States Meeting Transcript - 1st March 2011

STATES OF JERSEY

OFFICIAL REPORT

TUESDAY, 1st MARCH 2011

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

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

1. SENATOR J.L. PERCHARD OF THE CHAIRMAN OF THE COMITÉ DES CONNÉTABLES REGARDING KERBSIDE COLLECTION OF METAK CANS AND TINS:....................................................................................... 8
2. THE DEPUTY OF ST. JOHN OF THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES REGARDING THE FISCAL STIMULUS PACKAGE: .................. 8
3. SENATOR A. BRECKON OF THE MINISTER FOR HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES REGARDING THE NUMBER OF STAFF ON RESTRICTED CLINICAL DUTIES: ................................................................................... 9
4. DEPUTY J.A. MARTIN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR HOUSING REGARDING POMME D'OR FARM: .................................................. 10
5. DEPUTY J.A. MARTIN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR HOUSING REGARDING THE REPLACEMENT OF HEATING SYSTEMS: .................... 10
6. DEPUTY R.G. LE HÉRISSIER OF ST. SAVIOUR OF H.M. ATTORNEY GENERAL REGARDING DISCIPLINARY PROVISIONS FOR LAWYERS IN PUBLIC SERVICE: ................................................................................ 11
7. DEPUTY R.G. LE HÉRISSIER OF ST. SAVIOUR OF THE MINISTER FOR HOME AFFAIRS REGARDING THE DRAFT DISCRIMINATION (JERSEY) LAW 201-: .. 12
8. DEPUTY R.G. LE HÉRISSIER OF ST. SAVIOUR OF THE CHAIRMAN OF PRIVILEGES AND PROCEDURES COMMITTEE REGARDING THE DRAFT FREEDOM OF INFORMATION (JERSEY) LAW 201- AND THE MEDIA RELATIONS CODE OF CONDUCT: ................................................... 14
9. THE DEPUTY OF ST. MARTIN OF THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES REGARDING THE HISTORICAL CHILD ABUSE ENQUIRY: ...... 14
10. THE DEPUTY OF ST. MARTIN OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING THE HISTORICAL CHILD ABUSE ENQUIRY: ............................................ 17
11. DEPUTY T. M. PITMAN OF ST. HELIER OF H.M. ATTORNEY GENERAL REGARDING PRESIDING OVER COURT CASES: .................................. 18
12. DEPUTY T. M. PITMAN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES REGARDING THE RATE OF TAX FOR 1(1)(k) RESIDENTS: 18
13. DEPUTY T. M. PITMAN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT REGARDING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE HARBOURS AND AIRPORT SHADOW BOARD: ................................................... 19
14. DEPUTY T. M. PITMAN OF ST. HELIER OF H.M. ATTORNEY GENERAL REGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE PUBLIC ELECTIONS (EXPENDITURE AND DONATIONS) (JERSEY) REGULATIONS 2008: ............................... 25
15. DEPUTY M. TADIER OF ST. BRELADE OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING REMUNERATION TO THE MAGISTRATE DESIGNATE: .......................... 27

17. DEPUTY M. TADIER OF ST. BRELADE OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING JERSEY'S POSITION ON HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS: ........................ 28
18. DEPUTY M. TADIER OF ST. BRELADE OF THE CHAIRMAN OF THE PRIVILEGES AND PROCEDURES COMMITTEE REGARDING UNCONTESTED ELECTIONS: ............................................................................. 29
19. DEPUTY R.G. LE HÉRISSIER OF ST. SAVIOUR OF THE MINISTER FOR HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES REGARDING THE SALARY OF THE POST OF HOSPITAL MANAGING DIRECTOR: ................................................. 32
20. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING REDUNDANCIES IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR: ........................ 33
21. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES REGARDING THE TAX REVENUE FROM NON- FINANCECOMPANIES: ................................................................ 35
22. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES REGARDING TAX REVENUE FROM THE 10 PER CENT COMPANY TAX RATE: ................................................................ 36
23. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR ECONOMIC

DEVELOPMENT REGARDING THE ADVANCE TO WORK SCHEMES: .......... 38

24. DEPUTY M.R. HIGGINS OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES REGARDING THE APPOINTMENT PROCESS OF THE HOSPITAL MANAGING DIRECTOR: ................................................. 39
25. DEPUTY D.J. DE SOUSA OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES REGARDING THE REVIEW OF MENTAL HEALTH: ........ 41
26. THE DEPUTY OF ST. MARY OF THE MINISTER FOR TRANSPORT AND TECHNICAL SERVICES REGARDING ROAD TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS ON BATH STREET: .................................................................................. 42

28. THE DEPUTY OF ST. MARY OF THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES REGARDING A STUDY ON COMPARATIVE TOTAL TAX TAKE' IN COMPETITOR JURISDICTIONS: .................................................. 44
29. THE DEPUTY OF ST. MARY OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING THE ARRANGEMENTS FOR CEASING EMPLOYMENT DUE TO INCAPACITY: ..... 45
30. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES REGARDING COMPANY INCOME TAX PAID BY INDUSTRY: .............................................................................. 46
31. DEPUTY J.M. MAÇON OF ST. SAVIOUR OF THE MINISTER FOR ECONOMIC

DEVELOPMENT REGARDING PRICE PROMOTIONS ON ALCOHOL: ........... 46

32. DEPUTY D.J. DE SOUSA OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES REGARDING THE MORALE OF HER DEPARTMENT: ...... 47

2. Oral Questions ............................................................................. 48

1. Deputy J.M. Maçon of St. Saviour of the Chief Minister regarding senior civil servant salaries: ................................................................................... 48 Senator T.A. Le Sueur (The Chief Minister): .................................................. 48

1. Deputy J.M. Maçon: ...................................................................... 48
2. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier of St. Saviour : ................................................ 48
3. Deputy G.P. Southern of St. Helier : ...................................................... 49
4. Deputy A.E. Jeune of St. Brelade : ........................................................ 49
5. Deputy A.E. Jeune : ....................................................................... 49
6. Deputy M.R. Higgins of St. Helier : ...................................................... 49
7. Deputy M.R. Higgins: .................................................................... 50

2. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding the appointment of KPMG as consultants to assess Jersey's Health and Social Services' policy priorities: .......................................................................... 50 Deputy A.E. Pryke of Trinity (The Minister for Health and Social Services): ................. 50

1. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ................................................................ 50
2. Connétable G.F. Butcher of St. John : .................................................... 50
3. Senator S.C. Ferguson: ................................................................... 51
4. Deputy G.P. Southern : .................................................................... 51
5. Deputy G.P. Southern : .................................................................... 51
6. Deputy A.E. Jeune : ....................................................................... 51
7. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ................................................................ 51

3. Deputy D.J.A. Wimberley of St. Mary of the Attorney General regarding the investigation into an alleged pollution incident at La Collette: .......................... 52 Mr. T.J. Le Cocq Q.C., H.M. Attorney General: ............................................... 52

1. The Deputy of St. Mary : .................................................................. 52
2. Deputy P.J. Rondel of St. John : .......................................................... 53
3. The Deputy of St. Mary : .................................................................. 53
   4. Deputy A.E. Jeune of the Chairman of the Health, Social Security and Housing Scrutiny Panel regarding hospital waiting times and hospital projects: ............................ 53 Deputy G.P. Southern : (Chairman, Health, Social Security and Housing Scrutiny Panel): .... 53

1. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ................................................................ 53
2. Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire of St. Helier : .................................................... 54
3. Deputy D.J. De Sousa of St. Helier : ...................................................... 54
4. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ................................................................ 54
   5. Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire of the Chief Minister regarding the proposed new migration law: ........................................................................................ 54 Senator T.A. Le Sueur (The Chief Minister): .................................................. 54
   6. Deputy F.J. Hill of St. Martin of the Chief Minister regarding the Napier Terms of Reference: ................................................................................ 55 Senator T.A. Le Sueur (The Chief Minister): .................................................. 55

1. The Deputy of St. Martin : ................................................................ 55
2. The Deputy of St. Mary : .................................................................. 55

3. The Deputy of St. Mary : .................................................................. 55
4. The Deputy of St. Martin : ................................................................ 55

7. Deputy M. Tadier of St. Brelade of the Minister for Economic Development regarding complaints against the conduct of Jersey debt collection agencies: ...................... 56 Senator A.J.H. Maclean (The Minister for Economic Development): .......................... 56

1. Deputy M. Tadier : ........................................................................ 56
2. Deputy M. Tadier : ........................................................................ 56
3. Deputy M.R. Higgins: .................................................................... 56
4. Deputy M.R. Higgins: .................................................................... 57
5. Senator F. du H. Le Gresley: ............................................................. 57
6. Deputy M. Tadier : ........................................................................ 57

8. Deputy T.M. Pitman of St. Helier of the Chief Minister regarding the number of States employees holding managerial' roles as opposed to frontline' staff:................... 58 Senator T.A. Le Sueur (The Chief Minister): .................................................. 58

1. Deputy T.M. Pitman: ..................................................................... 58
2. Deputy T.M. Pitman: ..................................................................... 58

9. Deputy S. Pitman of St. Helier of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding the salary of the new Hospital Managing Director: ...................................... 58 The Deputy of Trinity (The Minister for Health and Social Services): ........................ 58

