States Meeting Transcript - 08/09/2009

STATES OF JERSEY OFFICIAL REPORT

TUESDAY, 8th SEPTEMBER 2009

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

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

1. THE DEPUTY OF ST. JOHN OF THE MINISTER FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT REGARDING THE RE-FIT OF THE FISHERIES VESSEL THE NORMAN LE BROCQ:.................................................................7
2. THE DEPUTY OF ST. JOHN OF THE MINISTER FOR TRANSPORT AND TECHNICAL SERVICES REGARDING THE COMPLETION DATES OF WORKS UNDERTAKEN AT LES CHARRIERES DE BONNES NUIT:........................7
3. THE DEPUTY OF ST. JOHN OF THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES REGARDING THE FUNDING OF THE ENERGY FROM WASTE PLANT AND THE PRE-PURCHASE OF EUROS:.....................................8
4. THE DEPUTY OF ST. JOHN OF THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES REGARDING THE SETTLEMENT OF ACCOUNTS BY HARCOURT: ..........................................................................................8
5. THE DEPUTY OF ST. MARY OF THE MINISTER FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT REGARDING THE COMPENSATION PAYMENTS TO ALTERNATE INSURANCE SERVICES LIMITED INVESTORS:....................9
6. THE DEPUTY OF ST. MARY OF THE CHAIRMAN OF THE COMITÉ DE CONNÉTABLES REGARDING THE ROLE OF PARISH ASSEMBLIES IN THE DEMOCRATIC LIFE OF THE ISLAND:...............................................9
7. THE DEPUTY OF ST. MARY OF THE MINISTER FOR PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT REGARDING CONDITIONS IMPOSED ON DEVELOPERS AND CONTRACTORS WHEN GRANTING PLANNING PERMISSION FOR THE CASTLE QUAYS DEVELOPMENT:..................................................12
8. DEPUTY A.E. JEUNE OF ST. BRELADE OF THE MINISTER FOR HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES REGARDING NURSES AND MIDWIVES EMPLOYED BY HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES:.................................................16
9. SENATOR B.E. SHENTON OF THE MINISTER FOR EDUCATION, SPORT AND CULTURE REGARDING THE DETAILED BREAKDOWN OF GRADES AT A' LEVEL BY HAUTLIEU STUDENTS: ................................................17
10. SENATOR B.E. SHENTON OF THE MINISTER FOR EDUCATION, SPORT AND CULTURE REGARDING THE DETAILED BREAKDOWN OF G.C.S.E. GRADES BY STUDENTS IN THE NON FEE PAYING SECTOR:..............................18
11. THE DEPUTY OF ST. MARY OF THE MINISTER FOR TRANSPORT AND TECHNICAL SERVICES REGARDING THE TIPPING OF INERT WASTE AT LA COLLETTE: ...........................................................................18
12. THE DEPUTY OF ST. MARY OF THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES REGARDING THE OVERSPEND ON THE INCINERATOR TO DATE:..................................................................................21
13. DEPUTY R.G. LE HERISSIER OF ST. SAVIOUR OF THE MINISTER FOR HOME AFFAIRS REGARDING THE ANNUAL COST OF IMPRISONING AN INMATE AT H.M.P. LA MOYE AND THE COST OF SECURITY FOR AN OVERNIGHT HOSPITAL STAY FOR AN INMATE: ................................................23

14. DEPUTY R.G. LE HERISSIER OF ST. SAVIOUR OF THE MINISTER FOR HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES REGARDING THE SAVINGS MEASURES PROPOSED BEFORE THE SUMMER RECESS: .....................................23
15. THE DEPUTY OF ST. MARTIN OF THE MINISTER FOR HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES REGARDING THE VERITA INVESTIGATION AND ISSUES RELATING TO THE LOCUM CONSULTANT GYNAECOLOGIST:................25
16. THE DEPUTY OF ST. MARTIN OF THE MINISTER FOR HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES REGARDING THE VERITA INVESTIGATION AND ISSUES RELATING TO A SENIOR CONSULTANT GYNAECOLOGIST:...................26

2. Oral Questions...........................................................................26

1. Deputy J.A. Hilton of St. Helier of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding the criteria for a Secure Accommodation Order for young people in the care of the Children's Service:.....................................................................26 Deputy J.A. Martin of St. Helier (Assistant Minister for Health and Social Services - rapporteur):.............................................................................27

1. Deputy J.A. Hilton:.....................................................................27
2. Deputy J.A. Hilton:.....................................................................27
3. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier of St. Saviour:...............................................28
4. Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire of St. Helier : ..................................................28
5. Connétable D.W. Mezbourian of St. Lawrence:........................................29
6. Deputy K.C. Lewis of St. Saviour:......................................................29
7. Senator S. Syvret:......................................................................30
8. Deputy J.A. Hilton:.....................................................................30

2. Deputy M. Tadier of St. Brelade of the Minister for Economic Development regarding the administration of Woolworths Jersey: ..............................................31 Senator A.J.H. Maclean (The Minister for Economic Development):.........................31

1. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................31
2. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................31
3. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................31

3. Deputy T.A. Vallois of St. Saviour of the Minister for Housing regarding the rise of housing rentals by 2.5 per cent as of October 2009:....................................31 Senator T.J. Le Main (The Minister for Housing): ............................................32

1. Deputy T.A. Vallois: ...................................................................32
2. Deputy D.J. De Sousa of St. Helier:....................................................32
3. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................32
4. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................33
5. Senator S. Syvret:......................................................................33
6. Deputy S. Pitman of St. Helier:.........................................................33
7. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................33
8. Deputy T.A. Vallois: ...................................................................34

4. Deputy A.K.F. Green of St. Helier of the Chief Minister regarding the Customer Service Department:............................................................................34 Senator T.A. Le Sueur (The Chief Minister):.................................................34

1. Deputy A.K.F. Green:..................................................................35
2. Senator S. Syvret:......................................................................35
3. Deputy A.K.F. Green:..................................................................35
4. Senator S. Syvret:......................................................................35
5. Deputy A.K.F. Green:..................................................................36

5. Deputy K.C. Lewis of the Minister for Home Affairs regarding the introduction of a zero tolerance approach to drink driving:....................................................36 Senator B.I. Le Marquand (The Minister for Home Affairs): .................................36

2.5.1 Deputy K.C. Lewis :....................................................................36

6. Deputy P.J. Rondel of St. John of the Chief Minister regarding the Computer Services Department's ability to provide 24-hour technological supporting the event of a system breakdown:.............................................................................37 Senator T.A. Le Sueur (The Chief Minister):.................................................37

1. The Deputy of St. John:................................................................37
2. The Deputy of St. John:................................................................37

7. Deputy A.E. Jeune of St. Brelade of the Minister for Education, Sport and Culture regarding the number of Jersey students pursuing a nursing diploma or degree:........38 Deputy J.G. Reed of St. Ouen (The Minister for Education, Sport and Culture):..............38

2.7.1 Deputy A.E. Jeune :.....................................................................38

8. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier of the Minister for Economic Development regarding the compatibility of the new Jersey Post scheme (Ship2Me) with the Think Twice, Buy Local' policy: ..........................................................................38 Senator A.J.H. Maclean (The Minister for Economic Development):.........................38

1. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................39
2. Senator B.E. Shenton:..................................................................39
3. Deputy A.T. Dupre of St. Clement:.....................................................39
4. Deputy K.C. Lewis :....................................................................39
5. Deputy J.A. Martin:....................................................................40
6. The Deputy of St. John:................................................................40
7. Senator S.C. Ferguson:.................................................................40
8. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................41
   9. Deputy F.J. Hill of St. Martin of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding the impartiality ofthe Verita enquiry:..................................................41 The Deputy of Trinity (The Minister for Health and Social Services):........................41

1. The Deputy of St. Martin:..............................................................41
2. The Deputy of St. Martin:..............................................................42

3. Deputy D.J. De Sousa:..................................................................42
4. Senator S. Syvret:......................................................................42
5. Senator S.C. Ferguson:.................................................................42

10. Deputy K.C. Lewis of the Minister for Education Sport and Culture regarding the adequacy ofthepool facilities in Jersey for the 2015 Island Games: ....................43 The Deputy of St. Ouen (The Minister for Education, Sport and Culture):....................43

1. Deputy K.C. Lewis : .................................................................43
2. Deputy J.A. Martin: .................................................................43
3. Deputy J.A. Martin: .................................................................44
4. Connétable L. Norman of St. Clement:..............................................44
5. The Connétable of St. Clement:......................................................44
6. Deputy K.C. Lewis : .................................................................44

11. Deputy C.F. Labey of Grouville of the Minister for Transport and Technical Services regarding the involvement of Connex in unscheduled services that would otherwise be undertaken by private coach companies:................................................44 Connétable M.K. Jackson of St. Brelade (The Minister for Transport and Technical Services): .........................................................................................44

