States Meeting Transcript - 30th April 2013

STATES OF JERSEY

OFFICIAL REPORT

TUESDAY, 30th APRIL 2013

COMMUNICATIONS BY THE PRESIDING OFFICER ......................................9

1. The Dean of Jersey – new Commission ..................................................9
2. Referendum (Reform of States Assembly) (Jersey) Act 2013 - result....................9
3. Liberation Day – recording of proceedings ..............................................9

QUESTIONS.....................................................................................10

2. Written Questions.......................................................................10

1. THE CONNÉTABLE OF ST. JOHN OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING THE APPOINTMENTS OF THE DIRECTORS OF HUMAN RESOURCES AND ORGANISATION DEVELOPMENT: .................................................10
2. THE CONNÉTABLE OF ST. JOHN OF THE MINISTER FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT REGARDING ATTENDANCE AT THE PARIS AGRICULTURAL SHOW:.................................................................................11
3. DEPUTY M.R. HIGGINS OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR HOME AFFAIRS REGARDING BREACHES OF THE DATA PROTECTION (JERSEY) LAW 2005 BY POLICE OFFICERS OR THEIR CIVILIAN STAFF: ..................................13
4. DEPUTY M.R. HIGGINS OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING DATA PROTECTION COMPLAINTS AND REQUESTS RELATING TO THE STATES OF JERSEY POLICE:......................................................................14
5. DEPUTY M.R. HIGGINS OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING REQUESTS SINCE 2005 MADE UNDER ARTICLE 53 OF THE DATA PROTECTION (JERSEY) LAW 2005: ............................................................................15
6. DEPUTY M.R. HIGGINS OF THE MINISTER FOR HOME AFFAIRS REGARDING COMPLAINTS MADE AGAINST THE CHIEF OFFICER AND THE DEPUTY CHIEF OFFICER OF THE STATES OF JERSEY POLICE SINCE 2004:.............15
7. DEPUTY M.R. HIGGINS OF H.M. ATTORNEY GENERAL REGARDING DATA PROTECTION BREACHES:..........................................................16
8. DEPUTY T.A. VALLOIS OF THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES REGARDING RETURNS TO THE TRASURY FROM INCOME DERIVED THROUGH PUBLIC SERVICES:.....................................................17
9. THE CONNÉTABLE OF ST. LAWRENCE OF THE MINISTER FOR TRANSPORT AND TECHNICAL SERVICES:.......................................................18
10. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR HOUSING REGARDING THE IMPACT OF THE RENT PROPOSALS WITHIN THE HOUSING TRANSFORMATION PROGRAMME:................................................19
11. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF THE MINISTER FOR HOUSING REGARDING THE INFLUENCE ON CENSUS FIGURES ON THE PROPOSALS CONTAINED WITHIN THE HOUSING TRANSFORMATION PROGRAMME:..............................20

12. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF THE MINISTER FOR SOCIAL SECURITY REGARDING THE PROTECTION OF THOSE IN RECEIPT OF THE RENT COMPONENT OF INCOME SUPPORT FROM THE IMPACT OF PROPOSED RENT INCREASES:..........................................................................22
13. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF THE MINISTER FOR TRANSPORT AND TECHNICAL SERVICES REGARDING CTPLUS JERSEY'S RECOGNITION OF THE TRADE UNION UNITE:.........................................................22
14. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING THE DATE WHEN CODES OF PRACTICE COVERING THE TRANSFER OF UNDERTAKINGS PROTECTION OF EMPLOYMENT WILL BE INTRODUCED:......................23
15. DEPUTY G.C.L. BAUDAINS OF ST. CLEMENT OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING THE USE OF ZERO HOUR' CONTRACTS: .........................24
16. DEPUTY G.C.L. BAUDAINS OF THE MINISTER FOR PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT REGARDING THE COST OF OFFSHORE WIND-MONITORING MASTS:................................................................................25
17. DEPUTY G.C.L. BAUDAINS OF THE MINISTER FOR TRANSPORT AND TECHNICAL SERVICES REGARDING THE DECREASE IN THE BUS USAGE SINCE CTPLUS REPLACED CONNEX:..............................................25
18. DEPUTY G.C.L. BAUDAINS OF THE MINISTER FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT REGARDING THE SUPPLY OF SUPER-UNLEADED FUEL:....30
19. DEPUTY J.H. YOUNG OF ST. BRELADE OF THE MINISTER FOR PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT REGARDING THE IMPACT ON FUTURE HOUSING SUPPLY OF THE JERSEY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY'S 2012 REPORT:........31
20. DEPUTY T.A. VALLOIS OF ST. SAVIOUR OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING THE COST OF CONSULTANCY REPORTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE VARIOUS MACHINERY OF GOVERNMENT REVIEWS SINCE 1999:.......31

3. Oral Questions...........................................................................32

1. Deputy M. Tadier of St. Brelade of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding concerns raised about levels of care at Highlands Care Home in the past 2 years: ......33 Deputy A.E. Pryke of Trinity (The Minister for Health and Social Services):.................33

1. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................33
2. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier of St. Saviour:...............................................33
3. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................33
4. Deputy J.G. Reed of St. Ouen:..........................................................33
5. Deputy G.P. Southern of St. Helier:....................................................34

6. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................34
7. Senator S.C. Ferguson:.................................................................34
8. Senator S.C. Ferguson:.................................................................34
9. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................34

2. Deputy G.P. Southern of the Minister for Housing regarding the mismatch between the projections contained within the Reform of Social Housing (P.33/2013) and population projections produced in 2012 following the 2011 Census results:.......................35 Connétable J.M. Refault of St. Peter (Assistant Minister for Housing - rapporteur):..........35

1. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................35
2. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................36
3. The Deputy of St. Ouen:................................................................36
4. The Deputy of St. Ouen:................................................................36
5. Deputy R.J. Rondel of St. Helier:.......................................................36
6. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................36

7. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................37

3. Deputy M.R. Higgins of St. Helier of the Minister for Home Affairs regarding complaints investigated by the Jersey Police Complaints Authority, the Deputy Chief of the States of Jersey Police and the Professional Standards Department: ................37 Is the Minister satisfied with the way in which complaints made by serving and former police officers and the public have been investigated by the Jersey Complaints Authority, the Deputy Chief of the States of Jersey Police and the Professional Standards Department? .........................................................................................37 Senator B.I. Le Marquand (The Minister for Home Affairs): .................................37

1. Deputy M.R.Higgins:..................................................................37
2. Deputy T.M.Pitman:...................................................................38
3. Deputy M.R.Higgins:..................................................................38
   4. Deputy S. Pitman of St. Helier of the Minister for Transport and Technical Services regarding CTPlus' official recognition of the union:....................................38 Deputy K.C. Lewis of St. Saviour (The Minister for Transport and Technical Services): .....38

1. Deputy S.Pitman:......................................................................39
2. Deputy S.Pitman:......................................................................39
3. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................39
4. Deputy T. Pitman: ......................................................................39
5. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................39
6. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................39
7. Deputy M.R.Higgins:..................................................................40
8. Deputy S.Pitman:......................................................................40

5. Deputy T. Pitman of the Chief Minister regarding the Assistant Chief Minister (with responsibility for External Relations) and his access to confidential documents central to the suspension of the Dean's Commission: .............................................40 Senator I.J. Gorst (The Chief Minister):......................................................40

1. Deputy T.M.Pitman:...................................................................40
2. Deputy M.R.Higgins:..................................................................40
3. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................41
4. Deputy T.M.Pitman:...................................................................41

6. Deputy S. Power of St. Brelade of the Minister for Transport and Technical Services regarding amendments to the current Motor Traffic (Third Party Insurance) (Jersey) Law 1948 relating to driving an uninsured vehicle:..........................................42 Deputy K.C. Lewis (The Minister for Transport and Technical Services):....................42

1. Deputy S.Power:.......................................................................42
2. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................42
3. Deputy J.A. Martin of St. Helier:.......................................................42
4. Deputy S.Power:.......................................................................43

7. Connétable P.J. Rondel of St. John of the Minister for Treasury and Resources regarding a recent spam attack' on Jersey Mail: ..................................................43 Senator P.F.C. Ozouf (The Minister for Treasury and Resources):............................43

1. The Connétable of St. John:............................................................43
2. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................43
3. The Connétable of St. John:............................................................44
4. The Connétable of St. John:............................................................44

8. Deputy G.C.L. Baudains of St. Clement of the Minister for Transport and Technical Services regarding changes to bus routes from 31st March 2013:.......................44 Deputy K.C. Lewis (The Minister for Transport and Technical Services):....................45

3.8.1 Deputy G.C.L. Baudains:...............................................................45

9. Deputy R.J. Rondel of the Minister for Treasury and Resources regarding increasing tax rates for the largest U.K. retailers operating in the Island:..............................45 Senator P.F.C. Ozouf (The Minister for Treasury and Resources):............................46

1. Deputy R.J. Rondel:....................................................................46
2. Deputy M.R.Higgins:..................................................................46
3. Deputy M.R.Higgins:..................................................................47
4. Deputy R.J. Rondel:....................................................................47

10. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier of the Chief Minister regarding the way in which the success of the public sector reform project would be measured: ................................47 Senator I.J. Gorst (The Chief Minister):......................................................47

1. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:...........................................................48
2. Deputy G.C.L. Baudains: ............................................................48
3. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:...........................................................48

11. Deputy S. Pitman of the Chairman of the Privileges and Procedures Committee regarding the dual role of the Bailiff :..............................................................49 Given that the dual role of the Bailiff can result in his disallowing, on the grounds that it breaches Standing Order 16, a personal statement from an elected Member criticising the judiciary, including the Bailiff as head of the Judiciary, will the committee be bringing forward proposals to address the role of the Bailiff and, if so, when?...................49 Connétable A.S. Crowcroft of St. Helier (Chairman, Privileges and Procedures Committee): 49

1. Deputy S.Pitman:...................................................................49
2. Deputy M.R.Higgins:...............................................................49
3. Deputy T.M.Pitman:................................................................49
4. Senator I.J. Gorst : ...................................................................50
5. Deputy S.Pitman:...................................................................50

12. The Connétable of St. John of the Minister for Economic Development regarding the employment licence granted to the Jersey Rugby Club: ................................50 Senator A.J.H. Maclean (The Minister for Economic Development):.........................50

1. The Connétable of St. John : .........................................................50
2. The Connétable of St. John : .........................................................50
3. The Connétable of St. John : .........................................................51
4. Deputy M. Tadier :...................................................................51

13. Deputy G.C.L. Baudains of the Chairman of the Privileges and Procedures Committee regarding the way in which the States Assembly would be constituted with 42 members:

51

The Connétable of St. Helier (Chairman, Privileges and Procedures Committee):............52

1. Deputy G.P. Southern : ..............................................................52
2. Deputy G.P. Southern : ..............................................................52
3. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:...........................................................52
4. Senator P.F.C. Ozouf : ...............................................................52
5. Deputy T.M.Pitman:................................................................53
6. Deputy J.H. Young of St. Brelade : ..................................................53
7. Deputy C.F. Labey of Grouville :....................................................53

14. Deputy T.M. Pitman of the Minister for Home Affairs regarding the States of Jersey Police's action in relation to 3 plots to kill Islanders since 2010:........................53 Senator B.I. Le Marquand (The Minister for Home Affairs): .................................53

1. Deputy T.M.Pitman:................................................................54
2. Deputy T.M.Pitman:................................................................54

15. Deputy G.P. Southern of the Minister for Transport and Technical Services regarding the dispute over union recognition atCTPlus:..............................................55

Deputy K.C. Lewis (The Minister for Transport and Technical Services):....................55

1. Deputy G.P. Southern : ..............................................................56
2. Deputy G.P. Southern : ..............................................................56
3. Deputy G.P. Southern : ..............................................................56

16. Deputy M.R. Higgins of the Chief Minister regarding action taken by the Data Protection Commissioner relating to a complaint against the States of Jersey Police:..............56 Senator P.F. Routier (Assistant Chief Minister - rapporteur):.................................56

1. Deputy M.R.Higgins:...............................................................57
2. Deputy M.R. Higgins:...............................................................57
3. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:...........................................................57
4. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:...........................................................57
5. Deputy G.P. Southern : ..............................................................58
6. Deputy G.P. Southern : ..............................................................58
7. Deputy T.M.Pitman:................................................................58
8. Deputy T.M.Pitman:................................................................58
9. Connétable D.W. Mezbourian of St. Lawrence:......................................58
10. Deputy M.R.Higgins:............................................................59

4. Questions to Ministers Without Notice - The Minister for Social Security ............59

1. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................59 Senator F. du H. Le Gresley (The Minister for Social Security): ..............................60

1. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................60
2. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................60

2. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................60

4.2.1 Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................60

3. Deputy J.H. Young:....................................................................61
4. Senator L.J. Farnham :..................................................................61
5. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................61

4.5.1 Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................61

6. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................62
7. Deputy J.H. Young:....................................................................62

4.7.1 Deputy J.H. Young:....................................................................63

8. Deputy P.J.D. Ryan of St. John:........................................................63
9. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................63

5. Questions to Ministers Without Notice - The Chief Minister..........................63

1. Deputy T.M.Pitman:...................................................................63 Senator I.J. Gorst (The Chief Minister):......................................................64
2. Senator L.J. Farnham :..................................................................64
3. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................64

5.3.1 Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................64

4. Deputy M.R.Higgins:..................................................................64
5. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................65

5.5.1 Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................65

6. Deputy S.Pitman:......................................................................65
7. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................66
8. Deputy J.H. Young:....................................................................66
9. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................67

5.9.1 Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................67

PUBLIC BUSINESS.............................................................................67

6. Draft Restriction on Smoking (Advertising, Promotion and Display) (Jersey) Regulations (P.17/2013)..................................................................68

1. The Connétable of St. Peter (Assistant Minister for Health and Social Services - rapporteur):.............................................................................68

1. Connétable M.P.S. Le Trocquer of St. Martin:..........................................70
2. Senator S.C. Ferguson:.................................................................72
3. Deputy S.G. Luce of St. Martin : ........................................................73
4. Senator P.F.C. Ozouf :..................................................................73
5. Deputy J.A. Martin:....................................................................74
6. The Deputy of Trinity :..................................................................75
7. Senator L.J. Farnham :..................................................................75
8. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................75
9. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................75
10. Deputy E.J. Noel of St. Lawrence : ..................................................77
11. Deputy G.C.L. Baudains: ............................................................77
12. The Connétable of St. Helier:........................................................77
13. Senator B.I. Le Marquand:..........................................................78

LUNCHEON ADJOURNMENT PROPOSED..................................................79 LUNCHEON ADJOURNMENT................................................................79

14. Connétable S.A. Rennard of St. Saviour:............................................79
15. Deputy S.Power:....................................................................79
16. Deputy R.G. Bryans of St. Helier:...................................................81
17. The Connétable of St. John : .........................................................81
18. Deputy T.M.Pitman:................................................................82
19. Senator A.J.H. Maclean:.............................................................82
20. The Connétable of St. Peter:.........................................................83 Deputy K.L. Moore of St. Peter (Chairman, Health, Social Security and Housing Scrutiny Panel):..................................................................................85

2. The Connétable of St. Peter:............................................................86

1. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................86
2. The Connétable of St. Peter:............................................................86

6.3. Draft Restriction on Smoking (Advertising, Promotion and Display) (Jersey) Regulations 201- (P.17/2013): amendment (P.17/2013 Amd.) ..........................87

1. The Connétable of St. Peter:............................................................87
2. The Connétable of St. John:............................................................87
3. The Connétable of St. Peter:............................................................87

7. Draft Restriction on Smoking (Amendment No. 3) (Jersey) Law 201- (P.18/2013)....88

1. The Connétable of St. Peter (Assistant Minister for Health and Social Services - rapporteur):.............................................................................88

1. The Connétable of St. Martin:..........................................................89
2. Deputy G.C.L. Baudains:...............................................................89
3. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................90
4. Deputy J.A. Martin:....................................................................90
5. Senator P.F.C. Ozouf :..................................................................91
6. Deputy S.Power:.......................................................................91

7. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................91
8. The Connétable of St. Peter:............................................................91 The Deputy of St. Peter (Chairman, Health, Social Security and Housing Scrutiny Panel): ...93

2. The Connétable of St. Peter:............................................................94

1. The Connétable of St. John:............................................................94
2. The Deputy of Trinity :..................................................................94
3. The Connétable of St. Peter:............................................................94

STATEMENT ON A MATTER OF OFFICIAL RESPONSIBILITY.........................95

8. The Chief Minister will make a statement regarding Jersey and the Royal Navy through an affiliation with Her Majesty's Ship Iron Duke ............................95

8.1 Senator I.J. Gorst (The Chief Minister):................................................95

1. The Connétable of St. Lawrence:.......................................................96
2. The Connétable of St. John:............................................................96
3. Senator S.C. Ferguson:.................................................................97
4. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................97
5. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................97
6. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................97
7. Senator P.F.C. Ozouf :..................................................................98

PUBLIC BUSINESS - resumption..............................................................98

9. Jersey Music Service: introduction of "user pays" charges (P.36/2013)...............98

1. The Deputy of St. John (The Minister for Education, Sport and Culture):..............99

1. Deputy J.H. Young:...................................................................101
2. Deputy M. Tadier :....................................................................103
3. Deputy G.P. Southern :................................................................105
4. The Connétable of St. Martin:.........................................................105
5. Deputy R.G. Bryans: ..................................................................106
6. The Deputy of St. Martin:.............................................................107
7. Senator P.F.C. Ozouf :.................................................................108
8. Deputy S. Pinel of St. Clement : .......................................................109
9. Senator F. du H. Le Gresley:..........................................................109
10. The Connétable of St. Mary : .......................................................110
11. The Deputy of St. Ouen:............................................................110
12. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:..........................................................111

2. Jersey Music Service: introduction of "user pays" charges (P.36/2013) - proposal to refer the matter back ..................................................................112

1. Deputy M. Tadier :....................................................................112
2. The Deputy of St. John:...............................................................113
3. Deputy M. Tadier :....................................................................114
4. The Deputy of St. John:...............................................................114
5. Deputy G.P. Southern :................................................................114
6. Deputy G.C.L. Baudains:..............................................................115
7. Deputy J.A. Martin:...................................................................115
8. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ............................................................116
9. Deputy J.H. Young:...................................................................116
10. Deputy M. Tadier :..................................................................117

