States Meeting Transcript - 23rd May 2017

STATES OF JERSEY OFFICIAL REPORT TUESDAY, 23rd MAY 2017

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

1. Manchester terrorist attack – book of condolence opened..............................7 The Bailiff :....................................................................................7
2. Welcome to the Director General in the British Islands of the Alliance Française.....7 The Bailiff :....................................................................................7

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

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

1. THE DEPUTY OF GROUVILLE OF THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES REGARDING COMMUNICATIONS WITH THE BOARD OF THE JERSEY ELECTRICITY COMPANY IN RESPECT OF THE ENERGY PLAN AND STANDBY CHARGE: [1(279)].........................................................7
2. DEPUTY J.M. MAÇON OF ST. SAVIOUR OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE NEW CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF THE STATES OF JERSEY TO HAVE EXPERIENCE IN EECTRONIC OR DIGITAL SERVICES: [1(280)]..................................................................................8
3. THE DEPUTY OF ST. JOHN OF THE MINISTER FOR SOCIAL SECURITY REGARDING THE CHILD COMPONENT OF INCOME SUPPORT: [1(281)]........8
4. THE DEPUTY OF ST. JOHN OF THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES REGARDING THE INCOME THAT WOULD BE LOST IN TAX REVENUE BY REPLACING THE CHILD ALLOWANCE WITH A DEPENDENT'S ALLOWANCE': [1(282)] ..............................................................11
5. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES REGARDING POTENTIAL CHANGES TO THE STRUCTURE AND DELIVERY OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL CARE: [1(283)]......11
6. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR SOCIAL SECURITY REGARDING THE PREVALENCE OF ZERO-HOUR CONTRACTS: [1(284)]................................................................................12
7. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR EDUCATION REGARDING PROJECTS FUNDED FROM THE PUPIL PREMIUM SCHEME: [1(285)]................................................................................13
8. THE DEPUTY OF ST. JOHN OF THE MINISTER FOR EDUCATION REGARDING THE RE-INTRODUCTION OF STANDARD ASSESSMENT TESTS AT PRIMARY- SCHOOL LEVEL: [1(286)]............................................................17

9. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR SOCIAL SECURITY REGARDING THE SURVEY WHICH UNDERPINNED THE REPORT ENTITLED LIVING LONGER: THINKING AHEAD': [1(287)].....................17
10. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES REGARDING THE SURVEY WHICH UNDERPINNED THE REPORT ENTITLES MENTAL HEALTH QUALITY REPORT 2017': [1(288)] 19
11. DEPUTY M.R. HIGGINS OF ST. HELIER OF H.M. ATTORNEY GENERAL REGARDING THE ROLE OF JURATS IN A REMISE DES BIENS: [1(289)] ........20
12. DEPUTY M.R. HIGGINS OF ST. HELIER OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING HUMAN RIGHTS AUDITS UNDERTAKEN IN RESPECT OF THE PRACTICES AND PROCEDURES OF JERSEY'S COURTS AND TRIBUNALS: [1(290)]........21
13. DEPUTY M.R. HIGGINS OF ST. HELIER OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING THE DUTIES AND TARGETS ASSIGNED TO THE FORMER ASSISTANT CHIEF MINISTER WITH RESPONSIBILITY FOR FINANCIAL SERVICES, DIGITAL, COMPETITION AND INNOVATION MATTERS: [1(291)] ..........................21
14. DEPUTY M.R. HIGGINS OF ST. HELIER OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING THE WORK-DIARY AND TRAVEL OF THE FORMER ASSISTANT CHIEF MINISTER WITH RESPONSIBILITY FOR FINANCIAL SERVICES, DIGITAL, COMPETITION AND INNOVATION MATTERS: [1(292)] ..........................23
15. DEPUTY M.R. HIGGINS OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR INFRASTRUCTURE REGARDING THE ODOUR-CONTROL SYSTEMS TO BE FITTED TO THE NEW SEWAGE TREATMENT WORKS AT BELLOZANNE: [1(293)]................................................................................24
16. DEPUTY L.M.C. DOUBLET OF ST. SAVIOUR OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING THE MINISTERIAL SUB-COMMITTEE TASKED WITH FINDING A SOLUTION TO THE PROBLEMS OF FINANCING STUDENTS: [1(294)] ..........27

3. Oral Questions...........................................................................27

1. Connétable C.H. Taylor of St. John of the Chief Minister regarding the reasons why the Assembly was not informed of the agreement to increase the level of risk of loans from the Jersey Innovation Fund of not being repaid from 10 per cent to 50 per cent: [1(297)]...................................................................................27

Senator I.J. Gorst (The Chief Minister):......................................................27

1. The Connétable of St. John:............................................................27
2. Connétable J.E. Le Maistre of Grouville ................................................28
3. Deputy G.P. Southern of St. Helier:....................................................28
4. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................28
5. Deputy K.C. Lewis of St. Saviour:......................................................28
6. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................29
7. Senator S.C. Ferguson:.................................................................29
8. Deputy M. Tadier of St. Brelade:.......................................................29
9. Deputy J.A.N. Le Fondré of St. Lawrence : .............................................30
10. Deputy J.A. Martin of St. Helier:....................................................30
11. The Connétable of St. John : .........................................................31

2. Deputy M. Tadier of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding whether he would require the Medical Officer of Health to issue an apology and correction following a statement to BBC Radio Jersey in relation to Cannabis: the Evidence of Medical Use': [1(298)]...................................................................31

Senator A.K.F. Green (The Minister for Health and Social Services):........................31

1. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................31
2. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................32
3. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................32
4. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................33
5. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................33