1. Deputy S. Pitman: ........................................................................ 59

2. Deputy S. Pitman: ........................................................................ 59
3. Senator P.F. Routier: ...................................................................... 59
4. The Deputy of St. John : .................................................................. 60
5. Deputy A.E. Jeune : ....................................................................... 60
6. Deputy T.M. Pitman: ..................................................................... 60
7. Deputy M.R. Higgins: .................................................................... 61
8. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ................................................................ 61
9. Deputy S. Pitman: ........................................................................ 61
10. Deputy S. Pitman: ..................................................................... 62

10. Deputy D.J. De Sousa of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding the extension of the Hospital Managing Director's employment contract: .................. 62 The Deputy of Trinity (The Minister for Health and Social Services): ........................ 62

1. Deputy T.A. Vallois of St. Saviour: ................................................... 62

2. Deputy A.E. Jeune :.................................................................... 62
3. Deputy A.E. Jeune :.................................................................... 62
4. Senator S.C. Ferguson: ................................................................ 63
5. The Deputy of St. John :................................................................ 63
6. Deputy S. Pitman: ..................................................................... 63
7. Deputy A.E. Jeune :.................................................................... 63
8. Deputy D.J. De Sousa: ................................................................ 64

11. Deputy M.R. Higgins of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding the salaries and remuneration packages of the senior management team at Health: ......... 64 The Deputy of Trinity (The Minister for Health and Social Services): ........................ 64

1. Deputy M.R. Higgins: ................................................................. 64
2. Deputy T.M. Pitman: .................................................................. 64

12. Senator S.C. Ferguson of the Chief Minister regarding the draft Migration legislation: 65 Senator T.A. Le Sueur (The Chief Minister): .................................................. 65

1. Senator S.C. Ferguson: ................................................................ 65
2. Senator S.C. Ferguson: ................................................................ 65
3. Senator S.C. Ferguson: ................................................................ 65
4. Deputy G.P. Southern : ................................................................ 66
5. Senator A. Breckon: ................................................................... 66

6. Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire: .............................................................. 66
7. Senator S.C. Ferguson: ................................................................ 67

13. Deputy G.P. Southern of the Minister for Treasury and Resources regarding the replacement of lost income tax revenue from non-finance companies: .................. 67 Senator P.F.C. Ozouf (The Minister for Treasury and Resources): ............................ 67

1. Deputy G.P. Southern : ................................................................ 67
2. Deputy G.P. Southern : ................................................................ 68
3. Deputy G.P. Southern : ................................................................ 68
4. Deputy A.E. Jeune :.................................................................... 68
5. Deputy G.P. Southern : ................................................................ 69

14. Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire of the Minister for Planning and Environment regarding the future of tidal power and renewable energy in this Island: ............................... 69 Senator F.E. Cohen (The Minister for Planning and Environment):............................ 69

1. Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire: .............................................................. 69
2. The Deputy of St. John :................................................................ 70
3. The Deputy of St. John :................................................................ 70

15. Deputy M. Tadier of the Minister for Housing regarding measures to eliminate the letting of substandard rental accommodation in the Island:...................................... 70 Deputy A.K.F. Green of St. Helier (The Minister for Housing): ............................... 70

1. Deputy M. Tadier : ..................................................................... 70

2. Deputy M. Tadier : ..................................................................... 71
3. Deputy G.P. Southern : ................................................................ 71
4. Deputy M. Tadier : ..................................................................... 71

16. Deputy T.M. Pitman of H.M. Attorney General regarding prosecutions under the Data Protection (Jersey) Law 2005: ............................................................ 71 The Attorney General: .......................................................................... 71

1. Deputy T.M. Pitman: .................................................................. 72
2. Deputy C.F. Labey of Grouville : ...................................................... 72

17. Deputy G.P. Southern of the Minister for Treasury and Resources regarding the balance between personal and company tax revenues: ............................................ 72 Senator P.F.C. Ozouf (The Minister for Treasury and Resources): ............................ 72

1. Deputy G.P. Southern : ................................................................ 72
2. Deputy G.P. Southern : ................................................................ 73
3. Senator J.L. Perchard: ................................................................. 73
4. Deputy M. Tadier : ..................................................................... 73
5. Deputy M. Tadier : ..................................................................... 73
6. Connétable P.F.M. Hanning of St. Saviour : ........................................... 74
7. Deputy M.R. Higgins: ................................................................. 74
8. Deputy G.P. Southern : ................................................................ 75

18. The Deputy of St. Martin of the Chief Minister regarding the termination of the Chief Executive to the Council of Minister's employment: .................................... 75 Senator T.A. Le Sueur (The Chief Minister): .................................................. 75

1. The Deputy of St. Martin : ............................................................. 75
2. Deputy M.R. Higgins: ................................................................. 75
3. Deputy M. Tadier : ..................................................................... 75
4. Deputy M. Tadier : ..................................................................... 76
5. Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire: .............................................................. 76
6. Deputy T.M. Pitman: .................................................................. 76
7. Deputy M.R. Higgins: ................................................................. 76
8. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ............................................................. 76
9. The Deputy of St. Martin : ............................................................. 77

19. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding the cost of the Interim Hospital Managing Director in December 2010: .................... 77 The Deputy of Trinity (The Minister for Health and Social Services): ........................ 77

1. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ............................................................. 77
2. Deputy A.E. Jeune :.................................................................... 78

3. Deputy A.E. Jeune :.................................................................... 78
4. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ............................................................. 78

3. Questions to Ministers without notice - The Minister for Planning and Environment

 .............................................................................................. 78

1. Deputy A.T. Dupré of St. Clement : ...................................................... 78 Senator F.E. Cohen (The Minister for Planning and Environment):............................ 78
2. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ................................................................ 78

3.2.1 Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ................................................................ 78

3. Connétable K.P. Vibert of St. Ouen :...................................................... 79
4. Connétable J. Gallichan of St. Mary : ..................................................... 79
5. Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire: ................................................................. 79
6. Senator F. du H. Le Gresley: ............................................................. 80
7. Deputy G.P. Southern : .................................................................... 80
8. Senator J.L. Perchard: .................................................................... 80

3.8.1 Senator J.L. Perchard: .................................................................... 80

9. Deputy J.A. Hilton of St. Helier : ......................................................... 81
10. The Deputy of St. Mary : .................................................................. 81

3.10.1  The Deputy of St. Mary : .............................................................. 81

11. The Deputy of St. John : .................................................................. 81

3.11.1  The Deputy of St. John :................................................................ 81

12. Deputy M. Tadier : ........................................................................ 82

3.12.1   Deputy M. Tadier : ..................................................................... 82

4. Questions to Ministers without notice - The Chief Minister ............................ 82

1. The Deputy of St. Mary : .................................................................. 82 Senator T.A. Le Sueur (The Chief Minister): .................................................. 83

1. The Deputy of St. Mary : .................................................................. 83
   2. The Deputy of St. John : .................................................................. 83

4.2.1 The Deputy of St. John : .................................................................. 83

3. Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire: ................................................................. 84
4. Connétable J.LeS. Gallichan of Trinity : .................................................. 84
5. Deputy T.M. Pitman: ..................................................................... 84
6. Deputy G.P. Southern : .................................................................... 85
7. Senator J.L. Perchard: .................................................................... 85
8. The Deputy of St. Martin : ................................................................ 85

STATEMENT ON A MATTER OF OFFICIAL RESPONSIBILITY .......................... 86

5. The Minister for Education, Sport and Culture - statement regarding Jersey examination results ........................................................................ 86

5.1   Deputy J.G. Reed of St. Ouen (The Minister for Education, Sport and Culture): ........ 86

1. Senator J.L. Perchard: .................................................................... 87
2. Deputy M. Tadier : ........................................................................ 88
3. Deputy M. Tadier : ........................................................................ 88
4. Connétable A.S. Crowcroft of St. Helier : ................................................ 88
5. Deputy J.M. Maçon: ...................................................................... 89
6. Deputy T.M. Pitman: ..................................................................... 89
7. Deputy T.M. Pitman: ..................................................................... 89

PUBLIC BUSINESS ................................................................................ 90

6. Historical Child Abuse: request to Council of Ministers (P.19/2011) .................. 90

1. Senator F. du H. Le Gresley: ............................................................. 90

LUNCHEON ADJOURNMENT PROPOSED ................................................... 93 LUNCHEON ADJOURNMENT .................................................................. 93 PUBLIC BUSINESS – resumption ................................................................ 93

2. Historical Child Abuse: request to Council of Ministers (P.19/2011) - amendment .. 93

6.2.1 The Deputy of St. Martin : ................................................................ 94

3. Historical Child Abuse: request to Council of Ministers (P.19/2011) - Amendment (P.19/2011 Amd.) - Amendment (P.19/2011 Amd.Amd.) ................................ 98

1. Deputy M. Tadier : ........................................................................ 98
2. Deputy T.M. Pitman: .................................................................... 101
3. Senator T.A. Le Sueur : .................................................................. 102
4. Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire: ................................................................ 103
5. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: .............................................................. 104

6. The Deputy of St. Mary : ................................................................ 104
7. The Deputy of St. John : ................................................................. 106 Senator J.L. Perchard: ......................................................................... 107
8. Deputy M.R. Higgins: ................................................................... 107 The Deputy of Trinity : ........................................................................ 107 The Attorney General: ......................................................................... 108

