States Meeting Transcript - 10th December 2013

STATES OF JERSEY OFFICIAL REPORT

TUESDAY, 10thDECEMBER 2013

COMMUNICATIONS BY THE PRESIDING OFFICER ......................................7

1. Message of sympathy – Nelson Mandela, former President of South Africa..............7 The Deputy Bailiff :............................................................................7

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

2. Written Questions........................................................................7

1. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR SOCIAL SECURITY REGARDING THE IMPACT OF R&O.75/2012:..........................7
2. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR EDUCATION, SPORT AND CULTURE REGARDING ENGAGEMENT WITH YOUNG VOTERS IN 2014:.................................................................................8
3. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE CHAIRMAN OF PRIVILEGES AND PROCEDURES COMMITTEE REGARDING ENGAGEMENT WITH YOUNG VOTERS IN 2014:......................................................................9
4. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING THE INTRODUCTION OF A HARMONISED MATERNITY POLICY: .........................................................................................10

3. Oral Questions...........................................................................17

1. Connétable P.J. Rondel of St. John of the Minister for Economic Development regarding the use of the former La Folie Inn building to train emergency services:................17 Senator A.J.H. Maclean (The Minister for Economic Development):.........................17

1. The Connétable of St. John:............................................................18
2. Deputy S. Power of St. Brelade : ........................................................18

2. The Connétable of St. John of the Minister for Treasury and Resources regarding tenders for the financial Quarter of the Esplanade:..............................................18 Deputy E.J. Noel of St. Lawrence (Assistant Minister for Treasury and Resources - rapporteur):.............................................................................18

1. The Connétable of St. John:............................................................19
2. The Connétable of St. John:............................................................19
3. Deputy S.Power:.......................................................................19
4. Deputy M.R.Higgins:..................................................................19
5. Deputy M.R.Higgins:..................................................................20
6. Senator S.C. Ferguson:.................................................................20
7. Senator S.C. Ferguson:.................................................................20
8. The Connétable of St. John:............................................................20

3. Deputy M.R. Higgins of the Chief Minister regarding the compensation scheme for Historic Child Abuse victims and the number of claims settled, disputed, rejected and pending: ................................................................................21 Senator I.J. Gorst (The Chief Minister):......................................................21

1. Deputy M.R.Higgins:..................................................................21
2. Deputy T.M. Pitman of St. Helier:......................................................21
3. Deputy M. Tadier of St. Brelade:.......................................................21
4. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................22
5. Deputy J.A. Hilton of St. Helier:........................................................22
6. Deputy M.R.Higgins:..................................................................23

4. Deputy G.C.L. Baudains of St. Clement of the Minister for Transport and Technical Services regarding repairs to the Bellozanne Chimney:.................................23 Deputy K.C. Lewis of St. Saviour (The Minister for Transport and Technical Services): .....23

3.4.1 Deputy G.C.L. Baudains:...............................................................23

5. Deputy T.M. Pitman of the Chief Minister regarding the use of the Data Protection (Jersey) Law 2005 to prosecute former Senator S. Syvret: ..............................24 Senator I.J. Gorst (The Chief Minister):......................................................24

1. Deputy T.M.Pitman:...................................................................24
2. Deputy T.A. Vallois of St. Saviour:....................................................25
3. Deputy T.A. Vallois: ...................................................................26
4. Deputy C.F. Labey of Grouville :........................................................26
5. Deputy M.R.Higgins:..................................................................26
6. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................26
7. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................27
8. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier of St. Saviour:...............................................27
9. Deputy J.A. Martin of St. Helier:.......................................................27
10. Deputy T.M.Pitman:................................................................28

6. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier of the Minister for Economic Development regarding the steps taken by his Department to encourage Play.com to remain in Jersey:...................28 Senator A.J.H. Maclean (The Minister for Economic Development):.........................28

1. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................29
2. Deputy M.R.Higgins:..................................................................29
3. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................29

7. Senator A. Breckon of the Minister for Housing regarding the need for more homes for States rental:............................................................................30 Deputy A.K.F. Green of St. Helier (The Minister for Housing):..............................30

1. Senator A. Breckon: ....................................................................30
2. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................30
3. Deputy G.P. Southern of St. Helier:....................................................31
4. Deputy J.A. Martin:....................................................................31
5. Deputy G.C.L. Baudains:...............................................................31
6. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................32
7. Senator A. Breckon: ....................................................................32
   8. Deputy M.R. Higgins of the Minister for Home Affairs regarding the arrest and detention of H.G. on 26th September 2010:.......................................................32 Senator B.I. Le Marquand (The Minister for Home Affairs): .................................32

1. Deputy M.R.Higgins:..................................................................32
2. Deputy M.R.Higgins:..................................................................33
3. Deputy T.M.Pitman:...................................................................33
4. Deputy T.M.Pitman:...................................................................33
5. Deputy M.R.Higgins:..................................................................33
6. Deputy M.R.Higgins:..................................................................34

9. Deputy T.M. Pitman of the Minister for Home Affairs regarding cyber-bullying complaints:.............................................................................34

Senator B.I. Le Marquand (The Minister for Home Affairs): .................................34

1. Deputy T.M.Pitman:...................................................................34
2. Deputy M.R.Higgins:..................................................................35
3. Deputy T.M.Pitman:...................................................................35

10. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier of the Minister for Treasury and Resources regarding the use of J.T. funds, and those of the Jersey Competition Regulatory Authority on Court costs: 35

Deputy E.J. Noel (Assistant Minister for Treasury and Resources - rapporteur):..............35

1. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:...........................................................36
2. Deputy T.A. Vallois:................................................................36
3. Deputy T.A. Vallois:................................................................36
4. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:...........................................................36

11. Deputy G.C.L. Baudains of the Minister for Economic Development regarding the sanctions available to the Jersey Competition Regulatory Authority: ...................36 Senator A.J.H. Maclean (The Minister for Economic Development):.........................37

1. Deputy G.C.L. Baudains: ............................................................37
2. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:...........................................................37
3. Senator S.C. Ferguson:..............................................................37
4. Deputy G.C.L. Baudains: ............................................................38

12. Deputy G.P. Southern of the Minister for Social Security regarding the coverage of financial support for up to 10,000 unpaid carers:........................................38 Senator F. du H. Le Gresley (The Minister for Social Security): ..............................38

1. Deputy G.P. Southern : ..............................................................39
2. Senator S.C. Ferguson:..............................................................39
3. Senator S.C. Ferguson:..............................................................39
4. Deputy G.P. Southern : ..............................................................40

13. Deputy G.P. Southern of the Minister for Social Security regarding breaches of employment law by Jersey employers using zero-hours contracts:......................40 Senator F. du H. Le Gresley (The Minister for Social Security): ..............................40

1. Deputy G.P. Southern : ..............................................................41
2. Deputy G.P. Southern : ..............................................................41
3. Deputy G.P. Southern : ..............................................................41
4. Deputy M. Tadier :...................................................................41
5. Deputy M. Tadier :...................................................................42
6. Deputy G.P. Southern : ..............................................................42

14. Deputy M. Tadier of the Minister for Treasury and Resources regarding plans for the use or disposal of the St. Saviour 's Hospital buildings:.....................................42 Deputy E.J. Noel (Assistant Minister for Treasury and Resources - rapporteur):..............42

1. Deputy M. Tadier :...................................................................42
2. Deputy S.G. Luce of St. Martin:.....................................................43
3. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:...........................................................43
4. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:...........................................................43
5. The Deputy of St. Ouen:.............................................................44

