States Meeting Transcript - 14th July 2014

STATES OF JERSEY OFFICIAL REPORT MONDAY, 14th JULY 2014

COMMUNICATIONS BY THE PRESIDING OFFICER ......................................6

1. The Bailiff :..............................................................................6

QUESTIONS......................................................................................6

2. Written Questions........................................................................6

1. THE CONNÉTABLE OF ST. JOHN OF THE MINISTER FOR EDUCATION, SPORT REGARDING I.T. INFRASTRUCTURE:...............................................6
2. DEPUTY G.C.L. BAUDAINS OF ST. CLEMENT OF THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES REGARDING COMPANIES WITHIN THE J.T. GROUP:.................................................................................8
3. DEPUTY J.M. MACON OF ST. SAVIOUR OF THE MINISTER FOR TRANSPORT AND TECHNICAL SERVICES REGARDING THE PEDESTRIAN CROSSING AT MILADI FARM:........................................................................9
4. DEPUTY M.R. HIGGINS OF ST. HELIER OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING THE EN DESASTRE' PROCESS:....................................................10
5. DEPUTY M.R. HIGGINS OF ST. HELIER OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING REGISTRATION CARDS:............................................................10
6. DEPUTY M.R. HIGGINS OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT REGARDING THE GAMBLING COMMISSION:................14
7. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR HOUSING REGARDING ANDIUM HOMES:....................................................18
8. DEPUTY G.C.L. BAUDAINS OF ST. CLEMENT OF THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES REGARDING J.E.C. WORK AT GREVE D'AZETTE:............................................................................22
9. DEPUTY J.H. YOUNG OF ST. BRELADE OF THE MINISTER FOR PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT REGARDING ENERGY EFFICIENCY GRANTS:..........23
10. DEPUTY J.H. YOUNG OF ST. BRELADE OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING THE REGENERATION STEERING GROUP:........................................24
11. DEPUTY J.A. HILTON OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES REGARDING ASBESTOS IN SCHOOLS: ............................25
12. DEPUTY M.R HIGGINS OF ST. HELIER OF H.M. ATTORNEY GENERAL

REGARDING THE AUTHORITY OF THE VISCOUNT TO PUBLISH INDIVIDUALS' INCOME TAX INFORMATION:....................................28 2.13. DEPUTY J.M. MAÇON OF ST. SAVIOUR OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING THE LAW DRAFTING LIST FOR ALL DEPARTMENTS:..........................28

3. Oral Questions...........................................................................33

1. Connétable P.J. Rondel of St. John of the Minister for Treasury and Resources regarding the Chief Executive of J.T.s recent bonus payment:........................34

Senator P.F.C. Ozouf (The Minister for Treasury and Resources):............................34

1. The Connétable of St. John:............................................................35
2. Deputy M. Tadier of St. Brelade:.......................................................35
3. Deputy J.H. Young of St. Brelade:......................................................35
4. Deputy G.P. Southern of St. Helier:....................................................35
5. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier of St. Saviour:...............................................36
6. Deputy G.C.L. Baudains of St. Clement : ...............................................36
7. Senator L.J. Farnham :..................................................................37
8. The Connétable of St. John:............................................................37

2. Deputy J.A. Martin of St. Helier of the Minister for Planning and Environment regarding the conditions attached to the planning permit for the Police Headquarters: ...........................................................................................38

Deputy R.C. Duhamel of St. Saviour (The Minister for Planning and Environment):.........38

1. Deputy J.A. Martin:....................................................................38
2. Deputy J.A. Martin:....................................................................38

3. Deputy J.A. Hilton of St. Helier of the Chairman of the Comité des Connétable s regarding the declaration of convictions by candidates for the position of Connétable : ...........................................................................................38

Connétable J.L.S. Gallichan of Trinity (Chairman, Comité des Connétable s):................38

1. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................39
2. Deputy M.R. Higgins of St. Helier:.....................................................39

3. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................39
4. Deputy J.A. Hilton:.....................................................................40

4. Deputy G.P. Southern of the Minister for Social Security regarding action following the decision of the Assembly to adopt Deputy Martin's amendment to the Draft Income Support (Special Payments) (Child Personal Care) (Jersey) Regulations 201- (P.90/2014):..............................................................................40

Senator F. du H. Le Gresley (The Minister for Social Security): ..............................40 3.4.1 Deputy J.H. Young:....................................................................40

5. Senator A. Breckon of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding the allocation of Social Workers to all 4 States Secondary schools:........................41

Deputy J.A. Martin (Assistant Minister for Health and Social Services - rapporteur): ........41

1. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................41
2. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................41

3. Senator A. Breckon: ....................................................................42

6. Deputy M.R. Higgins of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding the level of evidence seen by the Minister in relation to a specific child protection matter: ...........................................................................................42

Deputy A.E. Pryke of Trinity (The Minister for Health and Social Services):.................42

1. Deputy M.R.Higgins:..................................................................42
2. Deputy M.R.Higgins:..................................................................43

7. The Connétable of St. John of the Minister for Economic Development regarding the implications of the expiry of the lease for the Airport Fuel Farm: ....................43

Senator A.J.H. Maclean (The Minister for Economic Development):.........................43

1. The Connétable of St. John:............................................................43
2. Deputy S. Power of St. Brelade : ........................................................44
3. Deputy S.Y. Mézec of St. Helier:.......................................................44
4. Deputy G.C.L. Baudains:...............................................................44
5. Deputy S.Power:.......................................................................45
6. The Connétable of St. John:............................................................45

8. Deputy M.R. Higgins of the Minister for Home Affairs regarding the States of Jersey Police Force's duty to report any child protection concerns or issues fully and accurately to the appropriate States bodies:............................................45

Senator B.I. Le Marquand (The Minister for Home Affairs): .................................45

1. Deputy M.R.Higgins:..................................................................46
2. Deputy J.A. Hilton:.....................................................................46
3. Deputy T.A. Vallois of St. Saviour:....................................................46
4. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................46
5. Deputy M.R.Higgins:..................................................................47

9. Deputy G.P. Southern of the Minister for Housing regarding the waiting list for applicants to the Housing Gateway, who are pregnant:................................47

Deputy A.K.F. Green of St. Helier (The Minister for Housing):..............................47

1. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................47
2. Deputy S. Power:.......................................................................48
3. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................48
4. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................48
5. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................48
6. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................49

10. Deputy J.A. Martin of the Minister for Treasury and Resources regarding the creation of an additional storey of car parking spaces at Green Street:...............49

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

rapporteur):.............................................................................49