3. Deputy J.A. Martin of the Chief Minister regarding the date on which Senator P.F.C. Ozouf received a letter of appointment as Assistant Chief Minister in November 2014 [1(295)]...................................................................................33

Senator I.J. Gorst (The Chief Minister):......................................................33

1. Deputy J.A. Martin:....................................................................33
2. Deputy J.A. Martin:....................................................................34

4. Connétable A.S. Crowcroft of St. Helier of the Minister for Infrastructure regarding the relationship between the Department's agent and Grontmij and Sweco and the planning applications for the new sewage treatment works in Bellozanne Valley: [1(202)]...................................................................................34

Deputy E.J. Noel of St. Lawrence (The Minister for Infrastructure):..........................34

1. The Connétable of St. Helier:...........................................................35
2. Deputy M.R. Higgins of St. Helier:.....................................................35

5. Deputy J.A.N. Le Fondré of the Minister for Treasury and Resources regarding whether there had been a deficit in the public finances when the Minister had taken office at the end of 2014: [1(299)] .......................................................35

Senator A.J.H. Maclean (The Minister for Treasury and Resources):.........................35

1. Deputy J.A.N. Le Fondré:..............................................................36
2. Deputy M.R.Higgins:..................................................................36
3. Deputy J.A.N. Le Fondré:..............................................................36

6. Deputy M.R. Higgins of the Chief Minister regarding whether he would investigate measures that would ensure an equality of arms' for parties involved with the Independent Jersey Care Inquiry to be able to respond to that report: [1(305)] ......37

Senator I.J. Gorst (The Chief Minister):......................................................37

1. Deputy M.R.Higgins:..................................................................37
2. Deputy M.R.Higgins:..................................................................37

7. Deputy G.P. Southern of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding what measures, if any, he was considering to ensure continuity, or a replacement, of domestic care services: [1(300)].........................................................38

Senator A.K.F. Green (The Minister for Health and Social Services):........................38

1. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................38
2. Deputy M.R.Higgins:..................................................................38
3. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................38
4. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................39

5. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................39
6. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................39

8. Deputy M.R. Higgins of the Chief Minister regarding his assessment of the appropriateness of the cost for litigants in person to access transcripts or recordings of court hearings and trials; [1(306)]....................................................40

Senator P.F. Routier (Assistant Chief Minister - rapporteur):.................................40

1. Deputy M.R.Higgins:..................................................................40
2. Deputy R. Labey of St. Helier:..........................................................40
3. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................41
4. Deputy M.R.Higgins:..................................................................41
5. Deputy M.R.Higgins:..................................................................41

9. Deputy G.P. Southern of the Minister for Social Security regarding the choice of the words "tighten benefit rules" as an option under question 90 of the survey undertaken for the report Living Longer: Thinking Ahead": [1(301)]............................41

Deputy S.J. Pinel of St. Clement (The Minister for Social Security):..........................41

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

10. The Connétable of St. Helier of H.M. Solicitor General regarding whether, as a matter of law, Parishes could make use of a referendum in making important decisions and, if so, under what conditions: [1(303)]...................................43

Mr. M.H. Temple Q.C., H.M. Solicitor General:..............................................43

1. The Connétable of St. Helier:........................................................44
2. Deputy M. Tadier :...................................................................44
3. Deputy M. Tadier :...................................................................44
4. Deputy C.F. Labey of Grouville :....................................................45
5. Deputy M.R.Higgins:...............................................................45
6. The Connétable of St. Helier:........................................................46

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

1. Deputy T.A. Vallois of St. John:........................................................46 Deputy R.G. Bryans of St. Helier (The Minister for Education):..............................47

1. The Deputy of St. John:................................................................47
   2. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................47
   3. Deputy K.C. Lewis :....................................................................48
   4. Deputy M.J. Norton of St. Brelade:.....................................................48
   5. Deputy J.A. Hilton of St. Helier:........................................................48
   6. Deputy R. Labey : ......................................................................48
   7. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................49

1. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................49
2. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................49

8. Deputy J.A. Hilton:.....................................................................49
9. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................50
10. The Deputy of St. John:................................................................50
11. The Deputy of Grouville :...............................................................50

5. Question to Ministers without notice - The Chief Minister............................51

1. Deputy J.A. Hilton:.....................................................................51 Senator I.J. Gorst (The Chief Minister):......................................................51
2. Deputy M.R.Higgins:..................................................................51
3. Senator S.C. Ferguson:.................................................................52
4. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................52
5. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................53

6. The Deputy of Grouville :...............................................................54
7. Deputy R. Labey : ......................................................................54
8. Deputy J.A.N. Le Fondré:..............................................................55

STATEMENTS ON A MATTER OF OFFICIAL RESPONSIBILITY........................55

6. The Minister for Treasury and Resources - statement regarding the Future Hospital Funding Strategy........................................................................55

6.1 Senator A.J.H. Maclean (The Minister for Treasury and Resources):...................55

1. Senator S.C. Ferguson:.................................................................56
2. Senator S.C. Ferguson:.................................................................56
3. Deputy J.A. Hilton:.....................................................................56
4. Deputy J.A.Hilton:.....................................................................57
5. The Deputy of St John:.................................................................57
6. Deputy R. Labey : ......................................................................57
7. The Connétable of St. John:............................................................58
8. Deputy R.J. Renouf of St. Ouen:........................................................58
9. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................58
10. Deputy J.A.N. Le Fondré: ...........................................................59
11. Deputy M.R.Higgins:...............................................................59
12. Connétable D.W. Mezbourian of St. Lawrence:......................................60
13. The Connétable of St. John : .........................................................60
14. The Deputy of St. Ouen:.............................................................60

