States Meeting Transcript - 18/11/2009

STATES OF JERSEY OFFICIAL REPORT

WEDNESDAY, 18th NOVEMBER 2009

PUBLIC BUSINESS – resumption ...............................................................7

1. Draft Currency Notes (Variation of Maximum Amount of Issue) (Jersey) Regulations 200- (P.152/2009)..........................................................................7

1. Deputy E.J. Noel of St. Lawrence (Assistant Minister for Treasury and Resources - rapporteur):..............................................................................7

1. Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire of St. Helier : ...................................................7
2. Deputy G.P. Southern of St. Helier:......................................................8
3. Deputy D.J. De Sousa of St. Helier:......................................................8
4. Deputy R.C. Duhamel of St. Saviour:....................................................8
5. Deputy J.M. Maçon of St. Saviour:......................................................8
6. Deputy T.A. Vallois of St. Saviour:......................................................8
7. Deputy P.J. Rondel of St. John : ..........................................................8
8. Deputy M.R. Higgins of St. Helier:......................................................8
9. Connétable J.M. Refault of St. Peter:....................................................8
10. Connétable D.J. Murphy of Grouville :................................................8
11. Deputy K.C. Lewis of St. Saviour:....................................................9
12. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:................................................................9
13. Senator T.J. Le Main:.................................................................9
14. Deputy I.J. Gorst of St. Clement:......................................................9
15. Connétable M.K. Jackson of St. Brelade : .............................................9
16. Connétable A.S. Crowcroft of St. Helier : .............................................9
17. Deputy M. Tadier of St. Brelade:......................................................9
18. Deputy E.J. Noel:.....................................................................9 Senator S.C. Ferguson (Chairman, Corporate Services Scrutiny Panel):......................10

2. Deputy E.J. Noel: ......................................................................10
3. Deputy E.J. Noel: ......................................................................10

1. The Deputy of St. John:................................................................10
2. Deputy M.R.Higgins:..................................................................10
3. Deputy E.J. Noel: ......................................................................10

2. Social Security Fund: Research into Alternative Funding Mechanisms (P.153/2009) (re-issued)................................................................................12

2.1 Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................12

1. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:.................................................................13
2. Deputy I.J. Gorst : ......................................................................13
3. Deputy T.M. Pitman of St. Helier:......................................................13
4. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier of St. Saviour:...............................................14
5. Deputy J.B. Fox of St. Helier:..........................................................14
6. Senator P.F. Routier: ...................................................................15
7. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................16

3. Channel Islands Lottery: allocation of profits for 2009-2010 (P.155/2009) ............17

3.1 Connétable L. Norman of St. Clement (Assistant Minister for Economic Development - rapporteur):.............................................................................17

1. Deputy A.K.F. Green of St. Helier:.....................................................17
2. Deputy A.T. Dupre of St. Clement:.....................................................18
3. Deputy D.J. De Sousa:..................................................................18
4. The Connétable of St. Brelade:.........................................................18
5. Senator S.C. Ferguson:.................................................................18
6. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................18
7. The Deputy of St. John:................................................................18
8. The Connétable of St. Clement:........................................................19

4. Ratification of the Agreement for the Exchange of Information with Respect to Taxes between the States of Jersey and the Government of Australia (P.160/2009)..........19

4.1 Senator T.A. Le Sueur (The Chief Minister):...........................................19

1. Deputy J.M. Maçon:....................................................................20
2. Connétable D.W. Mezbourian of St. Lawrence:........................................20
3. Deputy A.E. Jeune of St. Brelade:......................................................20
4. The Deputy of St. John:................................................................20
5. Senator J.L. Perchard:..................................................................21
6. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:.................................................................21

5. Ratification of the Agreement for the Exchange of Information with Respect to Taxes between the States of Jersey and the Government of New Zealand (P.161/2009) .....22

5.1 Senator T.A. Le Sueur (The Chief Minister):...........................................22

1. Deputy J.A. Martin of St. Helier:.......................................................22
2. Deputy A.E. Jeune :.....................................................................22
3. Deputy I.J. Gorst : ......................................................................22
4. Deputy D.J.A. Wimberley of St. Mary:.................................................23
5. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................23
6. Senator S.C. Ferguson:.................................................................23
7. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:.................................................................23

6. Draft Taxation (Exchange of Information with Third Countries) (Amendment No. 4) (Jersey) Regulations 200- (P.162/2009)..................................................24

6.1 Senator T.A. Le Sueur (The Chief Minister):...........................................25 Senator S.C. Ferguson (Chairman, Corporate Services Scrutiny Panel):......................25

7. Draft Digital Switchover (Disclosure of Information) (Jersey) Law 200- (P.165/2009) ...........................................................................................26

1. Senator A.J.H. Maclean (The Minister for Economic Development):...................26

1. Deputy K.C. Lewis :....................................................................27
2. Deputy J.A. Martin:....................................................................27
3. The Connétable of St. Lawrence:.......................................................27
4. Deputy A.K.F. Green:..................................................................28
5. The Deputy of St. John:................................................................28
6. Deputy S. Pitman of St. Helier:.........................................................28

7. Deputy D.J. De Sousa:..................................................................28
8. The Deputy of St. Mary:................................................................29
9. Deputy J.M. Maçon:....................................................................29
10. Senator B.I. Le Marquand:..........................................................29
11. Deputy M. Tadier :...................................................................29

12. Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire:............................................................30
13. Deputy T.A. Vallois:................................................................30
14. Senator A. Breckon:.................................................................30
15. Deputy T.M.Pitman:................................................................31
16. Deputy S. Power of St. Brelade:.....................................................31
17. Deputy I.J. Gorst :....................................................................31
18. Deputy F.J. Hill of St. Martin:.......................................................32
19. Senator A.J.H. Maclean:.............................................................32 Deputy M.R. Higgins (Chairman, Economic Affairs Scrutiny Panel):........................35

2. Senator A.J.H. Maclean:................................................................35

1. The Connétable of St. Brelade:.........................................................36
2. Senator A.J.H. Maclean:................................................................36
   3. Senator A.J.H. Maclean:................................................................39

1. Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire: ...............................................................39
2. Deputy C.F. Labey of Grouville :........................................................39
3. Connétable J. Gallichan of St. Mary : ...................................................39
4. Senator A.J.H. Maclean:................................................................40