3. Jersey Music Service: introduction of "user pays" charges (P.36/2013) - resumption ..........................................................................................118

9.3.1 The Deputy of St. John:...............................................................118

ADJOURNMENT..............................................................................123

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

1. The Dean of Jersey – new Commission

The Bailiff :

The last 2 months have not been an easy time for the Anglican Church community in Jersey or, indeed, for the wider community in the Island. It is therefore a great relief that the Bishop has issued a new Commission for the Dean and that he will be free once again to perform his duties as Head of the Anglican Church of Jersey.  [Approbation] I had not, in fact, quite finished. [Laughter] It is excellent to hear that the Bishop and the Dean will be working together to address some of the issues which have been identified, including the important issue of safeguarding, but for today I simply want to say how nice it was to be able to turn to my right at the beginning of the meeting and say, once again: "Monsieur le Doyen"and what a pleasure it is to have our Dean back in this Assembly. [Approbation] On that topic, I would also like to thank the Vice-Dean, Canon Houghton, who was given the Bishop's Commission during the absence of the Dean. Canon Houghton was placed in a very difficult position, torn between his affection and respect for the Dean, and his duty to his Bishop. He carried out his role with great humanity and diligence and I would like to take this opportunity of thanking him publicly for what he did during that time. [Approbation]

2. Referendum (Reform of States Assembly) (Jersey) Act 2013 - result The Bailiff :

The next matter under A relates to the referendum. Article 12(5) of the Referendum (Reform of States Assembly) (Jersey) Act 2013, requires the Greffier to make arrangements for the result of the referendum held on 24th April to be reported to the States at their next meeting. Article 12(4) of the Act specifies the manner in which the result is to be reported so these are those results. There were 16,624 valid ballot papers. There were 159 invalid papers, in other words, spoilt papers. The total number of first choice votes for each option was as follows: Option A, 6,581; Option B, 6,804; Option C, 3,239. As none of the 3 options obtained more than half of the valid first choice votes, Option C was discarded. The total number of valid second choice votes from the discarded Option C votes cast for each of the remaining 3 options was as follows: Option A, 126; Option B, 1,386. The aggregate numbers of valid first and second choice votes cast for the 2 remaining options was therefore as follows: Option A, 6,707; Option B, 8,190.

3. Liberation Day – recording of proceedings The Bailiff :

The final matter that I have under A relates to Liberation Day. As Members know, we usually give permission for the media to record the special sitting of the States on Liberation Day. I have received requests from the Jersey Evening Post, Channel Television and the Société Jersiaise, who are doing  an article  on this programme and,  of course, the official organisation who will  be broadcasting the sitting down into Liberation Square so I trust Members agree to all of those organisations recording the proceedings. Thank you very much.

[9:45]

QUESTIONS

2. Written Questions

1. THE CONNÉTABLE OF ST. JOHN OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING THE APPOINTMENTS OF THE DIRECTORS OF HUMAN RESOURCES AND ORGANISATION DEVELOPMENT:

Question

Further to the appointment in 2011 of a new Director of Human Resources and of a new Director of Organisation Development (Change Leader) in December 2012, would the Chief Minister advise –

1. whether both postholders originate from or have strong connections with Scotland?
2. whether both postholders previously worked for Glasgow University's Executive Team and, if so, give details of positions held and dates of service?
3. whether the two postholders knew each other, in both a personal and professional capacity prior to working in Jersey and, if so, for how long?
4. whether the Director of Organisation reports to the Director of Human Resources?
5. whether a competitive process was used in both appointments and, if not, explain whynot?

Would the Chief Minister advise how many candidates were interviewed for each post, and how many applicants were from on-Island?

Would the Chief Minister provide details regarding who was responsible for writing the job description for the Director of Organisation Development's post?

Answer

I can re-assure the Connétable of St John that with regards to the two posts mentioned, the appropriate Jersey Appointments Commission processes and procedures were followed and that the Chair of the Appointments Commission chaired both appointments and that all necessary declarations of interest were made.

In total 34 applications were received for the post of Director of Human Resources, two of which were from on-island residents.

There were 65 applications for the post of Director of Organisation Development, 18 of which were local.

With regards to the job description for the Director of Organisation Development the normal process was followed. The Job Description was prepared by the Director of Human Resources and other members of the senior Human Resources team and agreed by the current Chief Executive. The role was evaluated by the HAY process.

2. THE CONNÉTABLE OF ST. JOHN OF THE MINISTER FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT REGARDING ATTENDANCE AT THE PARIS AGRICULTURAL SHOW:

Question

1. Given that Jersey attended the Paris agricultural show from 24th Februaryto 3rd March 2013, would the Minister advise the total cost to the Island, including staffing and accommodation?
2. What benefits to industry and to the Island were achieved?
3. Would the Minister outline which local based companies exhibited and advise the number of persons representing each industry and whether their travel, accommodation and expenses costs were met by his Department and, if so, the amount spent?
4. Would theMinisteradvisethe number of States Members and public sector employees who attended; the durationof their visits and their individual travel and accommodation costs, as well as the cost of the Stand and associated advertising?
5. Does the Minister consider that, given the timing of the show, the expenditure was justified?

Answer

1. The costto Jersey in attendingthe Salon d'Agriculture in Paris was £14,590.68. The costs were met by both the Economic Development Department and Chief Minister's Department onthe basis that there were both economic development and international affairs elements to Jersey's participation. All expenditure was in line with Departmental travel policy.
2. Jersey was invited to attend the 50th Salon International de L'Agriculture in Paris by the General CouncilofLaManche following a visit tothe Salon last year by theStatesofJersey and industry representatives from the Island. The joint venture with the General Council of La Manche has helped build upon the foundations laid down through the La Manche Working Group, to strengthen political and economic links with La Manche and enable the Island to demonstrate the variety and quality of its produce to a wide audience in Jersey's nearest marketplace. It also highlighted Jersey as a holiday destination and improved transport links with the new Blue Islands direct air link between Jersey and Paris and to explore future export opportunities.

The Show was held over 9 days from 23 February to 3 March 2013; opening times 09.00 to 19.00 and from 09.00 to 23.00 on the final Friday and attracted approximately 694,000 visitors. Jersey received, met and talked to approximately 5,500 of them over the period of the Show.

This high level of personal contact enabled analysis of the value of the event in terms of exposure and as a platform for selling artisanal products. There were 3 halls dedicated to artisanal producers emphasizing just how importantly the French take locally produced and/or specialist foods.

It also enabled the Island's rural development advisers to estimate the likely investment required from producers in time and costs so as to be able to make an informed decision as to whether Jersey will attend next year. It also allowed Jersey to observe how best to present our offering by learning from those stands that had been longer established and generate new ideas for marketing the Island. La Manche are already asking us whether we are prepared to attend again. A report to this effect has already been circulated to the producers.

3. Staff manning the stand represented all of Jersey's rural and marine industries, which varied over the duration of the 9 days with a higher attendance during the opening weekend and for the late night opening on the final Friday (until 23.00) but ranged from 1-3 people atany one time as we were dealing with, on average, 60 visitors per hour. Tastings, video displays and promotional material representing La Mare Vineyards, The Jersey Dairy, Jersey Sea Farms, Jersey Oyster Company, JerseyRoyal Company, Albert Bartlett and Jersey Tourism, were featured at the show. 1 person specifically representing the Jersey Oyster Company attended the show and he paid his own travel, accommodation and expense costs.
4. Costs

2 States Members

Travel and accommodation  = £1415.89

9 Public Sector Employees plus Bureau de Jersey Travel,

accommodation and subsistence* = £7,814.98

* Subsistence includes States Members

Stand= £3,375.00

Promotional Material (including translation) = £1,984.81 Total Costs  = £14,590.68

5. Yes,  especially  with the  media  coverage  we  received.  The  following  information  was provided by La Manche.

States of Jersey Press Release

"Jersey and La Manche at Paris agricultural show" Ouest France:

"The products of the land and sea at the Salon" "Friends for life"

L'Agriculteur Normand:

"50 good reasons to go to the Salon of Agriculture" "Inauguration of the La Manche stand"

La Manche press:

"La Manche shines at the Salon"

"Jersey Gold"

La Manche Libre:

"La Manche agricultural power" (web article with video) "Entente cordiale between La Manche and Jersey" "Normandy agricultural power"

Radio:

Tendance Ouest:

Interview

Pascale Bousquet (Account Director – Agendacom, Communications agency)

Quote "When you listen to her you feel like going straight to Jersey to eat some Jersey Royals and lovely Jersey Dairy ice cream with black butter!"

BBC Radio Jersey

Interview

Additional information

Public sector employees

Average cost of travel per person was £295.92

Average cost of accommodation per person was £65.93 per person per night Jersey Delegation

Average cost of subsistence* was £41.67 per person per day

* Includes States Members

3. DEPUTY M.R. HIGGINS OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR HOME AFFAIRS REGARDING BREACHES OF THE DATA PROTECTION (JERSEY) LAW2005BY POLICE OFFICERS OR THEIR CIVILIAN STAFF:

Question

Will the Minister advise members for each year since 2004 to the present date:

1. how many times, if any, the Home Affairs Department, Home Affairs Minister and/or the States of Jersey Police have notified theData Protection Commissioner that police officers or their civilian staff have unlawfully broken the Data Protection (Jersey) Law 2005?