PUBLIC BUSINESS.............................................................................61

7. Parish Rates: payment by the States of Jersey (P.12/2017)............................61

7.1 The Connétable of St. Helier:...........................................................61

1. The Connétable of St. John:............................................................62
2. Senator S.C. Ferguson:.................................................................62
3. Senator P.F.C. Ozouf :..................................................................62
4. Deputy M.R.Higgins:..................................................................63
5. Senator A.J.H. Maclean:................................................................63
6. Deputy J.A.N. Le Fondré:..............................................................64

7. Connétable L. Norman of St. Clement:.................................................64
8. The Connétable of St. Helier:...........................................................65

8. Jersey Sport: establishment (P.21/2017)................................................67

8.1 Connétable S.W. Pallett of St. Brelade (Assistant Minister for Economic Development, Tourism, Sport and Culture - rapporteur):..............................................67

1. Connétable S.A. Le Sueur -Rennard of St. Saviour:.....................................71
2. Senator P.F. Routier: ...................................................................71
3. Deputy M.J. Norton:....................................................................72
4. Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................72
5. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................73

LUNCHEON ADJOURNMENT PROPOSED..................................................74 LUNCHEON ADJOURNMENT................................................................74

6. Deputy J.A.N. Le Fondré:..............................................................74
7. The Deputy of St. John:................................................................74
8. The Connétable of St. Brelade:.........................................................75

The Connétable of St. Brelade : ...............................................................78

9. Standing Orders: Answers to Questions (P.25/2017)...................................78

9.1 Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................79

1. Deputy K.C. Lewis :....................................................................80
2. Deputy M. Tadier :......................................................................81
3. Deputy S.M. Wickenden of St. Helier:..................................................82
4. Deputy S.M. Brée of St. Clement:......................................................83
5. Senator P.M. Bailhache : ................................................................84
6. Deputy M.J. Norton:....................................................................84
7. Deputy R. Labey : ......................................................................84
8. Deputy J.A. Martin:....................................................................85
9. Deputy E.J. Noel: ......................................................................86
10. Senator I.J. Gorst : ...................................................................86
11. Senator P.F. Routier:................................................................87
12. Deputy G.P. Southern : ..............................................................88

10. Jersey Employment and Discrimination Tribunal: appointment of Chairman and members (P.28/2017)....................................................................90

10.1 Deputy S.J. Pinel (The Minister for Social Security):...................................90

11. Regulation of care workers' employment standards (P.29/2017)......................91

11.1 Deputy G.P. Southern :..................................................................91

1. Senator I.J. Gorst : ...................................................................95
2. Senator S.C. Ferguson:..............................................................96
3. The Connétable of St. John : .........................................................97
4. Deputy S.M. Brée: ..................................................................97
5. The Deputy of St. Ouen:.............................................................98
6. Senator A.K.F. Green:...............................................................99
7. Senator P.F. Routier:...............................................................100
8. Deputy A.E. Pryke of Trinity : ......................................................101
9. Deputy M. Tadier :..................................................................101
10. Deputy G.P. Southern : ..........................................................103 The Connétable of St. Clement (Chairman, Privileges and Procedures Committee):.........106

ARRANGEMENT OF PUBLIC BUSINESS FOR FUTURE MEETINGS ..................106

12. The Connétable of St. Clement (Chairman, Privileges and Procedures Committee):...106

1. Deputy M.R.Higgins:.................................................................106

1. Senator P.F. Routier:...............................................................107
2. Senator P.F.C. Ozouf : ..............................................................107
3. Deputy J.A. Martin: ................................................................108
4. Deputy S.M. Brée: .................................................................108
5. The Connétable of St. Clement:....................................................108
6. Deputy M.R.Higgins:..............................................................108

2. Senator P.F. Routier: ..................................................................109

ADJOURNMENT..............................................................................110

[9:31]

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

1. Manchester terrorist attack – book of condolence opened

The Bailiff :

Like all Members and members of the public, no doubt, I woke up to the news of what seems to have been a terrorist suicide bomber's attack in Manchester last night. We will soon be turning to the important business of the day but before we do so let us take a brief moment to reflect that for 22 people who have died, most of them young people who had everything to look forward to, their future on this earth has been taken away. For many more people who were close to them, parents, siblings, family, friends, partners, today and the coming weeks and months will be important only to remember those who have died. On behalf of us all in this Assembly and in this Island I say to them all, our hearts go out to you. A book of condolence will be open today in the public reception area of the Royal Court building at the other end of this building for Islanders who wish to sign it and I have asked that flags be flown half-mast today.

2. Welcome to the Director General in the British Islands of the Alliance Française

The Bailiff :

On a more cheerful note, I am pleased to welcome, on behalf of you all, Monsieur Emmanuel Bottieau, the Director General in the British Islands of the Alliance Française, who is in the gallery watching some of our proceedings today. [Approbation] It is very good to see him here. The Alliance Française in Jersey, as he will know, is the third largest branch of the Alliance in the British Islands and it is especially good to see him here.

QUESTIONS

2. Written Questions

1. THE DEPUTY OF GROUVILLE OF THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES REGARDING COMMUNICATIONS WITH THE BOARD OF THE JERSEY ELECTRICITY COMPANY IN RESPECT OF THE ENERGY PLAN AND STANDBY CHARGE: [1(279)]

Question

Further to the answer provided to oral question 1(231) on 18th April 2017, will the Minister, as shareholder representative, confirm what communications, if any, he has had with the board of the Jersey Electricity Company in respect of the implementation of the Energy Plan and of the Standby Charge and the impact this will have on local businesses and the cost of living within Jersey?