15. Deputy T.A. Vallois of the Minister for Treasury and Resources regarding the delegation of Ministerial powers under the Public Finances (Jersey) Law 2005: ...................44 Deputy E.J. Noel (Assistant Minister for Treasury and Resources - rapporteur):..............44

1. Deputy T.A. Vallois:................................................................44
2. Deputy T.A. Vallois:................................................................45
3. Senator S.C. Ferguson:..............................................................45
4. Senator S.C. Ferguson:..............................................................45

5. Senator S.C. Ferguson:..............................................................45
6. Deputy T.A. Vallois:................................................................45

4. Questions to Ministers without notice - The Minister for Home Affairs ..............46

1. Deputy S. Pitman of St. Helier:.........................................................46 Senator B.I. Le Marquand (The Minister for Home Affairs): .................................46
2. Deputy T.M.Pitman:...................................................................46
3. Connétable M.P.S. Le Troquer of St. Martin:...........................................47
4. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................47
5. Deputy T.M.Pitman:...................................................................47
6. The Deputy of St. Martin:..............................................................48
7. Deputy M.R.Higgins:..................................................................48
8. Deputy J.A. Hilton:.....................................................................48

4.8.1 Deputy J.A. Hilton:.....................................................................48

9. Deputy M.R.Higgins:..................................................................49
10. Connétable D.W. Mezbourian of St. Lawrence:........................................49

4.10.1 The Connétable of St. Lawrence:....................................................49

11. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................50

5. Questions to Ministers without notice - The Minister for Transport and Technical Services..................................................................................50

1. The Connétable of St. Lawrence:.......................................................50 Deputy K.C. Lewis (The Minister for Transport and Technical Services):....................50
2. The Connétable of St. Lawrence:.......................................................51
3. Connétable M.J. Paddock of St. Ouen:..................................................51
4. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................51

5.4.1 Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................52

5. Connétable A.S. Crowcroft of St. Helier:...............................................52
6. The Connétable of St. Helier:...........................................................52
7. Senator L.J. Farnham :..................................................................52
8. Deputy J.H. Young of St. Brelade:......................................................52
9. Deputy T.M.Pitman:...................................................................53
10. The Deputy of St. Martin:..............................................................53

5.10.1 The Deputy of St. Martin : ...........................................................53

11. Connétable J.E. Le Maistre of Grouville :...............................................53
12. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................53

5.12.1 Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:...........................................................54

13. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................54
14. Deputy J.A. Hilton:.....................................................................54
15. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................54
16. Senator S.C. Ferguson:.................................................................55

PUBLIC BUSINESS.............................................................................55

7. Minimum Wage: Amendment (P.135/2013) - resumption..............................56

7.1 Senator F. du H. Le Gresley:............................................................56

1. The Connétable of St. Martin:..........................................................57
2. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................58
3. Deputy M.R.Higgins:..................................................................59
4. Senator A. Breckon: ....................................................................60
5. Senator S.C. Ferguson:.................................................................60

6. Senator P.F. Routier: ...................................................................61
7. The Connétable of Grouville :...........................................................61
8. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................62

LUNCHEON ADJOURNMENT PROPOSED..................................................65 LUNCHEON ADJOURNMENT................................................................65

8. Draft Employment (Minimum Wage) (Amendment No. 10) (Jersey) Regulations (P.131/2013)..............................................................................65

1. Deputy S. Pinel of St. Clement (Assistant Minister for Social Security - rapporteur):...65
2. Deputy S. Pinel:........................................................................66

1. Deputy G.C.L. Baudains:...............................................................66
2. Deputy S. Pinel:........................................................................66

9. Long-Term Care Scheme (P.99/2013) ..................................................67

1. Senator F. du H. Le Gresley (The Minister for Social Security): ........................67

2. Long-Term Care Scheme (P.99/2013): amendment (P.99/2013 Amd.)................74

1. Deputy J.H. Young:....................................................................74
2. Senator F. du H. Le Gresley:............................................................78
3. The Deputy of St. Martin:..............................................................79
4. Deputy M.R.Higgins:..................................................................80
5. Senator I.J. Gorst :......................................................................80
6. Senator L.J. Farnham :..................................................................81
7. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................81
8. The Deputy of St. Ouen:................................................................82
9. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................83
10. Senator P.F. Routier:................................................................83
11. Senator S.C. Ferguson:..............................................................84
12. Deputy G.P. Southern : ..............................................................84
13. Deputy A.K.F. Green:...............................................................85
14. Deputy S. Pinel:.....................................................................85
15. Deputy J.H. Young: .................................................................86

3. Long-Term Care Scheme (P.99/2013): third amendment (P.99/2013 Amd.(3)) .......88

1. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................88
2. Senator F. du H. Le Gresley:............................................................91
3. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................92

4. Long-Term Care Scheme (P.99/2013): second amendment (P.99/2013 Amd.(2))......93

1. Senator A. Breckon: ....................................................................93
2. Senator F. Du H. Le Gresley:...........................................................95
3. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................96
4. The Deputy of St. Ouen:................................................................97
5. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................98
6. Deputy T.A. Vallois: ...................................................................98
7. Senator A. Breckon: ....................................................................98

5. Long-Term Care Scheme (P.99/2013) - resumption ....................................99

9.5.1 Senator P.F. Routier: ...................................................................99

ADJOURNMENT................................................................................99

[9:30]

The Roll was called and the Dean led the Assembly in Prayer. COMMUNICATIONS BY THE PRESIDING OFFICER

1. Message of sympathy – Nelson Mandela, former President of South Africa The Deputy Bailiff :

Very well. We come then to the Consolidated Order Paper. Under A I just give notice to Members that the memorial service is taking place in South Africa today in relation to the death of former President, Nelson Mandela, that I wrote in the absence of the Bailiff to the High Commission in London to say this: "I write on behalf of the States and the people of Jersey to express our deep sadness on hearing the news of the death of former South African President, Nelson Mandela, yesterday evening. Mr. Mandela was a formidable man and will be remembered with great affection as one of the all-time great leaders this generation will ever see. Most of us will in some way wish to reflect on his passing. He had global influence and was admired for his iconic stand against apartheid. He was a man of great courage and tolerance and remained true to his beliefs throughout his political career. His humanity touched many people, not just the people of South Africa, some of whom live and work in Jersey. It was perhaps his ability to bridge the reconciliation process that will be his defining quality. He will, I am sure, remain a source of inspiration for generations to come. Our thoughts and sympathy extend to his family and more widely to the people of South Africa at this sad time."

QUESTIONS

2. Written Questions

1. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR SOCIAL SECURITY REGARDING THE IMPACT OF R&O.75/2012:

Question

Will the Minister confirm that R&O.75/2012 reduced the sum payable for a child with severe disability, who was in receipt of Attendance Allowance prior to 2008, to 60% of the original award as of 1st July 2012?

Answer

I can confirm that R&O.75/2012 did not reduce the sum payable for a child with a severe disability who was in receipt of Attendance Allowance prior to the introduction of the Income Support scheme in January 2008.

In April 2011 the previous Minister for Social Security amended the Income Support Transitional Order to create a separate category of transitional protection in respect of families that included a child previously receiving Attendance Allowance.

I reviewed this position in June 2012 and further amended the Transitional Order so that 100% protection continues to be available to these families, regardless of the income of the household, and continues until each child reaches compulsory school leaving age and are eligible to make a claim to Income Support in their own right.

In early 2014 I will be lodging proposals to formalise the ongoing support that is available to a child below compulsory school leaving age who has a severe disability.

2. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR EDUCATION, SPORT AND CULTURE REGARDING ENGAGEMENT WITH YOUNG VOTERS IN 2014:

Question

What measures, if any, does the Minister have under consideration, in conjunction with the Privileges and Procedures Committee or otherwise, given that 2014 is an election year and that all those over 16 on election day will have the right to register and to vote, to improve:

1. the numbers of 16 to 19 year olds who register to vote;
2. access to politicians in schools and colleges through hustings, PSHE lessons or otherwise; and,
3. awarenessofcurrent election issues with theaimto significantly increaseturnoutof16to19 year olds in the forthcoming elections?

Answer

The Education, Sport and Culture Department, through States' schools, has an ongoing role in teaching young people about the democratic process. This continues during election year in line with the Jersey Curriculum, which requires students in Key Stage 4 to develop knowledge and understanding of their roles and responsibilities as citizens. The significance of active participation in democratic and electoral process is included in this.

It is a well-recognised principle that students should be able to learn about the democratic process in schools in a neutral environment. Teachers and lessons are expected to be unbiased and apolitical. They give students the background and context necessary for them to make informed decisions about political issues themselves.

The responsibility for promoting the election and organisation of hustings for candidates rests with the Privilege and Procedures Committee with assistance from the States Greffe. The ESC Department liaises with the States Greffe and supports its work to raise awareness about the election.

It is understood that the States Greffe are currently developing a plan for 2014. During the previous election period the following steps were taken and can be repeated next year:

• Voter registration forms were made available in schools and students were advised;
• Public information leaflets and posters, produced by the States Greffe on behalf of the Privilege and Procedures Committee, were made available in schools. These were specifically aimed at encouraging younger voters to register and explained the process;
• Specific areas were set aside in schools for candidates to display manifestos/posters if they wish;
• School premises were made available outside school hours for candidates to arrange hustings or meetings with prospective voters. This enables candidates to arrange times and venues that are especially convenient for younger voters.

Voting and attendance at hustings are not currently compulsory for any section of the population so it is appropriate to maintain the democratic principle of free choice in relation to younger voters.

As well as the above, ESC is investigating options for a new Youth Council which would aim to increase awareness of the political process and encourage greater participation among a range of young people.

3. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE CHAIRMAN OF PRIVILEGES AND PROCEDURES COMMITTEE REGARDING ENGAGEMENT WITH YOUNG VOTERS IN 2014:

Question

What measures, if any, does the Chairman have under consideration, in conjunction with the Minister for Education, Sport and Culture or otherwise, given that 2014 is an election year and that all those over 16 on election day will have the right to register and to vote, to improve:

1. the numbers of 16 to 19 year olds who register to vote;
2. access to politicians in schools and colleges through hustings, PSHE lessons or otherwise; and,
3. awarenessofcurrent election issues with theaimto significantly increaseturnoutof16to19 year olds in the forthcoming elections?

Answer

The Privileges and Procedures Committee is committed to raising awareness among Islanders of their right to register to vote and to vote on election day. The Committee has commenced preparatory work on its voter registration and turn-out campaign for the 2014 elections and hopes to see an increased turnout among all Islanders in the forthcoming elections.

The Committee was interested to read the Jersey Annual Social Survey 2013, which showed that just 16% of Islanders aged between 16 and 34 years voted in the October 2011 elections, compared with 74% of those aged 65 years or over and 39% of 35 to 44 year olds. We are keenly aware that there is significant capacity to improve voter registration and turn-out among the younger generations.

The Committee will be liaising with the Education, Sport and Culture Department to assist in raising awareness of the forthcoming elections in our schools. The Committee will be preparing information packs for students and posters will be distributed to schools aimed at encouraging younger voters to register to vote and explaining the voting process. Areas will be set aside in schools for candidates to display their manifestos and posters, and school premises will be made available outside of school hours for hustings meetings to be arranged, should candidates wish to take advantage of this opportunity. The Committee is also keen for voter registration forms to be made available in schools for students to complete, should they wish to do so.

The Committee will also continue its work with the Youth Service to raise awareness among young Islanders. Voter information, voter registration forms and candidates' manifestos will be made available online and social media will be used to engage with Islanders. The campaign in respect of the 2011 elections focused upon election issues, such as the provision of housing and education, and the Committee will consider its approach in respect of the forthcoming campaign early in the new year. The Committee also intends to discuss whether consideration should be given to the provision of pre-poll voting facilities in schools.

The Committee wishes to emphasise that its campaign will not just focus on 16 to19 year olds but will encourage everyone who is entitled to register and vote to do so. While it is important that the Committee does all it can to increase awareness among young people we must not forget that 16 to 19 year olds represent a small proportion of the total number of voters. The Committee will therefore be working to encourage Islanders of all age groups to register to vote, and to cast their vote in the October elections.

4. DEPUTY  G.P.  SOUTHERN  OF  ST.  HELIER  OF THE  CHIEF  MINISTER REGARDING THE INTRODUCTION OF A HARMONISED MATERNITY POLICY:

Question

Further to his statement of the 19th November 2013 on public sector pay in which he referred to "a harmonised maternity policy", will the Chief Minister inform members what the terms of this policy are, which employee groups are affected and how it compares with UK equivalents?

Answer

The current Maternity Policy, which was re-drafted and agreed in consultation with Trades Union representatives, applies to all employees of the States of Jersey.

Before this policy was agreed there were a number of maternity policies applicable to different pay groups. This meant women in different areas were treated differently, which was inequitable. The new policy has ensured a consistent approach across the organisation.

You can read the full Maternity Policy below.

Under the UK's maternity legislation a qualifying employee is entitled to 90% pay for the first 6 weeks (offset against Statutory Maternity Pay, SMP), then for up to a further 12 weeks they can be paid their SMP and half pay. Between 19 weeks and 39 weeks, they are paid their SMP entitlement, then from week 40 to 52 any further leave is unpaid. It is compulsory for an employee to take 2 weeks leave after the birth of the baby. An employee becomes eligible for maternity benefits after 26 weeks continuous employment in the UK.

MATERNITY LEAVE

Contents Page

1. Policy Statement 3
2. Policy Aims 3
3. Who does this Policy apply to 3
4. Key Principles 3
5. Links to Other Policies 4
6. Roles and Responsibilities 4
7. Policy Provisions 5
8. Glossary of Terms 10

This policy should be read in conjunction with the Management and Employee Guidelines on Maternity Leave.

1. Policy Statement for Maternity Leave

1. It is the aim ofthe States of Jersey to ensure that as far as possible all employees are able to combine their career and family responsibilities.
2. The States ofJersey values the contributions of all its employees and every effort will be made to support female employees throughout the maternity period and to encourage them to return to work from their Maternity Leave.
3. The Statesof Jersey aims ensure equality and consistency in terms and conditions which relate to the management of employees who are entitled to Maternity Leave and related pay.

2. Policy Aims

2.1 The purpose and aim of this policy is to:

• Provide clear guidance to  managers and  employees  about Maternity  Leave  and related pay entitlements.

3. Who does this Policy apply to?

1. This policy applies to all pregnant female employees[1] ofthe States of Jersey on permanent and non-permanent contracts of employment.
2. It does not apply to:

• Workers who are engaged on zero-hours agreements
• Workers who are engaged on UK training contracts
• Workers who work for the States of Jersey through a contract for services on an interim, locum, self-employed, or agency basis;

• Voluntary staff or those on honorary contracts where there is no implied contract of employment.

4. Key Principles

4.1 A standard set of underpinning principles has been developed for this Policy and will apply to all States of Jersey Human Resources Policies, and terms and condition of service. These principles can be found under Policies on the States intranet.

In addition the following principles also apply:

• No female employee will suffer detriment of any kind as a result of being pregnant or taking Maternity Leave;
• A female employee may not be dismissed for reasons of pregnancy or for taking Maternity Leave irrespective of their length of employment.