1. The Deputy of Grouville : ............................................................45
2. The Deputy of St. John:..............................................................45
3. The Deputy of Grouville : ............................................................45

12. Deputy J.A. Martin of the Chairman of the Comité des Connétable s regarding using the Honorary Police to support the States of Jersey Police in any Parish on certain nights: .45 Connétable K.P. Vibert of St. Ouen (Chairman of the Comité des Connétable s): .............46

1. Deputy J.A. Martin: .................................................................46
2. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:...........................................................46
3. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:...........................................................46
4. The Deputy of St. Martin : ...........................................................46
5. Deputy J.A. Martin: .................................................................47

13. The Deputy of Grouville of the Minister for Economic Development regarding proposals to introduce the U.K. Mational Lottery toJersey in the near future: ....................47 The Connétable of St. Clement (Assistant Minister for Economic Development - rapporteur): .........................................................................................47

1. The Deputy of Grouville : ............................................................47
2. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:...........................................................48
3. Senator S.C. Ferguson:..............................................................48
4. Senator A. Breckon:.................................................................48
5. Deputy K.C. Lewis : .................................................................48
6. The Deputy of Grouville : ............................................................49

14. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier of the Chief Minister regarding the role of Back-Benchers in formulating policy with respect to external affairs: .....................................49 Senator T.A. Le Sueur (The Chief Minister):.................................................49

2.14.1 Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:...........................................................49

15. The Deputy of St. Martin of the Chief Minister regarding the review of suspensions in line with P.98/2009 approved by the States on 1st July 2009: ..........................50 Senator T.A. Le Sueur (The Chief Minister):.................................................50

1. The Deputy of St. Martin : ...........................................................50
2. The Deputy of St. Martin : ...........................................................50
3. The Deputy of St. Martin : ...........................................................50

16. Deputy M. Tadier of the President of the Chairmen's Committee regarding the notice requirement for unaccredited media' to film a Scrutiny hearing:.......................51 Senator B.E. Shenton (President of the Chairmen's Committee):.............................51

1. Deputy M. Tadier :...................................................................51
2. Deputy M. Tadier :...................................................................51
3. Deputy M. Tadier :...................................................................51
4. Connétable J. Gallichan of St. Mary:................................................52
5. Connétable P.F.M. Hanning of St. Saviour:..........................................52
6. Deputy D.J.A. Wimberley of St. Mary : ..............................................52
7. The Deputy of St. Martin : ...........................................................53
8. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:...........................................................53
9. Deputy M. Tadier :...................................................................53

17. Deputy J.A. Martin of the Minister for Home Affairs regarding the introduction of a low cost formal identity card for young people tocarry when entering licensed premises:..54 Senator B.I. Le Marquand (The Minister for Home Affairs): .................................54

1. Deputy J.A. Martin: .................................................................54
2. Deputy J.M. Maçon of St. Saviour : ..................................................54

3. Questions to Ministers without notice - The Minister for Education, Sport and Culture...................................................................................55

1. Deputy S.Pitman:......................................................................55 The Deputy of St. Ouen (The Minister for Education, Sport and Culture):....................55

1. Deputy S.Pitman:......................................................................55
2. Deputy S.Pitman:......................................................................55

2. Senator B.E. Shenton:..................................................................55

3.2.1 Senator B.E. Shenton:..................................................................55

3. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................56

3.3.1 Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................56

4. Deputy K.C. Lewis :....................................................................56
5. Deputy J.M. Maçon:....................................................................57
6. Senator S.C. Ferguson:.................................................................57
7. The Deputy of Grouville :...............................................................57
8. Deputy T.M. Pitman of St. Helier:......................................................58
9. Deputy A.E. Jeune :.....................................................................58
10. Deputy D.J. De Sousa:..................................................................58

4. Questions to Ministers without notice - The Minister for Health and Social Services: ...........................................................................................58

1. The Deputy of St. Martin:..............................................................59 The Deputy of Trinity (The Minister for Health and Social Services):........................59

1. The Deputy of St. Martin:..............................................................59
   2. Senator J.L. Perchard:..................................................................59

4.2.1 Senator J.L. Perchard:..................................................................60

3. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................60

4.3.1 Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................60

4. Deputy A.E. Jeune :.....................................................................60

4.4.1 Deputy A.E. Jeune :.....................................................................61

5. Deputy D.J. De Sousa:..................................................................61

5. Composition and election of the States: revised structure (P.72/2009) proposition of the Deputy of St. Mary to defer debate until 6th October 2009........................62

5.1 The Deputy of St. Mary:................................................................62

1. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................64
2. Deputy S. Power of St. Brelade : ........................................................65
3. The Connétable of St. Clement:........................................................65
4. Deputy A.E. Jeune :.....................................................................65
5. Connétable G.F. Butcher of St. John:...................................................65
6. The Connétable of St. Mary:............................................................65
7. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................66
8. Deputy T.M.Pitman:...................................................................67
9. Deputy D.J. De Sousa:..................................................................67
10. Deputy J.A. Martin: .................................................................67

LUNCHEON ADJOURNMENT PROPOSED..................................................70

LUNCHEON ADJOURNMENT................................................................70

6. Composition and election of the States: revised structure (P.72/2009) – fourth amendment - proposition to reduce lodging period under S.O. 26(7)..................70

6.1 The Deputy of St. Mary:................................................................70

1. The Deputy St. Martin:.................................................................71
2. Deputy J.M. Maçon:....................................................................71
3. Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire: ...............................................................71
4. The Connétable of St. Saviour:.........................................................71
5. The Connétable of St. Mary:............................................................71
6. Connétable J.M. Refault of St. Peter:...................................................72
7. The Deputy of St. Mary:................................................................72

PUBLIC BUSINESS.............................................................................75

7. Electricity tariffs: Regulations under Article 22 of the Electricity (Jersey) Law (P.41/2009)...............................................................................75

7.1 Senator A. Breckon: ....................................................................75

1. Senator A.J.H. Maclean:................................................................78
2. Deputy D.J. De Sousa:..................................................................80
3. Senator S.C. Ferguson:.................................................................81
4. Deputy J.B. Fox of St. Helier:..........................................................82
5. Deputy A.K.F. Green:..................................................................82
6. Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire: ...............................................................83
7. Deputy R.C. Duhamel of St. Saviour:..................................................84
8. Senator P.F.C. Ozouf :..................................................................85
9. Senator J.L. Perchard:..................................................................87
10. Deputy T.M.Pitman:................................................................87
11. Senator S. Syvret:....................................................................87
12. Deputy M. Tadier :...................................................................89
13. Senator A. Breckon:.................................................................89

8. Composition and election of the States: revised structure (P.72/2009)................91

8.1 The Connétable of St. Mary (Chairman, Privileges and Procedures Committee):.......92

9. Composition and election of the States: revised structure (P.72/2009) - second amendment (P.72/2009 Amd.(2))........................................................94

9.1 The Connétable of St. Clement:........................................................95

10. Composition and election of the States: revised structure (P.72/2009) - second amendment (P.72/2009 Amd. (2)) - amendment (P.72/2009 Amd.(2) Amd.) ..........96

10.1 Deputy T.M. Pitman:...................................................................96

1. Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire:............................................................98
2. The Deputy of St. Mary:............................................................100
3. Deputy M. Tadier :..................................................................100
4. Connétable A.S. Crowcroft of St. Helier : ..........................................100
5. The Connétable of St. Mary : .......................................................100
6. Deputy D.J. De Sousa: .............................................................101
7. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:..........................................................101
8. Deputy R.C. Duhamel:.............................................................102
9. Deputy T.M.Pitman:...............................................................102

11. Composition and election of the States: revised structure (P.72/2009) - second amendment (P.72/2009 Amd.(2)) - resumption........................................105

1. Deputy J.M. Maçon:..................................................................105
2. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:................................................................105
3. The Connétable of St. Ouen:..........................................................106
4. Connétable D.J. Murphy of Grouville :................................................106
5. Senator S. Syvret:.....................................................................107
6. The Connétable of St. Brelade:........................................................107

ADJOURNMENT..............................................................................108

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

QUESTIONS

1. Written Questions

1. THE DEPUTY OF ST. JOHN OF THE MINISTER FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT REGARDING THE RE-FIT OF THE FISHERIES VESSEL THE NORMAN LE BROCQ:

Question

Could members be advised of the exact works carried out in the re-fit of the fisheries vessel the Norman Le Brocq, detailing the costs of each section of works; when the vessel was taken out of service; when it went back into service; whether the work was undertaken by a Jersey shipyard, and if not, explain why this work could not be carried out in the Island given the local expertise available?

Answer

The officer who oversaw the work on the Norman Le Brocq is regrettably on annual leave and rather than attempt to provide the Assembly with possibly incomplete detail I will ensure that a detailed answer is provided to all states Members for the sitting of September 22nd September.