8. Draft Proceeds of Crime (Amendment of Schedule 2) (No. 2) (Jersey) Regulations 200- (P.166/2009)........................................................................40

1. Deputy A.J.H. Maclean (The Minister for Economic Development):...................40

1. Deputy J.M. Maçon:....................................................................41
2. The Deputy of St. Martin:..............................................................41
3. Senator B.I. Le Marquand:..............................................................41
4. Deputy T.M.Pitman:...................................................................41
5. Deputy T.A. Vallois: ...................................................................42
6. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................42
7. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................42 The Deputy of St. John:......................................................................42 The Deputy of St. Mary:......................................................................43

2. Draft Proceeds of Crime (Amendment of Schedule 2) (No. 2) (Jersey) Regulations 200- (P.166/2009) Reference back.......................................................43

1. The Deputy of St. Mary:................................................................43
2. Senator A.J.H. Maclean:................................................................43
3. Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire: ...............................................................44
4. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................45
5. The Connétable of St. Lawrence:.......................................................46
6. Deputy M.R.Higgins:..................................................................46
7. Deputy S.Pitman:......................................................................46
8. Deputy T.M.Pitman:...................................................................46
9. Deputy A.E. Jeune :.....................................................................47
10. The Deputy of St. John:..............................................................47
11. Senator B.I. Le Marquand:..........................................................47
12. Senator S.C. Ferguson:..............................................................48
13. The Deputy of St. Martin : ...........................................................48
14. Deputy J.A. Martin: .................................................................48
15. Connétable P.F.M. Hanning of St. Saviour:..........................................49
16. Deputy T.A. Vallois:................................................................49
17. The Deputy of St. Mary:.............................................................49

3. Draft Proceeds of Crime (Amendment of Schedule 2) (No. 2) (Jersey) Regulations 200- (P.166/2009) - resumption..........................................................51

8.3.1 Senator A.J.H. Maclean:................................................................51 Deputy M.R. Higgins (Chairman, Economic Affairs Scrutiny Panel):........................52

4. Senator A.J.H. Maclean:................................................................52

9. Draft Proceeds of Crime (Supervisory Bodies) (Amendment of Law) (No. 2) (Jersey) Regulations 200- (P.167/2009)...........................................................53

1. Senator A.J.H. Maclean (The Minister for Economic Development):...................53 Deputy M.R. Higgins (Chairman, Economic Affairs Scrutiny Panel):........................53
2. Senator A.J.H. Maclean:................................................................53

10. Draft Foundations (Winding up) (Jersey) Regulations 200- (P.169/2009).............55

1. Senator A.J.H. Maclean (The Minister for Economic Development):...................55 Deputy M.R. Higgins (Chairman, Economic Affairs Scrutiny Panel):........................56
2. Senator A.J.H. Maclean:................................................................56

1. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:...........................................................56
2. Senator A.J.H. Maclean:.............................................................57
   3. Senator A.J.H. Maclean:................................................................57

1. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:...........................................................57
2. Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire:............................................................57
3. Senator A.J.H. Maclean:.............................................................57

LUNCHEON ADJOURNMENT PROPOSED..................................................59 LUNCHEON ADJOURNMENT................................................................59

PUBLIC BUSINESS - resumption..............................................................59

11. Draft Foundations (Mergers) (Jersey) Regulations 200- (P.170/2009).................59

1. Senator A.J.H. Maclean (The Minister for Economic Development):...................59

1. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:...........................................................60
2. The Deputy of St. Mary:.............................................................60
3. Deputy G.P. Southern : ..............................................................62
4. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:..............................................................62
5. The Connétable of St. Helier:........................................................63
6. Deputy K.C. Lewis : .................................................................63
7. Deputy M. Tadier :...................................................................63
8. Deputy T.M.Pitman:................................................................63
9. Senator S.C. Ferguson:..............................................................64
10. Deputy I.J. Gorst : ..................................................................65
11. Senator A.J.H. Maclean:...........................................................65 Deputy M.R. Higgins (Chairman, Economic Affairs Scrutiny Panel):........................68

2. Senator A.J.H. Maclean:................................................................68
3. Senator A.J.H. Maclean:................................................................69

1. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:...........................................................69
2. Senator A.J.H. Maclean:.............................................................70

4. Senator A.J.H. Maclean:................................................................70

1. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:...........................................................71
2. The Deputy of St. Mary:.............................................................71
3. Senator A.J.H. Maclean:.............................................................71

5. Senator A.J.H. Maclean:................................................................71

1. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:...........................................................72
2. The Deputy of St. John:..............................................................72
3. Senator A.J.H. Maclean:.............................................................72

6. Senator A.J.H. Maclean:................................................................73

11.6.1 The Deputy of St. John:..............................................................73

12. Employment of States of Jersey Employees Law: proposed changes (P.175/2009)....74

The Deputy of St. Martin:....................................................................75 Senator T.A. Le Sueur:.......................................................................75

1. The Deputy of St. Martin:..............................................................76

2. Employment of States of Jersey Employees Law: proposed changes (P.175/2009) - amendment (as amended) (P.175/2009 (Amd.))........................................77

Senator T.A. Le Sueur (The Chief Minister):.................................................77

1. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:..............................................................77
2. The Deputy of St. Mary:.............................................................79
3. Deputy T.M.Pitman:................................................................79
4. Deputy S.Pitman:...................................................................80
5. Deputy M. Tadier :...................................................................80
6. Deputy J.M. Maçon:.................................................................80
7. The Deputy of St. Peter:.............................................................81
8. Deputy D.J. De Sousa: ..............................................................81
9. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:...........................................................81
10. Deputy A.K.F. Green:..............................................................82
11. The Deputy of St. Martin:..........................................................82
12. Deputy G.P. Southern :.............................................................83
13. The Connétable of St. John:........................................................84
14. Deputy J.G. Reed of St. Ouen:.....................................................84
15. The Connétable of St. Helier:......................................................84
16. Senator S.C. Ferguson: ............................................................85
17. Deputy A.E. Jeune :................................................................85
18. Deputy T.A. Vallois:...............................................................85
19. The Connétable of St. Lawrence:..................................................86
20. Deputy I.J. Gorst : ..................................................................86
21. Senator P.F. Routier:...............................................................86
22. The Connétable of St. Brelade : ....................................................86
23. Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire: ..........................................................88
24. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:............................................................88

3. Employment of States of Jersey Employees Law: proposed changes (P.175/2009) - as amended..................................................................................89