5. Links to other Policies

5.1 Other policies and documents which may be helpful when considering this policy are:

• Equality & Diversity
• Flexible Working
• Career Break
• Parental Leave
• Adoption leave
• Health & Safety & Wellbeing
• Sickness Entitlement & Leave
• Redeployment

6. Roles and Responsibilities under this Policy

In addition to the generic policy responsibilities which can be found on the Policy intranet page, specific to this policy:

1. Employees are responsible for:

• Providing written notification of their Maternity Leave to their Line Manager in line with the timescales in this policy.

2. Line Managers are responsible for ensuring that:

• They maintain regular contact with the employee during their Maternity Leave, and that they are kept informed of any changes within the department and any vacancies which arise as a result of organisational change which may affect them;
• They consider any requests from the employee if they want to return to work on a part-time, job share or other flexible working arrangements, in line with the States Flexible Working Policy;
• They inform the Payroll Officer, Treasury & Resources, of the date that the employee will return to work;
• Ensuring that a health and safety risk assessment is carried out where the employee's work activity could put the health of her and her baby at risk.

3. Human Resources (HR) are responsible for:

• Together with Line Managers and Payroll ensuring that employees are properly recompensed during the period of their Maternity Leave.

7. Maternity Leave Provisions

1. Entitlement (See also 7.3)

7.1.1 All pregnant employees are required to take 2 weeks Maternity Leave following the birth of their baby regardless of length of service.

2. Notification of Maternity Leave

1. The employee must decide, following medical advice, when she will start her Maternity Leave. She must notify her Line Manager, in writing as soon as possible but no laterthan the end ofthe15th week (the qualifying' week) before her expected week of childbirth (EWC).
2. The employee must also state in writing her intention to return to work on the same number of hours as she worked prior to taking Maternity Leave. (See also section 7.8.5)
3. As far as possible, at least 28 days (4 weeks) written notice must be given if the employee wishes to change the start of her Maternity Leave.

3. Maternity Pay

1. Regardless of length of service the employee will be paid 100% of their normal pensionable pay (non-pensionable pay is excluded) for the first 2 weeks of her Maternity Leave.
2. If the employee has worked for the States of Jersey for over a year on a permanent contract or is on a fixed term contract with at least one year remaining at the end ofthe period of Maternity Leave, they will be paid 90% oftheir normal pensionable pay (this does not include standby, call-out and allowances which are not pensionable) for a further 10 weeks of their Maternity Leave.
3. The Social Security Maternity Allowance will be offset against maternity payments regardless of whether the employee is receiving the allowance.
   4. Pensions

1. The full period of Maternity Leave will only count as pensionable service under the Public Employees Contributory Retirement Scheme(PECRS)orJerseyTeachers Superannuation Fund (J.TSF) if the employee is a member of the scheme and optsto continue her contributions as if her pay had not been interrupted for the period of unpaid leave. The Employer will continue to pay its percentage of contributions in this case. The whole period of Maternity Leave will then count as pensionable service.
2. The first 12 weeks of paid maternity leave are subject to deductions for pension contributions.
3. An employee who has optedto continue paying pension contributions into either the PECRSor J.TSF scheme during the period of paid leave could be disadvantaged if she discontinues these payments during the same period of unpaid leave.
4. If an employee opts to discontinue her contributions to the relevant scheme, the period of Maternity Leave will not count as pensionable service. However, the period will still count towards qualifying service.
   5. Time off for Ante-natal Care

1. Expectant mothers will be given paid time off to attend ante-natal appointments.
2. The Employer mayrequirethe employee toshowevidenceof their appointment to their Line Manager and give reasonable notice of such appointments.

6. Annual Leave

1. Annual leave will accrue during the paid weeks of Maternity Leave.
2. The remaining 6 unpaid weeks (or 14 weeks if the employee extends their Maternity Leave to a totalof 26 weeks) will count as continuous service for employment purposes, but does not attract annual leave.

7. Employee Benefits

1. During paid Maternity Leave the employee has a right to continue to benefit from the terms and conditions of employment which would have applied had they been at work instead of on leave, except for the terms of providing for the employee's salary.
2. Whilst on Maternity Leave employees are still obliged to follow the Code of Conduct applicable to them.

8. Returning to work

1. It is expected that the employee will normally return to work within 1 month ofthe notified date of return. (For Teachers the return to work would be expected to be the start ofthe next full or half term.) If this is not possible the employee must discuss this with her Line Manager and HR and agree an alternative date.
2. Except during the first 2 weeksfrom the dayof childbirth, all employees whotakeMaternity Leave havethe right toreturntoworkatany time during either Ordinary Maternity Leave (first 12 weeks) or Additional Maternity Leave (upto26weeks), subject to her following the correct notification process.
3. Where it is not possible for the employee to return to her former post, every effort will be made to appoint themto another post in the same gradein the same department. Failing this, employment will be at the same grade elsewhere in the States of Jersey.
4. If an employee wantstoreturntoworkearlierthanthedateagreedwhen notifying Maternity Leave (7.2.2), she must putherrequestin writing to her Line Manager,giving28days(or 4 weeks) notice of her return to work. Where possible the new date will be accommodated.
5. An employee may apply to work reduced hours on returning to work subject to the agreement of her Line Manager depending on business and operational need.
6. Any furtherperiod of unpaid leave is not deemed to be Maternity Leave and will be considered under the relevant policy (see section 5).

9. Not returning to work

1. If the employee chooses not to return to work at the end of her Maternity Leave, she should submit the requisite contractual notice to terminate her contract.
2. In such circumstances then the employee must repay 10 weeks of 90% pay (less any Maternity Allowance received).

10. Sickness & Maternity Leave

The following provisions (7.10.1 and 7.10.3) are subject to the usual certification requirements when an employee is absent for reasons of sickness.

1. Sickness before commencement of Maternity leave

If an employee is absent for a pregnancy related reason in the 4 weeks before their EWC and does not return, her Maternity Leave is automatically triggered. This applies even if she has already notified a later Maternity Leave start date.

If the employee is absent for a non-pregnancy related reason her original Maternity Leave start date still applies and normal entitlement to sick pay applies, until her EWC.

2. Sickness during Maternity Leave

Illness  whilst  on  paid  or  unpaid  Maternity  Leave  does  not  entitle  the  employee  to contractual sick pay.

3. Sickness on return from Maternity Leave

If an employee is ill and unable to return to work on a date previously notified, she must provide  a  doctor's  medical  certificate  to  cover  any  period  of  sickness  absence.   An employee  will  be  required  to  return  to  work  before  entitlement  to  sick  pay  can  be triggered. If there are exceptional circumstances which affect this, they will be looked at on a case by case basis.

11. Keeping in Touch (KIT') Days

7.11.1 If the employee wishes, they may after the first 2 weeks of their Maternity Leave, come into their department for an agreed period of time. This work is unpaid and the employee is expected to make appropriate childcare arrangements for this visit. The employee's Line Manager is also expected to keep in regular contact with them during their Maternity Leave.

12. Health & Safety

1. The employer is required to protect the health and safetyatworkofall employees and others, including new and expectant mothers, by carrying out a risk assessment. It is the responsibility ofthe Line Manager to arrange this where the work activity ofthe pregnant employee could put her and her baby at risk.
2. If a risk is identified that could jeopardise the health andsafetyof a new or expectant mother or her baby, first consideration will be given to removing the hazards or preventing exposure tothe risk. Ifthe risk still cannot be avoided, furtherstepsto protect the health and safetyof the pregnant employee must be taken - changes in her working conditions or hours or offers of suitable alternative work should be considered as options.