2. how many officers or civilian staff, ifany, have been prosecuted for these breaches, (explaining further under what law they were prosecuted), how many were found guilty andthe penalty imposed in each case?
3. how many officers or civilian staff, if any, have been disciplined for these breaches and what was the penalty imposed in each case?

Answer

1. The States of Jersey Police have consulted the Data Protection Commissioner (DPC) periodically in connection with allegations of breaches oftheDataProtection Law. There is no requirement to formally notify the DPC of investigations into alleged breaches of the Law.
2. Two officers have been criminally prosecuted for Data Protection Law breaches. Both pleaded guiltyat the Magistrate'sCourt. Bothofficerswere sentenced tofinesof£300or 6 days' imprisonment in default.
3. The two officers prosecuted for data protection breaches (above) were also subject to discipline procedures. Both were dismissed from the Service. One was re-instated on appeal, the other is awaiting appeal. Additionally, two other officers and a civil servant have been disciplined. Both officers were reprimanded and the civilian dismissed for gross misconduct. (These were separate cases with differing levels of breach).

4. DEPUTY M.R. HIGGINS OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING DATA PROTECTION COMPLAINTS AND REQUESTS RELATING TO THE STATES OF JERSEY POLICE:

Question

Will the Chief Minister advise members

1. how many times the Data Protection Commissioner has received complaints and/or requests for assistance from citizens in relation to subject access requests from the States of Jersey Police, the Police Association and/or the Police Complaints Authority under Article 7 of the Data Protection (Jersey) Law 2005 for each year from 2005 to the present date (further breaking the information down by institution and whether they related to complaints or requests or both)?
2. the nature of any complaints received, the actions taken by the Commissioner in each case and the outcome of the intervention and the time taken to resolve the complaints from start to finish, if they were resolved and, if they were not resolved, the time spent on them;
3. the nature of the requests and the assistance given or not given in the circumstances;
4. the lessons, if any, learnt from these experiences?

Answer

The Office of the Data Protection Commissioner ("ODPC") is independent of government. Requirements to report and/or publish its activities are defined by statute (see Part 6 of the Data Protection (Jersey) Law 2005 ("the 2005 Law")) and by any applicable policies:

• Each year, it produces an Annual Report which provides statistics on complaints.
• Article 59 of the 2005 Law restricts the disclosure of information obtained by or disclosed to the Commissioner.
• ODPC has issued a Policy Statement and Guidance on Complaint Handling and a Policy Statement and Guidance on Communicating Enforcement Activities.

In light of the above, I do not judge that it would be appropriate for me to seek to place specific data relating to an individual intervention in the public domain. However, the Data Protection Commissioner is happy to liaise directly on the questions raised if that would be of assistance.

5. DEPUTY M.R. HIGGINS OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING REQUESTS SINCE 2005MADEUNDERARTICLE53OFTHEDATA PROTECTION (JERSEY) LAW 2005:

Question

Will the Chief Minister advise members how many times, in each year since 2005 to the present date, the Data Protection Commissioner has been requested to provide assistance; or has granted assistance and/or refused to grant assistance under Article 53 of the Data Protection (Jersey) Law 2005?

Will the Minister outline, in respect of assistance granted or refused –

1. the nature of the assistance requested, using the same headings contained under Schedule 10(2)(a), 10(2)(b)(i) and (ii) and 10(3)(a), (b) or (c) relating to legal advice and the conduct of proceedings;
2. The total number of persons assisted in each case;
3. the financial cost of assistance in each case, using the same headings contained under Schedule 10(2)(a), (b)(i) and (ii) and 10(3)(a), (b) or (c) relating to legal adviceandthe conduct of proceedings; and,
4. the outcome of the assistance given in terms of remedy?

Answer

Work is being carried out to provide a full answer to this detailed question. Given that there is the potential for some of the information being requested to be subject to a court case, more officer time is required to provide a suitable response; therefore I will provide the Deputy with the relevant information before the next States Sitting.

6. DEPUTY M.R. HIGGINS OF THE MINISTER FOR HOME AFFAIRS REGARDING COMPLAINTS MADE AGAINST THE CHIEF OFFICER AND THE DEPUTY CHIEF OFFICER OF THE STATES OF JERSEY POLICE SINCE 2004:

Question

Will the Minister advise members –

1. how many complaints have been lodged in each year since 2004 tothe present date against the Chief Officer and Deputy Chief Officer of the States of Jersey Police respectively listing against each the nature of the complaint.
2. how many of these complaints were investigated, by whom and what was the result?
3. how many complaints were not investigated and what were the reasons for not investigating them?
4. whether there are currently any complaints under investigation, and, if so, would he explain in each case the nature of the complaint, who is investigating it and the likely or anticipated date that it will be completed?

Answer

1. It is not appropriate for me to provide this level of information in relation to a group which, at any given time, includes only two people.
2. The same answer as for (a).
3. All complaints which have been made or will be madeto me aretreated seriously. It is my normal practice to first make an assessment astowhetherthere is a sufficient basis

to request a full investigation by an outside force and for this purpose I will often ask for a preliminary report on the matter before making that decision.

4. The same answer as for (a).

7. DEPUTY M.R. HIGGINS OF H.M. ATTORNEY GENERAL REGARDING DATA PROTECTION BREACHES:

Question

Will H.M. Attorney General advise members on how many occasions from 2004 to the present date his department has had referrals from either the States of Jersey Police or the Data Protection Commissioner regarding data protection breaches by -

1. police officers; and/or
2. civilian staff employed by the police

Would he advise in how many cases his Department has decided to prosecute the offenders?

Answer

The Law Officers' Department does not keep separate records for prosecutions brought under the Data Protection (Jersey) Law 2005 which came into force on 1st December 2005. After enquiry it is believed that:

1. There have been four referrals of complaints from the States of Jersey Police in respect of Police Officers. In two cases the officers were prosecuted.
2. There has been one referral of a complaint from the States of Jersey Police in respect of a civilian worker. There was no prosecution.

8. DEPUTY T.A. VALLOIS OF THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES REGARDING RETURNS TO THE TRASURY FROM INCOME DERIVED THROUGH PUBLIC SERVICES:

Question

Could the Minister advise how many States Departments make a return to the Treasury from income derived through their services to the public, how much each department returns and on what basis these returns are made?

Answer

It is not exactly clear what is meant by return, so this answer addresses it in the wider context in the interest of being as helpful as possible.

States Departments fall into two categories – States Funded Bodies and States Trading Operations. States Funded Bodies

The Housing Department is the only States Funded Department whose income exceeds expenditure. This net income is effectively its "return" for the year.

In 2012 this net income "return" was £24 million. This "return" began when the Rent Abatement and Rebate Schemes, which were funded by the Housing Department, were replaced by Income Support. This change meant the Housing Department's rental income exceeded its expenditure, thereby creating an annual net income. The "Annual Return" is how the original funding for the Rent Abatement and Rebate Schemes is transferred (via Treasury) to Social Security to help towards the Income Support Budget.

Other States Funded Departments do get income from the services they provide to the public. They use this income to help pay for the cost of their services so do not make a return to the Treasury. The MTFP contains information relating to the income of each department and details are also reported in the States Accounts.

States Trading Operations

The States currently has four Trading Operations; Jersey Airport, Jersey Harbours, Jersey Car Parking and Jersey Fleet Management. Two of these Trading Operations currently make a return to States General Revenues.

The financial return from each States Trading Operation is negotiated with the Treasurer of the States on behalf of the Minister for Treasury and Resources. The proposed financial return is then presented to the States as part of the Medium Term Financial Plan for approval.

In 2012 Jersey Harbours made a financial return of £118,683 and Jersey Car Parking made a return of £1,552,300.

In recent years, the requirement for a financial return from Jersey Airport and Jersey Harbours (above the £118,000) has been removed to reflect the fact that these departments will fund their own capital programme and also to provide for the costs of the proposed Ports Incorporation.

Jersey Fleet Management Trading Operation does not make a return on the basis that any surplus of income over expenditure will be used to offset future vehicle costs.

9. THE CONNÉTABLE OF ST. LAWRENCE OF THE MINISTER FOR TRANSPORT AND TECHNICAL SERVICES:

Question

Will the Minister advise whether vehicles are permitted to drive through Coronation Park in St Lawrence and, if they are permitted, when that permission was granted and by whom?

If such permission does exist, will he also advise –

1. How park users are made aware that vehicles will at times be driven through the park?
2. Whether there are any restrictions on the use of vehicles?
3. What safety procedures, if any, are in place to prevent accidents involving members ofthe public, particularly children?
4. If there aresafety procedures, when they were last reviewed and what, if any, changes were made following review?
5. Whether vehicles are restricted from any area ofthe park, particularly the children's play area?
6. Whether the Road Traffic (Jersey) Law 1956 is applicable to those who drive in Coronation Park and if it does not apply, what legislation, if any, covering the use of vehicles does apply?

Answer

I can confirm that vehicles are permitted to drive through Coronation Park. The Transport & Technical Department's staff and on occasions the Café' staff, are allowed to park their cars in the park as this frees up valuable space in the small car park for visitors.