I thank the Deputy and Members for their understanding.

2. THE DEPUTY OF ST. JOHN OF THE MINISTER FOR TRANSPORT AND TECHNICAL SERVICES REGARDING THE COMPLETION DATES OF WORKS UNDERTAKEN AT LES CHARRIERES DE BONNES NUIT:

Question

1. Can the Minister confirm the dates when the following infrastructure works at Bonne Nuit will be completed -

1. the placing ofan Armeco barrier on Les Charrières de Bonne Nuit, a matter that has been outstanding for some 6/7 years;
2. the correct operation of the sewerage plant to ensure that it operates at 100% effectiveness with no more pungent smells on the jetty, a matter that has been outstanding for some 5/6 years;

2. Would the Minister explain whether the failure ofthe bathing water at Bonne Nuit to reach the highest standard inrecenttests is relatedtothe operation ofthesewerageplantandwill the Department now consider connecting this plant to main drains?

Answer

1. i) The temporary barriers will be replaced with permanent Armco barrier prior to the end of this year.

ii) The quality of the effluent from Bonne Nuit sewage treatment works is extremely high and is achieving all regulatory requirements. Unfortunately there have been odour issues with the plant causing a nuisance to residents and visitors to the area. During the last month Officers have been adding a chemical solution to soak up the sulphide in the plant which is causing odours in the vicinity. To date the trials have shown a marked improvement of the nuisance odours and we are hopeful that the chemical dosing will fulfil the expectations of residents and visitors.

2. The effluent from the sewage treatment plant is treated in an ultra-violet plant which disinfects the effluent before being discharged into the sea. There are surface water

catchments in the area which discharge in this area and I am aware that the Environment Division is monitoring these together with the discharge from the sewage treatment plant. Perhaps the Minister for Planning and Environment could comment further on this issue.

3. THE DEPUTY OF ST. JOHN OF THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES REGARDING THE FUNDING OF THE ENERGY FROM WASTE PLANT AND THE PRE-PURCHASE OF EUROS:

Question

On 31st March 2009, in response to my written question regarding the hedging of funds in relation to the Energy for Waste Plant hedging of funds, I was advised that as a disciplinary process was underway the Minister was unable to comment at that stage. Given that many months have passed would the Minister now be in a position to advise why the pre-purchase of Euro funds was not put in place at an early stage and why it is still not in place?

Given that Euros come into the Airport/Harbours daily, would the Minister advise whether this money is collected on a daily/weekly basis and used to support the funding of the Energy from Waste Plant or transferred to a bank and charges paid?

Answer

A policy regarding the funding of the Euro element for the Energy from Waste Plant has been in place since December 2008. The Comptroller and Auditor General's comprehensive report of March 2009 details the situation with regard to why Euros were not pre-purchased in November 2008.

Euro income received by the Airport and Harbours relates to the operation of the Channel Island Air Control Zone. This will total 17.6 million over the next two and a half years. This income has been matched against forecast expenditure on the Energy from Waste Plant and will be used to fund these payments over the next three years. This eliminates exposure on a significant value (17.6 million) of the EfW contract and avoids associated banking and administrative costs.

4. THE DEPUTY OF ST. JOHN OF THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES REGARDING THE SETTLEMENT OF ACCOUNTS BY HARCOURT:

Question

In response to my written question on 28th April 2009, the Minister advised that Harcourt owed a considerable sum of money to Transport and Technical Services and the Waterfront Enterprise Board Limited. Would the Minister inform the Assembly whether these outstanding bills have now been settled and, if not, has the robust credit control procedure' been applied and, if so, what action has been taken?

Answer

There are no monies owed to WEB

The monies owed to Transport and Technical Services have not been paid by Harcourt.

Transport and Technical Services and Treasury officers have been pursuing this debt through the standard States debt recovery procedure. If this procedure is not successful, the Law Officers will be instructed to pursue recovery of this debt via the Courts.

5. THE DEPUTY OF ST. MARY OF THE MINISTER FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT REGARDING THE COMPENSATION PAYMENTS TO ALTERNATE INSURANCE SERVICES LIMITED INVESTORS:

Question

In his statement to the Assembly on 12th May 2009 about the compensation payments to those who had been given "recklessly misleading advice" by Alternate Insurance Services Limited, the Minister said that one of the "exceptional facts" which influenced his decision was that "normal professional indemnity cover became invalid".

As we can take it from the Minister's inclusion of this factor in the list of "exceptional facts" that this would be the normal route of recourse in such a case, just what exactly did the Minister mean by this phrase? Would the Minister explain what exactly happened which made it the case that "normal professional indemnity cover became invalid"?

Answer

In the case of Alternate, I stated examples of exceptional facts which appeared which were not inclusive or exclusive of the exceptional facts that might occur in any other case. I do not think that I can usefully add to what I stated previously. Each case will be considered on its appropriate merits. As the Assembly is aware, my Department is currently considering the issue of investor protection in the round.

In order to satisfy his interest in this case, I would refer the Deputy of St Mary to the Jersey Legal Information website where the relevant facts are set out in a lengthy judgement. Regarding the insurance issue, it appears that the IFA failed to notify his insurers of his knowledge concerning potential claims in good time. This resulted in the insurers having grounds to argue that there was invalidation of the indemnity cover.

As part of a lessons learnt exercise, I understand that the Commission has considered whether this issue could be prevented by requiring firms to have cover that cannot be voided for non- notification. However, it appears that this would be too difficult a requirement to set out in the Codes of Practice since it may well be impossible for a firm to obtain such cover.

6. THE DEPUTY OF ST. MARY OF THE CHAIRMAN OF THE COMITÉ DE CONNÉTABLES REGARDING THE ROLE OF PARISH ASSEMBLIES IN THE DEMOCRATIC LIFE OF THE ISLAND:

Given that the Parish Assembly is the decision-making body of each parish and the role these assemblies play in the democratic life of the Island, would the Chairman please advise the Assembly (with details of each individual parish):

Question

The precise measures taken, in each parish, to publicise the date and time of each Parish Assembly before it takes place, and how long in advance of the meeting it is publicised?

Answer

The Loi (1804) au sujet des Assemblées paroissiales, Loi (1905) au sujet des Assemblées paroissiales and Loi (1842) sur les publications dans les Eglises specify the requirements for the holding of a Parish Assembly. All parishes comply with the requirements of the law and publish in the Jersey Gazette and in the Boîte Grillée (Church box) a notice giving the date and time of the Parish Assembly. The notice must be placed in the Jersey Gazette at least two days before holding the Assembly but in practice could be placed up to a week or more prior to the meeting. The notice will appear on at least two dates but additional dates may be added depending upon the business to be conducted. The Jersey Gazette is also available on the website (www.thisisjersey.co.uk). Additional information received from parishes is as follows:

St Clement: a notice is placed on the notice board at the Parish Hall and advance notice can also

be found on the Parish website.

Grouville : also advertised on the Parish website and, depending on the amount of notice, may be

publicised in the Parish Magazine if printing deadlines permit.

St Helier: advertised on the Parish website and at the Town Hall . St John: advertised on the Parish website.

St Lawrence: advertised on Parish Hall notice boards and Parish website; forthcoming events are

also announced at community meetings (e.g. Sheltered Housing, Honorary Police Meetings, Roads Committee) and in the Parish magazine if printing deadlines permit.

St Martin: advertised on the Parish website and a diary of events is sent out with mailings 3-4

times a year.

St Mary: advertised on the Parish website.

St Ouen: advertised in a Notice Box in the public car park for the shopping area opposite the

Parish Hall and, depending upon printing deadlines, in the Parish Magazine Le Gris Ventre'.

St Saviour: advertised on the Parish website. Question

The precise measures taken, in each parish, to publicise the Agenda of each Assembly before it takes place, and how long in advance of the meeting it is publicised?

Answer

In accordance with the Loi (1804) au sujet des Assemblées paroissiales, the convening notice for a Parish Assembly must set out the business to be discussed. All parishes comply with the requirements of the law and publish the agenda in the Jersey Gazette and in the Boîte Grillée (Church box) as outlined in the answer above. The Jersey Gazette is also available on the website (www.thisisjersey.co.uk). As the notice of the meeting includes the agenda the additional information received from parishes for the previous question also applies to this question.

Question

When and how the date for an Assembly is fixed? Answer

The Parish Assembly is convened when required by the Connétable , and after notifying the Rector, to conduct the business of the Parish and to comply with dates in relevant legislation e.g. Licensing (Jersey) Law 1974. Most Parishes have one day of the week when Assemblies are usually held.

Question

Whether any individuals or groups are notified directly by arrangements other than by publication or public display of a notice or notices, and if so, who?