13. Early Birth

7.13.1 Employees who give birth before their Maternity Leave start date or their EWC are still entitled  to  the  same  number  of  weeks'  Maternity  Leave,  but  this  will  commence automatically from the date of the baby's birth.

14. Miscarriage or Stillbirth

1. A miscarriage or stillbirth earlier than the 24th week of pregnancy does not qualify the employee  for  Maternity  leave,  Maternity  pay  or Maternity  Allowance.Any sickness absence from work following such an event will be treated as normal sickness.
2. A stillbirth during or after the 25th week of pregnancy qualifies an employee for Maternity Leave and pay in the usual way.

15. Breastfeeding

7.15.1 A mother who is breastfeeding may request short-term flexible arrangements with her Line Manager to accommodate this. Any such request should be discussed prior to return from Maternity  Leave  and  will  be  looked  at  alongside  operational  demands  and  available facilities. Any breaks away from the workplace are without pay.

8  Glossary of Terms used in this Policy

3. Oral Questions The Deputy Bailiff :

We now come to Oral Questions. As indicated, I am going to call first on the Connétable of St. John to ask a question of the Minister for Economic Development.

1. Connétable  P.J.  Rondel  of  St. John of  the  Minister  for  Economic  Development regarding the use of the former La Folie Inn building to train emergency services:

Will the Minister advise who gave permission for the former La Folie Inn building, which is a proposed B.L.I./S.S.I. (Building of Local Interest/Site of Special Interest), to be used to train emergency services and why was this building chosen when the States have many former housing properties which are to be demolished and have no historic value that could have been used?

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

Permission was given by Ports of Jersey to the States of Jersey Fire and Rescue Service to use La Folie site earlier this year for an exercise, which involved the use of breathing apparatus as part of a search and rescue training, on the proviso that those activities would not cause permanent damage to the fabric of the building. Although I cannot comment on behalf of other departments, I understand different States buildings are identified and permission sought to use them based on specific challenges presented. La Folie in particular was popular as it is in a central location, has easy parking and the internal layout is compact and challenging for such exercises. I am assured that recent activities undertaken by the States Fire and Rescue Services  have not caused any damage to the property, which is regularly checked by officers and remains wind and watertight. Thank you.

1. The Connétable of St. John :

Will the Minister review the answer he has given, given that he says there has been no damage done to the building? Will he review through his officers to make sure that the building had not previously been used on other exercises by other emergency services, because I am reliably informed that there is considerable damage on the inside of that building?

Senator A.J.H. Maclean:

As I say, I am assured that that is not the case, but indeed if there is evidence to the contrary I would be interested to receive it from the Connétable . I am very happy to look into the matter and, using his terms, review what I have been informed to date.

The Connétable of St. John :

I would be more than happy to meet the Minister on site. Thank you.

2. Deputy S. Power of St. Brelade :

Could the Minister give an indication to the Assembly if the building is going to be continued to be used for training exercises? Could he give an indication as to whether the building will remain essentially unoccupied and not in commercial usage for the next 10 years?

Senator A.J.H. Maclean:

Part A of the question, it is not my understanding that there are regular exercises held at that particular building. In fact, I think the Fire and Rescue Services have used 8 different premises during the course of the last year or so. This is the only occasion that this particular one has been used. As far as further uses, yes, there have been a number of occasions when uses have been considered. Obviously La Folie has to be considered to the overall Ports of States. That is a matter together with Property Holdings and the States of Jersey Development Company that we are continuing to review. I am hopeful that announcements will be made in the not too distant future of progress for redevelopment.

The Deputy Bailiff :

We come on to the Connétable 's second question because he was so brief with the first.

2. The Connétable of St. John of the Minister for Treasury and Resources regarding tenders for the financial Quarter of the Esplanade:

Following the announcement that Camerons and a U.K. (United Kingdom) company are to work with the States of Jersey Development Company on the financial quarter of the Esplanade, can the Minister give details of all the companies who tendered and prices quoted for the work?

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

rapporteur):

S.o.J.D.C. (States of Jersey Development Company) undertook a pre-qualification exercise in June 2013, which led to a formal tendering process being undertaking in September 2013. The procurement of the first phase of the Jersey International Finance Centre was the subject of a Ministerial decision that the Minister for Treasury and Resources took on 30th October 2013. This decision approved a 2-stage design and build procurement route to be followed. This means that at this point in time the joint venture between Camerons and Sir Robert McAlpine Limited has been appointed as the preferred contractor. Under the terms of the pre-contract service agreement they will undertake a certain role up and until the main contract is let. No sub-contractors have been appointed at this stage. These packages will be tendered by the joint venture body during the course of the first stage on an open-book basis.

[9:45]

On 5th December 2013 the Camerons and Sir Robert McAlpine Limited joint venture held a meet the buyer event to provide local businesses with the opportunity to find out more about the scene and to present their businesses to the preferred contractor. The Social Security Department and Jersey Business also attended the event and more than 80 local companies registered to take part. This project has the potential to be a major stimulus for the local construction industry and the appointment of Camerons will ensure that local companies will have an opportunity to tender to undertake the construction work with the target of delivering as much as possible on Island.

1. The Connétable of St. John :

Could the Minister answer the question? I will read it again. Following the announcement that Camerons and a U.K. company are to work with the Jersey Development Company on the financial quarter of the Esplanade, can the Minister give details of all the companies who tendered and prices quoted for the work?

Deputy E.J. Noel:

To take the last point first, I cannot give the financial details, but what I can give is that there are currently 3 local contractors with experience of delivering such large construction projects. The first of which is Dandara, which were not invited to tender as they have a competing office scheme. The other 2 are Camerons and AC Major. Both submitted expressions of interest and pre-qualified. Tender documentation was sent to both. Given the size of the project both companies were joint venturing with U.K. contractors and Camerons with Sir Robert McAlpine Limited and AC Major with Kea. In the event AC Major did not submit a tender as its partner, Kea, withdrew due to the upturn in the workload in the U.K.

2. The Connétable of St. John :

Yet again, the Minister has been spending public money and will not tell Members. Will we please be told how much the price was quoted on, if they have received a tender and it has been given out? We are entitled to know that figure.

Deputy E.J. Noel:

It is quite interesting because I had a conversation with the Constable just before this sitting commenced and he agreed that it would not be in the interest of Islanders for this information to go into the public domain. It is confidential information and I cannot disclose it.

3. Deputy S. Power:

Would the Assistant Minister not agree with me, that it is hardly an acceptable position to have one company tender for works on the financial quarter, because it gives the department no benchmark as to how competitive that tender might be?

Deputy E.J. Noel:

That is exactly why S.o.J.D.C. are using cost consultants, EC Harris , to ensure that they receive good value for the contract.

4. Deputy M.R. Higgins:

I ask the Assistant Minister for Treasury and Resources, we are being told repeatedly that you cannot provide information because it is confidential. I have been looking at a number of contracts, including managed print contracts in the United Kingdom, which are being released. Many local authorities are now giving all the rates that are being provided by the people who have tended for the contracts. More and more local authorities are going for more openness. When is the Minister's department going to be far more open and provide details of contracts, including things like the incinerator contract, which is 5 years old, and any information would no longer be confidential and should be in the public domain?

Deputy E.J. Noel:

We are as transparent as we can be. S.o.J.D.C. in its remit, as I have already pointed out, there were only 3 contractors on the Island that could carry out the scheme. To put such financial information into the market place would be unfair.

5. Deputy M.R. Higgins:

The Assistant Minister has not explained why it is that other local authorities in the United Kingdom are now publishing contracts, especially when they have taken place say 4 or 5 years ago and the information could no longer be considered commercially sensitive. Will he review his policy?