Clearly works vehicles are required in the park for the various gardening operations undertaken by the team based there.

Maison des Landes and other special needs groups have permission to drive into the park allowing wheel chair users safe access to and from the vehicle

The owners of No's 1 and 2 Montrose Villas benefit from numerous contractual rights of way over Coronation Park. These contractual rights extend to vehicular rights of way to and from their properties and are perpetual.

1. Park users are made aware of vehicles in the parks by various signs. At both exits from the small children's playground there are signs warning parents that vehicles use the driveways. There is also the same sign warning parents as they cross from the paddling pool to go to the playground. In addition there is a signonthe main driveway which warns drivers that children are crossing and restricting vehicle speed to 5mph.

2. Vehicles belonging to the general public not included in the earlier part of my answer are not allowed in the park and as I have already said vehicles are restricted to 5 mph.
3. The main throughway for children crossing the drivewayis between the paddlingpool and the small children's playground. At both these junctions kissing gate' barriers prevent children fromrunning straight ontothedrivewaywithout stopping. The warning signs that I referred to earlier are on these kissing gates.
4. We are continually reviewing safety precautions and are currently looking at whether we can improve the signage warning the public that vehicles have access to the park.
5. Vehicles are restricted to the main driveways, although the works vehicle will drive where work requires.
6. The Road Traffic (Jersey) Law 1956 does not apply to those who drive in Coronation Park. Instead, it is the Policing of Parks (Jersey) Regulations 2005 which regulates that activity

10. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR HOUSING REGARDING THE IMPACT OF THE RENT PROPOSALS WITHIN THE HOUSING TRANSFORMATION PROGRAMME:

Question

Does the Minister consider that it is important that tenants in all sectors fully understand the impact of the rent proposals in the Housing Transformation Programme?

Under the proposals to raise rents to 90% of private sector rent levels, would existing States tenants with new tenancies face a rise in rents, based on a weighted average, of £39 per week (25%)?

Will those in 2-bed accommodation see a rise in rents in the order of £50 per week or 30%?

Does he accept that by year 5 of the plan, over 50% of States tenants will be paying higher rental rates and that all tenants are likely to see their rents subject to annual inflation-plus rises of 4.25%, or 23% over the five years amounting to a weekly addition of £35?

Will the Minister acknowledge that this combination will produce new tenancies at average rent levels which are £84 per week (54%) greater than at present, and if not, what figures does he have for proposed rent increases in 2014 (year 1) and 2018 (year 5)?

Answer

I believe it is important that all interested parties understand all of the impacts of the Housing Transformation Programme and I have been very open in communicating my proposals in the media. The Housing Transformation Programme's Report & Proposition and Full Business Case are public documents which have been widely publicised. In fact, all States tenants received a leaflet which explained how the rent policy would affect tenants in March when I lodged these proposals.

In addition to this, The Housing Department's magazine "Community News" was delivered to all States tenants this week, which contained an article about the proposals for reform. We have also been making use of social media to engage with customers; we will continue to do this in the weeks leading up to the debate on the 14th May.

For a number of years, the Department has operated a policy of uplifting rents for new tenancies to more appropriate levels following refurbishment and the proposed policy would add, on a weighted average, a further £11.89 or 6% to rents on new tenancies. For 2 bedroom accommodation the figure is £20.06 or 10%. I refer the Deputy back to my answer to question (7564) in which I set out clearly the ranges of rents for each type of unit. This shows that rents are clearly dependent on the size and type of unit.

As noted in my answer to the Deputy 's question (7564), section 5.2.3 of the Housing Transformation Programme's Full Business Case illustrates how the modelled convergence of current rents to 90% of market under the proposed rent policy will occur. This indicates that 51% of tenants, including those in newly developed properties will be at the 90% level by year 5. Tenants will see annual rent increases linked to R.P.I. plus 0.75%. If R.P.I. rises in line with the central scenario projections of the States of Jersey Statistics Unit, then tenants will see aggregate increases of 21% by year 5 of the Full Business Case. However, as we have seen with the latest inflation figures of 1.4%, these assumptions are subject to variation. A proper comparison is to look at these matters in real terms, which is 6% and £11.89 as noted above.

In 2010 it was recognised that States rentals had fallen significantly behind market, the proposed policy aims to bring rent levels from the 2010 weighted average of 69% of market to 90% of market. Considering the impact on the tenant of the average change in rent levels is meaningless. The change in rent for existing tenants moving to new tenancies is dependent on a wide range of circumstances such as where the tenant is moving to and from and for what reason. Indeed, many tenants downsize and so their rent could actually decrease.

Furthermore, as I have said, all tenants on low incomes and receiving Income Support will be fully protected and only those tenants who move will be subject to the proposed policy.

11. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF THE MINISTER FOR HOUSING REGARDING THE INFLUENCE ON CENSUS FIGURES ON THE PROPOSALS CONTAINED WITHIN THE HOUSING TRANSFORMATION PROGRAMME:

Question

Does the Minister accept the figures for rent rises in the Housing Trust sector given in the draft sector report of July 2012 which show a weighted average of £33 (18%) weekly, and if not, what figure does he have for rent increases in the Trust sector for 2014 (year 1) and 2018 (year 5)?

Given that the aforementioned draft report was never finished pending the results of the 2011 Census, will the Minister state what evidence, if any, the 2011 Census contained which had a bearing on the formulation of the Housing Transformation Programme (HTP) and in what ways, if any, his plans were changed by it?

What research, if any, has the Minister undertaken to estimate the capacity of the Trust sector to deliver housing over the period of the HTP and will he release any papers on this topic?

Will the Minister explain why the HTP contains no mention of the population it is intended to cater for and inform members of the extent to which the Statistics Unit was involved in developing the 30-year projections contained in the plan?

In particular, will he explain how the HTP caters for the demand outlined in the Housing Needs Survey 2013-2015 in the light of population growth targets?

Answer

I assume the Deputy is referring to the "States of Jersey – Rents and Income Support" draft report of July 2011.

The rent policy considered in the draft report involved uplifting all rents to 90% of market rent in April 2013 which is clearly not the rent policy now being proposed. Under the proposed policy, rents will only be charged at 90% of market rent when a property becomes vacant.

Additionally, market rent assessments provided in the draft report were based on assessments performed by the Trustees. Accurate market rents cannot be determined until proper independent market assessments have been undertaken. For both the reasons stated above, I do not accept the rental increase figures stated in the Deputy 's question and forecast rental income in the Trust sector cannot yet be determined without the property market assessments.

The July 2011 report concluded that "A further analysis of the impact of alternative rent limits policies on the capacity of claimants to access the private rented sector can be undertaken once data is available from the 2011 Census that will provide an accurate and current record of the size of the private rented stock, and its distribution between different types and sizes of dwellings."

As this reference clearly relates to the private sector rental market and the options for Income Support for claimants in this sector, I understand that the 2011 Census figures have been taken into account by the Minister for Social Security in formulating his proposals for Income Support in this sector which will be published shortly.

Indicative financial plans have been constructed for the Housing Trust sector, but a lack of detailed and independently verified data relating to their market rents and a full condition survey of their properties have meant that a full capacity review cannot be undertaken. These pieces of work will need to be undertaken in the future. In the interim, some of the Housing Trusts have confirmed to me that they have sufficient surpluses to undertake the developments as set out in my proposals.

I refer the Deputy to my answer to his question (7563) in which I explained that the proposals within the Housing Transformation Programme allow for the development of all sites currently in States ownership and designated for social housing and that the new Housing Company can and will deliver additional social housing for viable schemes if further sites are identified and borrowing is made available. I also recognised that that further units of social housing are required in order to meet the needs of our community in the longer term and I am working to ensure that these are brought forward.

My Housing Transformation Proposals have concentrated on setting up the appropriate structures to ensure that sufficient social housing is delivered in an appropriate and sustainable manner. The Full Business Case is based on a full condition survey of the housing stock plus proposals to build new units on defined sites as detailed in appendix B. The Full Business Case would have been flawed if it had included notional sites with notional costs. What I have delivered is a Business Case that resolves current issues, increases capacity and provides a structure that enables further supply of homes as sites are identified and in response to the Affordable Gateway Statistics and demand outlined in the Housing Needs Survey.

12. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF THE MINISTER FOR SOCIAL SECURITY REGARDING THE PROTECTION OF THOSE IN RECEIPT OF THE RENT COMPONENT OF INCOME SUPPORT FROM THE IMPACT OF PROPOSED RENT INCREASES:

Question

Will the Minister advise what measures, if any, he will take to protect those in receipt of the rent component of Income Support (IS) from the impact of the rent increases outlined in the figures contained in Appendix 2 of P.33/2013 Amd.(2) which show the rental income of the proposed Housing Company increasing at rates much greater than inflation from £40m in 2013 through £55.6m by 2018 to £75m in 2023?

Despite the assumption of static numbers of IS claimants contained in the Housing Transformation Programme, does the Minister consider that, when faced with weekly rent rises of between £35 and £80 over the next 5 years, more social housing tenants will be eligible and apply for IS, and if not why not?

Answer

I can assure members that tenants of the proposed Housing Company in receipt of Income Support will be fully protected from the impact of the rent increases as set out in P.33/2013.

Regulations will be brought to the States Assembly towards the end of 2013 setting out the specific changes required to the Income Support rental components, and these will be brought into force at the same time as the new rental policy is introduced. This is currently planned for April 2014.