Answer

The statutory notices are the legitimate notices for convening an Assembly. The Connétable notifies the Rector before publishing the date of the assembly and the Parish will contact those who are required to attend the Assembly e.g. applicants for a licence under the Licensing (Jersey) Law 1974; candidates for election to offices such as Rates Assessor, Roads Inspector, etc. Additional information received from parishes is as follows:

St Brelade: notification given to Procureurs du Bien Public and Parish Deputies.

St Clement: notification given to those parishioners who have signed up to the mailing list

(electronic).

St Helier: notification given to Parish officials, Parish Deputies and Senators living in the Parish. St Lawrence: notification given to Parish officials and Deputies.

St Ouen: notification given to Procureurs du Bien Public, Roads Committee and Honorary

Police.

St Peter: notification given to those parishioners who have signed up to the mailing list

(electronic).

Trinity : notification is given to the Procureurs du Bien Public, Honorary Police and Deputy . Question

Whether there is a fixed schedule of Assemblies or whether they are arranged as required, and in the former case, what steps are taken to publicise this Schedule?

Answer

Parish Assemblies are only held to conduct the business of the Parish. Whilst an Assembly might be expected to be held at certain times of the year, e.g. early summer to set the Parish rate, quarterly to consider applications under the Licensing (Jersey) Law 1974 etc., there is no fixed schedule of dates. The exception is the Parish of St Helier which advertises, on its website, that a Parish Assembly "usually occurs on the last Wednesday of the month"; but meetings would only be held if there was business to conduct and the meeting to set the Parish rate might be in addition to these meetings.

Question

Whether a note is kept of the numbers attending each meeting and if this note is an estimate or an actual count, and if a note is kept, how many attended the last meeting to set the parish rate?

Answer

Although there is no requirement in law to record the number of persons attending a Parish Assembly, the following information has been received from parishes:

St Brelade: a count is made and the number is recorded in the minutes; 41 persons were present at

the meeting to set the 2009 Parish rate.

St Clement: 84 parishioners were present at the meeting to set the 2009 Parish rate.

Grouville : a count is made and the number is recorded in the minutes; 40 persons were present at

the meeting to set the 2009 Parish rate.

St Helier: a note is sometimes kept of the estimated number attending. At the meeting to set the

2009 Parish rate there were 47 persons present of whom 41 were eligible to vote.

St John: a count is made and the number is recorded in the minutes; 21 persons were present at

the meeting to set the 2009 Parish rate.

St Lawrence: a count is made and the number is recorded in the minutes; 48 persons were present

at the meeting to set the 2009 Parish rate.

St Martin: no official count or estimate is made; those attending have the option to sign the

attendance book but this is not an accurate measure of the numbers attending. An estimated 80 persons were present at the meeting to set the 2009 Parish rate.

St Mary: a count is not routinely made but might be included in the minutes if a contentious item

was on the agenda; it is estimated that there were in excess of 30 persons present at the meeting to set the 2009 Parish rate.

St Ouen: a count is only made in the event of a vote.

St Peter: a count is made but not recorded in the minutes; an estimated 40 persons were present

at the meeting to set the 2009 Parish rate.

St Saviour: a count is made and recorded in the minutes; 28 persons were present at the meeting to

set the 2009 Parish rate.

Trinity : an approximate count is made but not recorded in the minutes; an estimated 40 persons

were present at the meeting to set the 2009 Parish rate.

7. THE DEPUTY OF ST. MARY OF THE MINISTER FOR PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT REGARDING CONDITIONS IMPOSED ON DEVELOPERS AND CONTRACTORS WHEN GRANTING PLANNING PERMISSION FOR THE CASTLE QUAYS DEVELOPMENT:

Question

Could the Minister furnish exact details of all the conditions which were imposed upon the developers and the contractors during the process of negotiating and granting planning permission for the Castle Quays development?

Answer

The following conditions were imposed on the planning permission granted for Phase I of Castle Quays.

Standard Condition

If the development hereby permitted has not commenced within five years of the decision date, this permission shall cease to be valid.

Reason: The Minister for Planning and Environment reserves the right to reconsider this proposal consequent on any future change of circumstances or policy.

Condition(s):

1. Within two months of commencement of any work on site the applicant shall prepare for approval by the Minister a Construction Environment Management Plan. This plan shall make provision for action plans torespondtoeach issue and shall also illustrate how these plans will be implemented during the course of the construction project. This must address:

A project description to include construction methods to be used, all earthworks proposed including methods of disposal, and haul route, drainage proposals including disposal of foul and surface water, the basement construction, noise control measures to safeguard existing and proposed residential accommodation, proposed working hours, and public consultation arrangements

Site specific issues should also address: construction traffic management

groundwater treatment measures

reduction of dust and airborne pollution measures

waste management implementation and monitoring controls

contaminated land handling arrangements

pollution prevention

environmental incident management

Operational matters should also address:

site works and compounds

site procedures and including working hours, route links and site boundaries

monitoring regime for noise, dust, odour and fuel storage

reporting arrangements for this monitoring and chain of command to enforce compliance storage locations for equipment, oil and fuel

traffic management during basement excavation

staff training and briefing

health and safety liaison arrangements

Consultation with other bodies must address:

contact arrangements and work practices with statutory bodies notably

Health and Safety and Health Protection

complaints procedures

2. All work must comply with Supplementary Planning Guidance, Planning Advice Note 2 - Development of Contaminated Land (2005)

Should Methane Gas be discovered on the site the developer will be obliged to provide an appropriate means of ensuring there is not egress to any buildings on site. This will be subject to the approval of the Minister for Planning and Environment.

3. That this consent shall cease to be valid should a formal Planning Agreement under Article 25 ofthe Planning and Building Jersey Law 2002not be signed within 4 months fromthe date of this consent.
4. Within six months of commencement of any work on site, the applicant shall prepare a Travel Plan for the approval of the Minister.
5. Within six months of commencement of any work on site the applicant shall submit a full implementation and maintenance scheme for all the soft landscaping shown on the approved plans

6. All planting and other operations comprised in the landscaping scheme approvedshall be carried outand completed inthefirst planting season following the completion of the development. Anytreesor plants plantedinaccordance with the approvedschemewhich, within a period of five years from the planting taking place; die, removed, or are seriously damaged shall be replaced in the next planting season.
7. All hard landscaping and other public realm works which are partofthe approved plan shall be coveredby a long-term maintenance scheme which shall require the approval of the Minister for Planning and Environment. These arrangements shall be submitted for theapprovalof the Minister prior to the occupation of any of the accommodation on site.
8. Detailed samples ofallexternal finishes shall be submitted andapprovedbytheMinister for Planning and Environment within six months ofthe commencement of work on site. This shall include samples of the proposed granite cladding, render, balconies, roofs and ground floor colonade finishes. In addition to those samples an agreed standard and quality of finish shall also formpartof the mattertobeagreedbytheMinister within six months from the commencement of the development.
9. A colour scheme for the external finishes shall be submitted for and agreed by the Minister for Planning and Environment within six months ofthe commencement ofwork on site. This scheme shall address particularly the colourtobe provided within the render finishes butshallalso illustrate the colour and texture of the granite work,andthe relationship intermsof colour between all external finishes.
10. Details of all external lighting proposed shall be submitted to the Minister for Planning and Environment within six months of the commencement of work on site. These details shall illustrate all fixtures and fittings and shall include matters relating to location and luminance.
11. The design ofthe residential units should achieve the following internal noise levels due to noise ingress:

Bedrooms - internal noise should not be greater than 30 dB(A)L Aeq, 8hrs (2300 - 0700hrs) Living rooms - internal noise should not be greater than 35dB(A)L Aeq, 16hrs (0700 - 2300hrs) Kitchens - internal noise should not be greater than 45 dB(A)L Aeq, 16hrs (0700 - 2300hrs).

12. The applicant shall ensurethat prior to development, theambient level of nitrogen dioxide at the site is assessed. The assessment should, as a minimum, include three months data collected, using monthly nitrogen dioxide diffusion tubes analysed at an accredited analytical laboratory.

The applicant shall continue to monitor levels of nitrogen dioxide, providing monthly results to the Health Protection Services Department, during construction and for a period of eighteen months after completion of blocks A and B.

The applicant shall provide a consolidated report detailing nitrogen dioxide levels, including interpretation and conclusions, within twenty eight days of the completion of the monitoring programme outlined above. All to the satisfaction of the Minister for Planning and Environment.

13. Notwithstanding the details on the approvedplans provision within the basement shall be made to permit recycling. The details of this provision to be provided within six months from the commencement of work on the site.

14. A report giving details of the proposed energy efficiency capability of the proposed buildings in conjunction with a detailed sustainability statement and implementation plan shall be submitted totheMinister for Planning andEnvironment within six months ofthecommencementofworkon the site.
15. Notwithstanding the information on the approved plans the provision made for plant on the roof is not approved. The applicant must submit detailed drawings to the Minister within six months ofthe commencement of work onthe site indicating the proposals for accommodating the plant. These proposals to be subject to the approval of the Minister.
16. Notwithstanding the information on the approved plans the northern elevation of Block B is not approved. The applicant shall provide an alternative approach to this elevation with the Minister for Planning and Environment for his approval within six monthsfrom the commencement of work on the site.

Reason(s):

1. To safeguard the amenityof the area and to ensure the proper development of the site
2. To safeguard the amenityof the area and to ensure the proper development of the site.
3. To ensure the implications of developing this land are properly and appropriately addressed.
4. To ensure the proper development of the site.
5. To ensure the site is developed in an appropriate manner which will improve and enhance the character and appearance of the area.
6. To ensure the site is developed in an appropriate manner which will improve and enhance the character and appearance of the area.
7. To ensure the site is developed in an appropriate manner which will improve and enhance the character and appearance of the area.
8. To ensure the site is developed in an appropriate manner which will improve and enhance the character and appearance of the area.
9. To ensure the site is developed in an appropriate manner which will improve and enhance the character and appearance of the area.
10. To ensure the site is developed in an appropriate manner which will improve and enhance the character and appearance of the area.
11. To ensure the site is developed in an appropriate manner which will improve and enhance the character and appearance of the area.
12. To ensure the site is developed in an appropriate manner which will improve and enhance the character and appearance of the area.
13. To ensure the site is developed in an appropriate manner which will improve and enhance the character and appearance of the area.
14. To ensure the site is developed in an appropriate manner which will improve and enhance the character and appearance of the area.

15. The present drawings illustrating the design approach are not satisfactory or appropriate.

8. DEPUTY A.E. JEUNE OF ST. BRELADE OF THE MINISTER FOR HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES REGARDING NURSES AND MIDWIVES EMPLOYED BY HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES:

Question

Would the Minister –

• advise the Assembly of the total number of nurses on the "Jersey register", and of these
• the number who are employed by the Health and Social Services Department (HSS);
• of the number employed by HSS, identify the proportion that have full time contracts, part- time contracts, or are employed as bank' nurses, breaking down each category into those who are locally resident (5 years' residency), those who are essentially employed (J category) and those with less than 5 years residency?

Is the Minister aware of the number of Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC) registered nurses in the Island who are not on the local register of nurses and who might be available to assist in the event of any chronic shortage due to the anticipated flu pandemic or other emergency situation? And if not, does the Minister have any plans to collate this information in the event of a chronic staff shortage, for example the anticipated flu pandemic or emergency situation?

Answer

The total number of nurses on the "Jersey register" as of the end of August 2009 is

• 1071 nurses
• 62 midwives
• 26 specialist community public health nurses

1. The number of registered nurses currently in post /employed by Health and Social Services Department is 569.(This excludes vacancies,orposts recruited towherestaff have not yet arrived)

The budgeted establishment is 660 full time equivalent, which includes 38 midwives.

2. All J' category registered nurses and midwives are working full time contracts. There are approximately 220 nurses in this category and these nurses have 5 years and under residency. They comprise 37.4% of the nursing and midwifery workforce.

2 (i) 369 registered nurses have lived and worked in Jersey for 5 years and more and this comprises 62.6% of the workforce.

2 (ii) The department employs 30 registered nurses on zero hours contracts and together they provide the core of the nursing bank'. Of these 6 are available to work fulltime hours the other 24 are only available to work part time.

In addition to the above, 164 registered nurses who already have substantive contracts with HSSD, undertake bank shifts in addition to their normal working hours. The Minister is unable to say how many registered nurses are living in Jersey, but not on the local register.

The Minister thanks Deputy Jeune for her suggestion regarding an Island wide, nursing, response to an emergency situation. In that event islanders may be called upon to provide assistance, following appropriate media requests, and this could include nurses on the NMC register. Any assistance subsequently provided, however, will need to be undertaken within appropriate legal frameworks.

It is a legal requirement, in seeking to maintain national NMC registration, for nurses and midwives to complete 150 hours of clinical practice per year or 350 hours over a 3 year period. There is also a requirement to produce evidence of annual continuing professional development which may preclude many individuals from maintaining professional registration.

Retired nurses without current NMC and local registration would only be legally entitled to work in a non registered nurse or midwifery capacity.

9. SENATOR B.E. SHENTON OF THE MINISTER FOR EDUCATION, SPORT AND CULTURE REGARDING THE DETAILED BREAKDOWN OF GRADES AT A' LEVEL BY HAUTLIEU STUDENTS:

Question

Can the Minister give a detailed breakdown of grades attained at A' level by the students of Hautlieu School, including details of students that got unclassified grades and those that failed to attend for examinations, together with a short analysis of how the results for Hautlieu School compare with the UK national average?

Answer

My aim is to encourage schools to work together collaboratively in the best interest of pupils, not to compete with each other.

The Department's policy on the publication of results is as follows:

• Aggregate results for all schools are published. This gives some indication of how the system has performed compared to national averages.
• Individual schools are required to publish their results to parents and governors.
• As Minister, I am provided with an annual report on each school's performance against a broad range of key performance indicators including value-added data when it becomes available.

The current system

School performance is monitored by the department and value added calculations are used to place examination results into a meaningful context. Unexplained underperformance is challenged.

A system of Professional Partnership has been introduced this year to challenge and support schools

External inspectors are continually working in our system reviewing various aspects of schools performance.

If requested, I would be prepared to provide members with more detailed results across the system, broken down by subject rather than by school, when that information has been collated and is available.

I would be prepared to discuss the performance of any individual school with any States Member or indeed parent of that school. However, the policy is not to publish raw examination results for individual schools because this could lead to the publication of league tables which are divisive, crude and give a distorted view of performance.

10. SENATOR B.E. SHENTON OF THE MINISTER FOR EDUCATION, SPORT AND CULTURE REGARDING THE DETAILED BREAKDOWN OF G.C.S.E. GRADES BY STUDENTS IN THE NON FEE PAYING SECTOR:

Question

Can the Minister give a detailed breakdown of grades attained at GCSE Level by the students of the non-fee paying schools only including details of students that got U grades, together with a short analysis of how these results compared with the UK national average?

Answer

As I have indicated in my response to Senator Shenton's question in relation to A' level results and Hautlieu, the policy is not to publish the results of individual schools as I do not wish to create the opportunity for the development of league tables because they are divisive and do not compare like with like.

Undue pressure can be placed on schools and lead to serious side effects. The introduction of league tables in England led to:

• a sharp increase in exclusions as there has been less incentive for schools to work with disaffected pupils;
• a narrow focus on teaching to the test at the expense of broader educational objectives;
• increased competitiveness between schools at the expense of collaboration.

We may not be following England in this respect but we are in step with other parts of Europe. League tables have been abolished in Northern Ireland, Wales and Scotland. In France the publication of results on a school by school basis is not allowed. In the Netherlands, Singapore and Spain, examination results are used by schools to compare their own performances but not published.

To compare the performance of the non-fee paying sector against the national average for the UK which includes all maintained and independent sector schools is an unfair comparison. Conclusions drawn from such comparisons are likely to be misleading.

I would be prepared to discuss the performance of any individual school or sector with any States Member or any parent. However, it is my policy not to publish raw examination results for individual schools because this could lead to the publication of league tables which are divisive, crude and give a distorted view of performance. League tables do not compare like with like.

11. THE DEPUTY OF ST. MARY OF THE MINISTER FOR TRANSPORT AND TECHNICAL SERVICES REGARDING THE TIPPING OF INERT WASTE AT LA COLLETTE:

Question

Could the Minister advise the Assembly how tipping of inert waste is organised at La Collette? Could the Minister ensure that the answer includes the following:

• A general outline of the system in use;
• How the different loads are sorted/allocated/counted/charged;
• How the decision is taken of what goes where and on what basis;
• What safeguards are built in to avoid errors which might lead to contamination of the sea or air, or land; and
• What enforcement measures may be used against contractors delivering to the site?

Answer

General Outline of Systems

Inert  waste is received on the weighbridge at La Collette Reclamation site.  The weighbridge operator enquires as to what type of waste the driver has on board and who it is being tipped for.

If the load is acceptable to the site (under the waste acceptance criteria for the site licence), the operator will record via the computerised weighing system, the date and time, ticket number, vehicle registration number, company name, type of waste, charge rate and value, order number or reference, gross, tare and net weights. The driver signs for the transaction on departure.

Based on the type of waste being delivered the driver will be instructed to drive to the appropriate tipping area within the site for that waste. The tip attendant will then inspect the load to see if there are any obvious contaminants on board before the load is allowed to be tipped. In the case of inert waste the tip attendant will then instruct the driver to tip the load at least four metres from the tip head. This is done in order to minimise the risk of a collapse of the tip face and also to allow the tip attendant or machine operator to re-inspect the load for wastes that are not acceptable for general fill, prior to pushing the waste over the tip edge. On acceptance of the load the driver is then directed to leave the site via the weighbridge, where they will complete the weighing out procedures.

Any suspected non-conforming loads are quarantined by the tip operators and the driver is immediately informed that his load may not be acceptable for disposal at the site. The suspect load will then undergo further inspections both visually, and if necessary by chemical analysis.

Loads are visually inspected for various contaminants such as high levels of organics, cement bonded asbestos, asbestos insulation board, ash from any source, metals, hydrocarbons and non- inert waste. If any of these materials are detected the load will be sorted as far as practical or removed from the tip head and a decision will be made on the appropriate method of disposal. Any loads that are found to be unacceptable will either be rejected and sent off site or impounded, but in either case both the customer delivering the waste and, if appropriate, the waste regulator will be informed of the decision.

Separation of Waste Categories

Quantities of inert waste that are not acceptable for general land-filling but which can be dealt with within La Collette Reclamation Site are processed as follows:

Asbestos - asbestos is received at the site every other Wednesday morning. Each load must be pre- booked via the waste regulator who then informs the site office of the number of loads to be accepted at La Collette. This information includes the waste consignment note number and the person delivering the waste. Acceptance of loads of asbestos is dealt with by the certified contractor CAC Environmental Services and air monitoring and quality control is carried out by the environmental contractor Normandie Analytical Services.

Organics - loads with high levels of organics will either be sent to the green waste reception (if containing very little soil) or will be sent to the bannelais reception area sited on top of a lined area for subsequent composting.

Ash - Loads containing ash from any source will be recorded and then directed to lined ash bays for containment and burial.

Metals - quantities of metals from loads received on site will be separated and deposited into metal skips for later removal to the Bellozanne scrapyard.

Hydrocarbons - any quantities of soil which may contain hydrocarbons for any reason (such as from brownfield sites) are required to be pre-notified to the waste regulator via the Planning process or the waste handling regulations. TTS are generally aware of these sites and will be involved in the decision making as to the correct disposal route for this waste, such as encapsulation or bioremediation.

Other loads delivered to the site which may be suspected of containing hydrocarbons due to the emission of odours or strange discolouration will be quarantined on site (usually be removal to a lined area) and sampling and analysis will be carried out. Disposal of these loads will then be decided upon based on the results of the analysis and the recommendations of the Waste Regulator.

Inert waste

Segregated - loads which contain high quantities of recyclable aggregates (greater than 80%) are diverted to our aggregate recycling centre managed by AAL Recycling Ltd, and are charged at a reduced rate to encourage recycling.

Non- Segregated - material mixed with lower levels of recyclable aggregates (less than 80%) are charged at the higher rate. However tipped loads which may be viable for recovery are collected from the tip head at the discretion of AAL Recycling Ltd. All remaining materials are incorporated into the general fill.

Recording of Loads and Charges

All loads delivered to the site are assessed by the weighbridge operator and tip attendant and based on their inspection the appropriate charge category is applied via a computerised weighing system which calculates the net weight of all loads and applies the appropriate charge. (see Appendix 1)

Safeguards

The Waste Management (Jersey) Law 2005 under Part 3, Section 23 (4) makes it an offence for waste to be disposed of in a manner that is likely to cause pollution. The initial responsibility is therefore on waste producers to dispose of waste in an environmentally responsible manner.

There are also a number of other regulatory and policy safeguards in place such as:

Development Control – controlling the development of any sites which may contain contamination due to their previous use.

Health Protection - involved in the control of all sites which may emit noise, dust or other substances potential injurious to human health and the environment.

Waste Regulator - who will be involved in the licencing of the transportation of any soils or materials that will have come from a potentially contaminated site, such as brown field sites, prior to delivery of the material to La Collette Reclamation Site or any other disposal facility within the Island.

TTS – There are three opportunities to inspect loads: the weighbridge operator on arrival, the tip attendant when placing the load and the machine operator before and during the incorporation into the general tip fill. At any of these stages any dubious materials can be quarantined until further inspections on its conformity can be carried out.

Enforcement Measures

TTS has no relevant regulatory powers and is regulated itself as the operator through the licensing system. However when potential problem loads are identified the material concerned is quarantined, the relevant regulatory bodies are informed and the Department has the option (via the Minister) to ultimately ban repeat offenders from the facilities.

Appendix 1

12. THE  DEPUTY  OF  ST.  MARY  OF  THE  MINISTER  FOR  TREASURY  AND RESOURCES  REGARDING  THE  OVERSPEND  ON  THE  INCINERATOR  TO DATE:

Question

Will the Minister advise the Assembly of the exact details of the total overspend on the incinerator to date, where by overspend is meant amounts which lie outside the sum voted in P73/2008, namely £102,810,000 plus the £3.5 million previously voted.

Would the Minister make quite clear to members in his answer the amounts due to:

1. any additional costs added after propositions P.72/2008 and P.73/2008, other than those dueto currency fluctuations, specifying exactly what these were;
2. the amount ofthe offsetting savings arranged by Transport and Technical Services toreduce the impact of the above increases, specifying exactly what these were for;
3. the amount due to the fall in the value of the pound before the contract was signed; and

4. the amount due to the fall in the value ofthe pound after the contract was signed, up to and including the most recent actual payment made to the contractor?

For each category above, would the Minister advise:

1. when the additional expense (saving) was known about?
2. who sanctioned the additional spend (reduction), and when?
3. the exact source of the extra funding? and
4. the legal authority for the additional spending?

Answer

P72/2008 and P73/2008 detailed the capital cost of the EfW project as £106,310,000 comprising two budgets of £102,810,000 and £3,500,000; this specifically excluded provision for the project contingency: "The total cost of £106.31 excludes provision for contingency items which will be managed from within the risk element of the States Capital Reserve Vote." Publishing this information at the time of contract signature could give a negotiating advantage to the contractor.

Transport and Technical Services has advised that the detail of the component costs of this project are the subject of a confidentiality agreement with the contractor concerned and therefore, costs can only be disclosed at a summary level.

To date, the expenditure and savings approved outside the £106,310,000 is detailed in Ministerial Decisions MD-T-2008-0105 and MD-TR-2008-0125.

Page 97 of the Comptroller and Auditor General's report, dated March 2009, details the additional costs, savings and associated information relating to the project as at the Engineering Procurement and Construction (EPC) contract signature on 14th November 2008.

As with any significant capital project, there may be additional project costs and savings identified as the project progresses. In line with other projects of this nature, a contingency was established to meet such costs. Project claims and variations are being managed and mitigated by the EfW Project Board as the project progresses.

Transport and Technical Services have advised that since the EPC Contract was awarded, forecast variations and claims costing an additional £302,321 have been identified as necessary by the EfW Project Board, and will be subject to consideration and approval by the Minister for Transport and Technical Services.

These variations and claims relate to the requirement for a Bulky Waste Facility shredder and amenity facilities, windows within the Energy from Waste Facility, gabion walls along the perimeter of the site, a revised process plant schedule and revised detailing for bunker concrete chute walls.

Transport and Technical Services has indicated that project management costs relating to the development of a Letter of Intent during the Preferred Bidder Period and to appoint the Architectural Design Consultant required by the Reserved Matters Approval are £79,708; these costs will be subject to consideration and approval by the Minister for Transport and Technical Services.

The total impact of all these costs and savings is not yet known. Any variation or claim that materialises with a value over £25,000 will be subject to consideration and approval by the Minister for Transport and Technical Services.

The sources of funding for any such costs will be the project budget and the associated project contingency. The authority for additional spending is via Ministerial Decision.

The Comptroller and Auditor General's report, dated March 2009, details his assessment of the additional cost relating to the exchange rate movements both prior and subsequent to the signing of the contract.

When publishing his report, the Comptroller and Auditor General estimated the variation in cost of the approach at that date at £3.06 million, subject to further exchange rate movements. The Comptroller and Auditor General's comprehensive report addresses the specific points that the Deputy raises.

Euro payments made against the contract to date are 29.1 million with a sterling cost of £27 million. A further 18.5 million (sterling cost £16 million) have been acquired and are being held to meet future payments. A further 17.6 million of Airport income in Euros over 2009-2011 has also been allocated to fund future payments at a fixed rate. The remaining 10.6 million are required at the end of 2010. They are to be acquired under an approved policy which includes a stop loss. The forecast cost of exchange rate fluctuations compared to that at contract signing date is not yet finalised but the maximum under the policy will be £2.7m, and at the exchange rate on 7th September would be £2.5m.

The cost of the exchange rate fluctuations has been funded from the project budget, including the project's contingency and the capital reserve, subject to Ministerial Decision.

13. DEPUTY R.G. LE HERISSIER OF ST. SAVIOUR OF THE MINISTER FOR HOME AFFAIRS REGARDING THE ANNUAL COST OF IMPRISONING AN INMATE AT H.M.P. LA MOYE AND THE COST OF SECURITY FOR AN OVERNIGHT HOSPITAL STAY FOR AN INMATE:

Question

What is the cost per annum of imprisoning an inmate at HMP La Moye?

What is the average cost of providing security for an overnight hospital stay for an inmate? Answer

The cost per prisoner place for 2008 was approximately £52,000, based on the Prison expenditure for 2008 divided by the daily average number of prisoners. This figure includes the charges for 9 prisoner places in England, the costs of which will vary according to the security of the particular UK establishment; current costs charged per head range between £34,000 and £64,000.

Since establishment costs at La Moye remain consistent, the implication is that the lower the numbers of prisoners held at the prison, the higher will be the annual cost per prisoner.

The average cost of providing prison officer cover for an overnight stay in is £650, based on the provision of two experienced officers working a 12 hour overtime shift.

14. DEPUTY R.G. LE HERISSIER OF ST. SAVIOUR OF THE MINISTER FOR HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES REGARDING THE SAVINGS MEASURES PROPOSED BEFORE THE SUMMER RECESS:

Question

Would the Minister explain the precise process that was followed in her Department to formulate the proposed programme of spending cuts which were announced before the summer break setting out clearly the personal involvement that she and her Assistant Ministers had at each stage?

Answer

The following information provides a timeline for the precise process that was followed by the H&SS Department in formulating the proposed programme of spending cuts which were announced before the summer break. The personal involvement of the Minister or Assistant Ministers is identified at the appropriate stages (Initials of Minister and Assistant Ministers present identified in brackets).

4th February – Specially convened Senior Management Team (SMT) meeting where the Finance Director presented the 2009 financial forecast and identified continuing underlying cost pressures.

19th May- As part of the formal finance report the Finance Director reiterated that in light of the discussed service risks the financial position for 2010 needed to be seriously considered and reassessed if H&SS was to mitigate these risks and remain within its cashlimit.

All SMT members were formally requested to identify (based on their professional opinion) the ten "lowest priority service areas" with regard to risk to patient life/urgent care. These were to be forwarded to the Finance Director by 21st May with the Chief Officer receiving the summarised information by 26th May.

23rd June – SMT meeting where it was agreed that service prioritisation would be undertaken in a workshop environment and that the Minister would be kept informed of developments.

26th June- Chief Officer informed the Minister and Assistant Ministers, by e mail, of the need to inform the States of the possible cuts in services required so as to divert funds into high risk emergency services. He emphasised the requirement to function within budget and confirmed details of the forthcoming SMT service prioritisation workshop. (AP, EN, JM)

30th June- SMT members participated in a workshop to categorise services into:- Those which were considered low risk (score 1)

Those where more information was required before a decision could be made (score 2) Those which were considered high risk to cease. (score 3)

The services analysed at the workshop were identified by the Directorate managers as having the least impact within their service if cut or reduced. The workshop split the SMT into teams of 3 and utilised a scoring mechanism from 1 to 3 (see above) in order to allow an objective approach to service reprioritisation. Teams were instructed to consider life saving impact, social impact and funding released before allocating a score. Scores were submitted by each team and Directorate managers could provide information but not score their own services. Where a score of 2 was given, further information was gathered so that a score of 1 or 3 could be allocated. The final culmination of scores allowed the services to be listed in rank order, with those with lowest scores deemed the lowest risk to cut.

The amount identified as possible/achievable by the SMT was, in total circa the same amount that was required to deliver the CoM pro rata savings and provide investment for the other estimated operational risks.

6th July- Weekly Minister's meeting (meeting chaired by Deputy Edward Noel as Minister was on annual leave). The consolidated outcome of the SMT workshop was presented to the Assistant Ministers. Deputy Noel was keen to ensure that there were no other "low priority" services that

could be considered. A meeting for July 8th was arranged whereby the Minister, Assistant Ministers and Finance Director could look more closely at the workshop outcomes. The Chief Officer highlighted how crucial the prioritisation work was in producing the 2010 Business Plan which should be explicit and transparent. (EN, JM)

8th July- Initial findings of the Nurse Staffing review presented to H&SS Minister. (AP, EN)

8th July- Minister and Assistant Ministers met with Finance Director to consider the list of lowest priority services to be disinvested in to release funds for investment to manage risks. It was

identified that there were considerable political difficulties associated with many of the proposed service reductions at that stage and further information was requested. (AP, EN, JM)

10th July- Weekly Minister's meeting- Finance Director reported difficulties in finalising the 2010 Business Plan due to financial deficits remaining even after cutting the lowest priority services. The Chief Officer advised identifying further service cuts to ensure that the remaining services are appropriately funded but that H&SS had to submit the draft situation to enable Treasury to prepare

for the briefing to States Members on the 20th July.

10th July- H&SS submitted draft business plan cashlimit reconciliation to Treasury Officers.

13th July- H&SS submitted pages signed by Accounting Officer in accordance with business planning process.

16th July- Chief Officer provided a report for the Minister called "Reconciliation of Expenditure". This was to support MD-HSS-2009-0041- Reconciliation of Revenue Expenditure which the Minister did not sign.

21st July- Draft Business Plan was sent to SMT members

23rd July- H&SS Chief Officer presented highlights from the Business Plan to staff and took Question and Answers.

27th July- Weekly Minister's meeting- A discussion took place regarding a timeline for service reprioritisation and the requirement for preparation for the Minister's presentation to States

members on 3rd September. (AP)

15. THE DEPUTY OF ST. MARTIN OF THE MINISTER FOR HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES REGARDING THE VERITA INVESTIGATION AND ISSUES RELATING TO THE LOCUM CONSULTANT GYNAECOLOGIST:

Question

As Verita's terms of reference require it to "review the main actions taken by the Health and Social Services in response to the death of Mrs Elizabeth Rourke  including its own interim internal investigation. This will include establishing whether or not there are any significant omissions to the investigation and, if so, exploring these" -

1. Was one of the main actions taken' the decision to exclude a Senior Consultant Gynaecologist?
2. Would the Minister give the reasons for the exclusion and the reasons why the Consultant Gynaecologist is still excluded?
3. Will the Minister give an updated breakdown ofthecost incurred by Health and Social Services tocoverthe salary and incidental costs of the excluded Consultant Gynaecologist together with thecost of the salaries and incidental costs to cover the work not being undertaken by him?
4. Has the hospital's own interim internal investigation (also known as the Serious Untoward Incident Investigation) been concluded and when will the report be published?
5. Will the Minister explain the purpose and terms of reference ofthe proposed Hutchinson investigation/review and give the costofthis proposed investigation, including the funds already expended on the related court case?

Answer

1. I can confirm that one ofthe main actions taken, following the events ofthe 17th October 2006, was to exclude a Senior Consultant.

2. The exclusion of a member of staff is not covered within Verita's terms of reference.
3. I can confirm that the costs incurred in covering the work not being undertaken by the excluded Consultant has, since October 2006, been calculated as £634,000.
4. The hospital's own internal investigation, know as a Serious Untoward Incident Investigation (SUI), was halted upon the instruction of the Law Officers so as not to impede the criminal investigations. Subsequently, and immediately following the Royal Court trial, it was deemed more appropriate that an external investigation be commissioned and this is being undertaken by Verita.
5. The terms ofreferenceof the Hutchinson enquiry areprivateandconfidentialastheyrelatetoan employee for whom I have a dutyofcare.It is notpossibleto predict accurately what the costs will be, but I will return with more details at an appropriate time.

16. THE DEPUTY OF ST. MARTIN OF THE MINISTER FOR HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES REGARDING THE VERITA INVESTIGATION AND ISSUES RELATING TO A SENIOR CONSULTANT GYNAECOLOGIST:

Question

In light of the fact that Verita's terms of reference require it to "review the main actions taken by the Health and Social Services in response to the death of Mrs Elizabeth Rourke including its own interim internal investigation. This will include establishing whether or not there are any significant omissions to the investigation and, if so, exploring these" -

1. Would the Minister give details of the main actions taken' and inform members whether they included the instant dismissal oftheLocum Consultant Gynaecologist, and if so, for what reasons exactly?
2. Would the Minister inform members whether any financial package was agreed, if so, at what cost to the public?

Answer

1. I can confirm that the surgeon in question was employed as a LocumMiddle Grade Doctor at the timeof the incident on 17 October 2006. This Doctor was not dismissed, but voluntarily left the temporary employment of Health and Social Services. The contractof employment as a Locum Middle Grade Doctor was, in any event, due to expire on 19th October 2006.
2. I can confirm that no financial package was agreed for the Locum Middle Grade Doctor, other than payment for the remaining few days of her contract of temporary employment.

2. Oral Questions

1. Deputy J.A. Hilton of St. Helier of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding the criteria for a Secure Accommodation Order for young people in the care of the Children's Service:

Would the Minister explain the criteria used when applying for a Secure Accommodation Order for young people in the care of the Children's Service and state how many orders have been applied for during the past 2 years and how many have been refused by the court when dealing with the matter?

Deputy A.E. Pryke of Trinity (The Minister for Health and Social Services):

I shall ask my Assistant Minister to answer the question. She has responsibility for Social Services.

Deputy J.A. Martin of St. Helier (Assistant Minister for Health and Social Services -

rapporteur):

Yes, in order to make an application for a Secure Accommodation Order, officers have to have evidence that a child or a young person has a history of absconding from other care settings, evidence over an appropriate period and whether, if they abscond, they are likely to suffer significant harm or, if they are placed in a non-secure placement, they are likely to injure themselves or others. The figures, since the new Children's Law came in in 2005; in 2006 3 were applied for; in 2007 4; 2008 3; 4 so far this year and 2 refusals which were in 2006.

1. Deputy J.A. Hilton:

The purpose of the question was to get an idea of exactly what sort of behaviour would be deemed serious enough by the Children's Service to take immediate action to address the behaviour of young people in their care. During the summer recess, I received a number of communications from members of the public about this very matter and I did meet with Deputy Martin and explained the circumstances surrounding the behaviour of 3 individuals in the care of the Children's Service, one of whom was charged with a serious offence and 2 individuals who were in the care of the Children's Service being implicated in 2 serious offences which were occurring at 1.00 a.m. and 2.00 a.m. in the morning. So I would like the Deputy to explain to the House why she does not believe that (a) the behaviour of the individuals involved at 2.00 a.m. in the morning and apparently deemed missing at the time is not absconding and (b) the effect of being involved in the crimes that they were involved in at the time at 2.00 a.m. in the morning did not put them at serious risk to themselves and also putting the public at serious risk of the actions of the individuals involved.

Deputy J.A. Martin:

Before I start, I certainly will not be going into the specifics of any children in the Children's Service and their care. The Deputy , the Assistant Minister and I have met with the States of Jersey Police and there seems to be a discrepancy about the States of Jersey Police and Voluntary Care Orders. Now, many of these children are on Voluntary Care Orders where there has been a breakdown in family circumstances and the parents themselves have allowed the children into care. The States of Jersey Police and both myself and the Assistant Minister for Home Affairs are waiting for more information from the Attorney General as we at the Children's Service seem to believe that if we report a child - and the Deputy uses the word "absconding" but I would say "missing" or maybe "home a bit late" - the States of Jersey Police will not pick them up. So this is where we are and if they are under an order from the court, they will pick them up but all the children are in a children's home and many of these children are already from a very, very seriously disturbed background. I do not really know what the Deputy wants me to do, other than lock them all up.

2. Deputy J.A. Hilton:

I certainly do not want the Deputy to lock them all up, as she puts it. My point is when children are placed into the care of the Children's Service, one would expect them to want to know where a 12 year-old is at 2.00 a.m. in the morning. [Approbation] My point is when is the Children's Service going to take the responsibility placed in them and start taking care of these young people and if a 12 year-old out at 2.00 a.m. in the morning being implicated in a street robbery is not serious enough, goodness knows what is.

Deputy J.A. Martin:

Again, I really wish the Assistant Minister would stop using ages and identifying facts in this very small community. All the children in our children's home will now know - or the parents will - of whom she is talking about. The Children's Service does take this very seriously. Everyone in this House put Williamson off for a year. The children's homes are not fit for purpose. They are too big. The offer from the police station and the policeman when I went with the Assistant Minister was: "Come around and fit locks on all the windows at the 2 children's homes." This is not satisfactory. We do take our job seriously. So do our officers, understaffed and undermanaged. I would say again we do not have the full co-operation of the States of Jersey Police. I fully accept that they are really under pressure on a Friday and Saturday night and, further down the line, you will see why I have a question to the rest of the Constables. We need more police on the streets and we need these children off the streets and we need them secure. We do not need their first contact with a policeman to end up down at Rouge Bouillon.

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

I have slightly been pipped to the post but I wonder if the rapporteur and perhaps the Attorney General could assist us also. Would the rapporteur confirm that when the department is acting in loco parentis, it actively dissuades children from leaving children's homes or is there an absolute freedom to go and come as they wish?

Deputy J.A. Martin:

I think the Deputy makes the comment "loco parentis". Now many of these children are in the children's home because they have no parents. No fault of their own. Now what do you want the Children's Service to do? This is instead of living in a home with 2 parents, one parent, an aunty. Does the Deputy think we can say: "You cannot go on school outings." [Laughter] "You are not allowed to go out with your friends on a Saturday night." Of course, we give them a barrier like a parent would do. They do not come home and I can assure you a lot of children in ordinary families do not come home on the time that they are set to come home, so I do not know what the Deputy wants us to do.

Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:

I wonder if I could follow up and ask the Attorney General if this an ambiguous area or is it quite clear?

The Bailiff :

I think not at this stage. This is question time to the Minister.

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

As I understand it, if your children are around the Island up until the age of 21, you are responsible for them. In this case, it seems that with the children in the care of the Health and Social Services Department, in the words of the Assistant Minister, you are not so responsible. Nevertheless, could I ask the Assistant Minister whether or nor she is satisfied that this sort of questioning from the Assistant Minister for Home Affairs to the Assistant Minister for Health and Social Services really sends out a signal to the public that the Council of Ministers have got an issue that they cannot get to grips with and they are left throwing questions backwards and forwards to each other on the floor of this House? Does she find this satisfactory because I certainly am concerned by this level of Government?

Deputy J.A. Martin:

Let me start by saying that we had a very productive meeting, I and the Assistant Minister for Home Affairs and there was a communication breakdown. I was briefed by my officers last Monday and I wanted the okay from the Minister before sending out the letter and it never went, and then the Deputy felt she had to ask in the House. In most of these matters, I think myself and the Assistant Minister for Home Affairs and the Ministers are working together. We both find frustrations on either side of what we are trying to do. At the end of the day, we are trying to protect and help but also keep an environment for the children who are in care as near a home environment as possible and because of the large children's homes, we are not achieving this. I would be the first to say it but why we are not achieving is because nobody will let the Children's Service get on with the job. Everybody has 53 different ideas as to how it should be done and not one step forward in 5 years since the Kathy Bull Report. So I am very sorry. It might not be the best way and I do apologise again to Deputy Hilton for not getting back to her, and this could have been avoided, but the answer is really what I have said, so she may still have wanted to question me on the floor of the House which is her entitlement.

5. Connétable D.W. Mezbourian of St. Lawrence :

I am quite concerned to hear the response of the Assistant Minister. About 18 months ago, I went out one evening with the States of Jersey Police. I was shown around the operations at Rouge Bouillon and heard from them first hand that their policy then was to always respond to calls to check on missing children, whether they be from children's homes or otherwise, but particularly in the case of children's homes. They had to stop everything else and go and look for those missing children because they were considered to be at risk and if anything happened to them and they had not responded, then frankly, all hell would be let loose. Will the Minister confirm 2 things to me please? Are the doors at these homes locked to prevent the children leaving and has she queried with the Minister for Home Affairs why there appears to be a change of policy?

Deputy J.A. Martin:

A change of policy, no. As I say, there is a discrepancy that when the Deputy went out, did she understand that the States of Jersey Police will go out to look for children on a Court Care Order. If they are signed involuntary, they have, they say, no powers. The Constable, in her question, said they will check on the children. Many times they will find the children and they will say they have located the child to the Children's Service, they will say the child is in no danger and they say they have no power to pick them up. I do not think the policy has changed and, as for the children's home door being locked, when would the Constable like us to lock it? These are children up to 17 years of age and some are nearly 18 in these homes. Of course they are given a curfew time to be home. Again, I say the doors are locked and the ones that are in that are young do not go out. If they are on a sleepover, we know where they are but the ones that are out, it is like anyone else. Once they decide they are not coming back, what is the point of locking the door? We are only locking them out.

The Connétable of St. Lawrence : Deputy , you are locking them in.

6. Deputy K.C. Lewis of St. Saviour :

On a similar vein, I think my question has largely been answered. Is my information, with the greatest respect to the service, that people running the homes are not allowed by law to restrain, detail or prevent someone from leaving the premises? If this is correct, does the Assistant Minister believe a change in the law is required?

Deputy J.A. Martin:

The Deputy is quite correct and if you are working in a children's home - and I wish more people would go and visit - if a 17 year-old presents to you and you are of my build and my height, which many of our workers are, and they tell you they are going out, firstly, no, you cannot physically stop them and that is right and, secondly, would you want to? Because I think, at this point, we have one person who was working in a children's home who had tried to stop someone coming out and has now been suspended. So there is no easy win and children know their rights. We are working with Home Affairs and we are trying to bring a policy together that will incorporate all these things but, really, on the ground, again, I will say that the majority of the children abide by the rules in the children's homes and I am absolutely shocked at the Constable of St. Lawrence who says I should be locking the doors and locking the children in. I really cannot believe that comment in this day and age.