Deputy E.J. Noel:

We always review our policies. In fact we have recently reviewed that policy on grants being made by the States. We have reduced the limit down from £100,000 to £75,000. That means that all grants given at £75,000 or above, those recipients will have to publish those accounts via the States. So, we are being more transparent and open with the public where we can.

6. Senator S.C. Ferguson:

We seem to have regressed a little. This information was always available 30 or 40 years ago. Why has it changed?

Deputy E.J. Noel:

Unfortunately I was not around some 40 or 50 years ago, so I could not possibly comment on what was the States policy then. But now we work in very competitive times. We cannot give a competitive advantage over one body against another.

7. Senator S.C. Ferguson:

Yes, but this particular tender has now been awarded, so there is no commercial confidentiality to worry about.

Deputy E.J. Noel:

What has been awarded is a pre-contract service agreement. The actual final contract has not been let yet. This is a pre-contract service agreement not the final contract.

8. The Connétable of St. John :

Can I correct the Assistant Minister? Yes, I agree confidentiality does pay a major part, but not when a contract or service contract has already been awarded. Assistant Minister, will you please give the Members of this House, who are responsible for money being spent, the actual figure that was quoted and accepted for the work that is being carried out by Camerons and Sir Robert McAlpine Limited, please?

Deputy E.J. Noel:

Unfortunately, no, I am not able to. The Connétable of St. John :

Are we going to be running a government that is going to be doing its business behind closed doors? Are we going to allow a Minister to get away with not answering questions?

The Deputy Bailiff :

This is entirely a political matter Connétable and it requires no intervention on that score from the Chair at all. We now go back to the first question which Deputy Higgins will ask of the Chief Minister.

3. Deputy M.R. Higgins of the Chief Minister regarding the compensation scheme for Historic Child Abuse victims and the number of claims settled, disputed, rejected and pending:

Will the Chief Minister update Members on the compensation scheme for Historic Child Abuse Victims and in particular the numbers of claims settled, disputed, rejected and pending, the number of claimants undergoing additional psychiatric or other assessments and the progress in extending the scheme to those in foster care?

Senator I.J. Gorst (The Chief Minister):

I understand in my absence the questioner was discourteous towards my Assistant Minister. I can assure the House that my Assistant Minister is fully briefed and completely capable of answering any questions which might be sent to the department. If I may now start the answer, 131 claims have been received. Of those 84 claims, 64 per cent have agreed a settlement. 47 cases are still being considered. No claims have been rejected and no claimants have disputed the settlement offered to them. No one has asked for their offer to be reviewed. 61 claimants - that is 46 per cent - have had or have agreed to have a report from a scheme psychiatrist. A paper will be taken to the Council of Ministers in the New Year detailing the options for foster care.

1. Deputy M.R. Higgins:

Of the people who have gone for psychiatric assessment, how many have had to see more than one psychiatrist?

Senator I.J. Gorst :

There are currently 2 claimants that have agreed following consultation, as I understand it, with their legal adviser to undergo a second form of assessment with regard to psychiatric report.

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

The Chief Minister said that no claims had been rejected. Could he enlighten the Assembly as to my information that at least one individual was being pressured to withdraw his application or he would be prosecuted? This is an individual who made statements to the police in the 1980s, but they conveniently disappeared. Is the Minister quite confident of his statement?

Senator I.J. Gorst :

I am confident of the information that I have been given by the lawyers administering the scheme on our behalf. If there are particular circumstances that the Deputy has been approached about from those who might claim then of course he can either contact me or contact the scheme's lawyers or the individual claimant's lawyers to consider that with them. But, I am not aware of the information, as I do not believe you would expect me to be, around individual claimants.

3. Deputy M. Tadier of St. Brelade :

Will the Chief Minister confirm whether he is aware that some of the victims have been advised that if they did not accept the compensation given to them, which they may have thought was a paltry sum, that they would have to pay their own legal fees? Does the Chief Minister think that kind of ultimatum is appropriate?

Senator I.J. Gorst :

As I said, I am not aware of individual cases in that regard. We should remember the reason that the Council of Ministers set up this scheme in the first place was so that claimants did not have to go through a lengthy and often difficult court process, notwithstanding the fact that many of those claims would be out of time. Therefore, the Council of Ministers came up with this particular scheme, which is far easier. It does not incur the costs associated with going to court and is more helpful in giving compensation than perhaps would have been claims taken through the court.

4. Deputy M. Tadier :

If it turns out to be correct, which I believe is the case, that some individuals have been told: "Accept this otherwise you will have to pay your own legal fees, i.e. the work that I have done for you as a lawyer", is that acceptable in the Chief Minister's opinion?

Senator I.J. Gorst :

Once again I am being asked to give an opinion with regard to what lawyers are telling claimants. Lawyers should be supporting claimants in accessing the scheme and helping them in that regard. You would not expect me to be party to what individual lawyers would be saying to their claimants.

Deputy M. Tadier :

May I have a point of order? The Chief Minister is implying that this question is out of order, that it does not fall under his responsibility, but it is a States-run scheme, which has been set up by the States of Jersey for his department. Therefore, does the Chief Minister accept that if the scheme is being run inappropriately it is up to him to be answerable for that?

The Deputy Bailiff :

You cannot expect him to comment on what lawyers have been saying. But you can be asked the question as to what your opinion is if they have concerns. That is really what Deputy Tadier is asking.

Senator I.J. Gorst :

In that case I could be asked my opinion on any number of issues which are completely outside of my remit. I do not think it is appropriate. I am not sure ..

The Deputy Bailiff :

It is part of the pleasure of being Chief Minister. Senator I.J. Gorst :

Thank you, Sir. That is why I enjoy the job so much. It would not seem appropriate to me, as an individual, that lawyers should be treating what are vulnerable claimants in this manner. It would depend, of course, on what sort of contract the lawyer would have with the claimant before they were representing them. My understanding was that claims like this elsewhere and perhaps some lawyers in relation to claims in these instances would be offering more of a no-win no-fee basis. Therefore, I think that if claimants are being told that by their lawyers they should go back and challenge it.

5. Deputy J.A. Hilton of St. Helier :

Can the Chief Minister tell the Assembly with regard to the psychiatrics assessments that take place, do they employ off-Island psychiatrists to do these and whether there have been any delays around these assessments taking place?

Senator I.J. Gorst :

As far as I am aware they are employing off-Island psychiatrists. One of the important things with regard to all these issues around historic abuse is trying to build confidence and bring independence, because some of the individuals have lost confidence in the service that was provided on-Island to them over a number of years. Therefore we have to acknowledge that and try and help them, because that is an issue which they need to deal with and the scheme needs to deal with as well. With regard to the delays, I am trying to think whether I am aware. I am aware of one case where perhaps there has been a delay, but I am not aware of the reasons why.

6. Deputy M.R. Higgins:

Is the Chief Minister aware that at least one person has been having trouble with the States lawyers who claim that the person was not at Haut de la Garenne and yet other survivors of the regime at Haut de la Garenne have confirmed that that person was present? Is the Chief Minister also aware that many of the States' records regarding Haut de la Garenne have conveniently disappeared or been destroyed.

[10:00]

Senator I.J. Gorst :

I am not aware of records having conveniently disappeared or being destroyed. I am aware that there have been some difficulties with some records for those who wish to make claims under the scheme. I am also aware that in those cases officers and departments have tried to recover information in any way that they could and tried to patch together information and records. I would have thought - again I am not aware of individual cases - that where individual's records are not able to ascertain whether individuals were resident at Haut de la Garenne and yet other third parties are able to verify it that would be part of the evidence used in determining a claim.