The Deputy of St. John : ........................................................................ 108 The Deputy of St. Mary :....................................................................... 108

9. Senator B.I. Le Marquand:.............................................................. 108
10. The Connétable of St. Ouen : ......................................................... 110
11. Deputy S. Pitman: .................................................................... 111
12. Senator J.L. Perchard: ................................................................ 111
13. The Deputy of St. Martin : ............................................................ 111
14. Deputy M. Tadier : .................................................................... 112

4. Historical Child Abuse: request to Council of Ministers (P.19/2011) – amendment (P19/2011 Amd.) - as amended .......................................................... 115

1. Senator T.A. Le Sueur : .................................................................. 115
2. Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire: ................................................................ 117
3. The Connétable of St. Ouen : ............................................................ 117
4. The Deputy of St. Mary : ................................................................ 117 Deputy S. Power: .............................................................................. 121 The Attorney General: ......................................................................... 121 The Deputy of St. Mary :....................................................................... 122
5. Senator J.L. Perchard: ................................................................... 122
6. Deputy M.R. Higgins: ................................................................... 123
7. Senator B.I. Le Marquand:.............................................................. 123
8. Deputy M. Tadier : ....................................................................... 125
9. The Deputy of Trinity : .................................................................. 126
10. Connétable S.A. Yates of St. Martin : ................................................ 127
11. Deputy G.P. Southern : ............................................................... 127
12. Deputy T.M. Pitman: ................................................................. 128

[09:30]

The Roll was called and the Vice-Dean led the Assembly in Prayer. QUESTIONS 1.  Written Questions

1. SENATOR J.L.  PERCHARD  OF THE  CHAIRMAN  OF THE  COMITÉ  DES CONNÉTABLES REGARDING KERBSIDE COLLECTION OF METAK CANS AND TINS:

Question

Does the Comité des Connétable s consider it unacceptable to burn an estimated 40 million used metal cans and tins in the Island's incinerator and, if so, will they agree to formally canvass the views of their parishioners over a proposal to introduce a monthly kerbside collection for metal cans and tins and if not, why not?

Answer

Whilst the Comité des Connétable s may have been somewhat surprised to learn that an estimated 40 million used metal cans and tins are burnt in the Island's incinerator each year, it is difficult to say whether this is unacceptable without a more detailed consideration of the implications of this method of disposal compared with other options available.

At the request of their parishioners, some parishes have already introduced kerbside collection for metal cans and tins whilst in other parishes the parishioners have decided such an additional service is not required as alternatives such as bring banks are available. Any decision to formally canvas the views of parishioners over a proposal to introduce a monthly kerbside collection for metal cans and tins will therefore be taken following meetings with Transport and Technical Services at which time the parishes will be able to put forward a properly reasoned case.

2. THE DEPUTY  OF  ST.  JOHN  OF  THE  MINISTER  FOR  TREASURY  AND RESOURCES REGARDING THE FISCAL STIMULUS PACKAGE:

Question

Further to the Chief Minister's February press statement concerning the Fiscal Stimulus spend of £44 million, would the Minister advise the total amount spent to date, the amount remaining and whether any of that remainder will be redirected to other projects and, if so, provide details?

Answer

The following table details the Fiscal Stimulus Programme spend

Fiscal Stimulus Programme  £M's Spend to date  22.1

Further Authorised Spend  16.1

Skills & Training – Statement of Intent  2.2

Total Predicted Spend  40.9

Remaining Amount  3.6

In a recent statement to the States Assembly, the Treasury and Resources Minister stated that he would return to the Assembly in the next few weeks to formally close the Fiscal Stimulus Programme to new applications. In his statement the Minister announced that he intended to use £2.2 million from the remaining Fiscal Stimulus funds to extend the Skills and Training programmes from October 2011 to August 2012. The latest figures for people registered as unemployed and actively seeking work in Jersey reinforced the need for this extra funding to enable the award-winning Advance to Work (AtW) and Advance Plus schemes to continue until August 2012.

The Minister will shortly be making a statement regarding the remaining funds to the Assembly.

3. SENATOR A. BRECKON OF THE MINISTER FOR HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES REGARDING THE NUMBER OF STAFF ON RESTRICTED CLINICAL DUTIES:

Question

Would the Minister give details of the number of Consultants and/or Doctors and Senior Nursing staff on restricted clinical duties, and advise whether they are in receipt of full pay or reduced pay, broken down into –

1. the length of time each orany of the above has been placed on restricted clinical duties;
2. number of any locums bought in to cover duties not being presently performed by the Consultants or doctors;
3. the cost to the department of locums required to cover (ii) above;
4. the number of any additional senior nurses bought in to cover any short fall in numbers caused by senior nursing staff on restricted clinical duties, as above, and costs?

Answer

There are currently four consultants and/or Doctors on restricted duties. All are on full pay. There are no Senior Nurses on restricted clinical duties.

1. The length of time that they have been placed on restricted duties varies from 5 months to 30 months. Note: This is longer than the 23 months previously reported, which was incorrect due to an omission of an earlier period of restricted practice, identified following further investigation, for one individual.
2. As a result of (i) above, further analysis of both the number and cost of locums is being carried out and this information will be circulated at the next States sitting.
3. There are currently no senior nurses on restricted clinical duties.

4. DEPUTY J.A. MARTIN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR HOUSING REGARDING POMME D'OR FARM:

Question

Would the Minister advise the Assembly where the money was found to undertake repairs to Pomme d'Or Farm?

Were the funds diverted from the monies set aside within the last 4 Business Plans to refurbish La Collette Flats (works which tenants were told would start this year and have again been delayed) and, if so, when will La Collette flats now be refurbished?

Answer

The funding to undertake the planned refurbishment at Pomme D'Or Farm has come in part from the sale of assets approved under P.6/2007 and in part from a capital allocation from the Treasury. The funds have not been diverted from monies set aside to undertake the refurbishment of La Collette Flats.

The refurbishment programme set out in the 2011 States Business Plan indicates that a number of projects would be undertaken in 2011 including, Pomme D'Or Farm, La Collette Flats Phase 1 (High Rise) and Jardin des Carreaux. The business plan identifies that funding for these schemes will come from asset sales as well as from the capital programme and from Fiscal Stimulus.

Late in 2010 my predecessor was approached by the Assistant Minister Planning & Environment in respect of a strategic review which his Department wanted to undertake of a number of sites in the Havre des Pas area, one of which was La Collette Flats. It was agreed that consideration would need to be given to the outcome of that review before any significant works were committed to.

The economic climate has restricted asset sales and the comprehensive spending review has led to a reallocation of capital funding. These factors have required that the order of proposed property refurbishments be reprioritised for 2010, 2011 and 2012 with projects only advancing as and when sufficient funds accrue.

Taking into account the funding constraints and the outcome of P&E's Havre des Pas review the priority order for projects for 2011 is Clos Gosset, Pomme D'Or Farm, Jardin des Carreaux and La Collette Flats Phase 1.

What will be clear to all members is that the current method of funding such projects from asset sales cannot provide any certainty about the timing of refurbishment projects, is not sustainable and is not in my opinion at all appropriate.

Finding a long term mechanism for financing the Department and the long term maintenance and improvement of the stock is a key driver behind the Housing Transformation Programme, the output from which will be presented in a White Paper in June this year.

5. DEPUTY J.A. MARTIN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR HOUSING REGARDING THE REPLACEMENT OF HEATING SYSTEMS:

Question

Can the Minister identify where the funding has come from to replace many good working heating systems with electric heating and state in which Annual Business Plans this money was included? Would he also give the overall cost for all the estates that have been converted to electricity and also the projected cost for the estates that still need to be done?

Answer

1,799 heating systems will be replaced during the project. A significant number of these systems were already past their replacement date. In respect of many others tenants could not afford to run them because of the volatility in the price of oil and gas. Annual servicing and repair costs required the commitment of significant amounts of revenue every year.

The funding for the electric heating replacement project during 2010 came from two sources. The Fiscal Stimulus Fund provided £2,118,000 and the balance of the spend to date came from the Housing Department's revenue budget. Future funding will come from the Department's revenue budget. The programme and the costs associated with it were set out in the 2009, 2010 and 2011 Annual Business Plans.

The cost of works to date is

Mains infrastructure  £834,000

Installation and other works  £2,612,000

Total  £3,446,000 The projected cost to completion is an additional

Mains infrastructure  £835,000 Installation and other works  £4,263,000 Total  £5,098,000

The heating switch programme is being run in tandem with other projects to upgrade other building elements such as replacing windows and doors, improving loft insulation and adding either external wall or cavity wall insulation.

Completion of these programmes will deliver significant benefits for tenants including:-

• Improved reliability (the project includes the replacement of copper hot water cylinders with stainless steel items and a full electrical system check which includes the replacement of smoke detectors)
• Individual control over heating and hot water provision whereas in the past operating times were determined by the Department
• Opportunities  to  directly  benefit  from  energy  saving  measures. Clearly  each  tenant's electricity bill will be dependant upon their individual energy usage.
• Greater stability in energy prices
• Potential cost savings (all the systems run on off peak tariffs and the replacement project includes other energy efficiency measures such as increasing levels of loft insulation)
• A single energy bill which is more transparent

6. DEPUTY R.G. LE HÉRISSIER OF ST. SAVIOUR OF H.M. ATTORNEY GENERAL REGARDING  DISCIPLINARY  PROVISIONS  FOR  LAWYERS  IN  PUBLIC SERVICE:

Question

To what extent, if any, are the provisions of Article 3 of the Law Society of Jersey Law 2005 replicated in procedures that apply to Lawyers in public service and, if there is no replication, what disciplinary provisions, if any, exist to deal with complaints from the public?

Answer

Article 3(4) of The Law Society of Jersey Law 2005 which was a 2006 amendment to the original law exempts the Law Officers and persons practising law as a Jersey Advocate or Solicitor in the course of their employment with the Law Officers' Department from a requirement that they must be members of the Law Society and subject to its rules and regulations. This exemption only applies to the Law Officers' Department and persons employed and practising as lawyers in other States Departments would be required to be members of the Law Society.

Article 32 of the Law specifically preserves the inherent jurisdiction of the Royal Court to exercise disciplinary control over its practitioners. This would include Jersey Advocates and Solicitors employed by the Law Officers' Department.

Some employees of the Law Officers' Department were admitted as solicitors or barristers in England and Wales or are professionally qualified by virtue of them being fellows of the Institute of Legal Executive and are not eligible, in any event, to be members of the Law Society.

The independence of officers employed in the Law Officers' Department is preserved by Departments of the Judiciary and the Legislative (Jersey) Law 1965. The consent of the Attorney General is required before a person employed by the Law Officers' Department could have his or her appointment suspended or terminated. These safeguards and legal protections are important to ensure that the work of the Law Officers' Department may be and be seen to be free from any Political or Executive interference.

All officers employed in the Law Officers' Department perform their duties for and on behalf of the Law Officers. As such, they are accountable to me for their actions. As Attorney General, I am accountable in the States and I am, from time to time, required to provide information about the work of the Law Officers' Department.

If a member of the public wished to complain that a member of my staff was guilty of professional or other misconduct, the matter should be reported to me so that I might decide how the complaint should be dealt with.

Staff employed in the Law Officers' Department are public servants and we are committed to providing a good service to the public. I expect all members of staff, whether professionally qualified or not, to maintain high professional and personal standards.

7. DEPUTY R.G. LE HÉRISSIER OF ST. SAVIOUR OF THE MINISTER FOR HOME AFFAIRS REGARDING THE DRAFT DISCRIMINATION (JERSEY) LAW 201-: Question

When does the Minister propose to lodge the Draft Discrimination (Jersey) Law 201- in the Assembly?

Answer

I will not be able to lodge the draft Discrimination (Jersey) Law 201- in time for debate by the current States.

I had hoped to lodge a draft Law which would include Race as the first attribute, but have run into a number of difficulties, as follows:-

1. Firstly, there are procedural issues which will need to be decided in relation to the difference between the procedures relating to employment related matters and the procedures in relation to discrimination matters which are not employment related.
2. Secondly, there are issues in relation to whether the exceptions in relation to the Race attribute should follow the current UK practice or the previous UK practice (which is reflected in the current draft).
3. Thirdly, the central Home Affairs Department is a small department which has no special experience in this area. I have inherited this project from a previous Minister for Home Affairs who had a particular interest in this area, but it lies outside of the normal remit of Home Affairs (which is public safety related issues). I am in discussion with the Community Relations Trust, who have expertise in this area, and will need to take advice from them. Furthermore, the Department which had responsibility for the running of the current Employment Tribunal has changed from Social Security to the Judicial Greffe.
4. Fourthly, much of the resources in the Home Affairs Department have been drawn into major change projects which are required by virtue of the CSR process within the various services which make up the remit of the Home Affairs Minister. Those change projects are now a higher priority than this Law.
5. Fifthly, there are a number of high priority projects upon which I must focus between now and the end of July 2011, including:-
   1. the new Police Force (States) Law, which will amongst other things bring into existence the new Police Authority;
   2. the Repatriation of Prisoners Law, which will allow foreign prisoners to serve their sentence in their own country at no cost to Jersey;
   3. the new Fire Service Law;
   4. amendments to the Criminal Justice (Young Offenders) Law to enable youths to serve their sentence in Greenfields rather than the Young Offenders Institution at La Moye; and
   5. amendments to the Sex Offenders Law.
6. Sixthly, in any event the States have not voted anymoney for the implementation of this Law and it is unlikely that that will occur during the current CSR process.

The best that I can realistically hope to achieve within the term of the present States is to bring together the various interested parties with a view to determining a clear direction for this project which can be taken forward either by the next Minister for Home Affairs or by the next Chief Minister (in the event of the project being transferred to that Minister with whom it rightly belongs).

8. DEPUTY R.G. LE HÉRISSIER OF ST. SAVIOUR OF THE CHAIRMAN OF PRIVILEGES AND PROCEDURES COMMITTEE REGARDING THE DRAFT FREEDOM OF INFORMATION (JERSEY) LAW 201- AND THE MEDIA RELATIONS CODE OF CONDUCT:

Question

When does the Committee propose to lodge the draft Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 201- and the proposition governing a code of conduct for the media (Media relations – Code of Conduct) in the Assembly?

Answer

The Committee has approved a revised draft Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 201- and report, and is awaiting further advice from the Law Officers Department prior to lodging. As soon as the advice is received, and any comment resolved, the draft will be lodged.

Following discussions with the members of the Media Working Party, the proposition and accompanying report entitled: Media Relations – Code of Conduct,' is now in the process of being redrafted. The revised proposition will be considered at the next meeting of the Privileges and Procedures Committee on 8th March 2011, and, if approved, will be lodged shortly thereafter.

9. THE DEPUTY OF ST. MARTIN OF THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES REGARDING THE HISTORICAL CHILD ABUSE ENQUIRY: Question

On 8th September 2008 the States approved P.91/2008 as amended to permit the withdrawal of up to an additional £7,500,000 from the consolidated fund as a Contingency sum to meet anticipated expenditure identified by various Departments in relation to the Historic Child Abuse Enquiry. Will the Minister provide details of -

1. the money spent by the identified Departments between November 2007 and 8th September 2008 and when and how the money was spent?
2. the money spent from 8th September 2008 to date by each of the identified Departments and when and how the money was spent?
3. The sum of money requested by each of the identified Departments which is unspent to date?
4. Whether the Upex Inquiry was funded from the Historic Abuse Fund, and if so, who gave consent and when was consent granted?
5. Whether the Wiltshire Police Inquiry was funded from the Historic Abuse Fund, and if so, who gave consent, and when was consent granted?

Answer

(a) and (b)

The question correctly states that on the 8th September 2008, the States approved an additional allocation under Article 11(8) of the Public Finances Law. The Minister assumes that the Deputy wishes to extract the sums that were approved after the approval of additional monies in contrast to the amounts prior to the additional States' authorisation.

The  difficulty  the  Treasury  has  in  answering  the  precise  questions  in  terms  of  dates  is  that accounting returns are completed internally on a quarterly basis. In order to answer parts (a) and (b) separately it would be necessary to look at each individual transaction. The Minister has provided the information as fully as possible to assist the Deputy in the time available.

The majority of this information has already been disclosed in public Ministerial Decisions. The answers  also  include  funding  reimbursed  from  the  £4.25  million  approved  by  the  States  in P83/2009.

Breakdown by Department

Home Affairs

T&R (Property Holdings)

Law Officers' Department

Chief Minister's Department

Economic Development Department

Education Sport and Culture (Jersey Heritage Trust)

Health & Social Services

Summary

3. Money was requested by Departments on a reimbursement basis, based upon actual expenditure incurred. Therefore no Departments are in possession of unspent funds to date. All reimbursement claims from this Article 11(8) funding for all departments were made following assurances from the departments concerned that appropriate controls were in place to ensure that accounting officer responsibilities were being discharged, and that financial directions were complied with in respect of the expenditure.

The   Deputy  will  recall  that  the  Minister  signed  decision  number  MD-TR-2011-0007  on  24th January 2011 to formally return the £346,416 unallocated balance of Article 11(8) funding for the Historic Child Abuse Enquiry to the consolidated fund. The only sum now remaining is £150,037 to meet anticipated costs of the Home Affairs Department relating to the Enquiry in 2011 and a small contingency of £26,000. This sum is currently held by the Treasury pending requests from Home Affairs for reimbursement, based on the usual assurances.

4. The Upex Inquiry was funded, at a cost of £37,000, from money reimbursed to the Health and Social Services Department in 2008 as that Department was designated as responsible for paying for the Inquiry. Based on assurances received, the Minister for Treasury and Resources gave consent for reimbursement of the expenditure on 18th August 2008.
5. The Wiltshire Report was not funded from money allocated to the Historic Child Abuse Enquiry by Article 11(8) approvals.

10. THE DEPUTY OF ST. MARTIN OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING THE HISTORICAL CHILD ABUSE ENQUIRY:

Question

On 6th December 2010 when the Chief Minister made his statement in relation to the Historical Child Abuse Inquiry, he stated that in the very near future the Council of Ministers would formally consider whether any unanswered questions remained and report to the States. The Chief Minister said he would take note of the Deputy of St Martin's suggestion to consider inviting some of those Members who had shown a keen interest in the matter so there could be a combined way forward, but it would depend on the outcome of the Council of Ministers' views.

Will the Chief Minister inform Members whether the Deputy 's suggestion was considered by the Council of Ministers and if it was, why it was not taken on board? If it was not considered will the Chief Minister explain why it was not considered?

Answer

I can assure the Deputy of St Martin that his suggestion was discussed by the Council of Ministers at meetings held on the 16th December 2010 and again on 27th January 2011. The Council of Ministers considered the suggestion very seriously but concluded that it was better for all States Members to be made aware of the Council of Ministers views as soon as possible rather than a selected group who in the Deputy 's words "had shown a keen interest in the matter".

11. DEPUTY T. M. PITMAN OF ST. HELIER OF H.M. ATTORNEY GENERAL REGARDING PRESIDING OVER COURT CASES:

Question

Will the Attorney General clarify whether a judge/magistrate having a link through family members to an individual who was a witness; a police complainant; or perhaps stood to gain either financially or otherwise in the event of a conviction would have to excuse him or herself from presiding over a case; further still, under what aspect of which law is this outlined, and does Jersey legislation on such matters differ from that in the UK?

Answer

The test for recusal is well established at customary law and follows the English common law: see Syvret v Attorney General [2009] JCA 181 for the Jersey Court of Appeal's consideration of the subject.

There is no general rule and each case must be determined on its own facts.

The Judge must first ascertain all the circumstances which bear on the suggestion he was (or would be) biased. The Judge must then ask himself whether those circumstances would lead a fair- minded and informed observer to conclude that there was (or would be) a real possibility that the judge was (or would be) subject to bias.

A fair minded observer is not unduly sensitive or suspicious. The assumptions that the complainer makes are not to be attributed to the fair-minded observer unless they can be justified objectively. The fair minded observer is the sort of person who takes the trouble to read the text of an article as well as the headlines. He is able to put whatever he has read or seen into its overall social, political or geographical context. He is fair-minded, so he will appreciate that the context forms an important part of the material which he must consider before passing judgment. But the fair-minded observer is not complacent either. He knows that fairness requires that a judge must be, and must be seen to be, unbiased. He knows that judges, like anybody else, have their weaknesses. The standing of the Judge and his oath of office are relevant considerations.

The question does not identify the nature of the link' between the Judge, his or her family and the third party. There is a myriad of possibilities and therefore it is impossible to comment. One can imagine many scenarios when any link is so tangential or insignificant that there is no difficulty in the Judge continuing to hear the case. In any event, it is a matter for a Judge to determine as and when the issue arises. If a party is unhappy with the decision, then there is a right of appeal.

12. DEPUTY T. M. PITMAN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES REGARDING THE RATE OF TAX FOR 1(1)(k) RESIDENTS: Question

The Minister has previously advised the Assembly that it is not possible to increase the rate of tax charged to 1(1)(k) residents granted such status in previous decades when much lower rates were in place. Will the Minister subsequently clarify whether those 1(1)(k) residents being granted such status in the 1990s when the rate was as high as a £200,000 minimum were consequently able to pay smaller amounts as the rate later became reduced? If so, under which mechanism/Article of the Income Tax (Jersey) Law 1961 or other relevant law is this permitted?

Answer

A commitment made by a 1(1)(k) to pay a certain level of tax is not affected by subsequent changes to the minimum requirements.

When 1(1)(k)s apply for their housing consent they need to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Housing Minister that their forecast income is sufficient to ensure they pay a tax liability of at least the minimum amount set at the time. These amounts are a policy decision set by the Housing Minister at a level to attract a certain number of applicants. Failure to meet the minimum agreed tax contribution could lead to the housing consent being revoked.

The amount of tax individuals actually pay is based on the Income Tax Law. All 1(1)(k) residents who applied before 2005 pay tax at 20% on all of their taxable income. 1(1)(k) residents who applied from 2005 onwards pay 20% on all of their Jersey source income and differential rates up to 20% on foreign income. The amount of tax payable by an individual therefore changes on an annual basis to reflect fluctuations in his or her level of income. Any policy changes made by the Housing Minister to entry criteria do not have retrospective application to 1(1)(k)s who have already committed to paying a certain level of tax.

13. DEPUTY T. M. PITMAN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT REGARDING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE HARBOURS AND AIRPORT SHADOW BOARD:

Question

Will the Minister provide Members with a copy of the job description of the Chairman and Members of the Harbours and Airport Shadow Board and full details of how the financial package(s) were evaluated and by whom; and will he provide details of how many individuals applied for the positions, who oversaw the selection process and when this took place?

Answer

Details of the posts are to be found in the attached document.

In arriving at the financial packages the Department carried out research into comparative boards such as Jersey Finance Limited and other Shadow Boards in the past such as Jersey Post.

Following an advertisement in the Jersey Evening Post, there were 47 applicants. The recruitment process, overseen by the Appointments Commission, took place between 24th September - 4th October 2010. The appointment panel was chaired by the Chief Officer of Economic Development and comprised a representative from the Appointments Commission and the Chief Officer of TTS. States HR provided administrative support. The appointment panel made a recommendation to the Minister for Economic Development who confirmed the appointment of Shadow Board members in MD-E-2010-0193.

14. DEPUTY T.  M.  PITMAN  OF ST.  HELIER  OF  H.M.  ATTORNEY  GENERAL REGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE PUBLIC ELECTIONS (EXPENDITURE AND DONATIONS) (JERSEY) REGULATIONS 2008:

Question

Would the Attorney General advise whether any of the 2008 election candidates, successful or otherwise,  failed  to  comply  with  the  Public  Elections  (Expenditure  and  Donations)  (Jersey) Regulations 2008 requiring that they provide full details of their campaign expenses, and if so, would he specify which roles they were standing for (e.g. Senator, Deputy or Connétable ), who the candidates were and what sanctions they faced, having failed to comply? If none, what was the reason for this?

Answer

In April 2009 my predecessor answered the following written question from the Deputy :

"Question

Will H.M. Attorney General explain what legal action, if any, can be taken against a number of candidates (successful and unsuccessful but all independents') in the 2008 Deputies elections who, well into 2009, had still  not supplied details  to the Judicial Greffe, as required by law, of their electoral campaign expenses?

Answer

The Law regulating election expenses is to be found in the Public Elections (Expenditure and Donations) (Jersey) Regulations, 2008 (the "Regulations"), which came into force on 25th July 2008.

Regulation 4 of the Regulations provides that:

"(1)A candidate's election expenses shall not exceed, in the aggregate –

1. where the candidate is a candidate for election as Deputy or Connétable , £1,500; and
2. 10 pence for each person entitled to vote in the election by virtue of Article 2(1), (2) or (3) of the 2002 Law.

(2)  A candidate whose election expenses exceed, without reasonable excuse, the limit imposed by paragraph (1) is guilty of an offence and liable to a fine."

Regulation 6 of the Regulations requires a candidate, no later than 15 working days after the day the Poll is held, to deliver to the Judicial Greffier a written declaration of his or her election expenses and donations of the specified kind received by the candidate. Paragraph (6) of Regulation 6 provides:

"A candidate who fails, without reasonable excuse, to deliver a declaration, or further declaration, in accordance with this Regulation is guilty of an offence and liable to a fine."

Regulation 15 requires the Greffier to make declarations received by him under the Regulations available for inspection, free of charge, at the offices of the Judicial Greffe, during normal working hours.

The legal – as opposed to political - enforcement mechanism for these Regulations lies in the bringing of a criminal prosecution. Such a prosecution will be considered in cases where a file is prepared by the police and passed to the Law Officers' Department, or alternatively to a Centenier, for a decision as to whether or not to prosecute.

The lodging of this question last week led me to make some enquiries of the Judicial Greffier. I understand there are two candidates from the Deputies' elections, neither of whom were elected, who have not yet filed a note of their election expenses as the Regulations require. I believe the Greffier is pursuing that matter to the extent he can. As far as I am aware, the Law Officers Department have as yet received no such police files for consideration in relation to the 2008 Deputies' elections."

In relation to the current question I have made further inquiries and am informed by the Deputy Judicial Greffier that one expenses return remains outstanding and that the candidate, who was unsuccessful, had left the island shortly after the election and remains outside the jurisdiction. As a result no investigation could be concluded and it accordingly remains the case that no investigation files have been received by my department.

The returns made remain available for public inspection.

15. DEPUTY M. TADIER OF ST. BRELADE OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING REMUNERATION TO THE MAGISTRATE DESIGNATE:

Question

Will the Chief Minister confirm the total remuneration that has been paid to the Magistrate Designate to date since his exclusion from sitting as a Magistrate, and whether any of that sum will be recoverable in the eventuality that the Magistrate Designate is found guilty of any of the charges against him?

Answer

The total remuneration which has been paid to the Magistrate Designate during the period 1 July 2008 to 28 February 2011 amounted to £341,945.78. This consists of basic pay and employer's pension and social security contributions.

Under long established States policy, none of this sum of money would be recoverable were the Magistrate Designate found to be guilty of the charges brought against him. Employees who are suspended or excluded from normal duties pending investigations and potential disciplinary proceedings receive normal pay, and this is not recoverable.

This long established policy is currently under review by the States Employment Board, particularly in terms of long term suspensions/exclusions.

I should explain that the Magistrate Designate is not an employee of the States Employment Board. He is, rather, an Office holder (appointed by the Crown).

16. DEPUTY M. TADIER OF ST. BRELADE OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING AMENDMENTS TO ZERO/TEN POLICY

Question

Will the Minister explain what alternative avenues, if any, were explored when coming to the recent decision to cease the 'deemed distribution' element of zero-ten, including whether any consideration was given to disputing the findings of the EU High Level Working Party and why this avenue was rejected?

Will the Minister state how long he anticipates it will take to hear from the EU/UK on whether the amended zero-ten policy will be acceptable?

Answer

As was stated in the States on 15 February 2011, there is always a need for a degree of flexibility in dealings with international bodies. In responding to the views expressed by the High Level Working Party, the Council of Ministers started from the firmly held view that the best interests of the Island are to be served by retaining the zero/ten business tax regime. Ministers wanted to give certainty to the business community as soon as possible, with all the benefits from the business growth that they believe this will foster. Ministers saw little prospect of achieving this through fighting to retain the deemed distribution regime so long as Jersey wishes to retain our voluntary participation in the Code Group process as part of our good neighbour policy towards the EU. Accordingly, the Council of Ministers reached a clear conclusion that repealing deemed distributions and having a zero/ten regime that equates with what Ecofin agreed in 2003 was Code compliant, would best serve the interests of the Island.

The Code Group is due to meet again in April and May. At the May meeting, the Code Group usually agrees the wording of its report to Ecofin for consideration at Ecofin's meeting in June. It is to be expected that the Code Group will comment in this report on Jersey's action to roll back the aspects of our tax regime that are considered to give rise to harmful effects. It is, however, not clear how ECOFIN will deal with the process of rollback and the extent to which our actions will be considered by them in the June meeting.

17. DEPUTY M. TADIER OF ST. BRELADE OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING JERSEY'S POSITION ON HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS:

Question

Does the Minister agree that if Jersey is to continue to promote and enhance its international identity and autonomy, as described in Section 15 of the Strategic Plan 2009-2014, it is important for Jersey, through the Chief Minister or the Assistant Chief Minister with special responsibility for International Affairs, to make its position clear on Human Rights violations in other jurisdictions?

Answer

I believe that Jersey's position on human rights violations in other jurisdictions is consistent with British foreign policy and with that pursued by other Western jurisdictions. In August 2010, the UK Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs set out a values-based foreign policy, stating that "We cannot have a foreign policy without a conscience. Foreign policy is domestic policy written large. The values we live by at home do not stop at our shores. Human rights are not the only issue that informs the making of foreign policy, but they are indivisible from it " In this respect, Jersey and British foreign policy are aligned.

Furthermore, Jersey implements UN and EU sanctions or restrictive measures, which are often applied in order to develop and consolidate democracy and the rule of law and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. These sanctions include imposing travel restrictions, trade embargoes, restrictions on financial services and asset-freezes on certain individuals and regimes that are widely recognised to be engaged in conduct contrary to internationally accepted standards.

18. DEPUTY M.  TADIER  OF ST.  BRELADE  OF  THE  CHAIRMAN  OF THE PRIVILEGES AND PROCEDURES COMMITTEE REGARDING UNCONTESTED ELECTIONS:

Question

Will the Chairman of the Privileges and Procedures Committee confirm how many uncontested elections have occurred over the past 10 years for each category of States Member; how many of these were in single seat constituencies and how many non-contested elections there have been in multi-seat constituencies for each category?

Answer Deputies

Since 1999 there have been 20 uncontested elections for the post of Deputy and 51 contested elections  (including  by-elections).  Three  of  the  20  uncontested  elections  were  in  multi  seat constituencies; the remaining 17 were in single seat constituencies, as follows:

Uncontested elections for Deputy

Single seat  Multi seat constituency  constituency

- 1

- 1 1  - 1  - 1  - 1  - 1  - 1  -

- 1 1  - 1  - 1  - 1  - 1  - 1  - 1  - 1  - 1  -

St. Ouen  1  1  1  - Trinity  1  1  1  -

Total  20  23  17  3

Note: Certain parishes are split into districts for the purpose of the Deputies elections. If there is only one seat in a particular district, this is a single seat constituency; if there is more than one seat, it is a multi seat constituency. If a constituency constitutes an entire parish and there is more than one seat available in that particular parish, this constitutes a multi seat constituency.

Connétable s

There have been 35 uncontested elections and 14 contested elections for the post of Connétable since 1999. There are no multi seat constituencies for the position of Connétable as there is only ever one seat available in each constituency.

Uncontested elections for Connétable

Date  Constituency  Number of uncontested elections 1999   St. Brelade  1

Trinity  1

2000   St. John  1

St. Lawrence  1

St. Martin  1

St. Mary  1

St. Ouen  1

2001   St. Clement  1

Grouville  1

St. Saviour  1

2002   St. Brelade  1

Trinity  1

2003   St. Martin  1

St. Mary  1

St. Ouen  1

2004   Grouville  1

St. Helier  1

St. Peter  1

St. Saviour  1

2005   Trinity  1

2006   St. John  1

St. Lawrence  1

St. Mary  1

St. Ouen  1 2007   St. Clement  1

St. Peter  1

St. Saviour  1 2008   St. Brelade  1

St. Martin  1

St. Ouen  1

St. Saviour  1

Trinity  1 2009   St. John  1 2010   Grouville  1

St. Helier  1 Total  35

Senators

There were no uncontested elections for the post of Senator during given the time period.

The following table shows the number of times an uncontested election has taken place and the number of seats that have been affected:

Category  Number of occurrences  Number of seats Deputies  20  23 Connétable s  35  35 Senators  0  0

The following table shows the number of uncontested seats per year:

Number of uncontested seats per year

Year   Connétable s  Deputies  Total 1999  2  9  11 2000  5  0  5 2001  3  0  3

2002  2  4  6 2003  3  0  3 2004  4  0  4 2005  1  6  7 2006  4  0  4 2007  3  0  3 2008  5  4  9 2009  1  0  1 2010  2  0  2 Total  35  23  58

The following table shows the number of uncontested elections per year:

Number of uncontested elections per year

Year   Connétable s 1999  2

2000  5

2001  3

2002  2

2003  3

2004  4

2005  1

2006  4

2007  3

2008  5

2009  1

2010  2 Total  35

Deputies  Total 7  9

0  5 0  3 3  5 0  3 0  4 6  7 0  4 0  3 4  9 0  1 0  2 20  55

19. DEPUTY R.G.  LE  HÉRISSIER  OF  ST.  SAVIOUR  OF THE  MINISTER  FOR HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES REGARDING THE SALARY OF THE POST OF HOSPITAL MANAGING DIRECTOR:

Question

What NHS hospitals, if any, were used for comparison purposes in fixing the contract payment for the Hospital Managing Director? Would the Minister specify the precise savings achieved by the Hospital Managing Director during his initial period in office to December 2010?

Answer

The contract with the Managing Director for the Hospital is a contract for services and not an employment contract. The value of the new two year contract was arrived at by taking the daily rate of the interim contract agreed in April 2010, which in turn was determined following a competitive recruitment exercise involving several agencies. The daily rate was that which the market determined to secure the level of skills and experience required by the Hospital. This was an immediate response to the urgent first recommendation of the Verita Report published in February 2010. A reduction in overall cost was achieved by placing the contract for services directly with the Managing Director's company rather than via the original placement agency thus eliminating the agency fee. This resulted in a saving of £76,000 over the 2 year period of the contract.

In arriving at the decision to extend the contract with the then interim Managing Director, alternative approaches such as a fixed term employment contract and a permanent appointment via open competition were also considered and benchmarked for cost. In arriving at a potential salary for a permanent appointment, consideration was given to the prevailing salaries in the Hospital sector in the UK for CEOs of small district general hospitals and Chief Operating Officers of large Teaching Hospitals. Professional advice was taken from an executive search firm retained for this purpose.

In 2010 some areas of hospital services were overspending on their direct service budgets. The forecast overspend was circa £1M. The main areas of financial pressure were around the rostering and utilisation of nursing staff in the medical wards, the utilisation of agency/locum doctors and increasing costs in some support services. Estates and facilities were also forecast to overspend due to pressure on maintenance budgets and overtime expenditure. Whilst many of these pressures remain, the Managing Director has assertively managed this problem to ensure expenditure has been minimised and controlled where possible and that where the expenditure could not be avoided, other lower priority expenditure was restricted so budgets could be transferred to the pressure areas. By combining the hospital under one manager, priorities between Surgical Services and Medical Services have been more effectively managed and ultimately enable a breakeven on Hospital budgets overall in 2010.

The Hospital Managing Director is directly responsible to the Chief Officer of Health and Social Services for the management of the General  Hospital, the Ambulance Service and Estates & Facilities for the entire Department.   This  responsibility includes around 2,500 staff, revenue budgets of almost £100M and the care of many thousands of people who use the Hospital every year. This task is complex and demanding and can only be delivered successfully by someone able to change the culture and win the respect and trust of some very talented people. I know that the Managing Director would want me to point out that the myriad of savings achieved across dozens of budgets over the last 9 months have been delivered through the hard work of everyone in the General Hospital and not just by him.

20. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING REDUNDANCIES IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR:

Question

Will the Chief Minister inform members what voluntary redundancy terms have been offered to public sector workers for 2012 and 2013 along with the terms that are on offer to the equivalent workforces in the UK and in Guernsey? Will he also state what terms will apply in the case of compulsory redundancies?

Will he confirm that the terms on offer locally are less than those available to UK and Guernsey workers and state whether this has arisen because we are in a worse economic and financial position than these two jurisdictions and, if not, what is the cause?

Will he also confirm that the target for redundancies over this period is 280 and if not, what is it? Will he further place this in the context of any overall target for job losses through non- replacement, outsourcing etc? What does he estimate will be the size of the total public sector workforce by 2014?

Will he also state whether there are any negotiations currently taking place over redundancies and if so in which sectors?

Answer

1. The terms agreed bythe States Employment Board on 2nd February 2011 for Voluntary and Compulsory Redundancy are:-

2011 – 2012 Voluntary Redundancy terms

The revised VR terms, with immediate effect for 2011 and 2012 will be four weeks pay per year of completed continuous service, capped at 18 months pay. In addition the maximum salary for redundancy calculation purposes will be capped at grade 15/3 currently £83,018.

2011 – 2012 Compulsory Redundancy terms

The introduction of CR terms, with immediate effect for 2011 and 2012 will be three weeks pay per year of completed continuous service, capped at 12 months pay. In addition the maximum salary for redundancy calculation purposes will be capped at grade 15/3 currently £83,018.

2013 – Voluntary Redundancy terms

In 2013 VR terms will be three weeks pay per year of completed continuous service, capped at 18 months pay. In addition the maximum salary for redundancy calculation purposes will be capped at grade 15/3.

2013 – Compulsory Redundancy terms No change to 2012 terms.

2. Clearly, in the UK public service, provision differs from service to service and organisation to organisation. For instance, the NHS and Local Government terms vary from the UK civil service redundancy terms. The recently revised Civil Service terms are as follows:

UK civil service voluntary redundancy

For each year of service one month's salary capped at 21 months pay UK civil service compulsory redundancy

For each year of service one month's salary capped at 12 months pay.

Guernsey civil service redundancy policy is 5 weeks pay for every year of service up to a maximum of 20 years, i.e. 100 weeks.

The Jersey statutory arrangement is effective after 2 years service and allows for one week pay per year of service capped at the level of average earnings (currently £630 per week and reviewed annually).

The States Employment Board determined the new terms as it wished to more closely mirror the States provision to that provided by sizeable local companies within the Island. The previous terms were extremely generous and introduced at a time (mid 90s) when the financial climate was very different in Jersey. The terms had become out of kilter with other organisations and indeed the financial climate we now find ourselves in. Although not quite as generous as the UK or Guernsey Civil Service, the new terms are considered fair, reasonable and more affordable.

3. There is no target for redundancies. The 2012 and 2013 CSR savings proposals identified 177 posts which may be lost if the schemes were to be implemented as then planned. However, all measures will be taken to minimise the number of compulsory redundancies by offering voluntary retirement, redeployment, etc. Similarly, there is no target for job losses through non- replacement, outsourcing etc. Non-replacement of vacant posts will be used to manage post losses where appropriate and some proposals may involve some kind of alternative service provision but this will be discussed with staff and unions at the appropriate time.

There are no current negotiations currently taking place over redundancies. There are a number of CSR proposals which means this situation may change over the course of the year.

21. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES REGARDING THE TAX REVENUE FROM NON- FINANCECOMPANIES:

Question

Will the Minister confirm that the income tax revenue from the profits of non-finance companies in 2007 was £82 million and that the total tax estimate for 2010 from non-finance companies (non 10% and utilities 20%) is £13.5 million, a reduction on the 2007 figure of £68.5 million?

Can the Minister explain to members why this revenue loss is so much greater than the estimate of £30 million lost revenue from the zero component of zero-ten previously given and will he state how this relates to the £10 million "cash flow" loss due to the abandonment of deemed distribution and attribution?

Will he further inform members how he proposes to re-coup some revenue from these zero rated companies and how his proposals will avoid ring-fencing either non-locally owned non-finance companies or the previously exempt companies and thereby breaching the EU Code on Business Taxation?

Will he also explain what scope there is for local owners of zero-rated companies to "roll-up" dividends in the companies they own in order to convert profits into a capital gain? What powers does the Minister have under the Income Tax Law or elsewhere to ensure that any loss of revenue from zero-rated companies is minimised?

Answer

As the question is effectively four questions in one the answers are numbered as though the paragraphs in the question had been numbered one to four.

1. The figure of £13.5 million was provided to the Deputy in the answer to his oral question 6053 of 15th February 2011. In the time available it has not been possible to confirm the source of the quoted figure of £82 million or his resulting calculation. It would be helpful if the Deputy could confirm the source of this data, and do so in any future questions so that answers can be most helpfully provided.
2. In asking this question, the Deputy does not seem to appreciate that Jersey, and indeed the world, has just suffered one of the greatest recessions in recent history. As explained on numerous occasions, the reduction in tax revenues caused bythe introduction in zero-ten was dealt with at the time through a number of measures including GST, 20 means 20 and reduction in spending. Since then, tax revenues have been further affected due to the decline in economic activity.

The estimated deferral of tax revenues from the removal of deemed distribution and attribution rules is not related.

3. The Deputy has asked the same question a number of times, including in oral question 6099 at this sitting, about what measures are being considered for raising revenues from non-financial services companies. I refer the Deputy to that response and the other statements made in the Assembly on this issue. Whatever measures are introduced, they will apply to relevant companies regardless of their ownership. In that way, the issues of ring-fencing referred to by the Deputy are not relevant.
4. The Deputy has identified a potential tax planning measure that taxpayers could attempt to employ in the absence of deemed distributions or other anti-avoidance measures. Jersey has a general anti-avoidance rules (Article 134A) which the Comptroller can invoke if a taxpayer has entered into a transaction for which the purpose or one of the main purposes is the avoidance of tax. In commercial transactions, for which the main purpose is unlikely to be the avoidance of tax, it is common for the purchaser of such companies to acquire the company on a cash-free, debt-free basis. In these cases, the vendor would be required to distribute the cash which should be a taxable event.

22. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES REGARDING TAX REVENUE FROM THE 10 PER CENT COMPANY TAX RATE:

Question

Can the Minister confirm that those finance companies now rated at a tax rate of 10% previously paid tax at a rate of around 13.5% and that following the introduction of the 10% rate it is estimated that only £50.4 million of company tax will be paid by finance companies in 2010?

Will the Minister give members his estimate of what effective rate of tax this represents, given that finance profits in the years 2008 and 2009 on which this tax was paid were £1,520 million and £809 million respectively?

How does this effective rate compare with the effective rate paid by:

1. Persons on marginal rate (27%) tax? and
2. Those paying full-rate tax (20%)?

Will the Minister produce for members a table indicating the proportion of General Revenue Income (as given in Table 4, page 8 of the Financial Report & Accounts 2009) derived from

1. company income tax? and
2. personal tax (income tax, impôts and GST)?

over the past decade and including the estimates of income for 2010 and 2011 as below:

Year Total general Company Tax £m % Personal tax %

revenue £m

(IT + impôts + GST)

2000 2001 etc

Answer

Deputy 's question is effectively four questions in one the answer is numbered as though the paragraphs in the question had been numbered one to four. The various parts of this question seek to compare very different sets of data which will make any comparison virtually meaningless.

1 and 2. In the first part of the question the Deputy asks about taxes paid and profits earned by

finance  companies'.  It  should be remembered  that for tax purposes a financial services company' which is subject to tax at 10% is defined by reference to specific regulations. The profits referred to for finance companies' are based on different criteria and the activities of some finance companies will be taxed at 0%. The figure of £50.4 million was provided to the Deputy in the answer to his oral question 6053 of 15th February 2011. It is presumed that 13.5% relates to the Deputy 's written question 5291 of 20th April 2010 where he estimated a "maximum tax rate" of 13.4% for businesses in the finance sector – this estimate was not confirmed by the answer to that question. It would be helpful if the Deputy could confirm the source of the data that he has used in his question, and do so in any future questions so that answers can be most helpfully provided.

3. The third part of the question seeks to compare the effective rates of companies to the effective rates of individuals. This will again produce a meaningless comparison. The Deputy has asked

a similar question in oral question 6100 at this sitting and I refer him to the response to that question.

4. To gather the data requested in this question will take a significant amount of resource, in particular an analysis of tax revenues by taxpayer over a 10 year period. Given the significant changes that have been made to Jersey's tax regime in recent years, changes which were introduced to protect our economy in the face of significant international pressure, this data is unlikely to provide a useful comparison. The Minister believes that the Treasury's resources are better spent ensuring tax that is due is collected and ensuring that our tax regime continues to remain fit for purpose.

23. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT REGARDING THE ADVANCE TO WORK SCHEMES:

Question

Following the announcement of further funding for the Advance to Work (ATW) schemes, (16 – 19, and 20 -24) will the Minister inform members for the years 2009 and 2010 -

1. how many young people have had an ATW place?
2. how many have subsequently found permanent employment? and
3. how much in total has been spent on this scheme?

Will he further inform members why he has managed to attract only 270 employers out of a potential 6,210 Jersey businesses to join the scheme?

Answer

Funding for the programme was secured in September 2009 and the first young people started the course thereafter.

1. 370 young people have had an ATW place.
2. 142 have subsequently found permanent employment. (This is the total number of people that have found employment - in some cases it has been contract work rather than permanent.)
3. A total of £714,351 was spent on the scheme in 2009 and 2010 - £110,495 in 2009 and £603,856 in 2010

The ATW team members are working closely with local employers to encourage them to join the scheme.

• There are a number of other agencies in the Island who also are continually looking for valuable work placements. These include Workwise, Trident, Jersey Employment Trust, Highlands College and others and ATW work in partnership with all these agencies to ensure that their clients are not adversely affected by placements being lost to different schemes. We recognise that there is always a limit to the number of placements that any employer can offer across the variety of valuable schemes in the Island.

• Employers who are laying off their own staff due to the economic climate are often unable to take on trainees due to the impression this may give those staff losing their jobs.
• Placements are always specific to individuals needs and career aspirations and therefore we do not simply put trainees with any employer if the match is not right.
• ATW are continually attracting new businesses to support the scheme and many have offered placements to more than one trainee. Many businesses who have been involved with ATW in the past and used it as a useful recruitment tool have in fact recommended the scheme to other businesses.
• Many employers tell us that they barely have enough work for their own staff and therefore they would have little for a trainee to do if they were on placement. ATW are firmly of the opinion that placements need to be able to offer meaningful work and we do not want trainees getting disillusioned with a workplace where there is simply not enough work for them to do.
• Mentors spend a great deal of time networking with employers to gain new placements, but always ensure that there is adequate supervision in place and that the motives of the employer for taking on a placement are within the spirit of ATW before placing a trainee.
• ATW require any business taking a trainee to have employer and public liability insurance to ensure the trainee is  covered whilst  in  placement  which prevents  some sole traders from participating  in  the scheme. (40% of businesses, 2,484 businesses  are registered with  the

Population Office)

24. DEPUTY M.R. HIGGINS OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES REGARDING THE APPOINTMENT PROCESS OF THE HOSPITAL MANAGING DIRECTOR:

Question

Will the Minister advise members of –

1. The process that was followed in determining the salary of the Hospital Managing Director and the job titles of the person or persons involved in the process?
2. What oversight of the process did the Minister have?
3. Did the Minister sign off the remuneration package?
4. The break down of the remuneration package –
   1. Is it strictly for salary costs?
   2. Does it include payments into any pension scheme, and if so, what is the nature of that contribution?
   3. Does the remuneration cover the cost of flights to and from Jersey?
   4. Does it include accommodation costs in Jersey?
   5. Does it cover payment to an agency, and in which case, how much?
5. The Minister stated that the Hospital Managing Director had already saved the hospital some £600,000 savings. Will the Minister outline what these savings are and their individual values?

Answer

1. The contract with the Managing Director for the Hospital is a contract for services and not an employment contract. The value of the new two year contract was arrived at by taking the daily rate of the interim contract agreed in April 2010, which in turn was determined following a competitive recruitment exercise involving several agencies. The daily rate was that which the market determined to secure the level of skills and experience required by the Hospital. This was an immediate response to the urgent first recommendation of the Verita Report published in February 2010. A reduction in overall cost was achieved by placing the contract for services directly with the Managing Director's company rather than via the original placement agency thus eliminating the agency fee. This resulted in a saving of £76,000 over the 2 year period of the contract. The contract was negotiated by the Interim Director of Human Resources for Health and Social Services.
2. The parameters for the negotiation were set following discussion and appraisal of the costs and benefits of a number of options by the Ministerial team for Health and Social Services. Discussions were held with the Ministerial Team on a number of occasions. There was assurance that the contract represented better value for money and that the Appointments Commission had approved the rationale for the appointment. The options were also discussed with the Chief Executive of the States. The Ministerial team was advised bythe Chief Officer and the Interim Director of Human Resources for Health and Social Services.
3. Yes.
4. (a) The contract agreed with the Managing Director of the Hospital is a contract for services and not an employment contract. As such there is no payment of a salary.

2. There is no payment into the States of Jersey pension scheme by either the Contractor or the Health and Social Services Department.
3. There is no additional payment for travel expenses
4. There is no additional payment for accommodation expenses
5. There is no on going monthly agency payment. There was a one-off introduction fee of £28,000 which allowed the Department to avoid additional agency costs of £104,000 over the two-year period, thus saving £76,000, as indicated above and in Written Question 6077.

5. In 2010, some areas of hospital services were overspending on their direct service budgets. The forecast overspend was circa £1M. The main areas of financial pressure were around the rostering and utilisation of nursing staff in the medical wards, the utilisation of agency/locum doctors and increasing costs in some support services. Estates and facilities were also forecast to overspend due to pressure on maintenance budgets and overtime expenditure. Whilst many of these pressures remain, the Managing Director has assertively managed this problem to ensure expenditure has been minimised and controlled where possible and that where the expenditure could not be avoided, other lower priority expenditure was restricted so budgets could be transferred to the pressure areas. By combining the hospital under one manager, priorities between Surgical Services and Medical Services have been more effectively managed and ultimately enable a breakeven on Hospital budgets overall in 2010.

The Hospital Managing Director is directly responsible to the Chief Officer of Health and Social Services for the management of the General  Hospital, the Ambulance  Service and Estates & Facilities for the entire Department.   This  responsibility includes around 2,500 staff, revenue budgets of almost £100M and the care of many thousands of people who use the Hospital every year. This task is complex and demanding and can only be delivered successfully by someone able to change the culture and win the respect and trust of some very talented people. I know that the Managing Director would want me to point out that the myriad of savings achieved across dozens of budgets over the last 9 months have been delivered through the hard work of everyone in the General Hospital and not just by him.

25. DEPUTY D.J. DE SOUSA OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES REGARDING THE REVIEW OF MENTAL HEALTH: Question

Would the Minister please inform members whether there have been any external and internal reviews in the area of mental health generally, what changes are being proposed, such as to the management structure of adult mental health and whether there are any staffing difficulties, such as in recruitment?

Answer

The most significant general review impacting on mental health services has concerned the establishment of the Community & Social Services Directorate within Health and Social Services.

Following consultation with key managers and staff it has been decided that Community Services will organise its multidisciplinary teams within age group "divisions" i.e. Children's Services, Adults Services and Older People's Services.

The impact on Mental Health services is that Old Age Psychiatry will be managed within the Older Persons division, whereas Adult Mental Health services will be provided within the Adults Services Division.

Each of these divisions will be lead by a Service Director. Following a recent interview process it was decided not to fill these posts permanently at this stage and they will be re-advertised.

To ensure robust management arrangements are in place, Acting Director Appointments have been made to the Service Director Posts for Older People and Adults, and a Children's Lead Manager is in place from previous arrangements.

The Managing Director of Community and Social Services has a full complement of senior managers in place in adults and older people's mental health services, although their configuration has been changed at senior level because of the reorganisation of services into age groups. He anticipates being able to fill the permanent Service Director positions when they are re-advertised and, with current acting up arrangements, considers that he has appropriate management arrangements in place.

Children's Mental Health services provided through Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) will be located within the Children's Division of the Community and Social Services Directorate.  The  Managing  Director  is  giving  consideration  to  what  management  capacity  is required to fully support the clinical and professional work so well undertaken by this team.

A further significant area of consideration has been in the area of clinical advice and support to staff in Community and Social Services. It has been decided to appoint a Deputy Medical Director to enhance clinical input. Interviews for this post are being arranged.

Other reviews taking place within mental health services include a long term review of buildings provision focussed on re- providing services currently located on the St Saviour's site. Similarly consideration is being given to the relocation of mental health services provided within the General Hospital.

In addition to the above there are, throughout the year, reviews of individual cases and specific service areas are undertaken to provide organisational learning as to how best improve services in the future. From time to time external professional input is arranged to provide an extra perspective.

Areas which have received a priority focus include:

• Nurse Liaison Services
• Support to vulnerable adults, particularly those at risk of suicide.
• AIMs (Adult In-patient Mental Health Service) (2008/10). Peer review of Orchard House by Royal College of Psychiatrists and Royal College of Nursing.
• Nurse Staffing Review of inpatient areas (2007/8). Currently being reviewed and updated.
• Cooper 2010/11. Review of Community Forensic Service (Draft Report).
• National Memory Clinic Accreditation (2010) Royal College of Psychiatry.

There are long standing recruitment difficulties in Mental Health Services, particularly in relation to nurse staffing. This is part of a more general problem in relation to the recruitment and retention of nursing staff and is currently the subject of discussion with the States Employment Board.

26. THE DEPUTY  OF  ST.  MARY  OF  THE  MINISTER  FOR  TRANSPORT  AND TECHNICAL SERVICES REGARDING ROAD TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS ON BATH STREET:

Question

In the light of forthcoming debates on speed limits and on the North of Town Masterplan, one of whose proposals is the eventual treatment of Bath Street to become a calmed and narrower one way street with wide pavements and trees, and given the current discussions about the future of the roads around the new Town Park and pedestrian and cycling routes, will the Minister inform members of the numbers of accidents on Bath Street as follows:

Can the Minister further give the dates for the fatal and serious injury accidents as follows -

Can the Minister give details of what the serious injuries were? Answer

Transport and Technical Services are provided with a version of the States of Jersey Police road traffic collision data base. The classification of injuries is made by the States of Jersey Police using the same definition as the UK Stats 19 system of road traffic collision reporting. Collisions are classified as non injury, slight injury, serious injury, and fatal, though when reporting killed and seriously injured accidents are often reported together as killed/seriously injured or KSI.

Between 2003 and 2010 the following collisions were reported in the States of Jersey Police road traffic collision data base. No Fatal collisions were recorded in the data base in this location during this period.