1. Deputy M. Tadier :...................................................................90
2. Senator A. Breckon:.................................................................91
3. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:..............................................................91
4. Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire:............................................................92
5. The Deputy of St. Martin : ...........................................................92

ARRANGEMENT OF PUBLIC BUSINESS FOR FUTURE MEETINGS ....................97

13. The Connétable of St. Mary (Chairman, Privileges and Procedures Committee):.......97

1. Connétable K.P. Vibert of St. Ouen:....................................................98
2. Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire: ...............................................................98
3. The Connétable of St. Mary:............................................................98
4. Deputy I.J. Gorst : ......................................................................98
5. Senator A.J.H. Maclean:................................................................98
6. Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire: ...............................................................99

7. Deputy T.M.Pitman:...................................................................99
8. The Connétable of St. Mary:............................................................99
9. Senator T.A. Le Sueur:.................................................................99

13.9.1 Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire:...........................................................100

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

The Roll was called and the Deputy Greffier led the Assembly in Prayer.

PUBLIC BUSINESS – resumption

1. Draft Currency Notes (Variation of Maximum Amountof Issue) (Jersey) Regulations 200- (P.152/2009)

The Bailiff :

We come next then to the Draft Currency Notes (Variation of Maximum Amount of Issue) (Jersey) Regulations, Projet 152, lodged by the Minister for Treasury and Resources. I will ask the Greffier to read the citation.

The Deputy Greffier of the States:

Draft Currency Notes (Variation of Maximum Amount of Issue) (Jersey) Regulations: the States in pursuance of Article 1(2) of the Currency Notes (Jersey) Law 1959 have made the following Regulations.

The Bailiff :

Yes, Assistant Minister, you are proposing this one.

1. Deputy E.J. Noel of St.Lawrence(Assistant Minister for Treasury and Resources - rapporteur):

Under Article 1 of the Currency Notes (Jersey) Law 1959, the States can increase the maximum amount of Jersey notes which can be issued. The present limit is set at £75 million and it was set in 1999. The proposition in front of Members seeks permission to increase this limit to £100 million. The last increase in currency in circulation was in 1999 when the limit was increased from £50 million to £75 million. If the increase was linked in line with inflation over the last 10 years the limit would now be £110 million. Currency in circulation remains stable throughout the year but peaks at Christmas as people use more cash during the festive period before decreasing again in January. Currently the amount in circulation is approximately £70 million but this will increase significantly, albeit in an unpredictable amount, during December. The increased limit will enable the Treasury to meet the seasonal demand for cash and avoid a repeat of the unfortunate situation which arose during the Christmas period during last year when demand briefly exceeded the issue limit. It must be emphasised that this is not a quantitative easing as witnessed recently in the U.K. (United Kingdom) because, unlike the U.K., Jersey has reserves, nor are the Treasury printing more money. The number of Jersey notes in circulation is governed entirely by the demand of the retail banks which is driven in turn by the cash needs of their customers. If the banks were unable to issue Jersey currency notes they would be forced to issue Bank of England notes instead, if they had sufficient stocks. I should also emphasise that Jersey has a fully backed currency which means that for every pound in circulation it is matched by £1 invested. I make the proposition.

The Bailiff :

You propose the principles. Are the principles seconded? [Seconded] Does any Member wish to speak?

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

I do not think I will oppose this but it does strike me a little strange that it is being done heavily backed by the need for there to be more currency at Christmastime. What is happening is £25 million more is being made available for the States to invest, if the facts be put clearly in front of Members' eyes. Most people at Christmastime, more and more so, are conducting their Christmas shopping online and with cards so cash transactions are, in my opinion, nothing to do with this. This is an extra £25 million that the States are going to invest. That is how I see it and I am not convinced that the way it is being sold is the way it is being sold.

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

I was interested to hear the remarks of the rapporteur that this was not the equivalent of quantitative easing in the U.K. I wonder if he would expand on that detail and explain to Members in what way this is different.

3. Deputy D.J. De Sousa of St. Helier :

I am happy to follow the last 2 speakers. My query is although we exceeded the circulation last year, what evidence do they have that it will exceed this year knowing the number of already redundant workers that we have and the number that are going to be redundant by Christmas?

4. Deputy R.C. Duhamel of St. Saviour :

Just a brief question for the Assistant Minister for Treasury and Resources. Would he be able to tell the House how much U.K. pound sterling is in circulation so we have got a comparison, please?

5. Deputy J.M. Maçon of St. Saviour :

A further question for the rapporteur. We are being told we are increasing this limit because we exceeded the £75 million limit that we have at the moment. I am just wondering how much did we exceed it last year by? For example, if you went to £80 million, why jump to £100 million? I would just like that clarified.

6. Deputy T.A. Vallois of St. Saviour :

I would just like to ask if the rapporteur can explain why it is for the Christmas period we are increasing the limit and not reducing it back down afterwards?

7. Deputy P.J. Rondel of St. John :

Will the rapporteur confirm that 10 years ago in fact this was passed by the States, the increase that was put through then? Also I must say that I am supportive of this given that it is 10 years since this was previously done and things have moved forward. The more money that the States have to invest, the better it is for the Island.

8. Deputy M.R. Higgins of St. Helier :

Deputy Vallois jumped in ahead of me there on this asking the question of why we are just doing .. we are being told it is to meet a seasonal increase. However, in the U.K. when this happens, the money is withdrawn after the Christmas period. So if it is just to deal with a seasonal increase, why are we not withdrawing it immediately afterwards? It is an unanswered question that needs to be answered.

9. Connétable J.M. Refault of St. Peter :

Certainly this morning on the radio, coming into the States, they were talking with one of the representatives of the major stores in Jersey. They were certainly commenting that last Christmas there was a significant downturn in business because that was when all the banks were collapsing and people were being far more cautious. They are certainly looking forward this year to more trade. I think the argument that perhaps there is not going to be a need for more cash is not necessarily relevant for this year. This question that I have really for the Assistant Minister for Treasury and Resources if he can help me is, is there a disadvantage to Jersey if we run out of Jersey notes and English notes were used instead?

10. Connétable D.J. Murphy of Grouville :

I think Members may be missing the point here that this is like an interest free loan. It is an I.O.U. Every note you issue is an I.O.U. for a pound from the States Treasury. They keep the money in and they invest it and so you earn money out of it. So the money going out is not costing us anything and we are earning interest on the money we have issued. I really do not see .. it is a complete no-brainer to me.