1. Deputy J.A. Martin: .................................................................49
2. Deputy M.R.Higgins:...............................................................50
3. Deputy M.R.Higgins:...............................................................50
4. Deputy J.H. Young: .................................................................50
5. Senator S.C. Ferguson:..............................................................50
6. Senator S.C. Ferguson:..............................................................50
7. Deputy J.A.N. Le Fondré: ...........................................................50

4. Urgent Oral Questions..................................................................51

1. Deputy G.P. Southern of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding consultation over planned major changes to the maintenance and engineering responsibilities of some Health and Social Services employees:........................51

Connétable J.M. Refault of St. Peter (Assistant Minister for Health and Social Services -

rapporteur):.............................................................................51

1. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................52
2. Deputy J.H. Young:....................................................................52
3. Senator S.C. Ferguson:.................................................................52
4. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................52

5. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................53
6. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................53

2. Deputy G.P. Southern of the Minister for Treasury and Resources regarding assurance regarding outsourcing Health and Social Services maintenance and engineering services to private contractors:............................................53

Deputy E.J. Noel (Assistant Minister for Treasury and Resources - rapporteur):..............53

1. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................53
2. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................54
3. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................54

3. Deputy S. Power of the Chief Minister regarding the resignation of the Treasurer of the States:................................................................................54

Senator I.J. Gorst (The Chief Minister):......................................................54

1. Deputy S.Power:.......................................................................54
2. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................55
3. Senator S.C. Ferguson:.................................................................55
4. Senator S.C. Ferguson:.................................................................55
5. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................55
6. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................56
7. Deputy M.R.Higgins:..................................................................56
8. Deputy M.R.Higgins:..................................................................56
9. Deputy J.H. Young:....................................................................56
10. Deputy J.M. Maçon of St. Saviour : ..................................................57
11. Deputy J.M. Maçon:.................................................................57
12. Deputy M.R.Higgins:...............................................................57
13. Deputy J.A.N. Le Fondré: ...........................................................58
14. The Connétable of St. John : .........................................................58
15. Deputy S.Power:....................................................................58

5. Questions to Ministers without notice - The Minister for Planning and Environment ...........................................................................................59

1. Deputy S.Power:.......................................................................59 Deputy R.C. Duhamel (The Minister for Planning and Environment): ........................60
2. Connétable J. Gallichan of St. Mary : ...................................................60
3. Senator L.J. Farnham :..................................................................60
4. Deputy J.H. Young:....................................................................60
5. Senator P.F. Routier: ...................................................................60

5.5.1 Senator P.F. Routier: ...................................................................61

6. The Connétable ofSt.Mary:............................................................61
7. Deputy G.C.L. Baudains:...............................................................61
8. Deputy J.H. Young:....................................................................61

5.8.1 Deputy J.H. Young:....................................................................62

9. Connétable D.W. Mezbourian of St. Lawrence:........................................62
10. Deputy J.M. Maçon:....................................................................62
11. Senator L.J. Farnham :..................................................................63

6. Questions to Ministers without notice - The Minister for Social Security.............63

1. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................63 Senator F. du H. Le Gresley (The Minister for Social Security): ..............................63

6.1.1 Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................63

2. Senator L.J. Farnham :..................................................................63
3. Deputy J.H. Young:....................................................................64
4. Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: ..............................................................64

5. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................64

6.5.1 Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................64

6. Deputy T.A. Vallois: ...................................................................64

1. Deputy T.A. Vallois: ...................................................................65
2. Deputy T.A. Vallois: ...................................................................65

7. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................65

STATEMENTS ON A MATTER OF OFFICIAL RESPONSIBILITY........................65

7. The Minister for Economic Development - statement regarding the Sea Transport Policy ....................................................................................66

7.1 Senator A.J.H. Maclean (The Minister for Economic Development):...................66

1. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................67
2. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................68
3. Senator L.J. Farnham :..................................................................68
4. Deputy G.C.L. Baudains:...............................................................68
5. Deputy S.Power:.......................................................................69
6. The Connétable of St. John:............................................................69
7. The Connétable of St. John:............................................................69
8. Deputy J.G. Reed of St. Ouen:..........................................................70
9. The Deputy of St. Ouen:................................................................70
10. Deputy R.G. le Hérissier: ............................................................71
11. Deputy M. Tadier :...................................................................71
12. Deputy M. Tadier :...................................................................71

PUBLIC BUSINESS.............................................................................71 Deputy J.M. Maçon:..........................................................................72 Senator I.J. Gorst :............................................................................72 Deputy M. Tadier : ............................................................................72 Deputy P.J.D. Ryan of St. John:..............................................................72 Senator P.F. Routier:..........................................................................72 Deputy J.A. Martin:..........................................................................73 Deputy J.M. Maçon:..........................................................................73

8. Grouville School: parking facilities (P.24/2014)........................................75

8.1 Connétable J.E. Le Maistre of Grouville :...............................................75

1. The Deputy of St. John:................................................................77
2. Connétable M.P.S. Le Troquer of St. Martin:...........................................78
3. The Deputy of St. Martin:..............................................................79
4. Deputy J.H. Young:....................................................................80
5. The Deputy of Grouville :...............................................................80
6. The Connétable of St. Clement:........................................................80
7. Deputy K.C. Lewis of St. Saviour:......................................................81
8. The Connétable of Grouville :...........................................................81

ADJOURNMENT................................................................................84

[14:30]

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

1. The Bailiff :

I have no matters under A except to welcome you all back again after your lengthy sojourn since the last sitting of the Assembly.

QUESTIONS

2. Written Questions

1. THE CONNÉTABLE OF ST. JOHN OF THE MINISTER FOR EDUCATION, SPORT REGARDING I.T. INFRASTRUCTURE:

Question

Would the Minister –

1. provide a detailed breakdown for the last three years in relation to the maintenance expenditure of the Department's IT infrastructure?
2. advise whether the company Logicalis has been contracted to rewire the majorityofESC sites to enable wifi and, if so,

1. was this put out to tender?
2. what, if any, were the alternatives?
3. why was this quote accepted?

3. advise whether an electrical contractor was used for the wiring and, if not, why?
4. advise whetherthe existing wifi infrastructurethat is, in some cases not even a year old, has been replaced?

Will the new wireless network allows teachers and students to work remotely and, if not, why?

Are some schools still waiting for their ICT Business Plan policies to be accepted and on what basis have some not been accepted?

Have schools been made aware of their budgets for September early enough to allocate funds for teacher training in ICT and, if not, why?

Does the Minister consider it is acceptable to have just one local network services provider for ESC, and what measures, if any, are in place to ensure that this monopoly position is not abused?