The Minister for Treasury and Resources has confirmed that the additional cost of higher Income Support rates following the change in social rental policy will be fully reflected in additional funding for Income Support on an annual basis.

The Housing and Social Security Departments have investigated the household incomes of existing Housing Department tenants who do not receive Income Support, using existing sources of information. This analysis identifies that a small proportion of tenants are likely to become eligible for Income Support in the future, following a change of tenancy which will result in the 90% rent being charged for the new property.

As noted above, additional Income Support costs resulting from the proposed rent policy will be met by the Treasury through an additional budget allocation to the Social Security Department. (See, for example, R.15/2013 section 1.5.5)

13. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF THE MINISTER FOR TRANSPORT AND TECHNICAL SERVICES REGARDING CTPLUS JERSEY'S RECOGNITION OF THE TRADE UNION UNITE:

Question

Will the Minister advise members whether there has been a failure on the part of the new bus service provider (CTPlus Jersey) to recognise the trade union Unite under the relevant code of practice of the Employment Relations (Jersey) Law 2005 and, if so, what steps, if any, has he taken or will he take to resolve this issue as a matter of urgency?

If this explanation involves any weakness in the lack of clarity in the code or the Law, will he undertake to correct it and, if not, why not?

Will he undertake to ensure that in the future following the transfer of an undertaking where the majority of staff are transferred, as in this case, a mechanism for automatic recognition is built into the process?

Does the Minister, having previously praised the good employment relations record of the parent company, consider that this latest episode reflects well on the company chosen to operate the Island's bus service?

Answer

It is not within my remit to monitor the management of employees of LibertyBus, as they are not employees of the States of Jersey.

I can confirm though that I am not aware of any failure of the kind suggested.

I understand that there are negotiations between LibertyBus and its employees ongoing at the present time, on the subject of union recognition. This is entirely proper and in accordance with the Employment Relations (Jersey) Law 2007 and the codes relating thereto.

In the circumstances, it would not be appropriate for me to say anything further in relation to this, save as set out below.

In the event that defects in the Employment Relations (Jersey) Law 2007, or the codes relating to it, were identified it would be a matter for the Minister for the Department of Social Security to address these. I am not aware of any such defects.

I do not propose to try and second guess what kind of arrangements may or may not be appropriate in future transactions.

In relation to the final point raised, given my comment above regarding present negotiations it would appear that appropriate steps are being taken to meet the requirements of the Employment Relations (Jersey) Law 2007 and the codes that relate to it. On this basis, yes this does reflect well on the company.

14. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING THE DATE WHEN CODES OF PRACTICE COVERING THE TRANSFER OF UNDERTAKINGS PROTECTION OF EMPLOYMENT WILL BE INTRODUCED:

Question

Further to his response to my oral question on 16th April 2013, regarding the introduction of codes of practice covering the Transfer of Undertakings Protection of Employment (TUPE) equivalent to or better than those in place in the UK, will the Chief Minister advise the date by which he will undertake to have such codes in place and, if not, why not?

If the date he has in mind is later than December 2013, will he explain the reasons for the delay? Answer

This matter is basically the same issue that was raised under an oral question asked by the Deputy on 16th April 2013.

As a consequence, the answer is essentially the same in that draft codes of practice covering such matters are in the process of development and consultation with a number of pay groups and will be refined as part of the on-going work attached to the proposed incorporation of the Ports of Jersey.

Good progress is being made and the working group is continuing its work, which the group will endeavour to be completed by December 2013 when both the Employer and Unions are satisfied with the outcome.

15. DEPUTY G.C.L. BAUDAINS OF ST. CLEMENT OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING THE USE OF ZERO HOUR' CONTRACTS:

Question

Would the Chief Minister state whether the Council of Ministers are concerned about the increasing prevalence of 'zero hour' contracts and their association with 'casual labour' issues of decades ago?

Notwithstanding that such terms can be appropriate in certain circumstances, is the Minister concerned that some employers are using these contracts as an excuse for bad work management and would he also state whether he believes it appropriate and morally acceptable for States bodies to use such contracts?

Answer

There are no statistics on the use of zero hour contracts across the Island. As a consequence, it would not be possible to verify the premise of the question that there is an increasing prevalence of such contracts or whether their use was associated with working practices in previous decades.

As the Deputy states zero hours contracts are entirely appropriate for people who agree to be available for work as and when required  but where no particular hours or times of work are specified. Examples of the appropriate use of such contracts include the use of Bank Nurses in Health and Social Services and Supply Teachers in the Education, Sport and Culture Departments respectively.

It is incumbent upon employers in the Island to use zero hours contracts appropriately and not to use them to cover work that is regular  in nature. To do otherwise can result  in Employment Tribunal claims in respect of the appropriate annual leave, recognition of bank holidays, unfair dismissal and redundancy.

In today's environment it is appropriate that State bodies utilise a number of different contractual and working arrangements which can include the use of zero hours contracts to the mutual benefit of the service and the affected individual.

16. DEPUTY  G.C.L.  BAUDAINS  OF THE  MINISTER  FOR PLANNING  AND ENVIRONMENT REGARDING THE COST OF OFFSHORE WIND-MONITORING MASTS:

Question

Would the Minister quantify the cost of purchase, installation, maintenance and removal of off- shore wind-monitoring masts and from which budget that will come?

Answer

The estimated costs associated with the off-shore wind-monitoring project can be broken down as follows:-

Funding for this project will come from existing Department of the Environment capital budgets.

The Transport and Technical Services Department are assisting in this project and supplying the communication infrastructure and the Ports of Jersey will be providing transport to and from the reefs.

We are exploring the opportunity for a commercial partner to contribute to these costs in exchange for access to the wind data that will be captured, therefore the costs to the Department of the Environment may reduce.

17. DEPUTY  G.C.L.  BAUDAINS  OF THE  MINISTER  FOR  TRANSPORT  AND TECHNICAL  SERVICES  REGARDING  THE  DECREASE  IN  THE  BUS USAGE SINCE CTPLUS REPLACED CONNEX:

Question

Given the 4% decrease in bus usage since CT Plus replaced Connex, would the Minister advise:

1. whether he was awareatthetimeofawardingthe contract that a similar problem existed in Guernsey, where the service is also operated by CT Plus?

2. how many buses CT Plus are presently using (and their capacity) compared withConnex and whether he considers this adequate?
3. whether  he  is  aware  of  the  problems  unreliable  buses  pose  to the  travelling  public, especially those trying to get to work?
4. what steps, if any, he is taking to halt the decline in bus usage and the consequential migration of people into cars?

Answer

1. Recorded trip numbers on Guernsey's bus service have beenreducingsincethepeakin2010 when it carried 1.64 million passengers. Subsequently in 2011 numbers declined to 1.58 million (-3.7%) and then 2012 this weakening continued to 1.51million passengers (-4.6%). Guernsey advises that this trend appears to mirror the decline in visitor numbers to the Island. Similarly, in Jersey during 2012 Connex reported a corresponding decline.

Following  the  withdrawal at  short  notice  of  Guernsey's  incumbent bus  operator  Island Coachways, April 2012 the States of Guernsey selected CT Plus from a field of seven bus companies to partner with it under a two year contract to operate the buses and assist the States of Guernsey to develop a long term future for the bus services' to stabilise what had already become a service under duress. The Guernsey situation differs from Jersey in several important aspects, in that the States of Guernsey owns the vehicles, sets the fares, and takes responsibility for setting the routes and frequencies, retaining the revenue and associated risks. The core responsibility of CT Plus is to supply drivers and operate the buses.

Working with the States of Guernsey, CT Plus is in the process of introducing new initiatives for Guernsey, such as late evening buses and innovative travel pass products, to try and reinvigorate the market.

The statistical significance of a 4% decrease in Jersey's recorded passenger numbers during the first quarter has yet to be established. It may be a continuation of the decline experienced by Connex, but is more likely to be attributable, at least in part, to the extended period of adverse and cold weather the Island suffered during early 2013, and the services' teething problems which have largely been addressed by LibertyBus through the Spring timetable changes and will further be addressed through the forthcoming Summer timetable changes.

2. LibertyBus have 90 vehicles available to them to deliver the public and school services, comparedto Connex's peak fleet strength of 84 vehicles. The LibertyBus fleet provides an additional 321seats compared to that of Connex at the height of their operation.

The table below summarises the fleets of the two companies, detailing seating and vehicle capacities. Of the 84 Connex vehicles, the nine Mercedes schoolbuses had all been taken out of service by the summer of 2012, reducing their fleet to 75 vehicles and the overall seating capacity by 267 seats.

COMPARISON OF VEHICLE CAPACITY - CONNEX V LIBERTYBUS

Connex fleet LibertyBus fleet

x = Vehicle type not operated

3. I am acutely aware ofthe problems that unreliable buses can causeto the travelling public, particularly those travelling to work. This is why I as Regulator impressed upon LibertyBus that addressing punctuality is of the utmost priority. Since then, most of the teething problems which occurred at the start ofthe service have been addressed by LibertyBus through the Easter and forthcoming Summer timetable changes.

Initiatives such as the split in the Service 15 from a through route into two separate services, the 15 and 16, and the new and very popular X12 express service from the West have contributed significantly to improving reliability.

