agency and bank staff and making it more efficient. I do begin to wonder whether that is achieving any results. Would the Minister care to comment?

Senator S. Syvret:

As I have explained in the Assembly on previous occasions, the degree to which we use such staff is often not within our control. We have things like maternity leave, sickness among staff, the complete inability in some cases - certainly in the last couple of years - to recruit the nursing specialisms has forced our hand. We have had no choice other than to use agency and bank staff in those cases, especially agency staff within those specialisms that are very, very difficult to recruit.

8. Deputy K.C. Lewis :

Further to Deputy Le Hérissier and Deputy Le Claire's comments, I too have had phone calls from nurses very late at night in tears stating that they cannot cope anymore. As was stated previously, we were informed this was a blip that happened 15 months ago. Can the Minister assure Members that this is well and truly solved? I can understand the pressures of not wanting to use bank staff for the reasons of economy, but can the Minister assure us that this has come to an end?

Senator S. Syvret:

I am not quite sure that the Deputy identified in his question what should have come to an end. If he is saying that staff are being compelled to take time off in lieu instead of being paid for overtime they work then I can assure you that I am not aware that that has occurred. If it has occurred it is not compatible with the terms and conditions of employment and if the Deputy , as indeed any other Member, has evidence of those kinds of issues please bring the evidence to my attention and I will happily investigate.

Deputy K.C. Lewis :

It is regarding the Job Families Agreement I am referring to. Most of the people that have contacted me for obvious reasons do not wish to be identified, but I am sure the Minister can source the information from his end.

Senator S. Syvret:

I thank the Deputy for that clarification. As I have said in answer to a previous question, there are problems and issues that we have identified and recognised with the Job Families Agreement and we are working co-operatively with the staff to iron-out those problems and move forward in a constructive and positive way.

7. Deputy G.P. Southern of the Chief Minister regarding under-lying assumptions in respect of the Retail Price Index and pay settlements:

Would the Chief Minister inform Members of the assumptions which underlie the predictions for the Retail Price s Index and consequent pay settlements as set out in the presentation on the Draft Annual Business Plan for the years 2008 to 2010?

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

The Annual Business Plan will be finalised by the Council of Ministers in June and lodged with the States in July for debate and decision in September. I have formally asked each Scrutiny Panel to undertake a review of the cash limits and the underlying assumptions, but that of course is for the Panels to decide for themselves. I have been sharing the Council of Ministers' thinking with the Corporate Services Scrutiny Panel since January and they have been taking a keen interest in our proposals. I expect that they will want to look very hard at our inflation assumptions and I will participate fully in any review they undertake. Inflation is notoriously very hard to predict, particularly given the impact of changes in the U.K. base rate. However, we have produced assumptions for R.P.I. as at March each year and our assumptions are 4.5 per cent in 2007, 3.5 per cent in 2008, 3 per cent in 2009, and 2.5 per cent thereafter. These assumptions are based on maintaining as much pressure as possible on underlying inflation, which we continue to hold at or near our target level of 2.5 per cent and they allow for current interest rates. The underlying assumption is that G.S.T. (Goods and Services Tax) will have a one-year impact from introduction, but that consumer and competition pressures will significantly lessen the impact on prices, and hence any addition to the index. Our targets are challenging and they will not be easy to meet, but that has to be our aim.

1. Deputy G.P. Southern :

Does the Chief Minister agree with his Treasury and Resources Minister that the all-items R.P.I. is likely for one year to be affected by the introduction of G.S.T., and further does he agree that such an effect will take place in March 2009 if the G.S.T. is introduced in April 2008, and further that in line with his advisers - the Crown Agents - on G.S.T., this impact is likely to be around a minimum of 2.4 per cent on the expenditure of all workers on the Island, and does he not agree then that his figure for March 2009 of 3 per cent is woefully inadequate?

Senator F.H. Walker :

I do not. The Deputy is right in saying that G.S.T. will have an upward impact on inflation for the first 12 months following its introduction; yes, of course. He is not correct in saying that that effect is likely to be 2.4 per cent. What he is doing is quoting the Crown Agent's view that if all items are uplifted in price by 3 per cent then the effect could be as high as 2.4 per cent. There is already clear evidence that that would not be the case and that a number of retailers will not be introducing the rate of G.S.T., or at least the full rate of G.S.T., into their sales prices. And there is I see the Deputy is surprised that there is evidence which I will gladly share with him at another time. And certainly it is also not the case that it would have an impact on all workers, and of course there is protection due for the low paid which the States are due to debate in the not too distant future. Thereafter, of course, after the first year G.S.T. will have a downward impact on inflation.

2. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:

Would the Chief Minister identify to what extent he has taken the increasing rise in the price of property and rentals into account in fixing these rates, given everyone thought this issue had been tamed, but in fact we are now faced with a very red hot property market. How has he taken this particular development into account?

Senator F.H. Walker :

The major impact caused by house prices in Jersey is the effect of the base rate of the U.K. The contribution to the December 2006 round of the R.P.I. of house purchase costs was 1.5 percentage points, of which one per cent was caused by the increase in base rate. I mentioned in my first answer that our forecasts are based on a continuation of current base rates, the latest predictions suggest there may be a small 0.25 per cent increase sometime within the next few months, followed in the slightly longer term within the period of the question by decreases. So, we have taken the house price scenario into account, and I should mention that despite the buoyancy of the housing market house price increases are still below both the rate of inflation and average earnings.

3. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:

Could I therefore infer from the Minister's answer that he is very happy with the supply and demand situation and they are, from his point of view, entirely in balance?

Senator F.H. Walker :

No, I am not. And of course if we want to see dramatic further increases in house prices then we would continue to have a shortage of supply, and it is essential if we are going to keep inflation under control that we balance supply with demand. That is very much in the planning of the Council of Ministers and, particularly, the Housing Minister at this time.

4. Senator B.E. Shenton:

The Chief Minister has stated that Deputy Southern 's assertion that 2.4 per cent increase in 2009 is incorrect. Could the Chief Minister state what his assumption of the effect of G.S.T. will be in the 2009 figure?

Senator F.H. Walker :

I cannot give a precise figure because we do not know what the precise figure is. What I said was that 2.4 per cent would only become a reality if all retailers passed on the full 3 per cent on all articles they are selling, and that will not be the case.

5. Deputy G.P. Southern :

Can I seek first of all a point of clarification? In his answer the Minister appeared to suggest that R.P.I. in 2007 would be 4.5 per cent. His figures are 4 per cent, was that just a slip? Secondly, I thank him for offering to show me the evidence that retailers and others will not raise their prices by 3 per cent when suffering from G.S.T., but will he share that evidence with the House?

Senator F.H. Walker :

I have received information in confidence from a number of retailers, and I said I would share that with the Deputy and share it with the Deputy I will. Sir, I think what we need here is to avoid self- fulfilling prophecies. What we do not want are Members of this House effectively almost encouraging retailers to pass on the full rate of G.S.T. We all need to work together to keep the price increases as low as possible and to keep the R.P.I. as low as possible. We all need to pull together in that respect and we should be avoiding self-fulfilling prophecies.

6. Deputy G.P. Southern :

Will the Chief Minister confirm the slip of the tongue rather than his new estimate of 4.5 per cent for R.P.I. in 2007?

Senator F.H. Walker :

Yes, I will. The Deputy is correct in that respect; it is 4 per cent.

7. Deputy G.P. Southern :

And will the Minister agree that in addition to talking up inflation that we must avoid at all costs wishing that things will work out fine?

Senator F.H. Walker :

We do not wish, we set challenging targets and then work as hard as we can to meet them, and that is what I invite the Deputy to join us in doing.

8. Deputy G.P. Southern :

Does the Chief Minister have any evidence that he is prepared to make public that G.S.T. will not be passed on?

Senator F.H. Walker :

Let me be clear, I did not say G.S.T. will not be passed on, I said G.S.T. will not be passed on in full on all items sold. And I will research the evidence I have to see what is possible for me at this stage to put into the public domain.

8. Deputy J.A.N. Le Fondré of the Minister for Transport and Technical Services regarding the re-opening of road works on recently improved roads:

Given the significant work presently being performed in improving Route de la Haule and the related disruption, would the Minister confirm whether the department will be ensuring that the road is not dug up for a considerable period of time after the completion of that work, and what, if any, is the maximum period of enforcement and what powers can the department use to ensure that this is enforced?

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

Transport and Technical Services Department and the Parish's power to prevent the breaking-up of a recently resurfaced road by a utility company is currently provided for by the Public Utilities Road Works (Jersey) Law 1963. The Law allows a 12-month post-resurfacing embargo to be imposed by the Highway Authority subject to a number of constraints. However, there is a corollary in the sense that the embargo does not apply to emergency works carried out by utility companies and should a utility company apply to the Highway Authority to consent to break a road up under the embargo, consent should not be unreasonably withheld. The T.T.S. (Transport and Technical Services Department) believes the current embargo period of 12 months gives insufficient protection to its roads, in particular key traffic routes. Therefore, in line with developments in other jurisdictions, T.T.S. is seeking to bring legislation before the States next year to enable the post-resurfacing embargo period to be increased to 3 years and its administration to be made more effective. However, despite current limitations and its powers, the Transport and Technical Services Department is actively seeking to achieve an effective minimum embargo period of 3 years to its current capital resurfacing programme, including La Route de la Haule. This will be achieved in 2 ways; first through the voluntary support of utility companies where it is generally recognised that the proposed law changes will have public and political support, particularly in respect of high profile projects. Therefore when the department indicated to companies our intention to apply a 3-year embargo that proposal was not challenged in respect of all current projects. Secondly, we are developing better co-ordination. The current steady State funding has allowed the department to develop a long-term resurfacing programme extending up to 2009, which is being issued to all utilities companies, and this programme has been developed with their full consultation to ensure that all planned utility and Transport and Technical Services Department works involving excavations are completed prior to any resurfacing.

1. Deputy J.A.N. Le Fondré:

The first thing that springs to mind is, is the Law only applicable to utility companies? And the original question I was proposing to ask as a supplementary was; is the main cause of the degradation of roads due to trenching by utility companies or is it, for example, commercial developers, or are there any other main reasons? But what I would personally like to know; is the Law only enforceable against utility companies and if somebody else comes along and wants to dig it up you have no powers?