4. Deputy G.C.L. Baudains of St. Clement of the Minister for Transport and Technical Services regarding repairs to the Bellozanne Chimney:

Would the Minister explain why he finds it necessary to repair the Bellozanne chimney immediately prior to demolishing it and how much this exercise is going to cost?

Deputy K.C. Lewis of St. Saviour (The Minister for Transport and Technical Services):

A structure such as the Bellozanne chimney requires regular maintenance inspections right up until the time it is fully decommissioned and finally demolished. A recent inspection identified small but significant defects which required the steel flues that protrude from the top of the chimney and pieces of loose concrete around the very top of the chimney to be removed. As the chimney sits within an operationally active area, it is close to the road, these defects had to be fixed as soon as possible. The works cost in the region of £39,500 and I am informed they are now complete.

3.4.1 Deputy G.C.L. Baudains:

I thank the Minister for the clarification. Could he advise then that the report that remedial work was required was inaccurate and what is being done is the start of the demolition? If material is being removed then surely that is part of the demolition.

Deputy K.C. Lewis :

It was the steel flues that protrude from the top of the Bellozanne Chimney and the surrounding concrete area that was unstable. I believe part of it has been removed and the concrete has just been remediated until such time as the whole chimney will be demolished, which I believe will be early part of next year.

Deputy J.G. Reed of St. Ouen :

The Minister has just answered my question.

5. Deputy T.M. Pitman of the Chief Minister regarding the use of the Data Protection (Jersey) Law 2005 to prosecute former Senator S. Syvret:

Will the Chief Minister clarify why the Data Protection Commissioner was able to utilise the Data Protection (Jersey) Law 2005 to prosecute former Senator S. Syvret as a data controller and why no similar actions have yet been brought against others who run hate sites such as forums and blogs under the same provisions and in doing so would he clarify precisely which Article of the Law was utilised?

Senator I.J. Gorst (The Chief Minister):

A data controller is a person who determines the purpose for which and the manner in which any personal data is processed. In the case of the former Senator the court judged that the Data Protection Law did apply to the way personal data acquired in his capacity as data controller was published. Each complaint to the Data Protection Commissioner's office is assessed on its own merits. A regulatory offence is dealt with by the Data Protection Commissioner's office. In the case of a criminal offence a file is submitted to H.M. Attorney General for consideration. If the Data Protection Commissioner does not comply with the law when bringing a case the court will dismiss the case. The Articles of the Data Protection (Jersey) Law 2005 used in the prosecution in question were Articles 21 and 55.

1. Deputy T.M. Pitman:

The manner in which the Data Protection Law has been interpreted, I would argue manipulated, in truth means that everyone who owns an iPhone, tablet or laptop could be classed as a data controller. So, what I would like the Minister to answer me is this: the former Senator was in fact no more a data controller than the individual who runs the Haut de la Garenne murder files hate site on which emails stolen from Deputy Martin by Deputy Power appeared and on a current site run by the same convicted criminal. Could the Minister please clarify why that person who is clearly a data controller has not been prosecuted, given that there have been complaints made to the authorities?

The Deputy Bailiff :

Deputy Trevor Pitman, it was, in my view, quite unnecessary to add the gratuitous attack on Deputy Power in the course of that question. I would ask you to withdraw the offending words, which will then be withdrawn from Hansard.

Deputy T.M. Pitman:

No, I certainly will not withdraw it, Sir, because I am just stating the truth, which I believe the Chair is fully aware of.

Deputy M.R. Higgins:

Sir, can I just ask a question, if I may, on this particular issue. It is a fact that Deputy Power was dealt with by this House with for basically taking documents that were not his and sending them out. Surely it is a matter of record that that took place.

The Deputy Bailiff :

With that I am not taking issue. What I am taking issue with was the gratuitous attack on a Member which is irrelevant to the question which was being put. That is the issue I was inviting Deputy Trevor Pitman to address and withdraw.

Deputy T.M. Pitman:

It is not gratuitous. The Deputy has admitted it. Deputy Martin, who was the victim, can clarify. I find the foot-stomping very worrying. I am stating a simple fact. There is nothing gratuitous, it is just fact.

The Deputy Bailiff :

Deputy Pitman, would you please explain why the reference to Deputy Power is relevant to the question which you were putting, which as I understood it was a question as to whether everyone who held an iPhone or an iPad was a data controller? I cannot for the moment see the relevance of the reference to Deputy Power.

Deputy T.M. Pitman:

With due respect, I think it is very relevant, because I am highlighting a very obviously and very worrying inconsistency within the law. We have clear breaches arising from the perfect example of data which was stolen. That has been acknowledged. It has gone on to a site where complaints have been made. Clearly that site, the person behind it is a data protection controller, yet no prosecution. So, I think it is entirely relevant. I maintain that, Sir. I am stating a simple fact.

The Deputy Bailiff :

Very well. Ultimately I think this is probably a matter for Members if they think it appropriate later on. Chief Minister.

Senator I.J. Gorst :

Sorry, Sir, I could not hear what your ruling was. The Deputy Bailiff :

Sorry. The ruling is that your question will stand. I think it is a matter for Members to take further with the Privileges and Procedures Committee if they wish.

Senator I.J. Gorst :

I am not sure the question is a question for me. The question is why is a particular site or individual or action not being prosecuted, so that does not in any way, shape or form fall, I believe, within any of my responsibilities. Prosecution decisions are made appropriately by the prosecuting authority. They are balanced and difficult decisions. It is not a question that I can answer. If the Deputy feels that a particular website warrants investigation or is in breach or committing a criminal offence with regard to what is being published on it that would fall foul of the Data Protection Law then he should approach either the Data Protection Commissioner or the police with those concerns. That seems to be the appropriate course of action.

Deputy T.M. Pitman:

I have already done both.

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

In 2010 the Corporate Services Scrutiny Panel carried out a review on data protection amendments. In particular the European Communities Implementation of Council Direction on Privacy and Electronic Communications Ordinance that was carried out in Guernsey in 2004. A recommendation was stated as accepted by the then Minister for Treasury and Resources. I was wondering whether the Chief Minister could advise whether anything has been carried out further in this respect in terms of looking at consistency with the Data Protection Law?

Senator I.J. Gorst :

I am not aware of whether that recommendation has now been enacted, but the Data Protection Commissioner, I think, since then is now working across both jurisdictions. So, if changes are being made or have been made to Guernsey legislation I would expect that proposals, if not already made, would be coming forward in due course for Jersey legislation as well.

3. Deputy T.A. Vallois:

Supplementary? Could I ask the Chief Minister that he looks over the responses that were given to that report and report back as to what will be updated or not, because I would imagine there needs to be regulations to come forward?

Senator I.J. Gorst :

I would be pleased to do that because, as Members will perhaps now realise from the number of questions that have been raised in this Assembly on these issues and with the advent of digital technology and social media, these issues have become far more complex.

4. Deputy C.F. Labey of Grouville :

Would the Chief Minister confirm that the said Deputy lost his seat as Minister for Housing because of those same breaches and because he no longer enjoyed the trust of his colleagues and the Council of Ministers?

The Deputy Bailiff :

No. That question does not arise out of the question which has been put. Deputy Higgins?

5. Deputy M.R. Higgins:

Does the Chief Minister think it is appropriate that a person who has been convicted of hate campaigns is invited by the Data Protection Commissioner to join in what was effectively a secret action against former Senator Stuart Syvret? In other words, a person who has abused the law is invited by the Data Protection Commissioner to join in an action. Does he think that is an appropriate use of the law?

Senator I.J. Gorst :

I am not aware of the facts which the Deputy raises. Therefore, I cannot say whether it is appropriate or not.