Further to this, following a contractual period of grace to allow LibertyBus to establish itself, I have incorporated into the Contract significant penalty clauses where unreliable services are identified. This information will be gathered automatically using GPS tracking equipment within the vehicles.

4. Notwithstanding statistical fluctuations between some years, the overall trend for recorded passenger journeys on the bus network continues to rise as set out in the Chart below:

Bus ridership change since 2002

3.4

Passengers

3.2 (million)

3.0 2.8 2.6 2.4 2.2 2.0

2002-3 2003-4 2004-5 2005-6 2006-7 2007-8 2008-9 2009- 2010- 2011-

10 11 12

While contrary to what is asserted in the question, car use has remained static, despite the Island's population having increased by around 10,000 during the period 2001-2011:

Total Annual traffic at 12 major sites

65,000,000 60,000,000 55,000,000 50,000,000 45,000,000 40,000,000 35,000,000 30,000,000

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

To ensure that this trend of increased public transport patronage continues, I have instigated various initiatives as follows:

• The fleet operated by LibertyBus under the 2013 Contract is required to be one composed of high quality vehicles on all public routes, which provide a fully accessible, comfortable and modern environment for the passenger. This includes the provision of more leg room and both buggy and wheelchair spaces on the single deck buses used on the majority of the network, with luggage racks on the double deck buses serving the Airport
• LibertyBus are contracted to provide a 14% increase in journey miles by 2015, ensuring a higher overall level of service
• Introduction of earlier morning services
• Additional Sunday and late evening services
• Express services on routes where the highest demand exists
• Over 25 new bus shelters installed between late 2010 and spring 2013, compared to 6 in the previous decade, along with additional roadside timetable information display sites
• The provision by LibertyBus of more accurate ticketing data, to allow unmet demand to be identified and new routes instigated
• The introduction of electronic smartcard ticketing this summer to allow cashless transactions, both speeding up bus boarding times and allowing more attractive commercial offerings to be made to the public
• Extended opening hours of the passenger concourse at Liberation Station, to 10:00 pm since the start of 2013
• Improved consultation process, including regular parish meetings with passengers
• On-board audible and visual next stop announcements expected to be implemented across the fleet this summer
• Telematics systems to monitor and improve driving standards, facilitating more comfortable journeys, due to be installed this summer

This list is not comprehensive, but intended to highlight the kind of initiatives being undertaken.

18. DEPUTY G.C.L. BAUDAINS OF THE MINISTER FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT REGARDING THE SUPPLY OF SUPER-UNLEADED FUEL: Question

Given that the supply of Super unleaded fuel has now been depleted at most garages, will the Minister explain why no public announcement has yet been made to direct those motorists who require such fuel to the supplies promised by the fuel companies?

Furthermore, given the way the fuel was withdrawn, would the Minister review how this information was communicated and explain what action, if any, he intends to take?

Answer

Fuel Supplies (C.I.) Limited has issued several media releases to date with more scheduled for May.

Reporting on super unleaded availability has been covered by Channel Television and jersey.isle- news.com and can be viewed at the following links:

http://www.channelonline.tv/channelonline_jerseynews/displayarticle.asp?id=504633 http://jersey.isle-news.com/archives/rubis-offers-fuel-solution-for-super-unleaded-supply/16676/

RUBiS has also written to car club members and information is available throughout the RUBiS forecourt network in the form of an FAQ.

Fuel Supplies (C.I.) Limited has also maintained dialogue with CICRA, States of Jersey, trade bodies and various motoring organisations throughout the process.

The continued supply of super unleaded involves the unorthodox importation of the fuel from France utilising large road tankers via ferry services followed by direct distribution to a limited number of RUBiS forecourts.

Motorists requiring supplies of Super Unleaded will only be able to access it via a special RUBiS Loyalty Card. The reason for requiring a card is to ensure that given the constraints surrounding the importation and distribution of relatively small quantities of fuel, there is sufficient supply for those motorists that can only use 98 Octane fuel.

Super Unleaded fuel is currently available from various forecourts in the Island and Fuel Supplies (C.I.) Limited has undertaken to continue to provide a limited supply to customers from at least two of their existing retailers.

The proposed solution for distribution is currently under review by Fuel Supplies (C.I.) Limited's logistics partners and site visits have been scheduled in May to ensure that the correct health and safety procedures and traffic regulations are complied with.

The withdrawal of super unleaded from the Island clearly caused some concern amongst consumers initially. However, given the requirement for the re-development of the La Collette Fuel Terminal and the declining demand for Super Unleaded (less than 5% of retail fuel sales), it appears that Fuel Supplies (C.I.) Limited has responded well and is going to extraordinary lengths to ensure that an adequate supply will be retained in the Island.

It is of course also open for the remaining distributors to develop their own plans to continue the supply of super unleaded to their customers.

19. DEPUTY J.H. YOUNG OF ST. BRELADE OF THE MINISTER FOR PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT REGARDING THE IMPACT ON FUTURE HOUSING SUPPLY OF THE JERSEY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY'S 2012 REPORT:

Question

Will the Minister inform the Assembly of the implications for the spatial and housing policies of the Island Plan 2011, and the Island's future housing supply, of the recent statement by the Jersey Development Company in their 2012 report (R.29/2013 refers) that "there is unlikely to be any further residential development on the St Helier Waterfront for a few years", and the actions, if any, he proposes to take to address those implications and compensate for this change of policy by the Company?

Answer

The implications of no further residential development on the St Helier Waterfront for a few years' does not, on the basis of the evidence available to date, have any significant implications for the housing policies of the 2011 Island Plan but is a matter that is kept under regular review through the preparation and publication of annual Residential Land Availability statements.

The 2011 Island Plan estimated that the St Helier Waterfront might yield up to 1,000 Category B homes during the Plan period 2011-2020. It was envisaged that 600 homes might be developed here by 2015, with a further 400 being completed by 2020.

Nearly 400 homes have already been built on the St Helier Waterfront since 2011 (at Castle Quay I) and planning permission exists for the development of nearly 350 more here (at Zephyrus and Castle Quay II).

Having regard to the overall level of housing supply, as set out in the latest Residential Land Availability statement (as at January 2012), the situation with regard to the provision of Category B homes generally is considered to be quite healthy, with nearly 600 Category B homes having already been built since the approval of the Island Plan in 2011 and another 600 under construction, together with planning permission existing for the development of nearly 1,800 more. When this is set against the requirements for new homes, it indicates a healthy surplus of over 800 Category B homes.

As stated above, however, the situation is regularly monitored and another Residential Land Availability statement, to reflect the position as at January 2013, is currently in preparation.

20. DEPUTY T.A. VALLOIS OF ST. SAVIOUR OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING THE COST OF CONSULTANCY REPORTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE VARIOUS MACHINERY OF GOVERNMENT REVIEWS SINCE 1999: Question

Could the Chief Minister advise how many consultants' reports have been produced across all States' departments during the period of the Machinery of Government reforms from 1999 to date and how much each one has cost?

Answer

In order to answer this question comprehensively it will require a significant amount of work and officer time. I have arranged for officers to commence this task and will endeavour to provide the Deputy with the relevant information by the next States Sitting.

In the meantime, I refer the Deputy to relevant information which is already in the public domain at the attached link (http://www.gov.je/Government/Consultations/).

3. Oral Questions Senator I.J. Gorst :

Sir, before we start, Deputy Pitman has got a question 5, an oral question, this morning which is, I think, in effect, addressed to the Assistant Chief Minister who Members will know is unwell today, and therefore not able to join us in the Assembly. I wonder if the Deputy would mind deferring that question until the next sitting so that the Assistant Chief Minister

The Bailiff :

He is on défaut as opposed to malade. Nobody has informed the Assembly of his malade. Senator I.J. Gorst :

Perhaps I can try and kill 2 birds with one stone. Firstly, could I beg the apologies of the Assembly for (a) being late myself but (b) I should have declared Senator Bailhache as malade.

Deputy T.M. Pitman of St. Helier :

The question was addressed to the Chief Minister. I know there is confusion about who is in charge but it was addressed to the Chief Minister.

The Bailiff :

We will come that in a moment when we get to question 5. Do you wish to affirm that Senator Bailhache is malade?

Senator I.J. Gorst :

I do, Sir, yes.

The Bailiff :

Very well, Senator Bailhache is marked as malade. Senator I.J. Gorst :

With regard to the matter of the question, of course I am more than happy to answer the question. I thought it was simply common courtesy. The question is, in actual fact, about an action of my Assistant Minister and therefore I felt it was best answered by that Assistant Minister.

The Bailiff :

I think it is a matter for Deputy Pitman. If he wishes to maintain the question, it is up to him.

1. Deputy M. Tadier of St. Brelade of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding concerns raised about levels of care at Highlands Care Home in the past 2 years:

Will the Minister advise whether any concerns have been raised about the levels of care at Highlands Care Home in the past 2 years, whether there have been any inspections at the home during that time period and if so, what the findings of those inspections were?