Answer

1. The detailed breakdown would put commercially sensitive information in the public domain. However, I am happy to provide the details to the Connétable in confidence. The overall maintenance expenditure is as follows. This includes the cost internet provision, firewall and filtering, Wide Area Network provision, Wi-Fi networks, PC replacement, managed services provision, server replacement and repairs.

2011 2012 2013 2014 Total £1,215,685 £864,170 £1,176,242 £2,224,485

The 2014 costs include committed spend and anticipated spend

2. Logicalis is an approvedStates contractor. They are carrying out wiring in some of the schools but are also managing the project overall and co-ordinating the subcontractors. This means there is a single pointof contact and also that Logicalis will test the cabling and provide a single warranty for allthework.

Each school building is different and the cabling requirements vary as a result. Each school was therefore regarded as a separate project and none reached the tender threshold. The work allocated to Logicalis was awarded in line with the requirements of the States of Jersey Financial Directions and States procurement procedures. There is a full Procurement Strategy for the Wireless Network Project.

Approved sub-contractors have been used that have existing relationships with schools and knowledge of the particular requirements of those buildings. The alternative would have been to use contractors with no prior knowledge of the schools. This would have increased risk in terms of cost and completion time.

3. Yes. Local electrical contractors that are approvedto carry out States work have been used for this project.
4. As partofthe Procurement Strategy for the Wireless Network Project full site surveys ofallschool buildings were completed. Existing cabling was reviewed to ascertain whether it could meet the requirements of the new wireless network. In some schools it was not suitable.

The new wireless networks will be connected to the new Wide Area Network (WAN) and associated new Internet feed. These networks need to be able to handle significant throughput with multiple devices connected simultaneously and many of the existing school networks are not designed to handle either the amount of traffic or the number of concurrent users.

Existing wireless hardware is being re-cycled where possible. However, in line with the "Thinking Differently" strategy, it is important to ensure there is no digital divide between schools and that all students and staff have the same new, fast, wireless network performance. This means existing wireless equipment may need to be upgraded with appropriate hardware. Length of time  it  has  been  in the  building  is  not relevant. The equipment  needs to  be compatible  with  the  latest  requirements,  which  have been  upgraded within  the  last  six months.

Secure remote access to the network requires an additional application. This is currently being tested to ensure the design is correct, cost is minimised and security requirements are met. Once it is in place it will support of the concept of "anytime, anywhere" learning to ensure teachers and students can work remotely.

The majority of business plans have been approved. Some schools are waiting for final approval and have been asked to fine-tune or enhance certain details. They have been supported by the Project Team at the Department and all the business plans are likely to be approved by the end of term or early in September.

26 business plans have been approved and approval letters and funding have been issued to

those schools.

Three schools are due to submit revised business plans imminently following the initial

feedback from the Project Team.

All schools were provided with a high level indicator of their budgets in December 2013. Further details were provided to every school in January 2014 so they have been made aware of their budget allocation well in advance and in time to plan for the autumn term. Funding is transferred immediately once business plans have been approved.

Yes. Having a single supplier is beneficial and helps to ensure consistency of service, security requirements, best value for money and ongoing support services.

This WAN contract is for a fixed period of three years with costs fixed over that term to ensure no monopoly position is created. The contract will be monitored and managed throughout and reviewed at the end of the period.

2. DEPUTY G.C.L. BAUDAINS OF ST. CLEMENT OF THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES REGARDING COMPANIES WITHIN THE J.T. GROUP:

Question

Would the Minister, as the shareholder representative, list the companies owned by or that are part of the JT group and would he also state their purpose and the return they provide to the parent company?

Answer

The results of JT Group Limited (which are consolidated to include all companies forming part of the group) for the year ended 31 December 2013 were presented to States Members by the management team of JT on Monday 30 June 2014. The presentation and the financial statements were subsequently circulated via email to all Members by the CEO of JT Group on Tuesday 1 July 2014. The presentation provided overall consolidated results and further details on the split of revenues in Jersey and elsewhere. JT advises that the returns of individual companies within the group are included in the consolidated published accounts for JT Group Limited to the extent that they can be disclosed. Each company is subject to regular performance review as part of normal business operations.

The companies owned by JT, or which are part of the JT group, are as follows:

For the avoidance of any doubt, JT employees that occupy a position on the boards of any of the above companies receive no remuneration for doing so.

3. DEPUTY J.M. MACON OF ST. SAVIOUR OF THE MINISTER FOR TRANSPORT AND TECHNICAL SERVICES REGARDING THE PEDESTRIAN CROSSING AT MILADI FARM:

Question

Could the Minister explain what action, if any, has been taken to establish a pedestrian crossing at Miladi Farm, to include reference to:-

1. the timeline of expected completion;
2. any drawings that are currently underway and any consultation with residents or the Parish which has or will be undertaken?

Answer

My Department has assessed the request for a crossing on Longueville Road by Miladi Farm and concluded that because of the very low number of pedestrians crossing at that location and low accident history, a formal crossing, such as a Zebra or Pelican, would not be an appropriate or safe solution. The Department therefore designed a road realignment which would have enabled a pedestrian refuge island to be installed, however this required a small area of land acquisition from a private land owner and attempts to acquire that land failed.

Although the number of recorded accidents on Longueville Road by Miladi Farm is low, there have been several road injuries in recent years elsewhere along that route, including a motorcyclist fatality. The accidents are mostly centred around the junctions with La Rue des Prés, Les Varines and Plat Douet Road. This suggests therefore that a more comprehensive approach should be taken and the Department is designing a speed reduction scheme which will encompass the length of Longueville Road stretching from Rue du Prés junction to Plat Douet Road junction. This should reduce the likelihood of accidents along the route and also assist pedestrians who wish to cross at various locations along the entire length of that road. A provisional sum of £100,000 has been allocated to this project from TTS capital funding in 2015. The Department will discuss the proposals with the Connétable and a public consultation will be carried out later this year.

4. DEPUTY M.R. HIGGINS OF ST. HELIER OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING THE EN DESASTRE' PROCESS:

Question

Will the Chief Minister request the Viscount to publish all of the guidance material relating to the publication of a désastre' issued by the Viscount's Office, together with the protocols governing the publication of information about a bankrupt's finances, including when the information can be given out and who can receive this information stating further when this guidance was promulgated and last changed?

Answer

I can confirm that I am content to write to the Bailiff and the Viscount in order to convey this request.

5. DEPUTY M.R. HIGGINS OF ST. HELIER OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING REGISTRATION CARDS:

Question

Further to the response given on 17th June 2014, will the Chief Minister set out for members the number of people who have applied for registration cards under the new Control of Housing and Work (Jersey) Law 2012, breaking down the numbers into the nationality and country of origin for all those who have applied during the first full year of its operation?

Answer

The figures below show all those people applying  for registration cards under the Control of Housing and Work (Jersey) Law 2012 for the first full year of operation of the new law.

Applying for a registration card does not mean people are new to the Island, as we all need registration cards when moving house or changing jobs.

When issuing cards we ask for an applicant's nationality, not country of origin.

6. DEPUTY M.R. HIGGINS OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT REGARDING THE GAMBLING COMMISSION:

Question

Will the Minister provide members with the following information regarding the Jersey Gambling Commission for each year since it was formed:

1. the number and type of gambling licences issued;
2. the revenue received from these licences broken down into each category;
3. the number and type of external gambling licences issued - such as those issued to firms outside the Island and the income generated from them;
4. the amount of money expended on support for problem gamblers and how it is spent;
5. the salaries of the board, directors and staff of the Gambling Commission; and,
6. the number, type and costof conferences attended by Gambling Commission directors and staff?

Answer

The Jersey Gambling Commission came into existence in October 2010 and administered the Gambling (Jersey) Law 1964 during 2011 and 2012. In 2013 the Gambling (Jersey) Law 2012 came into force. Each period operated distinct licensing regimes. Detailed information regarding numbers of social permits or registrations prior to the implementation of the new Law has not been retained. Data for 2011 includes the last quarter of 2010. Social and charitable income was received in total of £14,110 (Q4 2010 & 2011) and £10,900 (2012).

For both 2011 and 2012 the following information can be provided: LICENCES

Type Numbers  Fee

Granted

Amusement Premises Licence Betting Office/Credit Betting Licence Bookmaker's Licence

Occasional Bookmaker's Licence

Track Licence Gaming Machines

Gaming Machine Type 2

Hosting Providers Licence Disaster Recovery Licence

0 £3,000 per annum

29 £3,000 per annum

11  £500 per annum

1 £150  per  day  plus  £250

deposit

0 £500 per annum

0 £4,000  per  machine  per

annum

55 £4,000  per  machine  per

annum

2 £5,000 per annum 0 £5,000 per annum

PERMITS

Type Numbers Granted Fee

Amusement  With  Prizes  Permit  0 £1,000 per annum (Amusement Premises)

Amusement  With  Prizes  Permit  3 £110 per event (Commercial Event)

Bingo Permit (Private) Bingo Permit (Public) Cinema Racing Permit Crown and Anchor Permit Gaming at an Event Permit Lottery Permit

REGISTRATIONS Type

Bingo Certificate of Registration

Cinema Racing Certificate of Registration Lottery Certificate of Registration

No Data £50 per annum

No Data £10 per event

No Data £50 per event

No Data £110 per table per event No Data £50 per event

No Data £20 per lottery

Numbers  Fee Granted

No Data £20 per calendar year No Data £20 per calendar year No Data £20 per calendar year

Total Regulatory income for 16 months to December 2011 was £410,248. Total Regulatory income for the 12 months to December 2012 was £364,287. With regard to 2013 the picture is different because of the change in legislation. LICENCES

Type Numbers  Fee

Granted

Bookmakers' Licence Class 1 8 £3,000 per premises per annum Bookmakers' Licence Class II 3 £375 per annum

Occasional Bookmaker's Licence Crown and Anchor Licence Track Licence

Gaming Machines Class Licence Gaming Machines Category 3 Gaming Machines Category 4 Gambling Machine Licence Amusement with Prizes at Events Personal Gambling Licence Thrift Club Class Licence

1 £375 per annum

28 £110 per event

1 £500 per annum

1 £0

6 £150 per annum

0 £500 per annum

92 £4,000 per annum

1 £110 per event

6 £500 per annum

23 £25-150  per  annum  (£1300

total)

PERMITS

Type Numbers Granted Fee

Software Designers Permit   1 £1,250 per annum Machine Suppliers Permit 3 £0

Hosting Service Providers Permit  2 £5000

Charitable Gambling Permit 2 £100-500

REGISTRATIONS

Type Numbers  Fee

Granted

Charitable Registration 19 £20 per calendar year Total Regulatory income for the 12 months to December 2013 was £507,274.

No external licences can or could be granted under either Gambling (Jersey) Law. Licences are only issued to Jersey companies, regardless of where they might have operations.

£4283 was spent on assistance for problem gamblers in 2011. £4000 was to Gambling Therapy for development and provision of a dedicated Jersey webpage where Jersey residents could get help, advice and support on line, with the balance spent on the printing of posters, pamphlets and awareness material for the Island's bookmakers. In 2012 the figure was £6000 for the operation of the www.gamblingtherapy.je site and this reduced to £3000 in 2013 because of the low levels of use. Funding of support for problem gambling is targeted to actual need and the Commission is working with the Health Department to assess the level of support that may be needed for face-to- face counselling to compliment the on-line service.

Commissioners' fees for the 16 months to December 2011 were £96,000 Commissioner's fees for the 12 months to December 2012 were £72,000 Commissioner's fees for the 12 months to December 2013 were £72,000 Staff salaries for the 16 months to December 2011 were £221,982

Staff salaries for the 12 months to December 2012 were £205,262

Staff salaries for the 12 months to December 2013 were £238,327.

The Commission attends two annual meetings with regulatory colleagues of the Gaming Regulators European Forum (GREF) and International Association of Gaming Regulators (IAGR). Working party groups of these two organisations also hold meetings that Commission staff attend when necessary and relevant. The Commission also regularly attends the International Casino Exhibition in London as well as certain other industry conferences and meetings as required.

Conference and travel expenses for the 16 months to December 2011 were £25,344 Conference and travel expenses for the 12 months to December 2012 were £15,244 Conference and travel expenses for the 12 months to December 2013 were £18,173.

7. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR HOUSING REGARDING ANDIUM HOMES:

Question

Further to his answer of 30th June 2014, in respect of the Energy Efficiency grants made by his Department, will the Minister provide the following information:

1. the number and total value of grants approvedunder each ofthe criteria for eligibility for grants;
2. the number and total value of grants made in respect of properties sited within each parish;
3. whether details of these improvement grants are reported to the parish authorities for parish rate purposes;
4. whether they are reported for income tax purposes;
5. how he justifies not requiring repayment of these grants to private property owners in the event of onward sale of the sale of the properties, and
6. whether he will agree toreview these policies to ensure that in future, taxpayers interests are safeguarded?"

Answer

1. When referring to grant it might be helpful to clarify that in the Home Energy Scheme a 100% turnkey service is offered whereby eligible applicants in domestic properties have energy efficiency measures fitted to their home at no costto them. Contractors are employed by the Scheme after having successfully tendered for work in accordance with procurement guidelines. TheSchemearranges, co-ordinates andpays for thesecontractorstocarryoutthe identified energy efficiency improvements. The eligible individuals do not themselves receive any money directly.

The value of expenditure across the 5 eligibility criteria is as follows:

In receipt of Food Cost Bonus (GST) = £1,009,816.85 grant spend within 317 unique

properties

In receipt of Income Support = £653,226.25 grant spend within 521 unique properties

In receipt of Westfield 65+ Health Scheme = £958,449.69 grant spend within 468 unique

properties

Low income islanders of age 65 and over = £556,683.93 grant spend within 165 unique

properties

Ministerial Decision exemption for applicants not normally eligible but having

circumstances mirroring that of the eligibility criteria = £10,918.17 grant spend within 4 unique properties

2. For the Home Energy Scheme the total value of expenditure in respect of private domestic dwellings, split by Parish, are as follows:

Grouville = £188,360.88 over 78 properties St. Brelade = £732,943.38 over 270 properties St. Helier = £628,512.62 over 445 properties St. Clement = £294,468.88 over 149 properties St. John = £86,455.28 over 23 properties

St. Lawrence = £209,727.09 over 82 properties St. Martin = £90,121.82 over 49 properties St. Mary = £50,404.55 over 17 properties

St. Ouen = £161,988.42 over 46 properties St. Peter = £168,800.28 over 85 properties St. Saviour = £512,310.02 over 202 properties Trinity = £65,001.67 over 29 properties

3. The Departmentof the Environmentdoesnotreportdetailsofenergyefficiencygrantstothe parish authorities for ratepurposes.Itdoesnothave a datasharingagreement with anyofthe Parishes in respect ofthe applicants' information because the Department doesnot believe it is their responsibility to pass anyof this information onto the Parish rates authorities. The rateable value of a property is assessed on the information returned to each Parish by theowner of the propertyinJanuaryof each year.It is theownerthatis required to complete theAnnual Return giving the full address of all propertyowned including the name and address of the occupier, if let.

Despite the onus being on the owner to provide any information on alterations to the Parish, the Energy Efficiency Service believes that the interventions offered by the Scheme would not be pertinent to the rates assessment of the property and for this reason does not encourage or remind the recipient of the grant to inform the Parish as part of their Annual Rates Return.

The energy efficiency interventions provided by the Home Energy Scheme include loft insulation, cavity wall insulation, draught proofing, pipe lagging, low energy light bulbs and heating system improvements including potentially a new boiler for example.

When filling in an Annual Rates Return, the owner is required to state if there have been any changes, including changes of use or alterations, the quality' of any house, building or other structure on the land in the previous year or the purpose for which the property is used.

The question may be suggesting that the provision of energy efficiency measures might affect the quality' of the property and thus should be declared. However, the Rates (Jersey) Law 2005 does not give a definition of quality' and it has always been our understanding that factors routinely considered by rates assessors do not include criteria such as the presence of loft insulation, low energy light bulbs or heating systems.

The Energy Efficiency Service provides grants to some of the most socio-economically vulnerable people in our community. If the provision of grant assistance were to have the effect of increasing that person's rates liability then that would be counter-productive to our aim of reducing costs to this group.

4. The Department of the Environmentdoesnotreportdetailsofenergyefficiencygrantstothetax Department for income taxpurposes.Ithasalways been the beliefofthe Department that the provision of grants under the Home Energy Scheme is not a taxable event for the householders in receipt of the benefit of the grant (e.g. the installation of loft insulation, etc.). Therefore there is no relevant information to pass from Environment to the Taxes Office in respect of the householder or for the householder themselves to pass on.
5. The Department of the Environment was charged by the State's Assembly with setting up a scheme that provided grants to vulnerable Islanders. The Minister, the Department and the Jersey Energy Trust (including a member of the Board well experienced in UK grant schemes) considered a number of options when developing the Scheme during 2009 and its evolution ever since.

The option to require repayment of the grant was not considered viable for a number of reasons:

To require a repayment in the event of an onward sale would be a loan rather than a grant.

Loans are entirely different from grants and not considered in the spirit of what was meant by the original State's decision. Moreover, the uptake of loans have been shown to be far lower than compared to when a simple grant is offered. An example would be the recent failure of the Green Deal loan programme in the UK an example of this where the UK government have now moved to a grant system to encourage the uptake of energy efficiency improvement measures. One of the aims of this programme was to help as many eligible people as possible.

When developing the Scheme for Jersey a number of successful UK schemes were

investigated and we were advised that simplicity is key to encourage uptake. Again repayment is considered a barrier to uptake and is not commonly a feature of other types of comparable UK energy efficiency schemes.

A requirement to repay the grant in the event of an onward sale would be difficult and

extremely time consuming to administer and is likely to be dis-proportionate to the value of the grant awarded. The average grant spend per progressed-property is £2,162. Individual expenditure per property will vary according to the type of property and its tenancy arrangements and thus the type of interventions that can be applied.

If such a repayment-requirement were to be in place, there would be a necessity to have an up-front agreement at the time of application and this would be extensive and complex

and likely to put many of our target group off from applying for the grant. Our Scheme primarily works with the elderly or disadvantaged in our community. A 100% turnkey service is provided for this group with the Department arranging and paying contractors and no money coming to the client. For many of our clients, this level of intervention and assistance is required for them to feel comfortable and confident for energy efficiency measures to take place in their home. It is likely that further complexity in the form of legal payback agreements would cause them distress and unease and potentially prevent them from coming forward to receive the energy efficiency measures. When potentially eligible applicants do not come forward for the scheme they lose out on measures that will reduce their bills and bring environmental benefits in the form of reduced energy use and greenhouse gas emissions. Further complications would involve consideration of the procedures in the event of the homeowner passing away/going into

residential care and what liability would then be placed upon next of kin etc.

• If repayment of the grant was required a calculation as to the amount repaid would need to be made. This is a more complex calculation than simply recouping the whole amount that the measures cost. For example, a property might be sold 10 years after the installation of loft insulation at a cost of for example £1,500. A calculation to account for the depreciation in the value of that asset in the previous 10 years would be required before a reasonable and fair amount could be recouped.
• Finally and perhaps most importantly, even in the event of the onward sale of a home the energy efficiency measures installed will most likely remain in place. Therefore the benefits continue to be accrued for the lifetime of the installed measures which is often well over a decade. Thus the principle behind awarding the grant i.e. to bring comfort to the person occupying the home and environmental benefits to the Island will remain regardless of the owner of the property. Because the purpose for which the grant is awarded and the benefits they accrue remain in place, regardless of ownership. Therefore, it is not thought appropriate to attempt to recoup grant money and it is felt that tax payers interests are being safeguarded since the purpose for which the grant was awarded remains even if the original recipient no longer occupies the home for whatever reason.

6. For the reasons outlined above I do not currently have any plans to review these policies although the Energy Executive would be able to reconsider this as part of their ongoing role and monitoring ofthe delivery ofthe Energy Plan. The Deputy will recall from his Scrutiny Panel's examination of the Energy Plan that the Home Energy Scheme will continue to remain a core activity ofthe Energy Efficiency Service. However, our energy efficiency programmes will be extended into the able-to-pay sector although not with 100% grants in the format offered to the socio-economically vulnerable. He will recall from discussions and evidence given during his Panel's examination ofthe Plan that many ofthetarget group eligible for the 100% turnkey service have now come forward to receive these grants and that going forward the Scheme will focus on new entrantsto the eligibility criteria. Since this Scheme will become smaller in the years to come I do not consider it proportionate or reasonable to attempt to overcome the substantial obstacles (described above)that would arise in attempting to bring forward a repayment clause.

Conclusion

The Deputy is reminded of the open invitation that he has received to attend the Department to further discuss any queries he may have in respect of this Scheme, its client profile and its' administration.

8. DEPUTY  G.C.L.  BAUDAINS  OF  ST.  CLEMENT OF THE  MINISTER FOR TREASURY  AND  RESOURCES REGARDING  J.E.C.  WORK  AT  GREVE D'AZETTE:

Question

With regard to the JEC cable laying through St Clement, would the Minister, as the shareholder representative, advise –

1. how long Green Road will have been closed by the time the job is completed;
2. whether the 8 week partial second closure of Greve d'Azetteto enable the cable to be pulled through the conduit will be exceeded;
3. why the cable jointing trenches were not created during the conduit-laying part of the exercise;
4. why other sections of road are being dug up to reach conduit bends; and,
5. what guarantees, if any, can be given that the cables can, in fact, be pulled through the conduits and, if so, when will this happen?

Answer

The road works in the St Clement area form an integral part of the £70m Normandie 3 project to install a third interconnector to mainland Europe. The project is a key part of Jersey Electricity's 10 year investment programme in its strategic infrastructure and will enable the company to access more secure, more affordable and more sustainable electricity from the European Grid over the next 35 years. The work has been planned years in advance in close liaison with Transport and Technical Services (TTS) and Parish authorities who manage access to the roads and coordinate closures and diversions with all other utilities. The cable installation is by means of pre-installed ducts which allow greater flexibility in road closures and reduce the impact of the work in comparison to traditional open-cut' methods where up to 500m of trench is required to be excavated in stages and remain open while cables are pulled in.

1. A partial closure commenced on 10 June with a full closure from 16 June. The works areexpectedtobe complete by 18 July (i.e. a closure of less than 5 weeks).Accesstopremises has been maintained throughout.
2. The partial closure of Greve d'Azette is expected to last 10 weeks.
3. It is common practice to install ducts first, then excavate the joint bays and complete the joints as cable sections are installed. With a duct installation program lasting 15 months there is no benefit to excavating joint bays in advance as they would need to be reinstated and then re-excavated prolonging the work and disruption and increasing the cost.
4. The duct section in question, between La Blinerieand Greve D'Azette, is the most challenging ofthe 6 sections on the installation. Ideally duct installations should be kept as straight as possible to reduce friction when cables are pulled through. A number of factors have introduced deviations from the planned route. These have included the high volume of existing services in theroads, requests by TTS to consider alternatives to digging through Plat Douet Road (which is viewed as a high traffic' road), and suspension of works at St Clements Road traffic lights by TTS and a resumption during winter months when the water table was very high. As a consequence additional excavations have been required to facilitate the cable installation.
5. Cable installation on this section is expected to be complete by 18 July. Work will continue on cable installation between Greve D'Azette and South Hill until early August.

9. DEPUTY J.H. YOUNG OF ST. BRELADE OF THE MINISTER FOR PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT REGARDING ENERGY EFFICIENCY GRANTS:

Question

Will the Chief Minister explain why he has not published a detailed report of the work of the Regeneration Steering Group following the assurances given in his reply to my question of 29th April 2014 that this would be forthcoming by the end of May 2014?

Would the Chief Minister advise –

1. the number of meetings of the group since his election and attendances by Ministers
2. the subjects discussed
3. the significant policy decisions made by the group, if any, detailing their outcomes and achievements
4. the directions given to the States ofJersey Development Company, if any, to carry out development of public property.
5. whether the group :

1. has been monitoring the location and quantityof vacant office units in town;
2. has identified any particular areas of town which require priority for regeneration;
3. has a policy to encourage long standing vacant secondary and tertiary offices to be converted or redeveloped to residential uses securing additional dwelling units, and, if not, why not?

Answer

The report requested has been under development since the Deputy requested it. While it is later than anticipated it is now complete and is being presented to the States.

10. DEPUTY J.H. YOUNG OF ST. BRELADE OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING THE REGENERATION STEERING GROUP:

Question

Will the Attorney General state whether the Viscount is authorised to publish Income Tax information relating to a bankrupt and whether the Viscount's protocols are human rights compliant, especially with regard to Article 8 of the Convention, and, if so, will he explain why?

Answer

Under the Bankruptcy (Désastre) (Jersey) Law 1990 and the Bankruptcy (Desastre) Rules 2006 ("the Rules"), the Viscount must require all creditors of a person en désastre to prove their claims. On occasion, the Comptroller of Taxes will be a creditor and will be required to prove his debt like any other creditor.

The Rules provide that the Viscount must, as soon as practicable after the date for filing claims has expired, fix a time and a place for claims to be inspected and notice of the period and place must be published in the Jersey Gazette and in any other way the Viscount thinks fit, and must be notified to the debtor. Inspection will include from time to time inspection of the claims of the Comptroller of Taxes as creditor.

Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights provides that everyone shall have the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and correspondence.

However, Article 8 is a qualified right and the protection afforded by it is subject to proportionate action by a public authority in accordance with the law where necessary in a democratic society in the interests of, amongst other things:

1. the economic wellbeing of the country; or
2. the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

Interference with a debtor's right to privacy by the Viscount in the discharge of his statutory obligations is accordingly justified on the basis that it is proportionate, in accordance with the law and necessary to protect the rights of creditors and the economic wellbeing of the Island.

The Attorney-General is not aware of any formal "protocols" as set out in the question.

11. DEPUTY J.A. HILTON OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES REGARDING ASBESTOS IN SCHOOLS:

Question

1. Further to the Minister's response on 3rd June 2014, can he now confirm that all staff in all the schools which contain asbestos have been informed of exactly where the asbestos is?
2. Can the Minister state exactly what budget is allocated each year to asbestos removal and also indicate how much was spent on asbestos removal in the preceding five years?
3. Does the Minister agree that there is no known level at which asbestos is not a risk and therefore the children are being placed unnecessarily at risk of harm?
4. Given that the "Management Survey" of buildings is non-intrusive visual inspection, what steps, if any, is he taking to remove the potential risk with buildings containing ACMs?
5. Can the Minister state what steps are taken to ensure that any buildings used by the Education Department but not owned by the Department do not expose staff or students to asbestos?
6. Would the Minister provide the inspection reports for the years between 2008 and 2011 for all ESC sites that have asbestos?
7. Can the Minister advise whetherhe considers that there is no risk to students and staff at Highlands College?

Answer

1. Members are referred to answers to previous states questions raised by the Deputy withregardtoasbestos (question 8187on18th March 2014and question 8326on3rdJune2014). The responses below build on the information provided in those answers.

The information identifying where known Asbestos Containing Materials (ACMs) are within a property is available in the site Log Book[1] on sites where Jersey Property Holdings (JPH) has maintenance responsibilities. This information has been available to the site personnel for a minimum of five years and is updated on an annual basis after each re-inspection.

These Log Books are available to all school site staff (Head Teachers, Deputies, Teachers, Site Managers, Caretakers and other staff) and contractors working within these properties and if any site personnel require additional information or clarification on the content then the JPH team is available to assist.

It is incumbent on the Person in Control[2] on site to make their staff aware of the location of the Log Book and its content. JPH & ES&C officers work closely to ensure joint communications are released to the sites informing them of updates to the information held in the individual Log Books in a timely manner.

JPH under routine reviews of both the site Log Books and procedures for managing asbestos and, where appropriate, issue updated Log Books and Asbestos Management Plans (AMPs) to all sites where JPH has maintenance responsibility.

2. JPH spent in the regionof£570,000 in the last five years on the management and removal of ACMs. Asbestos removal is only a partofthe process of managing asbestos, with other management controls being monitor through re-inspection and encapsulation.

JPH does not allocate a budget for the removal of asbestos where it does not form part of any planned refurbishment project. However, if an incident is experienced or the ACMs deteriorate and requires removal, JPH prioritises funding for this project above other lower priority minor project works.

JPH holds information as to the cost of managing and removing asbestos on properties within its management remit.

3. The current accepted safe' level of air monitoring is <0.01 f/ml[3], known as the Clearance Indicator Level. There is no absolute zero as other interfering' fibres can be respirable and must be included by the Analyst.

There is always a risk when asbestos is present in a building. Risks are managed through the implementation of policy and procedures to reduce the likelihood and potential impact on the property users to a safe and manageable level.

JPH actively manages the risk of ACMs in line with the requirements of the Health & Safety

at Work (Jersey) Law 1989 and the Management of Asbestos in Workplace Buildings and Structures Approved Code of Practice (ACoP).

All of the JPH asbestos documentation has been produced in conjunction with our independent Health & Safety advisors Coppolo & Coyde who have provided advice and guidance to ensure the final documentation meets the requirements of the Health & Safety at Work (Jersey) Law 1989 & ACoP.

JPH have also worked with the States of Jersey Corporate Health and Safety Manager in providing updates for review and comment. JPH are on the working group assisting in the production of the States Corporate Asbestos Policy. JPH have provided the Health and Safety Inspectorate with the documentation for their review and comment with received comments being included in the documentation.

4. JPH manage ACMs in line with the current ACoP. An Asbestos Management Plan isinplace for each site under JPH's management and Refurbishment and Demolition (R&D) surveys are undertaken whenworksareplannedthatare likely to disturb the fabricof the building.Ifthe R&D survey identifies ACMs that will impactonthe planned worksthen,where appropriate, JPH instructs the removal ofthe material as partof funded refurbishment works. Where no refurbishment project is planned, the asbestos is managed through stringent processes and procedures to minimise the risk level.

JPH have carried out a risk based approach to removal of ACMs with the removal in areas accessible by staff, pupils and the public being the highest priority. Following this a review of any remaining ACMs is undertaken, which will recommend either further removal, encapsulation or other appropriate management processes.

In a previous answer to a question raised by the Deputy the approximate costs of removing all of the known ACMs in ES&C buildings was identified as being in the region of £3million (not including the additional cost of decanting the building occupants to temporary accommodation during the works).

5. The following response has been provided by ESC as it is outside the remit of JPH and the Minister for Treasury and Resources.

If a Landlord is renting a property to a third party then it is incumbent on the landlord to provide the necessary documentation at time of signing the lease that any ACMs present are appropriately managed. The landlord is also required to undertake annual inspections and update the relevant documentation provided to the tenant.

6. These reports and re-inspections are carried out by suitably qualified external organisations on behalf ofthe department and are available through a web based portal. A meeting with Deputy Hilton has been arranged on 28th July 2014to provide access and review with JPH, to further demonstrate tothe Deputy the processes and procedures currently in place between JPH and ESC. JPH are happy to meet with any other Member at this time, or at their convenience, to provide access to the reports and explain the associated processes and procedures.
7. There is always a potential risk ofthe presence of ACMs as the Management survey is a visual survey. However, as previously stated, JPH manage asbestos across its portfolio in line with the Health and Safetyat Work (Jersey) Law 1989 and the Management of Asbestos in Workplace Buildings and Structures Approved Code of Practice.

If the inspection reports indicate any change in the materials' consistency or stability, or site staff identify changes in the material, then JPH would look to undertake an R&D survey to ascertain the extent of the deterioration and, if appropriate, schedule removal of the material in accordance with the required legislation.

12. DEPUTY M.R HIGGINS OF ST. HELIER OF H.M. ATTORNEY GENERAL REGARDING THE AUTHORITY OF THE VISCOUNT TO PUBLISH INDIVIDUALS' INCOME TAX INFORMATION:

Question

Will the Attorney General state whether the Viscount is authorised to publish Income Tax information relating to a bankrupt and whether the Viscount's protocols are human rights compliant, especially with regard to Article 8 of the Convention, and, if so, will he explain why?

Answer

Under the Bankruptcy (Désastre) (Jersey) Law 1990 and the Bankruptcy (Desastre) Rules 2006 ("the Rules"), the Viscount must require all creditors of a person en désastre to prove their claims. On occasion, the Comptroller of Taxes will be a creditor and will be required to prove his debt like any other creditor.

The Rules provide that the Viscount must, as soon as practicable after the date for filing claims has expired, fix a time and a place for claims to be inspected and notice of the period and place must be published in the Jersey Gazette and in any other way the Viscount thinks fit, and must be notified to the debtor. Inspection will include from time to time inspection of the claims of the Comptroller of Taxes as creditor.

Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights provides that everyone shall have the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and correspondence.

However, Article 8 is a qualified right and the protection afforded by it is subject to proportionate action by a public authority in accordance with the law where necessary in a democratic society in the interests of, amongst other things:

1. the economic wellbeing of the country; or
2. the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

Interference with a debtor's right to privacy by the Viscount in the discharge of his statutory obligations is accordingly justified on the basis that it is proportionate, in accordance with the law and necessary to protect the rights of creditors and the economic wellbeing of the Island.

The Attorney-General is not aware of any formal "protocols" as set out in the question.

2.13.  DEPUTY J.M. MAÇON OF ST. SAVIOUR OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING THE LAW DRAFTING LIST FOR ALL DEPARTMENTS:

Question

Will the Chief Minister produce the law drafting list for all departments including the estimated completion dates for each piece?

Answer

This table is a list of the Law Draftsman's Office work currently in progress. It does not include -

• Draft enactments that have been lodged for debate.
• Any project for which drafting instructions haven't yet been received.

If a project is marked "awaiting further instructions", the law draftsman is unable to provide an estimate of when the project will be complete.

Confirmed timings of States debates will be subject to decisions by ministers and their departments.

3. Oral Questions The Bailiff :

We then come to Oral Questions but I wonder if I could raise one matter. I understand, Senator Ozouf , that you will be leaving the Chamber shortly to represent the Island, is that right?

Senator P.F.C. Ozouf :

Yes, I am shortly to be leaving to attend the same event that Senator Bailhache is, at the French Embassy in London, so I will be leaving as soon as I can after my expected question from the Connétable of St. John. The Chief Minister would stand in for me but if Members want me to answer it then perhaps they could ..

The Bailiff :

There is that question, but there is also an urgent oral question to the Minister for Treasury and Resources and it seems to me that perhaps we take that one first and then, if Members agree, take your questions first.

Senator P.F.C. Ozouf :

The only problem is I have just had notice of that question and there will be a period of follow-up questions, which I would ask that the Chief Minister could answer, probably with his notes, but I am not in a position to be able to answer the likely supplementaries from that because I have just literally had notice of it. So perhaps it would be, if it would be acceptable, either for the Chief Minister to answer it or for me to answer it first thing tomorrow morning.

The Bailiff :

You will be back tomorrow morning, will you? Senator P.F.C. Ozouf :

I will be here bright-eyed and bushy-tailed first thing. The Bailiff :

Deputy Le Fondré, you have posed the question to the Minister for Treasury and Resources, do you want to ask it now of the Minister for Treasury and Resources when he has only just seen it or would you prefer to leave it until tomorrow?

Deputy J.A.N. Le Fondré of St. Lawrence :

I am happy to ask the question today, to be honest. The Bailiff :

Of the Minister now?

Deputy J.A.N. Le Fondré:

Yes, Sir.

The Bailiff :

We will see what happens. You will have to do your best, Minister. Senator I.J. Gorst :

Sorry, I do not wish to confuse matters unnecessarily. This obviously falls under the remit of the States Employment Board, of which I am chairman so I will be answering my question. I am happy to answer today the second question. I think the Minister for Treasury and Resources is trying to say if Members wished him to answer it he of course would need to be briefed by the States Employment Board and that could either .. I can either answer it because I am briefed or it can be answered in the morning by the Minister for Treasury and Resources who will then have been briefed.

The Bailiff :

We will leave Deputy Le Fondré to think which he wants to do and we will get to that one when we get to ..

Senator S.C. Ferguson:

I think the Chief Minister has forgotten that the Treasurer is appointed on the basis, if I remember correctly, of a proposition brought to the States by the Minister for Treasury and Resources.

The Bailiff :

The Chief Minister says it is a States Employment Board matter and he is happy to answer. Deputy J.A.N. Le Fondré:

The reason I was looking slightly puzzled is because on my Order Paper as well as my Urgent Oral Question there appears to be one by Deputy Southern with the Minister for Treasury and Resources as well.

Senator P.F.C. Ozouf :

Yes, and that is going to be answered by my Assistant Minister because it falls within his remit of responsibility.

Deputy J.A.N. Le Fondré:

That is why I was looking slightly puzzled. The Bailiff :

Then we will leave the urgent oral questions and consider them after the ordinary oral questions, as usual, but is it question 3, Minister, you are saying you are particularly well-briefed on? Then do Members agree that we take the Connétable of St. John 's question 3 first?

1. Connétable P.J. Rondel of St. John of the Minister for Treasury and Resources regarding the Chief Executive of J.T.s recent bonus payment:

I do not like jumping the queue, but if I must. Given the number of complaints received by Jersey Telecom in relation to the new billing system, is the Minister, as the shareholder representative, content that the Chief Executive of Jersey Telecom receives a bonus of £118,000 bringing his total wages to £308,000 and, if so, please explain why?

Senator P.F.C. Ozouf (The Minister for Treasury and Resources):

I am grateful for taking the answer first. To provide some context to the Connétable 's question, it is worth noting that the number of complaints received in relation to billing has gone from 0.16 per cent of bills in January to 0.08 per cent of bills in June 2014. The new billing system is just one aspect of a large programme that J.T. (Jersey Telecom) is delivering. J.T. had its best financial year for over 130 years in 2013, with turnover increasing 26 per cent to £151 million and profits increasing by 12.4 per cent to £33.7 million. So I am content that the framework for the C.E.O.'s (Chief Executive Officer) bonus, which was agreed in advance by the Remuneration Committee of the independent J.T. board directors, is calculated on appropriate performance basis. As appropriate for a C.E.O. the majority of his bonus was linked directly to the financial results.

1. The Connétable of St. John :

Can the Minister tell us in how short a period of time the average complaint or query about a telephone bill is dealt with? Whether it is over the telephone and what the waiting time is for a response?

Senator P.F.C. Ozouf :

I have a detailed briefing note, which I am happy to send to the Connétable about the number of complaints between January and June is, and how long they take to deal with. I have got lots of notes about this. I have answered lots of questions previously on this complaints issue.