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

I do not have a problem with this proposition at all but I am just curious if the rapporteur can inform the Assembly if he has evidence that there is a move away from credit cards to cash in view of the recession.

12. Senator T.A. Le Sueur :

I point out that these Regulations are permissive. Although they permit up to £100 million to be issued, it does not mean that £100 million has to be issued at all times. It would be I think a waste of this Assembly's time to have to come back and change the figure every week depending on the number in circulation. It is obviously far more sensible just to give a maximum and for it to be managed appropriately. It is not quantitative easing because the funds are matched by equivalent currency elsewhere. It is just a transfer which enables us to benefit from using local currency rather than U.K. currency.

13. Senator T.J. Le Main:

It is important to point out as well that if people use Jersey currency we do earn out of it. If we run out of Jersey currency we use English currency which is of no benefit to the Island.

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

Not really wanting to prolong it. It is my understanding that this is relatively straightforward. It is a swapping of one English issued pound for one Jersey issued pound which benefits the Jersey people and the Jersey Government. Therefore, I hope that this will find support. It is nothing to do with quantitative easing, as some speakers have suggested. It is quite straightforwardly just that as I have explained.

15. Connétable M.K. Jackson of St. Brelade :

Would the rapporteur just clarify that in this whether there will not be any design changes given that there is quite a lot of confusion between the English 5s and our Jersey £1 notes? There is room for change here and I wonder if he could confirm whether that is going to be the case.

16. Connétable A.S. Crowcroft of St. Helier :

If I could follow the last speaker by being more specific. There was talk .. certainly the Minister for Treasury and Resources told me that there were plans to radically change the design of all our notes, notably of course the £10 note with its picture of the historic battle of Jersey. I wonder if the Assistant Minister could indicate if this is what is going to happen when this takes place.

17. Deputy M. Tadier of St. Brelade :

I do feel I have to comment in more general terms on the comments by the Constable of St. Peter. He seemed to be talking up the economy somehow, saying that we are in a better position this year than we were last year which may be true in terms of the banks but I would just like to point out that many people will be facing redundancies over the Christmas period. It is unlikely that those people will have a lot of money to spend. I think that is due to government neglect at this time.

The Bailiff :

Very well. I call upon the Assistant Minister to reply.

18. Deputy E.J. Noel:

I thank all those Members that have spoken. There have been quite a number so I will not address all their points individually. I would just like to pick up on the Constable of St. Helier 's comments and the Constable of St. Brelade's comments about the change in the currency design. That is in progress. There has been a consultation carried out. I believe that draft notes will be coming out at approximately Easter for Islanders to see. If I can take it back to the topic today. I may be trying to teach Members how to suck eggs but I would just like to explain how this works. Banks transfer money to the Treasury and we place those funds on deposit and earn interest on it. In return we give the banks pieces of paper that have a nice picture of our Queen and Duke. When these pieces of paper are no longer needed by the banks they give them back to us and we transfer back to them their monies but we hold on to the interest that we have earned. To answer the points about why there is a peak at Christmas. It is just something that traditionally happens year on year. It is completely unpredictable. Last year peaked I believe to some £86 million. The previous year it peaked by £600,000 over the £75 million limit. As has been mentioned, this is not anything to do with quantitative easing. Our currency is fully backed pound for pound. It is true that if the banks do not have Jersey currency to issue to their customers they will issue U.K. notes which we earn nothing on. I maintain the proposition.

The Bailiff :

Very well. All those in favour of adopting the principles, kindly show. Those against? The principles are adopted. Senator Ferguson, do you wish this matter to be referred to your scrutiny panel?

Senator S.C. Ferguson (Chairman, Corporate Services Scrutiny Panel): No, thank you, Sir.

The Bailiff :

Assistant Minister, do you wish to propose all 3 Regulations en bloc?

2. Deputy E.J. Noel:

I do, Sir.

The Bailiff :

Are they seconded?  [Seconded] Does any Member wish to speak on any of the individual Regulations? All those in favour of adopting the Regulations, kindly show. Those against? The Regulations are adopted. Do you propose them in Third Reading, Assistant Minister?

3. Deputy E.J. Noel:

I do, Sir.

The Bailiff :

Seconded? [Seconded] Does any Member wish to speak on Third Reading?

1. The Deputy of St. John :

Yes, just if the Assistant Minister could answer my question that I put to him originally about on the previous time it was increased, did that come to the States or was that done through some kind of Order?

2. Deputy M.R. Higgins:

Again I would like the Assistant Minister to answer the question. Why, if he is going to increase it over Christmas, he is not going to withdraw it after Christmas if it is just to deal with seasonal demand?

The Bailiff :

Yes, I call upon the Assistant Minister to reply.

3. Deputy E.J. Noel:

I apologise to those 2 Deputies. To answer the Deputy of St. John, I was not in the Chamber at the time. I do not know what happened 10 years ago. I believe that the Deputy is in a better position than I to know that. [Laughter] In regard to Deputy Higgins' question, this is a maximum limit. It does not need to be reduced at a later date. This will put us in stead hopefully for the next 10 years.

The Bailiff :

The appel is called for then in relation to the Third Reading. I invite Members to return to their seats and the Greffier will open the voting.

The Bailiff :

So that completes that matter.

2. Social Security Fund: Research into Alternative Funding Mechanisms (P.153/2009) (re- issued)

The Bailiff :

We move next to Social Security Fund: Research into Alternative Funding Mechanisms - Projet 153 - lodged by Deputy Southern . The Greffier will read the proposition.

The Deputy Greffier of the States:

The States are asked to decide whether they are of opinion to refer to their Act dated 10th June 2009 in which they approved the States Strategic Plan 2009-2014, and in the light of Strategic Priorities 1, 4 and 6 of that Plan - (a) to request the Chief Minister to reprioritise the Policy budget of the Chief Minister's Department to enable funding to be made available to the Minister for Social Security to research mechanisms to eliminate the need for supplementation of Social Security funding from general revenues; (b) to request the Minister for Social Security to report back to the States as a matter of urgency, and in any case no later than September 2010, with the results of the research and recommendations including analysis of the mechanisms outlined in the appendix to the attached report; and (c) to request the Minister for Social Security to bring forward for approval the necessary legislation to give effect to any proposals arising from the research and recommendations to enable any amendments to the current system to be in place no later than January 2012.