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

Highlands Care Home is registered under the Nursing and Residential Homes (Jersey) Law 1994. As required by this law, the home is inspected twice a year. I can confirm Highlands has been inspected in accordance with the statutory requirements. During inspection last year, concern was raised by the management at the home regarding a member of staff. This was investigated under the current safeguarding procedure. There were no current or outstanding regulatory actions in respect of Highlands. Information provided during inspection is given in confidence for the limited purpose of ensuring that the department has discharged  its statutory functions. The Solicitor General has confirmed that there is no legal authority in law to disclose inspection reports and the department does not therefore have the legal power to disclose any details of these inspections.

1. Deputy M. Tadier :

The Minister confirmed that there had been concerns raised by management but can she say whether there have been concerns raised to her department by members of the public about levels of care at the home?

The Deputy of Trinity :

I do not have the exact details of that but I am happy to look into it. There is a policy that any family member of the resident can ask to see the inspection body.

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

Given the large amounts of public money that are often paid to these homes and, as we see in the U.K., in fact, money which ensures their survival, would the Minister tell the House how these homes are publicly accountable for the public money that is placed in them?

The Deputy of Trinity :

As a regulatory body, I wear 2 hats. The regulation and inspection is a statutory function which is very detailed looking at various aspects of fire, number of staff per patients, et cetera, as well as the other hat. We have an S.L.A. (Service Level Agreement) with care homes and residential homes if we need to, or we purchase contract spot beds, and we continue to monitor all the care and support that they need.

3. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:

I wonder if the Minister could be a bit more precise. If complaints are received, for example, and they fall within the S.L.A. or the non-adherence to the S.L.A., how does the Minister respond to this?

The Deputy of Trinity :

As I have said, if there is a complaint, then the regulatory and inspection body will go into nursing homes or residential homes to look at the complaints and proceed from there.

4. Deputy J.G. Reed of St. Ouen :

Will the Minister confirm whether criminal record checks are required for all staff working in care homes?

The Deputy of Trinity :

Yes, all care homes undertake robust recruitment procedures, and these are a detailed application form, full employment history, qualifications and experience, 2 references and since the beginning of this year, a criminal record check, and this was following advice from the Law Officers' Department.

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

Would the Minister define for us what she sees as wearing 2 hats and if there is a conflict in her roles, as Minister, will she divest herself of one of those?

The Deputy of Trinity :

The 2 hats I was referring to as part of that is the statutory function, the regulation and inspection of all nursing and care homes as well as part of Community and Social Services with the S.L.A.s. With the Regulation of Care Law that is going to be coming to this House, hopefully by the beginning of January next year, that will change slightly because we will need to set up a Commission to look at the regulation and inspection function.

6. Deputy G.P. Southern :

Could the Minister please elucidate, because I do not understand whether she thinks that she has a conflict of interest presently and whether she is, in fact, getting rid of one of those roles?

The Deputy of Trinity :

No, because they are 2 separate functions. It might not be ideal in the Deputy 's eyes but this is how it is at the moment and that is why the Regulation of Care Law, which is coming to this House hopefully by July of next year, is important, because at the moment it is only privately run nursing homes and residential homes that are regulated and inspected.

7. Senator S.C. Ferguson:

The Minister said earlier that she does not have knowledge of complaints. Does she not discuss these with her Chief Officer, since they are indicative of the success of the policies being applied?

The Deputy of Trinity :

Matter of inspections is the regulation and inspection. If there is a serious complaint, yes, I will be notified, because if the complaints are not addressed or there is still an ongoing problem that needs to come to me, because I will take some action.

8. Senator S.C. Ferguson:

Surely a regular discussion of complaints is more useful than just an occasional discussion of a major complaint?

The Deputy of Trinity :

As I said, the regulation and inspection body go into each nursing and residential home. If there is a complaint and serious complaints, yes, they do come to me and I do discuss them along with other residential and nursing homes and other organisations that we do regulate.

9. Deputy M. Tadier :

Senator Ferguson touched on my point. The Minister earlier said she does not have the exact details when I asked if concerns had been raised by members of the public. It is simply a yes or no and I am astounded that the Minister does not seek to find that information which the question is seeking before coming to this Assembly. Can the Minister really confirm, I think she knows as well as I do, that she has been approached by at least one member of the public, who is one of my constituents, who has raised concerns that patients there have been left on their own, when alarms go off, that there are insufficient staff numbers, that there is a high level of staff turnover, that often clients come back home after respite smelling of urine, et cetera, and will she confirm that she is taking these concerns very seriously and acknowledge the fact that concerns have been raised, either directly or indirectly, to her department from members of the public?

The Deputy of Trinity :

Yes, I know the issue that the Deputy was talking about. As with any complaint, we take complaints very seriously, and the complaint goes to the inspection and regulatory authority who will address these complaints.

2. Deputy G.P. Southern of the Minister for Housing regarding the mismatch between the projections contained within the Reform of Social Housing (P.33/2013) and population projections produced in 2012 following the 2011 Census results:

Given that the scenario described in the 3 policy bullet points included on page 11 of the full business case associated with the Reform of Social Housing, P.33 of 2013, fails to match up with any of the population projections produced in 2012, following the 2011 census results, will the Minister state whether, in drafting the proposition, he sought input from the Statistics Unit and if not, why not?

Connétable J.M. Refault of St. Peter (Assistant Minister for Housing - rapporteur):

The increase in the overall population of the Island does not necessarily translate into an increased need for affordable housing. The need for affordable homes is a much more complex issue and one which is sensitive to economic fluctuations. For this reason, the Statistics Unit, the Planning Department and the Housing Department, jointly run the Housing Needs Surveys which aim to ascertain what the population's housing needs and aspirations are. The outputs from these surveys are validated against the Statistics Unit's population model, and they are reviewed annually and set out in the Planning Department's review of residential land availability on an annual basis. This document monitors the delivery of homes, including those on sites approved in the Island Plan and identifies the impact that insufficient or slow to emerge supply has on housing needs. Shortages in supply are dealt with in the Island Plan and in 2011, it was agreed that schemes on States land be brought forward as a means of meeting the level of need identified in the most recent Housing Needs Survey. It is these sites which form the basis of the growth in the new housing company's business case. I fully acknowledge, that even without widening eligibility criteria to include groups such as key workers, couples and singles under 50 without children, further sites are required to meet the growing demand, and I am working with the Minister for Treasury and Resources and the Minister for Planning and Environment to identify appropriate sites. The important thing about my reform proposals is that they will put in place the structure necessary to respond to the changing housing requirements of the Island. The housing company will have ..

The Bailiff :

I think, Assistant Minister, that is rather long for a concise answer. The Connétable of St. Peter :

Thank you, Sir. I look forward to hearing the Deputy 's questions.

1. Deputy G.P. Southern :

Within that extremely long answer, the Assistant Minister failed to address the question. Did the Assistant Minister seek to include the Statistics Unit in his debate of future demand or not? How much input was there from the Statistics Unit? There appears to have been none apart from these 4 paragraphs on housing numbers.

The Connétable of St. Peter :

I can go back to paragraph 2. Would you like me to read it again? I am sure you would not. I did state there that the Statistics Unit, Planning Department and Housing Department jointly and together, run the Housing Needs Surveys and those report back to us annually to determine the ongoing need.

2. Deputy G.P. Southern :

Is it the case that the Housing Needs Survey last completed, showed a demand for 400-plus of social rented units and the Assistant Minister's own waiting list indicates 800-plus social rented units and no reference is made to this in the entire 120 pages of the full business case contained in R.15?

The Connétable of St. Peter :

We do reflect the needed growth. The business plan shows an increasing 434 units of housing as part of the business plan for the new Housing Unit. The current level of actual need actively in the housing gateway stands at 1,304 from all different ranges from one-bedroom to 5-bedroom needs.

3. The Deputy of St. Ouen :

I would just like to ask the Assistant Minister, he speaks about the Housing Needs Survey, would he confirm whether the Housing Needs Survey measures current demand or future demand?

[10:00]

The Connétable of St. Peter :

The Housing Needs Survey does not measure future demand, it measures known requirements and the very limited trend from that. To project further forward without the proper data would be the wrong thing to do to come forward as part of the S.H.U. (Strategic Housing Unit).

4. The Deputy of St. Ouen :

Is that not the point that I think Deputy Southern is trying to make, and the question is whether or not the Statistics Unit have been involved in considering future requirements beyond those that we know currently?

The Connétable of St. Peter :

As I said before, the Statistics Unit are embedded with us and Planning to develop the ongoing need as they see it evolving.

5. Deputy R.J. Rondel of St. Helier :

The Assistant Minister mentioned that they are woefully short of sites, and that they are in discussions to bring further sites forward. When does he anticipate that this may happen?

The Connétable of St. Peter :

I would hope to see that happening sometime this year, but we are in the hands of the Minister for Planning and Environment and maybe a question later on could be addressed to him on that matter.

6. Deputy G.P. Southern :

Does the Assistant Minister consider that it is appropriate to bring forward his Housing Transformation Plan without any reference, apart from 4 short paragraphs, to the population for which he is supposed to be catering, given that he is bringing a 30-year plan? Has he ever seen a housing plan previously which did not talk in depth about the population that it was catering for?

The Connétable of St. Peter :

I wish life was that simple. As we already know, the population model is being developed by the Chief Minister's Department. That will have an impact on the ongoing growth or not of the population. If we were to work simply on a straight  line graph on the current explosion of population, then we would be looking at something considerably larger than the reality will be in 30 years' time, which makes it very difficult to use existing trends to develop a future profile.