6. Deputy M. Tadier :

Article 10 of the European Court Convention on Human Rights says that everyone has the right to freedom of expression and the right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas, without interference by the public authority. This is a qualified right. Will the Chief Minister explain where he thinks the balance lies between the defence of Article 10 and the ability of an individual to make a complaint and use the Data Protection Law for published comments which he or she feels are distressing, but which may nonetheless be true?

Senator I.J. Gorst :

There are other Members of this Assembly who are far more qualified to deal with the legal interpretation of where the juxtaposition between European Human Rights and the interplay with the Data Protection Law. The Data Protection Law is there to protect individuals against inappropriate use by data controllers of their personal information. It is, I believe, a fundamental right. It is even more so in the digital age in which we live as I have just said. But, these issues are complex.

7. Deputy M. Tadier :

Does the right to ask for information on yourself to be taken down because one finds it distressing, even though one does not have to prove that it is incorrect, override the basic Article 10 right to freedom of expression?

The Deputy Bailiff :

Deputy , the Chief Minister is often expected to answer questions with his opinions on almost everything. That is the nature of the job. But that particular question is really a legal question, which also does not really arise out of the question which has been put by Deputy Trevor Pitman, which was the utilisation of the Data Protection Law to prosecute a former Senator and why similar actions have not been brought against others.

[10:15]

Deputy M. Tadier :

Sir, may I rephrase? The reason I ask is that both the Data Protection Law and human rights legislation falls under the Chief Minister, I believe. Therefore it is his area to answer questions on this and its application of those 2 laws. The issue here is about getting the balance of those 2 laws. If the Data Protection Law seems to be being used to .. it has opened the door to be used indiscriminately. So just because an individual does not like what has been written about him or herself does that pose a political issue in the Chief Minister also enforcing human rights, which are also an issue for all individuals in our society?

Senator I.J. Gorst :

I cannot and do not wish to be drawn on the complexities of where human rights relate to data protection. However, I am quite willing to ask for legal advice on that matter if that is what particular Members would require. Equally those Members can ask themselves as well.

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

Would the Chief Minister not acknowledge, given the issues raised in the question, that now may be the time for an independent inquiry to be held into the workings of the law, given some of its apparent perversion of anomalous consequences?

Senator I.J. Gorst :

I have said on many occasions in this Assembly when answering questions on this particular issue, if Members of this Assembly feel that the law is not working in the way that it was intended when it was introduced or feel that the other place in this building when interpreting and making decisions in the courts on this law then this Assembly has a responsibility to bring forward amendments and discuss it in this Assembly. That is the right and proper process. We do not need to have an independent review of it. If we do not think it is working, bring forward amendments to it. That is what our job is.

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

The question asked about the 2005 law and prosecuting a former Senator, he was prosecuted after he was a Senator, so I will call him Mr. Syvret. Is the Chief Minister certain that the law at the moment is not in favour of sitting States Members above former States Members and ordinary Members of the public? Is he absolutely sure that law is carried out equally for everybody?

Senator I.J. Gorst :

I have no reason to suspect anything other than that the Data Protection Commissioner is acting in an appropriate manner. The particular issue that seems to be on some Members' minds with regard to an existing States Members, I answered that question in October of this year. It was quite straightforward. That breach was a regulatory breach of the data protection principles which is covered in Schedule 1 Part 1 of the Law. The particular breach that this question relates to was a criminal breach and it refers to those Articles in the law which carry a criminal sanction. At the end of the day the court agreed with the Data Protection Commissioner in that regard.

10. Deputy T.M. Pitman:

These are my last questions in the States for now. I would hope that I might get an answer. It is quite simple. The Data Protection Commissioner uses the term to justify non-prosecution of others if they are, in her words, kitchen table bloggers. So, could the Chief Minister enlighten me as to what is the difference between a kitchen table blogger and a data controller? I am happy if he refers to H.M. Solicitor General, because I know it might be a bit complex.

The Deputy Bailiff :

Frankly I do not understand how the Chief Minister can be expected to explain an expression which has been used, you say, by the Data Protection Commissioner.

Deputy T.M. Pitman:

It goes to the fundamental part of the law. As I was trying to highlight before, these inconsistencies mean we cannot say that someone who is not employed by a magazine, a newspaper, for example, is a data controller, but someone else who is also not employed by anyone is a kitchen table blogger. I am just trying to understand, as many of the public are, why Senator Syvret could be prosecuted and others cannot. I think it is relevant, with due respect.

The Deputy Bailiff :

I understood the last question. Could you answer that, Chief Minister? Senator I.J. Gorst :

I have answered the question with regard to the prosecution that the question alludes to. With regard to the term "kitchen table blogger" it is not a term that I am familiar with. I am not party to the correspondence where the Deputy says that the Data Protection Commissioner has used it. I would have thought the simplest follow-up would have been to ask indeed the Data Protection Commissioner what was meant by that term.

Deputy T.M. Pitman: I have already done that.

6. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier of the Minister for Economic Development regarding the steps taken by his Department to encourage Play.com to remain in Jersey:

Would the Minister outline the steps taken by his department to encourage Play.com to remain in Jersey and state whether he is aware of the reasons why ultimately they decided to move?

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

My department was regularly in contact with the senior management at Play.com and provided every assistance possible, including taking action in the High Court in an attempt to preserve L.V.C.R. (Low Value Consignment Relief). This assistance continued when the company was acquired by Rakuten, a Japanese company with global operations. Three principle factors impacted Rakuten's decision to consolidate their operations out of Jersey and into the U.K. Firstly, as a Japanese company, the fiscal treatment of profits that arise in low-tax jurisdiction by the Japanese tax authority system meant that it was not a viable option for Rakuten to retain the headquarters operation in Jersey. Secondary, H.M. (Her Majesty's) Treasury changes to L.V.C.R. for consignments from the Channel Islands changed the competitive landscape within which Play.com operated. As we made clear in our submission to the U.K. courts, the consequences of the proposed changed included significant job losses, which regrettably have arisen. Finally, as part of its global expansion Rakuten changed their business model from the Play.com fulfilment model wherein Play.com sold their own stock to that of market place, where a web platform developed by Rakuten is used by other retailers as an internet shop window. Members will, of course, be familiar with Amazon who operates a similar model. Thank you.

1. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:

All the factors appear to have been out of the control of the local authorities. Could the Minister absolutely assure the House that the push and pull factors which he outlined in no way reflected adversely on the lack of incentives offered by various authorities on the Island.

Senator A.J.H. Maclean:

No, I cannot. What I said in my answer were the principle reasons. I outlined 3 principle reasons. However, there are other factors that were relevant to Play.com. Those come under the heading and title of competitiveness. They are issues around data costs, data transfer costs, post costs and freight costs. We worked at quite considerable lengths with Play in order to address some of those issues of competitiveness. I should add though that their particular business model was the overriding factor. We have many other companies similar to the old model of Play.com still operating, developing and flourishing in Jersey despite competitive issues.

2. Deputy M.R. Higgins:

Would the Minister accept that the policy of the fulfilment industry or the policy that is pursued which enable some very large companies to come in and make an awful lot of money has worked to the disadvantage of most citizens of this Island? In the sense that now because of restrictions brought in by the U.K. Government, people are being made to pay V.A.T. (Value Added Tax) on goods they are sending to the U.K., including gifts in some cases, over a certain value and the U.K. authorities are being far more draconian on goods going into the U.K. Therefore, the policy is flawed. It has benefited some, created employment for a number for a short period of time, but then in the long-term has been detrimental to the Island.

Senator A.J.H. Maclean: