States Meeting Transcript - 8th March 2016

STATES OF JERSEY OFFICIAL REPORT TUESDAY, 8th MARCH 2016

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

1. Welcome to His Excellency The Lieutenant Governor..................................7 The Bailiff :....................................................................................7
2. Welcome to visiting students – Year 5, Grands Vaux School and Beaulieu School.....7

The Bailiff :....................................................................................7

3. International Women's Day..............................................................7 The Bailiff :....................................................................................7

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

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

1. THE CONNÉTABLE OF GROUVILLE OF THE MINISTER FOR HOME AFFAIRS REGARDING DUTY-FREE HYDROCARBON OIL:..................................7
2. DEPUTY S.M. WICKENDEN OF ST. HELIER OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING THE E-GOVERNMENT DESIGN AUTHORITY TENDER:............8
3. DEPUTY S.M. WICKENDEN OF ST. HELIER OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING ASSISTANCE BEING PROVIDED BY DIGITAL JERSEY IN THE DELIVERY OF E-GOVERNMENT:....................................................9
4. DEPUTY S.Y. MÉZEC OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES REGARDING THE COSTS OF THE FUTURE HOSPITAL CONSULTATION:......................................................................9
5. DEPUTY S.Y. MÉZEC OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES REGARDING CAR PARKING AT THE INTERNATIONAL FINANCE CENTRE:..............................................................................10
6. DEPUTY S.Y. MÉZEC OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES REGARDING THE STAFF COST SAVINGS SET OUT IN THE MEDIUM TERM FINANCIAL PLAN:................................................10
7. DEPUTY S.Y. MÉZEC OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR HOME AFFAIRS REGARDING THE INTRODUCTION OF A NEW CRIMINAL OFFENCE FOR INCITING RELIGIOUS OR RACIAL HATRED: .....................................11
8. THE DEPUTY OF ST. OUEN OF THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES REGARDING THE AMOUNT OF INCOME TAX TO BE COLLECTED FOLLOWING THE ASSESSMENT OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY PENSION ENTITLEMENT FOR 2015:................................................11

9. THE DEPUTY OF ST. JOHN OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING THE ENGAGEMENT OF CONSULTANTS BY DEPARTMENTS:........................12
10. DEPUTY M. TADIER OF ST. BRELADE OF THE MINISTER FOR SOCIAL SECURITY REGARDING THE ACCOMMODATION COMPONENTS OF INCOME SUPPORT:.............................................................................32
11. THE DEPUTY OF ST. JOHN OF THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES REGARDING A POSSIBLE REVIEW OF THE STATES OF JERSEY FINANCE FUNCTION:................................................................33
12. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR HOUSING REGARDING RENTAL SUPPORT AVAILABLE TO LOW-INCOME FAMILIES: .33
13. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR SOCIAL SECURITY REGARDING THE RENTAL COMPONENT OF INCOME SUPPORT:34
14. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR INFRASTRUCTURE REGARDING THE OUTSOURCING OF CLEANING AND GARDENING SERVICES:............................................................35
15. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING THE IMPACT OF STAFFING REDUCTIONS UPON THE CAREER AVERAGE REVALUED EARNINGS (CARE) PENSION SCHEME:................36
16. DEPUTY S.M. WICKENDEN OF ST. HELIER OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING THE SKILLS REQUIRED BY JERSEY'S DIGITAL INDUSTRY:....36
17. DEPUTY S.M. WICKENDEN OF ST. HELIER OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING THE SUPPORT PROVIDED TO JERSEY'S DIGITAL INDUSTRY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE OBJECTIVES OF THE STRATEGIC PLAN:..........36

3. Oral Questions...........................................................................38

1. Deputy M. Tadier of St. Brelade of the Minister for Instructure regarding the number of Parks and Gardens staff and cleaners at risk of redundancy as a result of outsourcing proposals:..................................................................38

Deputy E.J. Noel of St. Lawrence (The Minister for Infrastructure):..........................38

1. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................38
2. Deputy M.R. Higgins of St. Helier:.....................................................39
3. Deputy S.Y. Mézec of St. Helier:.......................................................39
4. Deputy S.Y. Mézec :....................................................................39
5. Deputy G.P. Southern of St. Helier:....................................................39
6. Deputy K.C. Lewis of St. Saviour:......................................................40
7. Senator Z.A. Cameron:.................................................................40
8. Connétable C.H. Taylor of St. John : ....................................................40
9. The Connétable of St. John:............................................................41
10. Deputy M. Tadier :...................................................................41

2. Deputy C.F. Labey of Grouville of the Minister for Infrastructure regarding the cost of redundancies and the possible rise in Income Support costs against the cost to the States of outsourcing services:..........................................................41

Deputy E.J. Noel (The Minister for Infrastructure):...........................................41

1. The Deputy of Grouville :...............................................................42
2. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................42
3. Deputy J.A. Martin of St. Helier:.......................................................42
4. Deputy J.A. Martin:....................................................................43
5. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................43
6. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................43

7. Deputy K.C. Lewis :....................................................................43
8. Deputy M.R.Higgins:..................................................................44
9. Deputy S.Y. Mézec :....................................................................44
10. The Deputy of Grouville : ............................................................44

3. Connétable A.S. Crowcroft of St. Helier of the Minister for Infrastructure regarding traffic survey reports compiled by Jersey in Transition: ..............................44

Deputy E.J. Noel (The Minister for Infrastructure):...........................................45

1. The Connétable of St. Helier:...........................................................45
2. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................45
3. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................45
4. Connétable J. Gallichan of St. Mary : ...................................................46
5. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................46
6. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................46
7. Deputy S.Y. Mézec :....................................................................47

4. Deputy S.Y. Mézec of the Minister for Infrastructure regarding the factors taken into account when deciding what constitutes a "responsible employer":...................47

Deputy E.J. Noel (The Minister for Infrastructure):...........................................47

1. Deputy S.Y. Mézec :....................................................................47
2. Deputy A.D. Lewis of St. Helier:.......................................................48
3. Deputy A.D. Lewis :....................................................................48
4. Deputy K.C. Lewis :....................................................................48
5. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................49
6. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................49
7. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................49
8. Deputy S.Y. Mézec :....................................................................50

5. Deputy G.P. Southern of the Minister for Infrastructure regarding the timetable for the implementation of the outsourced provision of cleaning and gardening services: 51

Deputy E.J. Noel (The Minister for Infrastructure):...........................................51

1. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................51
2. Deputy S.Y. Mézec :....................................................................52
3. Deputy S.Y. Mézec :....................................................................52
4. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................52
5. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................52
6. Deputy J.A. Martin:....................................................................53
7. Deputy J.A. Martin:....................................................................53

6. Deputy A.D. Lewis of the Minister for Infrastructure regarding the use of States' property assets: ..........................................................................54

Deputy E.J. Noel (The Minister for Infrastructure):...........................................54

1. Deputy A.D. Lewis :....................................................................54
2. Deputy S.Y. Mézec :....................................................................55
3. Connétable M.P.S. Le Troquer of St. Martin:...........................................55
4. The Connétable of St. Martin:..........................................................56
5. Deputy J.A.N. Le Fondré of St. Lawrence : .............................................56
6. Deputy R. Labey of St. Helier:..........................................................56
7. Deputy D. Johnson of St. Mary:........................................................57
8. Deputy A.D. Lewis :....................................................................57

7. Deputy J.A. Martin of the Minister for Infrastructure regarding the number of meetings held with employees of the Department for Infrastructure and the Unions about proposed changes to service provision:..........................................58

Deputy E.J. Noel (The Minister for Infrastructure):...........................................58

1. Deputy J.A. Martin:....................................................................58
2. Deputy J.A. Martin:....................................................................58
3. Deputy S.Y. Mézec :....................................................................59
4. Deputy S.Y. Mézec :....................................................................59
5. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................59
6. Deputy J.A. Martin:....................................................................60

8. Deputy M. Tadier of the Chief Minister regarding the proposed outsourcing of jobs at the Department for Infrastructure:.....................................................60

Senator I.J. Gorst (The Chief Minister):......................................................60

1. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................60

2. Deputy S.Y. Mézec :....................................................................60
3. Deputy S.Y. Mézec :....................................................................61
4. Senator Z.A. Cameron:.................................................................62
5. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................62
6. Deputy M.R.Higgins:..................................................................62
7. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................63

9. The Connétable of St. Helier of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding the monitoring and improvement of the Island's air quality:..........................64

Senator A.K.F. Green (The Minister for Health and Social Services):........................64

1. The Connétable of St. Helier:...........................................................64
2. Deputy M.R.Higgins:..................................................................65

3. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................65
4. The Connétable of St. Helier:...........................................................66

10. Deputy S.Y. Mézec of the Chief Minister regarding the social and economic impact of plans to outsource Department for Infrastructure jobs:...............................66

Senator I.J. Gorst (The Chief Minister):......................................................67

1. Deputy S.Y. Mézec :.................................................................67
2. Deputy K.C. Lewis : .................................................................67
3. Deputy S.Y. Mézec :.................................................................68

11. Deputy G.P. Southern of the Minister for Infrastructure regarding local government public-private partnerships:............................................................68

Deputy E.J. Noel (The Minister for Infrastructure):...........................................68

1. Deputy G.P. Southern : ..............................................................69
2. Deputy M. Tadier :...................................................................69
3. Deputy G.P. Southern : ..............................................................69

12. Deputy A.D. Lewis of the Minister for Treasury and Resources regarding the definition of "middle" and "high" earners: ............................................70

Senator A.J.H. Maclean (The Minister for Treasury and Resources):.........................70 3.12.1 Deputy A.D. Lewis : .................................................................70

4. Urgent Oral Questions..................................................................70

1. Deputy S.Y. Mézec of the Chief Minister regarding action to be taken against 2 civil servants arising from the costs of travelling to South Africa:..........................70

Senator I.J. Gorst (The Chief Minister):......................................................70

1. Deputy S.Y. Mézec :....................................................................71
2. Deputy J.A.N. Le Fondré:..............................................................71
3. Deputy M.R.Higgins:..................................................................71
4. Deputy R. Labey : ......................................................................72
5. Deputy J.A. Hilton of St. Helier:........................................................72
6. Deputy T.A. Vallois of St. John:........................................................72
7. Deputy K.C. Lewis :....................................................................72
8. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................73
9. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................73
10. Deputy A.D. Lewis : .................................................................74
11. Deputy S.Y. Mézec :.................................................................74

2. The Connétable of St. Helier of the Minister for Infrastructure regarding communication to States Members of the intention to sign a Ministerial Decision:...75

Deputy E.J. Noel (The Minister for Infrastructure):...........................................75

1. The Connétable of St. Helier:...........................................................75
2. The Connétable of St. John:............................................................76
3. The Connétable of St. John:............................................................76
4. The Deputy of Grouville :...............................................................77
5. Deputy J.A.N. Le Fondré:..............................................................77
6. The Deputy of St. John:................................................................77
7. The Deputy of St. Mary:................................................................78
8. Deputy J.A. Martin:....................................................................78
9. The Connétable of St. Helier:...........................................................78

5. Questions to Ministers without notice - The Minister for Social Security.............79

1. Deputy S.Y. Mézec :....................................................................79 Deputy S.J. Pinel (The Minister for Social Security):.........................................79

1. Deputy S.Y. Mézec :....................................................................79
   2. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................79
   3. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................80
   4. Deputy J.M. Maçon of St. Saviour:.....................................................80
   5. Deputy S.M. Wickenden of St. Helier:..................................................80
   6. Deputy L.M.C. Doublet of St. Saviour:.................................................81
   7. Deputy R.J. Renouf of St. Ouen:........................................................81
   8. The Connétable of St. John:............................................................81
   9. Deputy J.A. Martin:....................................................................81
   10. Connétable L. Norman of St. Clement:.................................................82

5.10.1 The Connétable of St. Clement:......................................................82

6. Questions to Ministers without notice - The Minister for Education..................82

1. Deputy L.M.C. Doublet :................................................................82 Deputy R.G. Bryans of St. Helier (The Minister for Education):..............................83
2. Senator Z.A. Cameron:.................................................................83
3. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................83

6.3.1 Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................83

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

6.4.1 The Deputy of St. John:................................................................84

5. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................84
6. Deputy L.M.C. Doublet :................................................................84
7. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................84
8. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................84

6.8.1 Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................85

9. Senator P.F.C. Ozouf :..................................................................85
10. The Deputy of Grouville :...............................................................85
11. Deputy P.D. McLinton of St. Saviour:..................................................86
12. Deputy L.M.C. Doublet :................................................................86

PUBLIC BUSINESS.............................................................................86

7. Public Employees Contributory Retirement Scheme Committee of Management: membership (P.8/2016) ..................................................................86

7.1 Senator I.J. Gorst (The Chief Minister):................................................87

1. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................87
2. Senator I.J. Gorst :......................................................................87

ARRANGEMENT OF PUBLIC BUSINESS FOR FUTURE MEETINGS ....................87

8. The Connétable of St. Clement (Chairman, Privileges and Procedures Committee):....87

8.1 Senator P.F.C. Ozouf :..................................................................88

ADJOURNMENT................................................................................88

[9:32]

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

1. Welcome to His Excellency The Lieutenant Governor

The Bailiff :

First of all, I am very pleased to welcome as always His Excellency to this Chamber. [Approbation]

2. Welcome to visiting students – Year 5, Grands Vaux School and Beaulieu School

The Bailiff :

Members will also see we have quite a crowded public gallery. We have Year 5 children from Grands Vaux School and from Beaulieu and Members might like to know that Grands Vaux, Year 5, adopted the proposition that homework should be banned. [Laughter] [Approbation] 66 per cent in favour, 22 per cent against and 11 per cent abstained.

Senator L.J. Farnham :

Can we have the names please, Sir? [Laughter] The Bailiff :

I think that would be most inappropriate, Senator. Anyway, I am very pleased to welcome those children and I am sure Members would like to join me in doing so. [Approbation]

3. International Women's Day

The Bailiff :

Next, a special welcome today to Senator Cameron, to the Connétable of St. Lawrence, the Connétable of St. Mary, the Connétable of St. Saviour, Deputy Martin, the Deputy of Grouville , Deputy Hilton, the Deputy of Trinity , the Deputy of St. John, Deputy Pinel and Deputy Doublet , because today, as Members will know, is International Women's Day. We are celebrating our respect and appreciation for women's economic, political and social achievements and my male colleagues may wish to show that respect and appreciation in the usual way.  [Approbation] Deputy Pinel, I think that is the last favour you will get today probably. That is a mark of respect and appreciation, I am sure. We now come to the rest of the Order Paper.

QUESTIONS

2. Written Questions

1. THE CONNÉTABLE OF GROUVILLE OF THE MINISTER FOR HOME AFFAIRS REGARDING DUTY-FREE HYDROCARBON OIL:

Question

Will the Minister for Home Affairs provide details, for each of the last three years, of –

1. the number of road side checks carried out by the Jersey Customs and Immigration Service to detect the misuse of Duty Free Hydrocarbon Oil (Red Diesel);
2. any other checks or actions carried out by the Customs and Immigrations Service to detect misuse of Duty Free fuel, excluding checks carried out under the registration scheme that was launched in December 2015;
3. the number of vehicles detected misusing Duty Free fuel in those checks or actions;

4. the number of prosecutions that have resulted from those checks?

Answer

Duty Free fuel can be lawfully used in tractors and associated agricultural machinery, plant machinery, vehicles used solely for refuelling aircraft, lifting and handling vehicles, aircraft, marine craft and used as furnace fuel. It can be sourced in two ways;

1. Direct delivery to an End User from an Approved Hydrocarbon Oil Supplier a process controlled by the new registration scheme
2. Bought from an approved garage or marine concession controlled by compliance visits, audits and monthly submissions detailing onward sales.

For the years 2013, 2014 & 2015

1. A total of sixteen road side checks were conducted in conjunction with Parish Honorary Police, Driver Vehicles Standards Department and States of Jersey Police.
   1. 2013 = 6
   2. 2014 = 5
   3. 2015 = 5
2. Other checks and/or actions to detect misuse of Duty Free fuel

1. Seven garage forecourts are approved to store and supply Duty Free fuel. Each garage submits a monthly return to Customs & Immigration detailing the onward sales. A total of 252 submissions were received for the period 2013 - 2015.

• 2013 = 84 submissions
• 2014 = 84 submissions
• 2015 = 84 submissions
• Customs officers conducted at least one compliance visit to each garage during the

period 2013 - 2015

2. Five marine concessions are approved to store and supply Duty Free fuel. Each concession submits a drawback request to obtain a refund on the duty paid. The drawback requests are reconciled against metered fuel delivery tickets.

• 2013 = 112 drawbacks approved
• 2014 = 129 drawbacks approved
• 2015 = 131 drawbacks approved
• Customs officers have either audited or conducted compliance visits to all five marine concessions during the period 2013 – 2015

3. 0
4. 0

Miscellaneous

1. 2014 - A company employee accidentally filled a vehicle with red diesel. Customs were informed immediately and the relevant duty was collected.
2. 2015 - A company employee accidently filled a vehicle with red diesel. The manager informed Customs immediately and the vehicle's tanks were flushed.

2. DEPUTY S.M. WICKENDEN OF ST. HELIER OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING THE E-GOVERNMENT DESIGN AUTHORITY TENDER:

Question

How many times did the eGovernment team travel to the UK to  meet with UK companies that were tendering for the eGovernment Design Authority tender and how much did each visit cost?

Answer

The eGovernment team did not travel to the UK to meet UK companies that were tendering for the eGovernment Design Authority contract, consequently there is no expenditure to report.

The eGovernment team hosted one open briefing session and a series of one to one briefing sessions in Jersey as part of the Design Authority procurement process. The costs of visiting Jersey to attend these briefings were at the visiting companies' expense.

3. DEPUTY S.M. WICKENDEN OF ST. HELIER OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING ASSISTANCE BEING PROVIDED BY DIGITAL JERSEY IN THE DELIVERY OF E-GOVERNMENT:

Question

Further to the answer tabled to question 9238 on 23rd February 2016 regarding the support provided to Jersey's digital industry, could the Chief Minister advise how Digital Jersey is being mandated to assist in the eGovernment deliveries and what authority, if any, Digital Jersey will have over the eGovernment team to be able to meet the mandate given to them?

Answer

Digital Jersey works closely with the eGovernment team to ensure there is close dialogue between the local digital industry and the States of Jersey.

The eGovernment programme forms part of Public Sector Reform, which has a political oversight group that determines the mandate for specific elements of the eGovernment programme.

4. DEPUTY S.Y. MÉZEC OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES REGARDING THE COSTS OF THE FUTURE HOSPITAL CONSULTATION:

Question (e)

6. Further to the Minister's answer to written question 9230 tabled on 23rd February 2016, which asked for a breakdown of the costs of the Future Hospital consultation and showed that £12,720 had been spent on video recordings, for what reasons was such a sum spent on approximately 72 minutes of basic footage, which works out at around £177 per minute?

Answer

The future hospital project is one of the most important that the Island has ever embarked upon. It is therefore appropriate that Islanders are fully informed about the need for a new hospital. This message can best be delivered using a range of communications media. Set against the overall size and cost of this project, this expenditure is a very small sum, particularly considering its effectiveness in imparting information to members of the public.

The video material was intended to support a four-week period of public engagement and a 12-week period of public consultation. As is normal, not all of the footage filmed ended up being used. In addition to filming interviews with clinical staff, poster animations were produced that brought together subject matter in an eye-catching, creative and engaging way.

Video is proven to be one of the most engaging media (compared with standalone images/text/audio) – viewers remember more of what they see and hear compared with seeing or reading alone. Furthermore, online video maximises the reach of any message. Using digital channels gives 24/7 access to content and helps to engage those people unable to access information through other means. Online video is particularly effective in targeting the younger generation through channels such as Twitter, LinkedIn and Facebook, where a conversation can be started and feedback monitored.

Of course, creating high quality, well lit, framed/focused and branded video messages takes time, effort and skill to deliver. It has to be paid for, but professionally  made and delivered video content that raises awareness and gets audiences thinking about key issues would be expected for a project as important as the future hospital.

5. DEPUTYS.Y. MÉZEC OFST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES REGARDING CAR PARKING AT THE INTERNATIONAL FINANCE CENTRE:

Question

7. Further to the Minister's answer to written question 9240 regarding the International Finance Centre, could the Minister elaborate on what he refers to as the demand profile'?

(h)

9. Can the Minister also set out a building delivery timeline that shows the car park ready by 2022, given the substantial number of buildings which need to be completed and the seemingly slow pace at which new tenants are being confirmed?

Answer

Demand profile' refers to the requirements of known prospective tenants in terms of space needs and timing for new office accommodation. What is not known at this relatively early stage is the level of demand from inward investment business. The demand profile will dictate the timing of delivery for the car park

As part of its planning applications for the Jersey International Finance Centre, SoJDC has submitted a detailed phasing plan that sets out the sequencing of the development. The delivery order is as follows:- Building 4, Building 5, Building 6 and Building 3 then the delivery of the underground public car park followed by Building 2 and finally Building 1.

As previously referred to, the delivery of the Jersey International Finance Centre is demand led and the completion date of 2022 for the new underground public car park remains an educated best estimate based on market information.

SoJDC remains in dialogue with more than 20 prospective on-island tenants that have potential requirements totalling in excess of 325,000 sq. ft. over the next 5 years. This level of demand would fill the first 4 buildings and takes no account of any new inward investment business that may be attracted to Jersey.

6. DEPUTYS.Y. MÉZEC OFST.HELIEROFTHEMINISTERFORTREASURYAND RESOURCES REGARDING THE STAFF COST SAVINGS SET OUT IN THE MEDIUM TERM FINANCIAL PLAN:

Question

10. Could the Minister outline how pension contributions, potential benefits payments to those who are unable to find work and potential reduced tax take have been factored into the department's calculations when determining how to achieve the £60 million savings in staff costs set out in the Medium Term Financial Plan?

(k)

(l) What alternative plans does the Minister have should targets fail to be met due to the pursuit of the £60 million savings in order to ensure that damage is not caused to essential frontline services? (m)

Answer

The States need to find savings in every area of the public sector. Around half of States spending is on staff so we need to reduce those costs to contribute towards the redistribution of available funds to the agreed priority areas, in particular health and education.

The proposal to deliver the staff savings comprises many strands that include delivering a continued pay restraint, taking advantage of natural attrition supported through strict vacancy management, stronger performance management and the redesign of services.

Natural turnover and voluntary redundancies will be used to minimise the number of compulsory redundancies; neither of these occurrences are expected to affect contribution or benefit payments as they are taken in a planned manner by members of staff who will consider effects on their financial position.

Departments are currently working on service redesign options. As plans develop staff and unions are actively engaged to deliver services in a more modern efficient and affordable way. There will need to be consideration of any consequences of these plans but until they are developed further it would be impossible to assess other effects, including whether changes may result in changes to benefits costs or income from taxation.

The Council of Ministers is still agreeing the plan but the target of delivering a balanced position by 2019, as advised by the Fiscal Policy Panel, continues to drive the savings target.

7. DEPUTYS.Y.MÉZECOFST.HELIEROFTHEMINISTERFORHOMEAFFAIRS REGARDING THE INTRODUCTIONOF A NEW CRIMINAL OFFENCE FOR INCITING RELIGIOUS OR RACIAL HATRED:

Question

14. Further to the Minister's answer to question 9209 tabled on 2nd February 2016 regarding the introduction of a new criminal offence for inciting racial or religious hatred, could the Minister provide an estimated timetable for the process of achieving this indicating when such a law could enter into force?

Answer

As noted in the Answer to question 9209, work is not able start until other legislative priorities have been delivered, most notably amending and updating the sexual offences law. It is, therefore, anticipated that work would start in 2017. Until the work has been fully scoped it is not possible to be definitive about when the law would come into effect, although it would hopefully be within 12 months of work starting.

8. THE DEPUTY OF ST. OUEN OF THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES REGARDING THE AMOUNT OF INCOME TAX TO BE COLLECTED FOLLOWING THE ASSESSMENT OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY PENSION ENTITLEMENT FOR 2015:

Question

Would the Minister advise what additional amount of Income Tax the Comptroller of Taxes expects to collect as a result of assessing Social Security pension entitlement in 2015 over 53 weeks instead of the usual 52 weeks? Furthermore, what is the estimated number of pensioners who are likely to become liable

for Income Tax for 2015 only as a result of having to declare an additional week's pension entitlement? Of that figure, how many are single pensioners and how many are married or in civil partnerships?

Answer

The Income Tax Law obliges the Comptroller to collect tax on pension income which has arisen in any year. Old age pension technically arises every Thursday but it is paid four weeks in advance.

Where pensioners have received an additional week's pension income in those years with 53 Thursdays, that additional income will be taxed at the marginal or standard rate depending upon the taxpayer's overall income for that year. The Comptroller has not estimated what tax will be collected from that.

Based  on  individuals  having a  full pension record, the Comptroller  currently  estimates that  up  to 45 households could pay income tax for the first time as a result of declaring an extra week's pension income: around 20 single people; and around 25 couples. This is an over-estimate as only a minority of local pensioners receive a full 100% Jersey pension. It should be noted that the taxpayers in this group would all need additional income to bring them close to the threshold level. This could be from an occupational or private pension, earnings and/or other income.

For pensioners solely reliant upon the States pension, no tax liability would arise as the tax exemption thresholds are around 50% higher than the maximum level of States pension as indicated in the table below.

9. THE  DEPUTY  OF  ST.  JOHN  OF  THE  CHIEF  MINISTER  REGARDING  THE ENGAGEMENT OF CONSULTANTS BY DEPARTMENTS:

Question

15. What are the requirements set out by departments for engaging consultants and advisors to support decision making?

(p)

17. What limits are set within budgets for such engagement?

Answer

Engaging consultants with specialist technical expertise, supported by clear terms of reference, can save money for the States of Jersey and deliver better outcomes for taxpayers.

Each department is responsible for using its own budget to deliver services in an efficient and cost effective way. There is no limit set for engaging consultants other than the overall cash limit for each department.

However there is a financial direction on Management of Consultants which all departments are required to follow.  It  sets  out  the  rules  for  planning  the  engagement,  specific  procurement  procedures,  contract management, project closure and post-implementation review.

Each departments also has a Scheme of Delegation which specifies the limits of an individual's authority to commit expenditure on all goods and services. This includes expenditure on consultants and advisors.

It is a fundamental principle that budget holders may only commit resources within their delegated limits for individual transactions and that they may only commit expenditure to the limit of their delegated budgets. Approval routes are built into authorisation processes within the financial systems.

Financial directions are currently being reviewed in line with recommendations from the Comptroller and Auditor General and the Public Accounts Committee. Requirements for spending on consultants will be included within the new expenditure financial direction due to be issued later this year.

10. DEPUTY M. TADIER OF ST. BRELADE OF THE MINISTER FOR SOCIAL SECURITY REGARDING THE ACCOMMODATION COMPONENTS OF INCOME SUPPORT:

Question

18. Further to the Minister's answer to oral question 9264 asked on 23rd February 2016 regarding Income Support accommodation components, can she clarify what she means when she says of the 1,898 Income Support households in private sector rental, 48% are below the cap' and 52% above the cap'?

(s)

(t) Further to her comments that components were never designed to be incredibly generous; they are a modest assistance to low income families who are required to rent in the private sector', is it the case that, with the move to 90% market rents for social housing providers, these components will now exceed the maximum components for those renting in the private sector; and if so, what is the justification for this?

Answer

The figure quoted relates to the proportion of households renting in the private sector who are paying more towards their weekly rent than the maximum value (cap') of the Income Support accommodation component. This could be for a number of reasons, including people who occupied a property before claiming Income Support and do not wish to move. For example, this could include a claimant who has recently been made redundant and receives financial support from Income Support whilst finding new employment. In other cases, an individual may make a specific decision to spend a greater proportion of their weekly income on their rent, for example a single person may choose to rent a property with a small garden. It is important to consider this statistic with the understanding that the private sector has a wide range of accommodation, and that there will be many factors that people take into account when deciding where to live.

The maximum accommodation components for Income Support households renting in the private sector were approved by the States as part of P.1/2014, the Income Support Regulations which allowed the Social Security Department to meet its obligations under P.33/2103 "The Reform of Social Housing." These maximum levels increased the rates that preceded them, and were calculated by the Housing Department using market rental data across individual Housing Department properties. An average market rent of all of the units of a specific property type was calculated, to give a figure that represented the average rent for each comparable property type in the open market. This gives the basis for the maximum accommodation component that is linked to the standard of property available to people renting in social housing. This change provided ongoing additional support of £1,000,000 per annum to private sector tenants as part of the Housing Transformation Programme. Support for accommodation costs has also been fully protected within the MTFP, and so rental components for private sector tenants are due to rise in each of the next 4 years.

The changes to support for social housing rents were also set out very clearly as part of P.1/2014, The move for Income Support to meet the cost of 90% market rents for social housing tenants allowed social housing providers to charge rents that "more closely reflect their realistic value on the open market, receiving a rental income that will in turn be re-invested in the maintenance of existing stock and the development of essential social housing projects." This support for Jersey's strong social housing sector is critical if we are going to improve the quality and increase the supply of affordable social housing in the Island.

It is correct that in some cases the social housing component will exceed the private sector component for a particular size of property. The private sector caps are currently set at 95% of the average of social sector rentals. By definition, there will be some social rents above the average and some below the average. Therefore, as social sector tenants have their full rental cost included in their accommodation component, some social sector tenants will receive components above the maximum available in the private sector and some will receive components below.

11. THE DEPUTY OF ST. JOHN OF THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES REGARDING A POSSIBLE REVIEW OF THE STATES OF JERSEY FINANCE FUNCTION:

Question

(u)

(v) Following the recent publication of the Comptroller and Auditor General's report Review of Financial Management – Part 2' (R.19/2016), will the department be carrying out a full review of the finance function across the States of Jersey? If so, how will the review be undertaken? Will it require engagement from a consultant or advisor and would the Minister also provide a target date for the completion of any such review?

Answer

It is important to recognise that good financial management is not simply the function of finance staff but is the responsibility of all those staff with financial management responsibilities.

The Minister is informed by the Treasurer of the States that the recommendations from the Comptroller and Auditor General's report Review of Financial Management – Part 2, have been discussed at the Finance Advisory Board. The Treasurer of the States and the Finance Advisory Board support the recommendations and recognise that there is good practice in some aspects of financial management in some departments but also recognise that good practice needs be in place across all departments in a consistent and robust manner.

In January 2016, before the publication of the Comptroller and Auditor General's report Review of Financial Management – Part 2', the Finance Advisory Board had identified the need to undertake a review of financial management against a recognised best practice model and had selected the National Audit Office Financial Maturity model.

The proposed programme of work will require a Programme Board (PB) and Project Team. It will also establish an on-going continuous improvement programme that will include periodic assessment of practice against the model.

The programme will comprise four main stages:

1.0 Assessment and gap analysis – Q2-Q3 2016

2.0 Preparation of 12 month Development Plan – Q2-Q3 2016

0. Implementation of Development Plan – Q2/3 2016 to Q2 2017

0. Post Implementation Review and Preparation of Continuous Development Plan – Q3 2017

It is proposed that a Board is set up to oversee the programme comprising a sub group of the Finance Advisory Board, chaired by the Treasurer.

A Project Team will be established with individuals from across the finance function (Treasury and Departments) who will be responsible to the Board for implementing the development plan.

The review will examine expert advice previously obtained. However, it is likely that further advice will be needed to access the function against the best practice model. In light of the Comptroller and Auditor General's most recent report the current terms of reference for the review are being assessed to ensure they address relevant issues raised in that report.

12. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR HOUSING REGARDING RENTAL SUPPORT AVAILABLE TO LOW-INCOME FAMILIES:

Question (w)

What housing policies have resulted in the apparent reduction in rental support available to low-income families, given the differences between the figures produced in the House Price Index for quarters three and four 2015 for average private sector rents and the accommodation component of Income Support?

Answer

There has been no reduction in the rental support available to low-income households. Rental support to private sector tenants has in fact increased as part of the Housing Transformation Programme.

Whilst the Rental Price Index provides a helpful overview of advertised rents in the private sector, it is an ongoing piece of work being developed by the Statistics Unit. The Index represents an average of all rents across the private rented sector and includes the full range of different types of accommodation,.

The Income Support limits for private sector rents are linked to the average rental value of social housing properties, following the recommendation set out in R.44/2013 Options for Income Support in the Private Rented Sector' and subsequently approved by the States Assembly in P.1/2014. These changes ensured that the Social Security Department was able to meet its obligations under P.33/2013 The Reform of Social Housing.'

Following the recommendation of R.44/2013, the Income Support limits for private sector rents were set with reference to the average rents that could be achieved across a variety of types of accommodation administered by the former Housing Department, if rent was set at an open market level. This provided an equivalent average rent for comparable properties in the open market, which is a fair point of reference for the size and standard of accommodation that is included in the Income Support scheme.

The Income Support limits were increased in 2014, which provided additional support of £1 million per year to private sector tenants as part of the Housing Transformation Programme. Support for private sector rents has also been fully protected within the Medium Term Financial Plan, and rental components for private sector tenants are due to rise in each of the next 4 years.

This is a fair and sustainable way of providing support to low income private sector tenants with the costs of renting.

13. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR SOCIAL SECURITY REGARDING THE RENTAL COMPONENT OF INCOME SUPPORT:

Question (x)

Can the Minister account for the differences between the figures produced in the House Price Index for quarters three and four 2015 for average private sector rents and the accommodation component of Income Support contained in the following table which shows that the rental component of Income Support has not kept up with average rents in the private sector –

What policy decisions have led to this apparent reduction in real terms in rental support available to low- income families?

Why does rental support now not match real rents as used to be the case under the fair rent' policy and what impact has this had on the amount of support received by low income families comparing the situation in 2013 and 2015?

Answer

The average monthly rental figures quoted in the table are not directly comparable to the maximum value of the Income Support accommodation component. This is because they represent an average of all rental properties in Jersey, including those that are very expensive. Income Support tenants comprise approximately a quarter of the private rental sector market, whereas the rentals figures published in the House Price Index report represent an average of all private sector rents, which includes the significant market in very high quality rental accommodation available in Jersey.

The previous fair rent' policy did not match real rents in the private sector, as the maximum Income Support accommodation components were based on the standard rent payable for properties owned by the Housing Department. One of the key principles approved as part of P.1/2014 stated that "Previous research into the private sector rental market has established that the historic process for the annual increase of Housing rents had resulted in "fair rent" levels that did not reflect the market, and so the proportionate increase in rates will allow the Income Support system to provide support to private sector tenants in a way that better represents their cost of living."

The Regulations that were approved by the States as part of P.1/2014 replaced the "fair rent" levels with a comparable set of maximum rates that were designed specifically for private-sector rental properties. These maximum levels increased the support available to Income Support families renting in the private sector. They were calculated by the Housing Department using market rental data across individual Housing Department properties. An average market rent of all of the units of a specific property type was calculated, to give a figure that represented the average rent for each comparable property type in the open market. This now links the maximum private sector accommodation component to the standard of property available to people renting in social housing.

This change provided ongoing additional support of £1,000,000 per annum from 2015 onwards to private sector tenants as part of the Housing Transformation Programme. Support for accommodation costs has also been fully protected within the MTFP, and rental components for private sector tenants are due to rise in each of the next 4 years.

14. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR INFRASTRUCTURE REGARDING THE OUTSOURCING OF CLEANING AND GARDENING SERVICES:

Question (y)

Will the Minister provide a breakdown of the short and long-term savings attached to his plans to outsource the cleaning and gardening services currently delivered by his department?

Answer

The Department for Infrastructure is working to meet the savings target of £4.6 million by 2019, internal service reviews are being conducted across all sections of the Department including Parks & Gardens and Cleaning Services. We are hoping that Parks & Gardens and Cleaning Services will contribute £1m to the savings target.

At this stage we cannot provide a detailed breakdown of the short and long term savings that may be achieved through outsourcing until we have concluded the tendering process for some of these services. However, estimated savings are at this stage following initial soft market' testing are £1m for the Department for Infrastructure and further savings for the States of Jersey as a whole are anticipated.

The procurement process has recently commenced and the pre-qualification questionnaire has now been published on the States Procurement portal. Only once the service reviews are completed alongside the evaluation of the tendering process will the Department be able to provide such a breakdown.

15. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING THE IMPACT OF STAFFING REDUCTIONS UPON THE CAREER AVERAGE REVALUED EARNINGS (CARE) PENSION SCHEME:

Question

(z)

What estimate has been made of the effect of achieving significant reductions in staffing within the next three years, and what impact would that have on the viability of the new Career Average Revalued Earnings (CARE) pension scheme?

Answer

There is no impact on the viability of the new Career Average Revalued Earnings (CARE) pension scheme from a reduction in staffing levels. The new pension scheme has been costed using prudent assumptions so that the employer and employee contributions cover the CARE benefits being accrued. While a smaller number of new employees would result in a lower level of contributions being paid into the scheme this will be matched by a lower level of benefits being accrued and a lower level of scheme liabilities. There is no impact on CARE scheme viability.

16. DEPUTY S.M. WICKENDEN OF ST. HELIER OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING THE SKILLS REQUIRED BY JERSEY'S DIGITAL INDUSTRY: Question

Further to the answer tabled to question 9238 on 23rd February 2016 regarding the support provided to Jersey's digital industry, could the Chief Minister advise what specialisms have been identified so far that Jersey is lacking, if any, and outline what the Government has done to inform the local digital community and education services of any such lack of skills?

Answer

During the Design Authority procurement process emphasis, through evaluation methodology, was placed on supplier experience and track record in dealing with complex clients, ideally within the public sector. The selection process adhered to this evaluation methodology and feedback will be provided to all suppliers who bid for the contract.

The preferred supplier has been requested to engage with the local industry to identify, within 30 days, opportunities to use this contract to grow capacity and capability and to develop the skills of the local industry. This will include knowledge transfer in the context of complex design architecture, specifically including the enterprise architecture approach to systems, data and security.

17. DEPUTY S.M. WICKENDEN OF ST. HELIER OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING THE SUPPORT PROVIDED TO JERSEY'S DIGITAL INDUSTRY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE OBJECTIVES OF THE STRATEGIC PLAN:

Question

Further to the answer tabled to question 9238 on 23rd February 2016 regarding the support provided to Jersey's digital industry, could the Chief Minister advise –

• why it has taken almost a year to draft a digital framework when the Strategic Plan was agreed on 30th April 2015;
• why is has taken 3 years to act on one of the Key Objectives for eGovernment, which was to grow the local digital sector; and
• whether any policies in the Design Authority tender process specify the need to align with the Strategic Plan and, if so, what are they, and if not, why not?

Answer

1. The Strategic Plan includes the aim to Develop a plan to promote additional jobs and growth in the Technology sector, with a particular focus on Fintech'. Work in this field has progressed considerably since April last year, in FinTech and many other areas of ICT. This includes:

1. hosting the Channel Islands' first global Fintech conference in October 2015
2. the appointment of a new Chief Executive of Digital Jersey
3. the launch of Digital Jersey's 2016 Plan, which focuses on New Business
4. the announcement that we would produce a digital framework for Jersey (similar to the framework for financial services published in 2014)
5. the commissioning of a report (published in December) examining which sectors within FinTech (and also MedTech, AgriTech, RegTech etc.) Jersey can best capitalise on, and what actions it needs to take to do so.

These strands combine with progress made by the JFSC to create a light-touch and innovation- friendly sandbox'style regulatory environment for FinTech products.

The Digital Policy Framework will reflect these and other developments, guided by the Strategic Plan and complementing four other closely-related government policy initiatives: the Innovation Review and Action Plan, and new Strategies for Telecoms, Cyber-Security and Enterprise.

A first draft of this Digital Framework will be circulated among key stakeholders in the coming month, and should be officially ready for launch in the second quarter of 2016.

2. In the context of developing the digital industry the mandate given to the eGovernment programme is to identify and act on opportunities to stimulate the digital industry in the process of delivering the primary objectives of the programme, which are to enhance customer service and create a more efficient public sector.

Since relaunching the programme in January 2015 much of the budget committed to system development, project management and business analysis has been spent with local suppliers. It is anticipated that details on this expenditure will be published in the first half of 2016.

The Design Authority will seek to identify what opportunities exist to stimulate the local digital industry in moving towards target enterprise architecture and how these opportunities should be developed.

3. The appointment of a Design Authority is directly aligned with Strategic Plan, specifically: Desired Outcome 1.3 - Improved, more productive and sustainable public services.

The Design Authority will establish the enterprise architecture for the States of Jersey, which will enable delivery of the eGovernment objectives.

This will also support delivery of other desired outcomes. For example improved data architecture will support all initiatives that span the States of Jersey, such as 1,001 days.

3. Oral Questions The Bailiff :

We now come to Oral Questions. There are a number of questions to the Minister for Infrastructure regarding the redundancy issue and I am going to be quite strict on Members' questions so that the supplementaries relate to the subject matter of the question. The first question relates to staff and cleaners at risk of redundancy.

1. Deputy M. Tadier of St. Brelade of the Minister for Instructure regarding the number of Parks and Gardens staff and cleaners at risk of redundancy as a result of outsourcing proposals:

Would the Minister advise how many Parks and Gardens staff and cleaners are at risk of redundancy as a result of the outsourcing proposals?

Deputy E.J. Noel of St. Lawrence (The Minister for Infrastructure):

If I may, I would just like to express on behalf of Members and welcome Year 5 from Grands Vaux and from Beaulieu School and hopefully at some point in the future they may be future parliamentarians sitting in this Assembly. But I will move on now to answering Deputy Tadier 's question. Firstly, for clarification, employees in the service areas, parks and gardens and cleaning services have not been put at risk of redundancy. Internal service reviews are ongoing therefore at this stage we cannot provide accurate information about the numbers of affected employees. However, our employee numbers are reducing on a weekly basis due to applications being accepted as part of the voluntary redundancy programme, employees being redeployed to other areas of the States, and employees leaving to retire or to take up roles in the private sector.

[9:45]

Once the service reviews are completed officers will then be commencing a full employee consultation programme, meeting with staff, sharing the contents of the service reviews with affected employees, and listening to their views and suggestions on how we may mitigate redundancies. In addition to the employee consultation programme, officers are meeting monthly with both Unite and Prospect Unions and senior management meetings are taking place on a weekly basis with Unite to discuss issues of concern. On completion of the consultation programme the department will agree a way forward and will then have accurate and up-to-date figures on the affected employees but until that time we simply do not know.

1. Deputy M. Tadier :

May I add my welcome to the students in the gallery, and on behalf of Reform Jersey I hope that in future we might see some of you as party members in this Assembly. I would like to ask the Minister whether he can be more specific about the figures. We started off with 140 with their jobs being threatened. Can he be more specific about how many have already taken voluntary redundancy and what he expects needs to be done in order to meet his targets?

Deputy E.J. Noel:

In 2015 we had some 25 successful applications for individuals to be part of the voluntary redundancy scheme of last year. The breakdown of that was 21 from the manual workers side and 4 from the Civil Service side of our department. We have a similar number in progress currently but we have also had a number of individuals that have left States employment primarily to retire or to move on to jobs outside of the States. Therefore although the original worst case scenario was some 150 individuals that has been substantially reduced to less than a third of that. The continual trend is for that number to be reduced and in an ideal situation I would want no employees to have to suffer compulsory redundancy and we are working to that aim, but as Members will appreciate it is challenging and we may not reach that goal.

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

The Minister, with the figures he just gave about voluntary redundancy and so on, but he also mentioned that some people have transferred to other parts or other departments, can he also give us the figures for those people please?

Deputy E.J. Noel:

We have had, to my knowledge, at least 3 individuals that have transferred within my own department from areas that are more at risk, so to speak, to substantial reconfiguration to those that are less so. We are working with our colleagues at Health and Social Services, and indeed outside of the States we are working with Andium, Ports of Jersey and with the Parish of St. Helier .

3. Deputy S.Y. Mézec of St. Helier :

As I pointed out in the States question time 2 weeks ago, the Minister is following a course of action, which was the precise opposite of what he said during his election for the office of Minister for Transport and Technical Services, so could I ask him if he could inform the Assembly when exactly was the moment that he decided to abandon this election pledge?

Deputy E.J. Noel:

It was not so much an abandonment of an election pledge but facing up to reality that this Assembly back in October last year agreed an M.T.F.P. (Medium Term Financial Plan) programme over the next 4 years by which way my department needs to make some £4.6 million worth of savings year-on-year over that period. We simply cannot do that without reducing our headcount.

4. Deputy S.Y. Mézec :

Does the Minister see any connection at all between the recent results from the change.je poll which showed that virtually all of the Ministers have very significant dissatisfaction ratings among the public, as well as the overall direction that the Government is taking the Island down, having 82 per cent dissatisfaction? Does he see a connection between those figures and his answer previously, which shows the political promises from this Government are worth absolutely nothing?

Deputy E.J. Noel:

Although that change.je questionnaire was of some interest, they have acknowledged that it was not necessarily .. it was a self-selecting questionnaire and therefore you have to look at the data in that light. But, yes, the Government does have to step-up and does have to engage more with the public. When you have difficult messages and difficult decisions to make that they are not popular. That is the situation we find ourselves in.

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

The Minister denies that any staff will be put at risk, why then in his summary of the impact of service reviews does he say, on page 12, a document I have in my possession: "That cleaning and Parks and Gardens service reviews will have significant impact on the total number of staff employed. In Parks and Gardens 54 employees will be put [his words] at risk. In cleaning services 93 employees will be put [his term] at risk."

Deputy E.J. Noel:

I just need to correct Deputy Southern there. I have not said that no employees will be put at risk at any point. Almost certainly we will - although we are trying to mitigate it as much as possible - there will be some compulsory redundancies. The document that Deputy Southern is referring to is a document that was produced on 2nd December last year. It was a document that was shared with the unions on a confidential basis and that was to outline the position of where we were in this process and to give the unions an indication of what the worst case scenario would be. Luckily we will not see that worst case scenario; as I have said, the numbers are less than a third of those that were in that document.

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

Is the Minister aware that many U.K. (United Kingdom) county councils, predominantly Conservatives, are now abandoning the principle of outsourcing as being far too expensive, are in fact insourcing? The county council in Cumbria - this was in the weekend national newspapers - claim that if it was not for insourcing they would not have been able to cope with the recent devastating floods that were inflicted on the north of England. Will the Minister take this on board?

Deputy E.J. Noel:

Deputy Kevin Lewis makes some good observations there. We are going to be maintaining our workforce for emergency reaction projects such as when we have major storms and flooding. The document that that article was based on is subject to a question I have got later on from Deputy Southern , so I will be able to answer that then. But as I have said previously in this Assembly, when you do a soft test analysis on one building in the States remit, which is Cyril Le Marquand House, that costs us some £160,000 a year to clean. We have soft-tested that with the private sector on a like-for-like basis and it came in at some £90,000 to clean on an annual basis. If that difference was substantially less than £70,000 we could probably live with it. But at that sort of difference then I am afraid we do need to look at our costs and see how we can provide the same level of service for less.

7. Senator Z.A. Cameron:

Many of the public sector workers that have accepted or being made redundant appear to be working on the front line. These jobs will then need to be outsourced to the private sector. In the meantime the appointment of overseers and bureaucrats to procure those services continue to increase, adding to the paperwork and pressure felt by those who are going to have to deliver the services. How does the Minister expect this type of public sector reform to improve the productivity of those delivering services and also deliver savings to the taxpayer?

Deputy E.J. Noel:

The Senator again makes some valid observations there but from our experience, just looking at the V.R.s (voluntary redundancies) that have come through in 2015, it is not all front line staff that are moving on from States employment. As I said, there are 21 manual workers and 4 were civil servants, so this change is happening across the piece, it is not just aimed at manual workers. We are very much looking at redesigning the whole of our services to reduce the public sector without damaging front line services.

8. Connétable C.H. Taylor of St. John :

Could the Minister confirm that he has a business plan and is it on the web page? Deputy E.J. Noel:

Yes, this is a question I had 2 weeks ago from Deputy Wickenden. The department does have a business plan and no, it is not on the webpage. But it will be by June.

9. The Connétable of St. John :

If the business plan is not available until June it should have been available last October or November as to what you would going to be doing this year. My concern is the fact it has not been published means that we have no barometer in which to test what you are doing. I seriously question does the Minister have his own barometers to know what targets he is trying to meet and what he is trying to achieve?

Deputy E.J. Noel:

Very much so and that target was set by this Assembly. That target is to save £4.6 million on a year-on-year basis by 2019 and we are working through that. The reason why we have not published our business plan is because it is changing and we are having to change it as a result of the service reviews that we are doing.

10. Deputy M. Tadier :

Does the Minister accept that while he might have a mandate from this Assembly for the overall budget spend in the next few years and for the remainder of this States he does not have any backing from this Assembly for the specific and, I think, swingeing cuts that he is putting through in his department infrastructure? Moreover and more importantly, he does not have the mandate from the public because he never told the public and his fellow Ministers never told the public at election time that he was going to propose any of this, let alone any of the hardworking staff on the front line in his department. Does the Minister accept those 2 points and if so, will he go back to the drawing board and find other better ways to either make savings or perhaps even rethink fundamentally the tax and spending model of this Government, which is fundamentally unsustainable?

Deputy E.J. Noel:

We are making substantial savings over the next 4 years to reinvest: to reinvest in Health, to reinvest in Education and to reinvest into the growth of our economy and to reinvest in St. Helier. We have been tasked to make these savings. May I remind Members that in its previous guises, my department, be it T.T.S. (Transport and Technical Services) or Public Services, or Resources Recovery Board has, when asked, always stepped-up to the mark and made its savings. Up until now we have been able to do that from non-staff areas. We have cut all the surplus fat from the organisation to an extent where the only savings that we can make on a year-on-year basis are from our headcount.

2. Deputy C.F. Labey of Grouville of the Minister for Infrastructure regarding the cost of redundancies and the possible rise in Income Support costs against the cost to the States of outsourcing services:

Has a comparative in-depth analysis been carried out on the cost of the redundancies being made in the department together with the possible rise in income support costs, against the cost to the States of buying-in the services required from the private sector and, if so, will he provide this information to the Assembly, and also advise  how many Civil Service staff, including managers, will  be impacted by the changes?

Deputy E.J. Noel (The Minister for Infrastructure):

My department has been asked to make the £4.66 million worth of savings as set by this Assembly in the M.T.F.P.2 (Medium Term Financial Plan 2016-2019). These savings will only be achieved by reducing staff numbers. Unfortunately the scale of the savings makes redundancies unavoidable, be they voluntary or compulsory. While we want to avoid redundancies, these

savings will only be achieved by making radical changes in service delivery. A social impact assessment has not been looked into by my department, we are simply reviewing our services to meet the target set by the M.T.F.P.2 and approved by this Assembly. I refer Members to my previous answer to Deputy Tadier with regard to staff numbers.

1. The Deputy of Grouville :

Should I take that as a no, a comparative in-depth analysis has not been carried out?

Deputy E.J. Noel:

That is exactly what I said. Our department has not carried that out nor is it in our remit to do so.

2. Deputy M. Tadier :

The Minister in question and his fellow Ministers seem to have a strange sclerotic relationship when it comes to public consultation. On the one hand they say it is very important for the public to have their say on various issues, even if they do U-turns at the very last minute. But when it comes to massive changes to our public services, which taxpayers and citizens rely on, they seem to think it is okay just to go ahead without a mandate and then give an answer with a straight face in this Assembly saying: "Oh, by the way we have not done any social impact assessment, we do not know what impact it is going to have on Social Security, whether they are going need to pay more for individuals", et cetera.

[10:00]

Is this really responsible Government and if so, can the Minister perhaps come back in short order with some workings to show that these plans will not create unintended consequences that will have a negative impact on some very hard-working staff in our community and their families?

Deputy E.J. Noel:

This Assembly has given the Council of Ministers the mandate in approving the M.T.F.P.2. The M.T.F.P. process allows for extended lodging periods and therefore there has been ample time to review the outcome of that decision prior to it being made. Naturally we will be going forward with the M.T.F.P.2 addendum later on this year. With regard to the social impact assessment, that is for our Economics Unit to address and I believe that they are going to be looking into that and reporting back on the economic outline of our proposals for effectively investing some £63 million worth in additional health and education services, some £5 million worth of growth in other areas. The appropriate funding for our infrastructure to account for the depreciation of again some £55 million, which leaves effectively a £28 million gap, which could be argued to be 2 sides of a structural deficit. So therefore we have £145 million of a plan and that plan is going to be funded by some £35 million worth of additional health charge, an additional £10 million worth of user pays taxes or charges, £10 million worth of savings from our social security system and a total of £90 million worth of savings across all States departments with at least three-quarters of that being funded from the States payroll costs.

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

The Minister has acknowledged that no in-depth analysis has been carried out yet he has told us in the first answer to a question of Deputy Tadier they have been out softly to cleaning companies and asked on a like-for-like basis: "Can you clean this office down the road for us?" When he says like-for-like, did he find out exactly how much the cleaners doing the work were going to be paid and who was going to be picking up the difference; the taxpayer at Social Security?

The 2 things are completely different. The economic impact is a piece of work to be done in conjunction with the States economist. The soft testing of the market, whether or not you can get services provided at a less expensive solution to the taxpayer, is a completely different topic. The 2 are not related.

4. Deputy J.A. Martin:

Sorry, I have to push the Minister. He said for less expense or in the previous answer he said like- for-like. Now which is it? Is it the same terms and conditions for the workers or has the Minister not even bothered to ask?

Deputy E.J. Noel:

The terms and conditions that will be paid in the private sector will be substantially different to those paid in the public sector. The like-for-like is the quality of the service is comparable on a like-for-like basis. So we are talking about the actual end product, the actual service being provided to the public, the cost needs to be looked at and the difference on one building between £160,000 worth and £90,000, in my opinion, is too great.

5. Deputy G.P. Southern :

The Minister talks about savings to be made from outsourcing. Is he aware that, using his own figures of 50 redundancies, if all of those 50 redundancies were to get low paid unskilled work that the cost to the taxpayer annually, in terms of increased income support, would be £500,000 a year. If none of them were to get that unskilled work then the cost would rise to £1.2 million a year. Are there not costs and has he not done the calculation through income support, there are not costs in his proposals to outsource?

Deputy E.J. Noel:

I do believe that Deputy Southern is throwing up lots of smoke and maybe a few mirrors there. Those employees that will be leaving States employment may go on to get comparatively paid jobs. They may go on, in some instances, to get jobs that pay more. But the likelihood is that they will move on to jobs that pay less. But it is on their household income that income support is calculated. You cannot just conflate 2 issues and come up with the figures that Deputy Southern has done because they are completely and utterly inaccurate.

6. Deputy G.P. Southern :

The Minister has now done the calculation, has he, in the list 5 minutes because he could not tell us what the numbers were 5 minutes ago?

Deputy E.J. Noel:

No, certainly not. If I may say, Deputy Southern is being a bit flippant because this is an important topic, particularly for those individuals that are going to be affected. Income support is a matrix on the household income, so you cannot simply take one individual and say what their income support figure will be or will not be [Interruption] .. the Deputy says he can do an average. But there are multiple layers in this and you cannot just pick one figure out and quote it across this Assembly with any degree of accuracy.

7. Deputy K.C. Lewis :

As the previous Minister for Transport and Technical Services, it is my duty to report that I have had many late evening phone calls from the T.T.S. workforce, now Infrastructure workforce. Many emotional phone calls: by their own admission, a lot of people will never work again. Will the Minister not concede that when you are the Minister not only do you run the department but you have a duty of care for the workforce?

We all, as States Members, have a duty of care and we particularly have a duty of care to those that work for the States across the piece. As a former member of the S.E.B. (States Employment Board) I am very aware that we need to be an employer that has compassion, an employer that is considerate and does not take steps lightly. That is why we have a substantial and extensive programme of consultation with the staff and those that will be affected will be taken through a programme and helped to try and mitigate the effects on their individual life. If they come up during that process with challenges to the service reviews or suggestions whereby they could continue it in States Employment, we will look at that and we will work with them to ensure that the outcome is as least harmful to them as possible.

8. Deputy M.R. Higgins:

Part of the Deputy of Grouville 's question was asking would he advise how many Civil Service staff, including managers, will be impacted by the changes. Can he tell us does his review extend and include those earning £100,000 in his department or other senior people or are they excluded from this review and you are only looking at the lower paid?

Deputy E.J. Noel:

No, they are very much included in this review because we are doing a complete service review, section by section. We are looking at the service we provide, we are looking at the type of service that the public want and how to best deliver that service for the most efficient and best value for money. Yes, I can confirm to the Deputy that it is not just the lower paid we are looking at, it is across the piece. It is from the top level down.

9. Deputy S.Y. Mézec :

In a previous answer the Minister spoke about making difficult decisions. Would he not concede that decisions become very, very easy when you do not even bother to try and ascertain what the impact of those decisions are going to be?

Deputy E.J. Noel:

The decisions that my department has been asked to look at is how we save £4.6 million on a year- by-year basis on a budget that is just below £25 million. That is over a 20 per cent cut in our spending. We do have to look at that very carefully and we do have to make sure that the department is still fit for purpose at the end of it. That is exactly what we are doing.

10. The Deputy of Grouville :

To say that I am surprised that he has not carried out an in-depth cost analysis would be an understatement. The Minister has said it is not in his remit to do such analysis, so how does he know that these measures he is pursuing will have the results of reducing his budget expenditure? Is it not symbolic measures and will create a false economy in the long term?

Deputy E.J. Noel:

Absolutely not. I believe some Members are getting confused here between what is a departmental budget, which we have been asked to substantially reduce, and what is the social economic impact of the overall package of £145 million. The latter is for the economists to answer for and it is the former for my department to implement.

3. Connétable A.S. Crowcroft of St. Helier of the Minister for Infrastructure regarding traffic survey reports compiled by Jersey in Transition:

What conclusions, if any, has the Minister been able to draw from the recent traffic survey reports compiled by Jersey in Transition?

Deputy E.J. Noel (The Minister for Infrastructure):

I would like to thank the Constable and, indeed, Jersey in Transition for providing my department with the surveys. For the record, they are providing interesting data on how many vehicles, cyclists and pedestrians use Midvale Road, Val Plaisant and Bath Street during the morning rush hour. Last year they also carried out a more comprehensive survey on Conway Street. My department has carried out similar surveys across St. Helier as part of our review of traffic in the town area, which the Constable is well aware of, and we are carrying out on behalf of the Future of St. Helier project. Their efforts are very helpful and complement the data that we already have. The key conclusions with which Jersey in Transition make, and which I would concur with, is that there are significant proportions of pedestrians using the roads as well as cyclists and vehicles. Sometimes the pedestrians and cyclists outnumber the motor vehicle. The aim of the Future of St. Helier project is to ensure that our town is an attractive place to live, work and visit. Traffic was clearly a key issue at last year's public consultation and finding the right balance between the various road users will be essential. To that end, I understand that the group will also be conducting cycle surveys and I would be pleased to see the results of those. I would also invite representatives from Jersey in Transition to meet with the Department of Infrastructure and the Parish to share our collective surveys and to work more closely together in the future.

1. The Connétable of St. Helier :

I thank the Minister for his answer. With respect to Conway Street, the survey was very striking in that it showed that approximately a third of the users of Conway Street are in vehicles, two-thirds are on foot or on a bicycle. Does the Minister not agree with me that there needs to be a review of how we allocate road space in congested streets like this, where the majority of road users are being marginalised and pressed into very small areas and the minority of road users have the lion's share of the space? Is this not a good case for improving, in particular, pedestrian facilities in these busy streets?

Deputy E.J. Noel:

Absolutely, and the Constable will know that my department is working on a solution for Conway Street, among other areas in St. Helier including Charing Cross, Midvale Road and others. I would welcome the Constable's assistance perhaps with the money that he gets from the States paying rates to fund some of these improvements.

2. Deputy M. Tadier :

Is the Minister committed to reducing car usage in Jersey and, if so, what are the main ways that he intends to do that?

Deputy E.J. Noel:

Yes, I am, as it has also been a States decision in the Sustainable Transport Policy whereby we want to reduce peak hour congestion. It is an evolution project, it is not an overnight one: there are no silver bullets. It is going to take a lot of work. We need to improve the alternatives. We have already seen substantial improvement in our bus service along the lines that the Constable has mentioned. Improving the infrastructure within St. Helier will also help that situation. Yes, we should be doing what we can to encourage people out of their motor vehicles and enjoy this wonderful Island of ours in different ways.

3. Deputy M. Tadier :

Is not the reality that while we have seen some very small increase in bus usage we have not really seen any significant decrease in car usage and it is essentially a failure of Government in that respect? Can the Minister specifically say how increasing the bus fares, the cash fares, to £2 as a flat rate for the bus helps encourage people to use alternative methods of transport rather than their cars when petrol is at an all-time low in the last few years?

Deputy E.J. Noel:

Several questions there. I will take the first one first. It is not fair to say we have had a marginal increase in bus usage. Bus usage over the last 2 years has increased substantially. The Deputy is correct that unfortunately the peak hour traffic has not reduced but also in that time we have seen the population rise, which was not built into the original target figures for the reduction in congestion.

[10:15]

This is an ongoing process. It does take time. People's love of the motor car in Jersey is a great one and it will take cultural changes to get people to look at doing their transport in different ways.

4. Connétable J. Gallichan of St. Mary :

Does the Minister consider that the lack of a large public car park, multiple-storeyed perhaps, on the north-west outside of town contributes greatly to the vehicles travelling through town, down Midvale Road, through Bath Street, seeking car parking and, if so, will he be pressing for that solution?

Deputy E.J. Noel:

I would want a series in an ideal world. One, I would want an actual proper ring road, but secondly, I would want the car parks to be around that ring road to encourage people to walk from there into the centre. There is one site that will be coming available in the coming years and my preference would be to trial it as a temporary car park and that is the old police station, the old Rouge Bouillon school site, to use that as a temporary solution for car parking in that area and to see if that helps alleviate the issues. If it did then consideration could be made for creating a car park there that had greater capacity, be it a multi-storey or otherwise. But we are looking at, with the private sector, providing a multi-storey car park on the eastern side of town. We have had discussions, although briefly, with the Constable at his request to consider an underground car park, under People's Park with the park going back on top. It was the Constable's suggestion, not mine. So we are trying to alleviate the need for motorists to drive through our town.

5. Deputy G.P. Southern :

For the first time today the Minister has mentioned the population as a cause of infrastructure problems and increased demands in infrastructure. Will he therefore be pressing the Chief Minister and the Council of Ministers to come up with a permanent population policy, migration policy, in order that stresses on his Infrastructure Department are relieved?

Deputy E.J. Noel:

We need a population policy that balances the needs of funding our society and our demographics. We need to maintain that ratio as close to it as we can to those that are in work and those that are retired and out of work because it is affecting those predominantly that are in work that pay our taxes in the whole and therefore that balance is a fine one.

6. Deputy G.P. Southern :

Was that a yes or a no? Will he be pressing the Minister? Deputy E.J. Noel:

The population is a complex matter. It cannot be answered in a yes or no question, particularly not from Deputy Southern , if I may be a bit cheeky. We do need to maintain our working population to be able to provide that basis of income to the States to fund the services that we need to provide.

7. Deputy S.Y. Mézec :

Is the Minister aware that the flat fare for a bus fare in Guernsey, which is run by the same company as Jersey, is precisely 50 per cent of what it is about to be in Jersey, plus they also have free parking in St. Peter Port. So would he acknowledge that there are alternative ways to affect problems with traffic rather than simply trying to make everything more expensive for everyone and that you can change behaviour by making things cheaper for people as well? Would he agree to investigate this as a potential alternative to his policy in every arena of life, which seems to be to just make things more difficult for people with less money?

Deputy E.J. Noel:

To compare the Guernsey bus service with the Jersey bus service is comparing apples and pears. Yes, they both provide a bus service but they are completely different .. the risks are completely differently allocated. In Guernsey their subsidy is substantial per head of population. Ours is not to be sniffed at either but they are very, very different animals. In Guernsey I believe that the buses are owned by the States of Guernsey, ours are not. We do not have that type of investment. So they are not comparable.

The Connétable of St. Helier :

I would like to thank the Minister for his answers to questions which have ranged widely over the subject of transport policy, which of course has given him a lull in the fighting this morning. I will certainly be happy to pass on his invitation to Jersey in Transition to meet him and his officers. I cannot really turn that into a question, Sir.

4. Deputy S.Y. Mézec of the Minister for Infrastructure regarding the factors taken into account when deciding what constitutes a "responsible employer":

In the context of outsourcing Infrastructure jobs to the private sector, could the Minister explain what factors are taken into account when deciding what constitutes a "responsible employer"?

Deputy E.J. Noel (The Minister for Infrastructure):

We have made a commitment to the unions and to staff to stress the importance of third party contractors being a responsible employer within the tender process. The evaluation criteria within the tender process will reflect this intention and reward those who can demonstrate that they are a responsible employer within the tender evaluation process. We have defined a responsible employer as an employer who can demonstrate a track record of compliance with employment legislation, is committed to the delivery of appropriate training and development of skills as befits the role, has policies and processes consistent with the responsibilities that they have as an employer under the relevant legislation, uses terms and conditions of employment appropriate to the sector that they are operating in and, finally, it is not reliant upon the need for employment of licences to fulfil the services that they are tendering for.

1. Deputy S.Y. Mézec :

I thank the Minister for his answer there. Could we therefore seek to get an undertaking from him, that he will not be outsourcing jobs to firms which pay below the living wage and therefore requiring taxpayers to essentially subsidise them further, that he will not outsource to firms which will take people from full contracts to zero-hours contracts, where you could cause a huge amount of disruption to their lives and their careers, and will he also give an undertaking not to outsource

jobs out to firms which will give their workers a reduced entitlement to things like sick pay and holidays because those things, which I think many of these workers who are worried about their futures would consider much more important than whether we are simply going for a firm which ticks the boxes of basically doing what is legal already and nothing else?

Deputy E.J. Noel:

Doing what is legal already or nothing else is not on the cards. What they need to do is to demonstrate that they will invest in their staff. They will provide training and they will not be reliant on getting additional licences from the Government to fill those posts.

Deputy S.Y. Mézec :

That was not anything even close to an answer to my question there. The Bailiff :

That is a matter for Members.

2. Deputy A.D. Lewis of St. Helier :

Once the living wage for Jersey is established and calculated, will the Minister undertake to commit to joining the Living Wage Foundation and ensuring that all of his outsourced suppliers are being paid a living wage once it has been established? Would he commit to becoming a member of the foundation?

Deputy E.J. Noel:

I do not have the exact figures but I believe the States of Jersey, if we were compliant with the living wage amount, and whatever that may be because there are different ways of calculating it, that we would pretty much be almost 100 per cent compliant. There would be very few States employees that earnt less than that currently on an hourly basis. I may be wrong but that is certainly my recollection from when I was on the States Employment Board. I will certainly look at the membership of that body from maybe .. I do not believe that a department can be a member of that body, but if merely the States Employment Board, but I will look into that to see if it has merits.

3. Deputy A.D. Lewis :

What I was talking about really was the suppliers because within the Living Wage Foundation remit it is suppliers that also need to be paid a living wage and it is quite relevant with the outsourcing of services to independent suppliers.

Deputy E.J. Noel:

It will be one of the factors - and I say one of the factors - that we may or may not consider if we do decide to outsource services. That final decision has not been made yet and we have many processes to go before that decision is made.

4. Deputy K.C. Lewis :

Yesterday morning, I attended a Scrutiny meeting in the States Building here. Walking down Colomberie I happened to notice a gardening contractor working for Housing presumably with a very loud petrol driven strimmer. The gentleman concerned had no safety equipment whatsoever, no safety clothing, no safety helmet, no eye protection, no ear protection. Is this the road we are now travelling down?

I hope Deputy Kevin Lewis contacted the Social Security Department to report that incident because if they were activities undertaken without the appropriate safety issue that is of great concern and is something that I am sure the Minister for Social Security would want the information on. So I urge Deputy Kevin Lewis to provide that information to the Minister for Social Security.

5. Deputy M. Tadier :

Does the Minister accept that when it comes to these kind of responsible employees, the States does not have a very good record or rather his ministerial colleagues, we know that the Minister for Economic Development has no problem in signing a contract with Condor which uses a practice called "social dumping", where they use staff from Eastern European countries and pay them much less than the minimum wage that is available in Jersey. Will the Minister give an undertaking to make sure that when he puts these new policies through in his department that it extends throughout the whole of the States  so that we do not  see such  nefarious practices being carried out  by ministerial government?

Deputy E.J. Noel:

Perhaps Deputy Tadier did not hear what I said in the answer to his colleague's question. We are going to ensure that any private contractor that takes on contracts from the Department of Infrastructure is not reliant upon the need for employment licences to fulfil the services that they are tendering for. Therefore the situation whereby they would be using labour from outside of the Island and .. I cannot remember the term, something dumping, that the .. social dumping will not be applicable.

6. Deputy M. Tadier :

That is understood. It was merely by way of analogy to say that there are practices going on in other areas of government where clearly social and moral considerations have not been taken on board. But does the Minister accept that in that list he gave earlier he did not mention pay or terms and conditions, and secondly, he did not give any indication of whether or not contracts would be given to non-locally owned businesses whereby essentially tax revenues, which could be ending up in Jersey, would not be ending up here? Does he consider that those 2 areas need to be added to his list if we are to have a meaningful and responsible employer relationship?

Deputy E.J. Noel:

I am a bit concerned by something that Deputy Tadier said there. He appeared to infer that unessential employment practices were currently taking place within the States of Jersey. I believe that is definitely not the case. The States Employment Board is very much a responsible employer so I do not believe that those services that Deputy Tadier mentioned are taking place. We will make sure that any contracts that we give, and we do currently give many Jersey Property Holdings currently does effectively use third party contractors for its work. It does not have any direct labour at all. So we already do manage such contracts and ensure that those firms are acting in a responsible way when carrying out work on behalf of the States of Jersey.

7. Deputy G.P. Southern :

Will the Minister come clean and admit that pay and conditions for an outsourced worker are a matter of indifference for him and that what he is engaged in is a race to the bottom in terms of workers' terms and conditions with its outsourcing policy? Will he accept that the major reason why he can talk about contracts which did cost £160,000 and costing £90,000 is merely because standards might be the same but payment to the workers have been cut to the bone?

Deputy E.J. Noel:

I do not know about being cut to the bone. What is certainly unlikely to be the case is for there to be such an employer pension scheme that we currently have within the States of Jersey, and that is one of the major differences between the funding of the 2. Sorry, I have forgotten the rest of Deputy Southern 's question, would he like to repeat it?

Deputy G.P. Southern :

How much of a saving that he keeps referring to from £160,000 to £90,000 is made up by a reduction in pay down to the minimum wage or thereabouts?

Deputy E.J. Noel:

Undoubtedly, it is virtually all going to be staff-related costs.

8. Deputy S.Y. Mézec :