Will the Minister also confirm how he has utilised the States of Jersey's majority shareholding in the Jersey Electricity Company for the implementation of the Energy Plan and in respect of the Standby Charge?

Answer

The Assistant Treasury Minister as shareholder representative communicates formally with the Chairman and Chief Executive (as representatives of the Board) of Jersey Electricity at least twice per year. A broad range of topics are covered which has included the Energy Plan and Standby Charges.

Jersey Electricity's commitment to the Energy Plan and the significant financial investment it has made, for example, in undersea cables, which has helped Jersey reduce its carbon emissions by around one third over the last 25 years is recognised.

Specifically on the Standby Charges issue, the Assistant Minister is aware of Jersey Electricity's commercial reasons for implementing the changes.

The States of Jersey's majority shareholding in the Jersey Electricity Company has therefore not been utilised in respect of these issues. Unlike most other States-owned companies the JEC is not wholly-owned.

2. DEPUTY J.M. MAÇON OF ST. SAVIOUR OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE NEW CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF THE STATES OF JERSEY TO HAVE EXPERIENCE IN EECTRONIC OR DIGITAL SERVICES: [1(280)]

Question

Will the Chief Minister confirm that, in advertising for the new Chief Executive Officer of the States of Jersey, a key criteria for the post will include experience in implementing electronic or digital services and, if not, will he explain why not?

Answer

Digital transformation is one of the key drivers for public sector reform in the States of Jersey and this is clearly stated in the candidate brief for the role of Chief Executive Officer (CEO).

The CEO role is unique and covers a broad scope of areas across the public sector. Candidates will be required to demonstrate the high level skills needed to oversee significant transformation.

The Candidate Brief prepared for the recruitment states the purpose, knowledge and skills required. These include:-

the ability to exercise initiative in ensuring the delivery of the States of Jersey vision, objectives and priorities; and,

experience of delivering substantial organisational change programmes and the ability to lead a public service reform programme.

3. THE DEPUTY OF ST. JOHN OF THE MINISTER FOR SOCIAL SECURITY REGARDING THE CHILD COMPONENT OF INCOME SUPPORT: [1(281)] Question

Will the Minister advise how the child component of Income Support has been determined and why it is deemed necessary to pay a different amount to that of the adult component; and explain how the difference between the needs of a child and of an adult living in an Income Support household has been assessed?

Answer

Income Support is based on a series of components that are allocated to households, depending on the composition and needs of the household. A range of components deals with housing, childcare and care costs. In addition a component is allocated to each adult in the household, with a separate component for each child in the household, and a single household component.

Prior  to  the  introduction  of  Income  Support  extensive  modelling  was  undertaken  to  identify appropriate values for components that provided a reasonable match with the previous benefit systems and could be afforded within the available budget.

Today, the adult component is provided at £92.12 per week, the child component is currently £63.98 per week and the household component is £51.31 per week.

The table shows how these basic components are combined for different sized households:

NB. This table does not include the additional support for rental, child care and health related costs that is also available to Income Support households.

Most systems for assessing household income will allocate different values to adults and children within the household. For example, the Statistics Unit looks at household income as part of the Income Distribution Survey. A process known as equivilization is used to compare the incomes of different sized households.

The scale used by the Statistics Unit are shown in the next table:

The follo

wing table gives the

weigh tings used

in this equivalence scale for the various household types listed above. As can be seen,

• a single adult has the highest weighting of 0.67 (or 0.58 AHC)
• a second adult joining the household adds a lower weighting of 0.33 (or 0.42 AHC)
• with each child then adding a further, smaller weighting of 0.2

This pattern is generally reflected in the Income Support components, with

• a single adult receiving £143.43 in basic components
• a second adult joining the household adding an extra £92.12 in basic components
• each child adding a further £63.98.

The modified OECD equivalence scale is used widely but other scales which allocate different weightings to adults and children are also used internationally. Generally, the allocation to a child is always less than the allocation to an adult.

4. THE DEPUTY OF ST. JOHN OF THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES REGARDING THE INCOME THAT WOULD BE LOST IN TAX REVENUE BY REPLACING THE CHILD ALLOWANCE WITH A DEPENDENT'S ALLOWANCE': [1(282)]

Question

Will the Minister provide an estimate of the amount of income that would be lost in tax revenue, if any, if child allowance were changed to a dependant's allowance' with the definition of dependant' being a relative (including a relative of the person's spouse or civil partner) who was unable to maintain himself or herself as a result of old age or ill-health or a child maintained at the individual's / household's own expense?

Answer

The income-tax system currently allows £3,000 of income to be earned tax-free by eligible taxpayers for every child they maintain.

It is not possible quickly to estimate the additional costs (in respect of tax foregone) if the scope of the existing child allowance were extended in the way envisaged as the States do not hold data on the number of people likely to be included within the proposed scope of an extended income-tax allowance.

The Social Security Department provides financial assistance to adults who are unable to support themselves due to old age or incapacity, through a range of benefits including Income Support and the Long Term Care scheme.

5. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES REGARDING POTENTIAL CHANGES TO THE STRUCTURE AND DELIVERY OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL CARE: [1(283)] Question

Will the Minister advise whether consideration has been given to potential changes to the structure and delivery of Health and Social Care services and, if so –

1. state if and when any changes will be open to public consultation;
2. state what timescale he has for bringing a proposition to the States seeking acceptance of a new model, and, if there will be no such proposition, explain why not;
3. explain in particular whether, giventhe dispute which has arisen over the changes to the terms and conditions of home care workers between Unite the Union and Family Nursing and Home Care management as a result of changes to the delivery of services, there will be any consultation over any new model with employee representatives as prime stakeholders and, if none, why not; and
4. assure members that any proposals will not reduce the public's ability to hold the Minister to account?

Answer

The document, Redesign of the Jersey Health and Social Care Governance Model', is currently a policy under consideration. It was sent to the Health and Social Security Scrutiny Panel confidentially in advance of a private briefing so as to assist the Panel in considering how it wished to undertake a review of the Report & Proposition. It is disappointing that this question has been asked on the basis of information provided to the Panel in confidence and before the planned private briefing that would have answered these and other questions.

The document proposes that governance of the health and social care strategy is further strengthened and broadened, including introducing a Public and Patient Advisory Group, to ensure that the views of Islanders are regularly heard throughout the strategy implementation. This builds on the success of the engagement approaches used in the Mental Health Strategy, where a Citizen's Panel provided valuable insight.

1. The proposed model is the next logical step on our transformation journey. This was subject to public consultation in 2012. The proposed model has been developed with over 40 stakeholders from across health and social care, including public and patient representatives, voluntary sector organisations and Primary Care. These stakeholders wholeheartedly support the proposed model, especially regarding improving transparency, visibility and the voice of Islanders. I do not believe this requires further public consultation.
2. I will be lodging a Report & Proposition in June, subject to approval by the Council of Ministers.
3. No changes are planned to the terms and conditions of employees in HSSD as a result of these governance changes. FNHC, as a key partner, was one of a number of stakeholders involved in producing the proposed governance model. A briefing for the HSSD Staff Partnership Forum (which comprises trade union representatives) on the proposed model will be held later this month.
4. The proposed governance model fully retains the Ministerial role. It strengthens public accountability by proposing that strategy meetings are held in public and that public and patient representatives participate in strategic discussions. The proposed Public and Patient Advisory Group further increases the voice of Islanders in strategic discussions and improves communication, engagement and accountability.

6. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR SOCIAL SECURITY REGARDING THE PREVALENCE OF ZERO-HOUR CONTRACTS: [1(284)]

Question

Following her response on 2nd May 2017 to oral question 1(275), in which she stated that 85 of 598 jobs on the Back to Work (BTW) scheme were zero-hour contracts, will the Minister explain the over-representation of zero-hour contracts in BTW jobs (14 per cent) compared to the wider private sector (11 per cent) as recorded in the most recent Jersey Labour Market report?

Will the Minister commit to keep a record of the jobs advertised by employers on her Department's system shown by full time, part time, and zero-hours, and by employment sector?

Furthermore, given her commitment to examine the use / misuse of zero-hours contracts in 2018, will she work with the Statistics Unit to analyse the prevalence of zero-hour contracts in the employment sectors entitled Miscellaneous Business Activities' and Education, Health and other services', given they are the sectors with the largest prevalence of such contracts in the private sector?

Answer

Back to Work is committed to supporting jobseekers move into sustainable employment. Taking up the offer of a zero hours or temporary job is often a very positive first step into employment for many, particularly for those who may have barriers such as long term unemployment. It allows the employee to build up their skills and experience, gain confidence, and therefore improve their overall employability to then move into a full- time permanent post. For people out of work and relying on Income Support I firmly believe that any job is better than no job and therefore, it is not surprising that for a small group (14%) of our jobseekers, a zero hours contract offers an opportunity to gain some paid work as a foot in the door' and is a positive step forward to full time work.

Jobs in Jersey is a part of the gov.je website that provides an easy way for employers to advertise roles to the public free of charge – in many cases the employer does not specify details about the role they are advertising such as salary or contract type. In some cases this may be because the employer has not yet made decisions about the specifics of a role, in other cases it may be that they do not want to share this on a public website. If Social Security were to require employers to give all information about every role in order to use the website for advertising, it could have a negative impact with fewer jobs being advertised through this useful mechanism. For this reason Social Security will not change the current way the system is used and recorded.

I can confirm that my officers will be working with the Statistics Unit to undertake further analysis of the zero hours contract figures reported in the Labour Market Survey.

7. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR EDUCATION REGARDING PROJECTS FUNDED FROM THE PUPIL PREMIUM SCHEME: [1(285)]

Question

Further to his response to written question 1(258) on 2nd May 2017, will the Minister list the 50 projects which received funding from the Jersey pupil premium scheme, along with the numbers of pupils taking part in these projects and a breakdown of the sums spent, by school, in 2016 and, if appropriate, in 2017?

Will the Minister further explain what the "initial evidence [] of positive results for individual pupils", referred to in that answer, is?

Answer

Please see a breakdown (attached) which provides details of the 50 pilot Jersey Premium projects that were completed in 2016. Evaluation of spend and analysis of impact for 2017 will be collated at the end of the year to assess the successful implementation of each schools strategy and action plan.

With regard to the "initial evidence [] of positive results for individual pupils", a number of different tools and assessment criteria were chosen by each school to measure the impact of their specific projects at a pupil level. The sensitive personal nature of the information prevents the Education Department from providing detail. However, as an example, a Reading Response intervention undertaken by pupils in Year 2 at a primary school proved extremely successful. Not only did it engage pupils and their families, the rapid improvement also developed a real sense of achievement in individuals who received the support. The first five pupils made accelerated progress of between 12 to 21 months over a three to six month period. As a direct result of this project, pupils are now able to access the curriculum for their year group alongside their peers. The school has expanded the programme to ensure more pupils who would benefit have access to this support.

School   Total JP Expenditure 2016 D'Auvergne School £31,578 First Tower £23,360 Grands Vaux £50,596 Grouville £10,469 Haute Vallee School £55,566 La Moye £12,437 Le Rocquier School £22,680 Les Landes School £8,497 Mont Nicolle £23,907 Plat Douet £27,938 Rouge Bouillon  £25,373 Samares £23,017 Springfield School £10,243 St Clement School £11,794 St Lawrence £884 St Luke's £2,353 St Saviour School £6,485 Trinity £1,163 Total £348,339

Emotional literacy based project providing small group wellbeing and self-regulation support  3

50. to targeted pupils

8. THE DEPUTY OF ST. JOHN OF THE MINISTER FOR EDUCATION REGARDING THE RE-INTRODUCTION OF STANDARD ASSESSMENT TESTS AT PRIMARY- SCHOOL LEVEL: [1(286)]

Question

Will the Minister provide an explanation for the re-introduction of Standard Assessment Tests (SATs) at primary-school level; and advise what purpose such tests serve and how they are conducive to assessing the overall progress of an individual student in education?

Answer

This year, in order to support teacher judgements and to build a complete picture of the progress pupils have made during the year, Year 6 pupils across the Island have completed Key Stage 2 English and mathematics standard assessment tests. This is a pilot taking place in all States schools and the majority of private schools.

The tests are being used because the curriculum changed in 2014 and, as a result of this, schools had to start using a new assessment system. Both elements of primary education are new, so it is important to double- check the effectiveness of our monitoring processes.

In Jersey, the tests are not being used in the same way as the UK. Ongoing assessment by teachers remains the main method of assessing how children are progressing. These tests will simply complement the work that teachers do with pupils every day, including the usual range of strategies that help build a complete picture of how pupils are progressing during the school year. The new tests will only be part of the child's overall progress report. Unlike in the UK, they will not be reported or listed separately.

The tests are low-key and schools have not been undertaking any additional preparations related to them. No SATs are being taken in Key Stage 1.

9. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR SOCIAL SECURITY REGARDING THE SURVEY WHICH UNDERPINNED THE REPORT ENTITLED LIVING LONGER: THINKING AHEAD': [1(287)]

Question

Will the Minister inform members whether the report Living Longer: Thinking Ahead' was produced internally and state to what extent, if any, advice was sought from either the Statistics Unit or other external advisors on the neutrality of the questions and on the interpretation of the results of the survey on which the report was based?

Answer

Living Longer: Thinking Ahead consultation

In October 2016, the Minister for Social Security launched the first part of a major review into income in retirement and the Social Security scheme.

"Living Longer: Thinking Ahead" asks for public feedback on the issues of income in retirement and the Social Security Scheme. It marked the start of a public conversation that will help to set the direction of Jersey's Social Security scheme and how people save for retirement for the next thirty years.

Income in retirement

People are generally living longer and healthier lives, and many more people enjoy active lives into their 80s and 90s. However, this raises the challenge of making sure that we will have enough income and savings to look after ourselves after we have stopped working.

The review looks to understand the public's views on living longer and having a longer retirement so that the government can play the right role in helping people to save for their retirement in the future.

The Social Security scheme

Alongside this, the review will consider the role of the Social Security pension and how the Social Security scheme could be adapted to people living longer.

Over the next 20 years, the number of people over 65 will double while the number of people under 65 will stay roughly the same. This will mean that the number of working age people supporting each pensioner will fall and, without any changes, the cost of pensions will outstrip the value of contributions. Most other developed countries are also facing this challenge now.

The Social Security scheme is based on a pay as you go' principle, which means that a person's contributions are not saved in their own pension pot. Instead they are used to pay out the Scheme's benefits, which is mostly the Social Security pension. Each generation relies on the next to pay for their Social Security pension.

The Scheme's other contributory benefits protect people when they are less likely to be able to earn a living. For example, the scheme pays benefits to new mothers and to people when they are ill or disabled, and after the death of their partner. The Scheme does not pay for Income Support which tops up the income of households with low incomes who meet the appropriate work requirements and have lived in Jersey for at least five years.

Consultation approach

The questionnaire aimed to explore in more detail the answers from the pension section of the 2015 Jersey Annual Social Survey, and people's understanding and views about how the government could adapt the Social security Scheme to living longer during the 2020s.

The questionnaire included multiple choice questions and opportunities for free-text answers which gave people the opportunity to reply in their own words, and provided more information about the views and ideas of those who took part. Workshops were also  held with interested members of the public and representatives from interest groups and the business community.

The consultation information and questions were produced by Social Security officers and tested with some members of the public before they were finalised. The approach taken in the questionnaire was discussed with the Statistics Unit. The design and printing of the consultation was carried out externally.

1,300 people responded to the questionnaire and Social Security officers held 13 workshops that were well attended by the public and representatives of interest groups and the business community. The views and ideas of the people who took part will be taken into account in the next stage of the review.

The Minister published a summary report, and a more detailed report, of the responses, comments and ideas on 15 May 2017 on the Social Security Review webpage (www.gov.je/socialsecurityreview).

Over the next few years, the government will build on the consultation comments and ideas, looking in more detail at: contributory benefits, the contribution rules for self-employed people, how working-age incapacity is assessed, and retirement income and saving (for example, workplace pensions).

10. DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES REGARDING THE SURVEY WHICH UNDERPINNED THE REPORT ENTITLES MENTAL HEALTH QUALITY REPORT 2017': [1(288)] Question

Will the Minister inform members whether the report Mental Health Quality Report 2017' was produced internally and state to what extent, if any, advice was sought from either the Statistics Unit or other external advisors on the neutrality of the questions and on the interpretation of the results of the survey on which the report was based?

Answer

The Mental Health Strategy (2015) gave a commitment to producing better information about the quality and performance of the mental health system. In particular, there was a commitment to produce a Quality Report. Following a national procurement process, a team of external providers led by Dr Richard Ford from Mental Health Strategies (www.mentalhealthstrategies.co.uk), which has worked widely on policy development and service transformation in the NHS, was commissioned to help produce the report.

A local project group was set up to manage the piece of work. Members of the project group in addition to the expert provider included Directors from Community Social Services, Head of Informatics from Health & Social Services, Executive Director MIND Jersey, Chief Nurse, the Deputy Director Commissioning, and with input from the Public Health Intelligence Unit (now part of the Statistics Unit).

The Project Board agreed the process used to develop the Quality Report, which included a literature search for best practice and a series of three workshops which were used to identify a locally owned framework of indicators and measures based on what was felt to be most meaningful locally. Attendees at the workshops included people from across government departments – including the Statistics Unit - as well as representatives from General Practice, Community Voluntary Sector and people with lived experience. The names of people who attended the workshops are included in the back of the Quality Report including which organisation they represented.

A draft framework of indicators and measures was consulted on, via workshop delegates, during December 2016 and a revised framework was then signed off by the project board in early 2017. The narrative contained within the Quality Report was drafted by the Mental Health Strategies team with guidance and editorial input form the Project Board.

The report contains data sources from across Government and also Community Voluntary Sector. This allows the report to give a system-wide view that to date has not existed in one document.

The final draft of the Quality Report was presented to the Children and Vulnerable Adults group for discussion and support ahead of publication on May 15th 2017.

11. DEPUTY M.R. HIGGINS OF ST. HELIER OF H.M. ATTORNEY GENERAL REGARDING THE ROLE OF JURATS IN A REMISE DES BIENS: [1(289)]

Question

Further to a response given on 14th June 2016 to a question regarding the rôle of the Jurats in a remise des biens, will H.M. Attorney General provide members with the details of the rôle of Jurats, from the time of their appointment by the Court to the final payment of creditors, including their interaction with the subjects of the remise; and will he further explain the meaning of the term bon père' in the context of a remise?

Answer

The Deputy 's question differs little in substance from the first part of the question on 14 June 2016 to which the Deputy refers, which was as follows: "Will Her Majesty's Attorney General advise what the role of the Viscount's office and the Jurats is in a remise des biens". The following answer therefore inevitably repeats much of the answer that was given on that occasion.

Remise des biens is an insolvency remedy available to a debtor who owns Jersey land which, if sold, may be sufficient to repay in full the debts due to his or her secured creditors. It is a process by which the debtor may obtain permission to remit (entrust) his or her property into the hands of the hands of the Court. Only a debtor can apply for permission, and the Court has a discretion whether or not to grant the remedy. The advantage for the debtor who obtains permission is the chance of avoiding the potentially harsher consequences of a declaration of désastre or the ordering of a dégrèvement.

The first stage of an application is that the Court appoints two Jurats to investigate the debtor's assets and liabilities. The Jurats then have 15 days within which to report back on whether a remise would be worthwhile, in other words, whether the value of the property would exceed the secured claims on it. It is on the strength of this report that the Court decides whether or not to grant permission.

If the Court does grant permission, two other Jurats are appointed by the Court to sell the property and distribute the sale proceeds to the creditors. This process normally takes six months but can be extended to one year. Part of the reason for the relatively short timescale is that interest will accrue against secured debts which may erode or even exhaust any surplus. The six month period is not intended to effect a fire sale but a sensible period of time to achieve a realistic price in the context of increasing debts and creditors. The Jurats will aim to achieve the best sale price they can for the property, normally by sale on the open market. They must ensure, however, that the sale proceeds are enough to pay the secured creditors. If they cannot, the remise will fail and (as mentioned already) another insolvency procedure like a désastre or dégrèvement may follow. While the Jurats are responsible for the sale of a property and distributing the proceeds to the creditors, they are assisted by a member of the Viscount's insolvency team who provide support.

In terms of the Jurats' interaction with the subjects of the remise', the Loi (1839) sur les remises de biens (Article 5) provides that whoever has obtained permission to remit his or her property into the hands of the Court may not act other than according to the advice and counsel of the Jurats authorised to examine the said property. The debtor has a duty to assist the Viscount and the Jurats. The precise extent of communications and dealings with the debtor will depend on the circumstances and the nature of the property or properties concerned.

In terms of the duty to act en bon père de famille, this expression encapsulates the duty in Jersey law on any trustee or administrator of another's property to discharge his or her functions diligently and prudently. The obligation is common to fiduciary offices in Jersey law, in which guardians ad litem and tuteurs are under the same obligation to act en bon père de famille.

At the end of the process, if the remise is successful, then a debtor will be discharged from all his or her debts, including those of unsecured creditors who may not have been paid.

Therefore, a remise can be a beneficial procedure for a debtor.

12. DEPUTY M.R. HIGGINS OF ST. HELIER OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING HUMAN RIGHTS AUDITS UNDERTAKEN IN RESPECT OF THE PRACTICES AND PROCEDURES OF JERSEY'S COURTS AND TRIBUNALS: [1(290)]

Question

Further to the answer to written question 1(260) of 2nd May 2017, will the Chief Minister explain when the Judicial Greffe arranged for each of the Human Rights audits of  the practices and procedures of Jersey's courts and tribunals to be carried out, by whom they were carried out, and where the findings of these audits can be examined?

Answer

The former Judicial Greffier, requested Advocate John G P Wheeler, the former Master of the Royal Court, to carry out an audit of the functions of Judicial Greffe, the Viscount's Department and the then Office of the Data Protection Registrar. The various reports prepared by Master Wheeler date between 2nd January 2001 and 8th May 2002.

Application to view any report relating to the Judicial Greffe should be made to the Judicial Greffier, any report relating to the Viscount's Department to the Viscount and to the former data protection Registrar to the information Commissioner.