2.1 Deputy G.P. Southern :

It is a rare pleasure for me to stand here without my sleeves rolled up metaphorically and with a 20 minute speech in my back pocket and ready and committed to spend 2 hours battling away to move the agenda of this Ministerial government inch by inch on to rational ground and progressive measures. Instead the Council of Ministers and the Minister for Social Security have said: "By jove, I think he has got it. He appears to have brought something we can fully support." So it is a great pleasure for me to stand today. I thought it was a black swan day yesterday but this is certainly a first for me. But just briefly then. This is a measure that we have been, I believe, putting off for far too long. I first brought the substance of what I am asking to be researched back in 2003. The fact is that certainly in these days of fiscal black holes and absence of revenues and recession, we can ill afford to allow States supplementation - the contribution from the taxpayer into the Social Security Fund - to rise as it is estimated to do on these figures to £67 million annually and rising still. There are many ways that we might examine the Social Security Fund and many aspects that we need to research. One of them is outlined here. I think these measures are reasonable and the timescale that I have put on them is also reasonable and matches more or less what Social Security and the Council of Ministers were intending to do. Key to this .. and I would ask that all 3 of the paragraphs are accepted even though it appears that the first half of the first one, to reprioritise the policy budget of the Chief Minister's Department, is redundant because apparently there is already funding in Social Security to enable this work to be done. But, nonetheless, the key word I think that we need to agree is research mechanisms to "eliminate". I want to go as far as possible. Examine the elimination of supplementation not just keeping some sort of cap on it. The second paragraph clearly refers to aspects of the report and the annex in particular so including analysis of the mechanisms outlined in the appendix to the attached report. It is clear that that must be accepted if my wishes are to be carried through. Those mechanisms are the potential for removing the earnings limit for employer and employee totally on Social Security contributions and increasing the rate for all by measured percentages over the coming time to eliminate totally the need for supplementation. I believe the first measure of its own probably reduces the need for supplementation by half approximately and there will need to be some increase in rates that we need to examine how we do that in order to eliminate the second half of that. Thirdly, that says by September 2010 we want to hear from the Minister for Social Security that he has done this research and the paper is there in front of us so we can make an informed decision about the way forward, then to come forward with some amendments by January 2012. I first brought this proposition in 2003. That is 9 years in the making. But I think that is reasonable. It can be achieved. It requires less money than I thought, so I think we can probably go ahead with this and accept that we need to do this research and we need to do it pronto. By 2012, let us see something on the desk here that we can agree or disagree this is the way forward in terms of supplementation.

The Bailiff :

The proposition, is it seconded? [Seconded] Does any Member wish to speak on the proposition?

1. Senator T.A. Le Sueur :

Yes, just to confirm that as my comments say I am quite happy to accept this proposition. I think the Deputy may have been trying to score points and suggest that I had seen the light. I had in fact seen the light some considerable time ago. In fact as the comments make quite clear, the work required is already underway. The funding is already there. It is not a question of me seeing the light. The light has been shining.

2. Deputy I.J. Gorst :

The proposer says he finds himself in a strange and unusual situation. I feel the same. Not only did this Assembly approve my Business Plan which undertook to start this piece of work in 2010, it was one of my election pledges when I was voted to this office so it is particularly nice that the Deputy feels that he can come and support me and get a second approval in effect [Laughter] from this Assembly for my pledge and for my Business Plan. But on a more serious note, it is a piece of work which needs to be undertaken - the Deputy is absolutely right - and it is a piece of work which has started to be undertaken. He uses the word "elimination" of supplementation. That is an interesting word because, as we all know, currently supplementation is money raised from the taxpayer so anyone paying tax helps to top up the future pension of those low earners within our community. To eliminate that will in effect mean that someone will have to pay. If it is not the taxpayer, one can only think that in actual fact then it is going to be the contributor to the fund. While we are eliminating supplementation in that scenario, someone else is having to pay. It is a moot point as to whether the individual would rather pay it as a taxpayer or rather pay it as a contributor to the fund. But this is the piece of work that is being undertaken. These proposals will come back to the States and the States will have a final say on it but we should remember that someone somewhere will pay whichever way we look at it or whichever way we divide up the cake. As the Chief Minister's comment said, I am more than happy to support this proposition. I would just say as well that in looking for solutions, the Deputy is absolutely right. By removing the ceiling on contributions we would raise about £30 million so we would have to look at how we were going to raise the other half of the current cost of supplementation. But I think it is a rare day but it is a good day for politics in this Island when we across the Chamber can agree that something needs to be done. I suspect the arguments might rear their heads when it is what will need to be done. But we will cross that bridge when we get to it so I am fully supportive today of the

Deputy 's proposition.

3. Deputy T.M. Pitman of St. Helier :

I have to say I totally oppose these measures. I do not but I just wanted to .. I am sure it will come as no surprise that I will be supporting this. Of course it would be unfair as well to criticise the Assembly for what my grandmother used to call faffing about, i.e. putting off necessary action in the past. But I feel it should be said that quite a few of the major players involved in all that are

still with us. Supplementation was, as I recall, an issue that came up quite regularly at the election. Certainly its importance was referred to within the J.D.A.'s (Jersey Democratic Alliance) manifesto. So I am pleased with what I have heard in this short debate. Looking at the proposition and hearing Deputy Southern 's explanations, particularly to part (a), are at the risk of using Deputy Le Fondré's wholly misleading words reference stealing Boxing Day yesterday, it is all very simple and all very straightforward. I hope it is this time. I welcome the apparent new commitment from the Chief Minister to inclusive government by his support and with the light apparently having been seen and burning brightly, I hope we can then move on to explore progressive taxation generally with equal vigour. I will support this.

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

Yes, I do support it but I take to heart the words of the Minister for Social Security. We know there have been 2 elephants at least in the room. One has been supplementation and the other, although it is now subsumed elsewhere the issue has not been wrestled to the ground, namely rent rebates. The assumptions upon which those 2 programmes operate have led to basically not out of control expenditure but certainly expenditure we are not really able to determine. The only thing I would say back to my point about the Minister, ultimately is this taxation under another form? There is no doubt it will, as Deputy Pitman said, undoubtedly have implications for the structure of the Social Security system because one of the groups I know from people I meet who feel very, very squeezed by it are the small business people. They find the quarterly payments really tough. They found that not only tough in the current conditions but previously. There are groups like that in the system which will have to be thought about as we inevitably will have to restructure it, were this to go through. The other group because in a way I think we may be moving more to hypothecated taxes and I wish to follow my good friend Deputy Hill whose ability to publicise his propositions in any debate of the States is almost unbeatable. But I would like to bring up the issue of the residential care insurance. That is looming on the horizon. We know there are enormous costs building up. There is a political will among the people, I find, to pay for that but we have got to get our act in order. We have been dragging our feet for years on that. That is another cost that is looming and probably will not be absorbed by general taxation. For the moment if people get the security of not, for example, having to sort of dramatically sell-off their houses or their family having to be approached for a big payment, I think they will look kindly on it if only we can get our act together. This is really, really dragging on. So I support Deputy Southern . He has opened up the whole area. It needs rethinking. But let us remember there are other implications looming.

Deputy I.J. Gorst :

Sir, perhaps the Deputy would like me to give a point of clarification. I think I answered a question - maybe it was at the last States sitting but one - and I am pleased to be able to confirm that the Green Paper for the long term care will in be before the Council of Ministers next Thursday. So we are very far down that line and I will be meeting with Scrutiny hopefully in December to discuss the way that we are going to interact with the public on publicising that Green Paper. Just to give that information.

The Bailiff :

Does any other Member wish to speak?

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

The principles as contained in this proposition rightly will and do need to be reviewed but I suspect that this is the easy part. I remember going to many pre-meetings before G.S.T. (Goods and Services Tax) was on the agenda or on the final element to the agenda where this was one of the subjects that was looked at. I am not going to talk about the details of the people that were on the table that I was on but they were people that I would have suspected would have been totally against taking it away from one set of people and giving it to another set because of the reason that this was perceived as a taxation as opposed to a Social Security pension fund. But there was recognition that somewhere along the line from 1948 onwards that this should have been dealt with before now and there was a necessity to make sure it is. But at the same time it is recognised that one can swap a payment of £50 million or £60 million from a Social Security fund into a taxation but it does not alter the fact that that money has to be made up by the public. We are already increasing demands on the public in one form or other. We did make a promise that we would not have any more taxation until 2012, which this is an indication it might be if G.S.T. was kept across the board at 3 per cent. But every time we sit in the States nowadays there are greater pressures on finding ways of increasing the money or reducing the cost to the States in providing the services required and the extra demand for the cost of especially things like health, education and social security. It is a difficult one. Recognising that this is the easy part, I think that the side that has been touched on by Deputy Le Hérissier is in fact the people that are self-employed and indeed those that are non employed. There are some people that cannot claim but cannot provide the work that they would otherwise like to do. As long as we understand there is still this perception of life that once you get to a certain age you are no longer a useful member of society to be earning the same amount as what you used to do. Many people have an occupation pension scheme or whatever that they can support themselves to a degree. But in Jersey, unlike Guernsey, you are classed as self-employed whether you are non-employed or whatever. These are the sort of areas that we are going to look at. Other areas that will come out of this is that we are asking for 20 Means 20.' There are a lot of people that are now paying much more in their income tax and can ill afford to have increases because these are the people that will get targeted. They also have families. Being recently an Assistant Minister for Education with responsibilities among some other things for grants and bursaries and scholarships, et cetera, there is increasing pressure on these parents because of the costs that are now being asked by the United Kingdom and elsewhere for the support of our children. We are now demanding that our young people have the higher education skills and qualifications that are required for what now are ordinary everyday jobs. In fact the recent one we have just heard of course is for future nurses will now need a degree. We must bear this in mind. I shall support this proposition but I also recognise that this is going to be a very difficult task to tread a very fine balance to be able to ensure that we are not just receiving an extra £30 million to £50 million or whatever, which we can spend for taxation purposes only to put an unnecessary .. maybe not unnecessary but to put a strenuous burden on the residents of this Island, many of which by then I suspect will have other pressures put on them for end user pays as

we had in an indirect way yesterday brought to the States on gambling control, et cetera. I just thought that it be appropriate that I make those comments today.

6. Senator P.F. Routier:

I realise today that we are not discussing the research itself and the outcomes of that research but it is interesting some of the comments which people have made. I suppose people have widened it a bit because the proposition does talk about going to the extent of eliminating the need for supplementation. Fair enough, that work can be done. But from my perspective some of the comments which have been made have highlighted some of the difficulties there would be with shifting that balance quite considerably from one section of the community who are going to pay to another section of the community who are going to pay because somebody has got to pay. There is no getting away from it. Someone has got to pay for the pensions and everything else.

The Bailiff :

Senator, I appreciate I have allowed a little latitude but this is a debate on whether to look into it. Everyone seems to agree it should be looked into.

Senator P.F. Routier:

I agree entirely. The only comment I would make that it would be a sad day that we lose the social contracts we have with our community if we move it from one section of the community to the other and we are not supporting those at the low end of incomes. I will leave it at that. I do support the work being done.

The Bailiff :

Does any other Member wish to speak? Very well, I call upon Deputy Southern to reply.

7. Deputy G.P. Southern :

I thank all those who have contributed to the debate today. I am aware that what we are talking about here is going forward to do the research with all the implications that that contains. It is not about withdrawing support for the low paid. It is or could be about making the system that we use to pay our Social Security contributions and pay for our pensions more progressive. As Deputy Le Hérissier has suggested, there are 2 issues, 2 big pots of money that we have seen to. They are the elephants in the room. Why should we have 2 of them? Rent rebate is the other. It may encourage him to recognise that that has now been subsumed in income support and I certainly have my eyes fixed firmly on that. So perhaps we will find a way to deal with that as well. Just briefly. When he says that effectively there is no free lunch. Somebody has to pay for this. We have to recognise and we must and perhaps we will in the coming 3 years recognise that the days of low tax, low spend are over. We are among the lowest taxed, including social security. Compare us with Ireland, the Isle of Man, the U.K., et cetera, we pay far less than almost anywhere else, certainly in the Western world. Those days, I am afraid, we have to recognise are over and we have to look at ways of funding a decent society including our pensioners. I was talking to the manager of the Citizens Advice Bureau and he said he was talking to his friend who was about to retire. He said: "Well, you are not going to be able to exist on the States pension. That is the reality so you better start drawing-in and looking at your expenditures because the reality for most people is they cannot exist on a States pension." Serious and heavyweight questions need to be asked. This makes a start. I maintain the proposition and I call for the appel.

The Bailiff :

The appel is called for then in relation to the proposition of Deputy Southern , Projet 153. I invite Members to return to their seats and the Greffier will open the voting.

3. Channel Islands Lottery: allocation of profits for 2009-2010 (P.155/2009) The Bailiff :

We move next then to Channel Islands Lottery: allocation of profits for 2009-2010 - Projet 155 - lodged by the Minister for Economic Development. I will ask the Greffier to read the proposition.

The Deputy Greffier of the States:

The States  are asked to  decide whether they  are  of opinion to  agree in accordance  with the provisions of Regulation 4(5) of the Gambling (Channel Islands Lottery) (Jersey) Regulations 1975, that all monies standing to the credit of the Channel Islands Lottery (Jersey) Fund which have not already been set aside by the Minister (representing 90 per cent of the total Jersey portion of the profits of the Channel Islands Lottery from 2009 and 2010) should be paid to the Association of Jersey Charities for the benefit of the community and the charitable needs of the Island.

Senator A.J.H. Maclean (The Minister for Economic Development):

Sir, if I may, can I ask my Assistant Minister, the Constable of St. Clement , to be rapporteur for this item?

3.1 Connétable L. Norman of St. Clement (Assistant Minister for Economic Development - rapporteur):

Some of us - or a few of us anyway - may be old enough to remember when Super Fred was the public face of the Best of Jersey Lottery' and then the Channel Islands Lottery. In those days the profits from the lottery were used to offset some of the capital costs of the development of Fort Regent. When that was completed the States agreed that the Jersey part of the profits from the Channel Islands Lottery should be used for charitable purposes. Ever since then it has been agreed that these moneys, the profits from the lottery, should be paid to the Association of Jersey Charities. This proposition maintains that position for next year and 2010. I make the proposition.

The Bailiff :

Is the proposition seconded? [Seconded] Does any Member wish to speak on the proposition?

1. Deputy A.K.F. Green of St. Helier :

I am sure most Members know but this money really is a lifeline to many local charities. It is getting more and more difficult for local charities to raise what we call unrestricted funding, i.e. that is funding that comes without a handle on it. You can usually get, for example, banks to pay for capital developments and suchlike but to pay for rent and staff and all the, what I call, everyday things is getting more and more difficult. This money, while it is not used for that, does take the pressure off, does allow the charities to use the monies that they raise through their own ends to meet the day to day expenditure and this does help to meet the special expenditure such as a new roof and the like. I will support it and urge Members to do the same.

2. Deputy A.T. Dupre of St. Clement :

Just something I would like to bring up. Talking about the lottery, I do think it is time we went back to having a bumper one in the summer as well. It went very well. If we can use perhaps half the profits once again to charity I think that would be a very good idea.

3. Deputy D.J. De Sousa:

I will be supporting this and I hope every Member will. I am sure they will. Hopefully charities like the Women's Refuge as well will benefit out of this. We know that the charities have really been struggling this year and it will be of benefit to them.

4. The Connétable of St. Brelade :

Would the rapporteur kindly confirm that the Economic Development Department receives accounts presented from the Association of Jersey Charities annually?

5. Senator S.C. Ferguson:

It is a sort of slightly elliptical comment but when I was on the Health and Social Services Committee, the funding for charities we did start a move to encourage the smaller charities to work together and use common facilities. This work was carried on by Karen Huchet. I do regret that perhaps our charities here do not work as efficiently as might be. There are circumstances where charities could share the same premises. There are various examples that have been set up. I urge those Ministers who give grants to charities, particularly the Minister for Economic Development working with the Association of Jersey Charities, to continue this work so that charities are not paying unnecessary rents on property and so on and where they can more effectively use their funds for the purpose for which they were set up.

6. Deputy M. Tadier :

I obviously cannot disagree with anything that has been said up until now. I just want to bring it back to something that was raised yesterday, this whole idea about when you are gambling knowing exactly what your odds are. I think it is absolutely imperative whether the proceeds go to charity or if they go to individuals, that when people buy a lottery ticket or when they place a bet, be it in a fruit machine or whatever, they know what they are getting themselves into. I would like to see in future the actual odds that are published. I can give an example. When you buy a hospice ticket for that very good cause at Christmas time or whenever it is to win the £1 million, you know exactly how much it is costing and what your odds are. You know that if a ticket costs you £300 and I think there is a pool of potentially £3 million let us say and the prize money is £1.4 million, let us say, you know exactly that you have got a 40 per cent return on your money. People make that decision and either think I am going to buy a lottery ticket because I know although the odds are not particularly great the rest of the money goes to charity. I think it is absolutely imperative that people can make that decision otherwise some people might say: "Rather than buy a lottery ticket, I am just going to give £30 to charity because that is cheaper." I think that is the only point I wanted to make.

7. The Deputy of St. John :

I think this is one of our better moments that this House puts things like this in place. I must say as a former chairman of the Channel Islands Air Search when we required a number of items, whether it would be the flare radar or the new aircraft itself some 10, 12 years ago - probably closer to 20 years ago now - we had help as a charity from these particular profits. To me, it is there and it is doing an excellent job. I sincerely hope it is supported by everybody.

The Bailiff :

Does any other Member wish to speak? Very well, I call upon the Connétable to reply.

8. The Connétable of St. Clement :

I appreciate the supportive comments and, strangely enough, particularly those of Deputy Tadier because this is one of the points I made yesterday that gaming - and this is gambling - has to be verifiably fair. When we have the Gambling Commission hopefully when we bring that back in a couple of weeks, all gambling will be verifiably fair when it is properly regulated because the lottery is fair and all the information about the odds, the prizes, what you get if you buy 100 tickets or whatever is all contained on the tickets and that is from the scratch cards to the main Christmas lottery draw. That is the sort of fairness and openness that I want to see in all gaming on this Island in the future. Deputy Green was absolutely right. The monies which nowadays is approaching £500,000 - I think it was £440,000 last year - is a lifeline to the Association of Jersey Charities and is indeed a major source of their funds. Yes, of course the Association of Jersey Charities do provide us with their accounts. Senator Ferguson made the point about charities working together. Absolutely right and something which again we can mention to the Association of Jersey Charities who have all the charities in their family. But of course many charities who can benefit from these funds are small charities that do not have premises, do not have staff, rely totally on honorary officers and people who do a tremendous amount of work for no reward whatsoever except the reward that they get from the satisfaction of the work that they do. They are just as valuable as those charities who have got premises and expenditure of millions and millions of pounds. [Approbation] Deputy Dupre wants to see the Bumper Lottery back. Certainly there is no doubt about it that the larger the prize, the more attractive it is to the punters as it were and we sell more tickets. The scratch card system which we currently have and have had for a number of years with the £20,000 maximum prize continues to decline. They did rise a little, they plateaued and they are now starting to decline a little bit. We will be looking next year, as I have mentioned before, to totally revamp the Channel Islands Lottery system, hopefully make it more exciting and attract more monies which will make more profit for the Association of Jersey Charities. But certainly the

larger prizes, as I say, do attract the punters. This is evidenced from the current Christmas draw. For those Members who do not want to know what the current first prize is, if they could cover their ears now. It has now reached £400,000 which I think is excellent and still growing. I think I have covered all the points that have been made. I maintain the proposition.

The Bailiff :

All those in favour of adopting the proposition, kindly show. Those against? The proposition is adopted.

4. Ratification of the Agreement for the Exchange of Information with Respect to Taxes between the States of Jersey and the Government of Australia (P.160/2009)

The Bailiff :

We come next to the Ratification of the Agreement for the Exchange of Information with respect to Taxes between the States of Jersey and the Government of Australia - Projet 160 - lodged by the Chief Minister. I ask the Greffier to read the proposition.

The Deputy Greffier of the States:

The States are asked to decide if they are of opinion to ratify the agreement for the exchange of information with respect to taxes between the States of Jersey and Australia, as set out in the appendix to the report of the Chief Minister dated 5th August 2009.

4.1 Senator T.A. Le Sueur (The Chief Minister):

I propose to speak on both this proposition and the subsequent one at the same time because I am sure that Members will be getting fed up with me coming to this House to ratify different agreements. I think this is about the fourth time I have done it this year and these represent the twelfth and thirteenth countries with whom we are proposing to ratify an agreement. There is not much I can add to what has been said in respect of the previous treaties, other than to remind Members that as a result of signing tax information exchange agreements and as a result of other good practices and good regulations and good standards, we immediately were put on to the so- called White List as being a country or jurisdiction which is regarded very satisfactorily. These agreements which we are about to ratify further strengthen that opinion. If Members turn to pages 5 and 6 of the Australian one, they will see on Section 13 that the agreement provides for a declaration recognising the Island's commitment to high standards, to welcome Jersey as a member of the community of nations committed to co-operation and to provide clarification of improvements in respect of Jersey's view and the removal by Australia of any references to Jersey as a tax haven. These agreements are vital to our ongoing reputation internationally and I am pleased to propose the ratification of the one with Australia.

The Bailiff :

Is that seconded? [Seconded] Does any Member wish to speak?

1. Deputy J.M. Maçon:

On 16th July when we had the ratification between Jersey and the U.K., I did raise with the Minister the issue of the manpower and financial implications. If I may quote from Hansard, I believe you said: "Contained by inference but the Deputy is right to raise the point that there must be such a statement in relation to every proposition." The Deputy of St. Mary raised the same point. The Deputy of St. John commented how many propositions had been sent back to him by the Greffe because of not having such statements. It carried on, Sir, and I believe you said: "If I may, the Chief Minister perhaps did not make myself clear. I felt that in relation to the other 3 propositions is not set out as clearly and distinctively as it should be." Senator Le Sueur replied: "I agree, Sir." You replied, Sir: "I do not think that there is a problem necessarily in the current projets because they are simply sets of regulations saying the consequences are set out in the associated 3 propositions." Senator Le Sueur replied: "I will take note when I bring forward subsequent agreements for ratification." Within these there is still no statement of financial and manpower implications. I am concerned that the Chief Minister has given an undertaking to this House that in subsequent ratifications he would include them. I will ask the Chief Minister why are they not there.

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

Just one small point. The Chief Minister made reference to the Australian agreement whereby any reference to Jersey as a tax haven will be removed from governmental references. He also said that he would speak to P.161 at the same time as P.160. I do not see a similar reference to the Government of New Zealand not making reference to Jersey as a tax haven. I wonder if the Chief Minister can just comment on that, please.

3. Deputy A.E. Jeune of St. Brelade :

I was just wanting to help out Deputy Maçon of St. Saviour. I think if he looks at page 6 of the proposition, number 14, it is contained in there. We usually do see it as a separate item so perhaps it was just an oversight.

Deputy J.M. Maçon:

I thank the Deputy for her clarification but the point I was making is I  believed we had an undertaking that it would be made specifically clear.

4. The Deputy of St. John :

In following the previous speaker, I have to ask should we not ask the Minister to take this away and return with the relevant paragraph put in place?

5. Senator J.L. Perchard:

Just briefly. Can I congratulate the Chief Minister and the Minister for Treasury and Resources and all those involved in preparing these agreements? I think Jersey is fast establishing itself as a jurisdiction where openness and transparency is important to our financial services industry. I congratulate him and ask, perhaps, when summing up, if he could advise as to how many other agreements are in the pipeline and when we will be signing more of them.

The Bailiff :

Does any other Member wish to speak? Very well, I call upon the Chief Minister to reply.

6. Senator T.A. Le Sueur :

I was anticipating that some Members might question the financial and manpower implications. They are, as Deputy Jeune says, quite clearly set out in paragraph 14 that there are no implications for financial and manpower resources. It is not a separate paragraph. I did check with the Greffe and there is no requirement for it to be a separate paragraph as long as it is made clear. It is, in my view, quite clear to anyone who reads paragraph 14. To the Constable of St. Lawrence, pre- empting discussions on the New Zealand one, there are no references to New Zealand and tax havens there because New Zealand has not previously considered Jersey as a tax haven so it would not be relevant to put it in. I thank Senator Perchard for his complimentary remarks. He asks how many more are in the pipeline. There are 2 more in the pipeline which I am ready to sign as soon as the territories concerned agree to their part of it. I cannot remember who they are. One of them is Mexico; the other one is not. [Laughter] The other one is Italy, sorry. There are others in the course of negotiation. We are continuing to do that as part of our ongoing activities and, indeed, we are also starting to look at double taxation agreements. Meanwhile, I maintain the ratification of the agreement with Australia.

The Bailiff :

The appel is called for in relation to the proposition of the Chief Minister, Projet 160, concerning Australia. I invite Members to return to their seats and the Greffier will open the voting.