13. DEPUTY M.R. HIGGINS OF ST. HELIER OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING THE DUTIES AND TARGETS ASSIGNED TO THE FORMER ASSISTANT CHIEF MINISTER WITH RESPONSIBILITY FOR FINANCIAL SERVICES, DIGITAL, COMPETITION AND INNOVATION MATTERS: [1(291)]

Question

Will the Chief Minister provide members with the details of the specific duties and targets, if any, he assigned to the Assistant Chief Minister with responsibility for Financial Services, Digital, Competition and Innovation matters appointed in November 2014, either upon the Assistant Chief Minister's appointment or subsequently; and will he further provide the details of what particular outcomes the Assistant Chief Minister achieved in those areas of responsibility before he resigned?

Answer

During  his  period  of  responsibility  for  Financial  Service,  Digital,  Competition  &  Innovation Senator Ozouf was tasked with policy development and delivery across these areas, helping to support the overall aims of the Council of Ministers, and in particular, to improve the performance of our economy. He vigorously pursued progress across all of these areas and has made good on delivery against a wide range of objectives. The table below summarises:

14. DEPUTY  M.R. HIGGINS  OF  ST.  HELIER  OF THE  CHIEF  MINISTER REGARDING THE WORK-DIARY AND TRAVEL OF THE FORMER ASSISTANT CHIEF  MINISTER  WITH  RESPONSIBILITY  FOR  FINANCIAL  SERVICES, DIGITAL, COMPETITION AND INNOVATION MATTERS: [1(292)]

Question

In relation to the  Assistant Chief Minister with responsibility  for  Financial Services,  Digital, Competition and Innovation matters who was appointed in November 2014, will the Chief Minister publish the work-diary of that Assistant Chief Minister, from the date of his appointment to his resignation, showing whom he met, when and where he met them, and for what purpose; and will he also confirm the amount of travel that the Assistant Chief Minister undertook, the cost of any such travel and how many air miles, if any, he personally acquired from any such travel?

Answer

Whatever the differences over policy or personality, Senator Ozouf 's work ethic and commitment to Jersey are clear. Since his appointment as Assistant Chief Minister, Financial Services, Digital Competition and Innovation, Senator Ozouf has overseen and taken responsibility for a wide ranging, intensive programme of meetings, speaking engagements and conferences in Jersey, the UK and overseas. In addition, Senator Ozouf attended significant numbers of meetings with island organisations on local issues. These meetings will be listed and provided to States Members as requested.

On 10 June 2016 the States of Jersey published a review of Travel Policy and Recommendations for Improvement. Appendix 2 of the review contains a breakdown of flights expenses and accommodation booked for civil servants and States Members during 2014 and 2015:

https://www.gov.je/Government/Pages/StatesReports.aspx?ReportID=2106

Travel and Entertainment Expenses for Ministers and Assistant Ministers are also published on an annual basis:

http://www.statesassembly.gov.je/AssemblyReports/2015/R.108-2015.pdf http://www.statesassembly.gov.je/AssemblyReports/2016/R.117-2016.pdf

Senator Ozouf has always had a policy of using any Avios miles gained through his States business to reduce the cost of travelling on States business.

15. DEPUTY M.R. HIGGINS OF ST. HELIER OF THE MINISTER FOR INFRASTRUCTURE REGARDING THE ODOUR-CONTROL SYSTEMS TO BE FITTED TO THE NEW SEWAGE TREATMENT WORKS AT BELLOZANNE: [1(293)]

Question

Further to his answer to oral question 1(266) on 2nd May 2017, will the Minister confirm for members what odour-control systems will be fitted to the new sewage treatment works to be built at Bellozanne and state the extent to which they will eliminate all odours discernible by nearby residents; and will he also inform members of the cost of any such odour-control systems, and the overall estimated cost of the total sewage treatment works?

Answer

Most of the answers to this question can be found on the Planning website using the following link; https://www.mygov.je/Planning/Pages/PlanningApplicationDocuments.aspx?s=1&r=P/2017/0309

The section on Odour can be found under Other Documents', Environmental Impact Statement Pt 9', pages 13.1 to 13.19.

However, in summary, Odour Control Units (OCUs) will be fitted to the new inlet works and Tanker Import Facility (TIF). These will supplement the OCUs that currently treat odour from the existing sludge tanks.

The inlet works OCU will include the following:

• Initial discharge collection chamber
• Screens
• Grit Removal
• Storm overflow chamber
• Primary Settlement Tanks distribution chamber
• All channels connecting the above
• Skip building (screenings and grit handling).

The TIF OCU will include the following:

• Tanker discharge enclosure
• Tanker discharge reception hopper
• Liquor balancing tank.

These units will treat the odour generated at the points where raw sewage and imports from septic tanks and other sources arrive at the STW site. These are the most odorous processes of the STW and the odour from these parts of the site will be reduced by over 90% compared with leaving the same structures open to the atmosphere.

Across the new STW site as a whole, odour will be reduced by 18% compared with the current site. Odour modelling has predicted the impact on nearby residents using the following levels of odour concentration to define the number of properties affected.

The attached two maps show the results of the modelling for the 2016 existing site' and for the 2016 proposed site' with the properties covered by the 5 ouE/m³ boundary condition in both cases indicated.

The type of odour control plant to be used will only be confirmed during the initial detailed design phase (November 2017 to March 2018) but is likely to be either a biological or carbon based media.

The current estimate for the proposed odour control installations is £2.75m with the overall cost of the total sewage treatment works budgeted at £75m. This includes all enabling works such as hillside removal and clinical waste incinerator re-location, but doesn't include covering and odour controlling primary settlement tanks which is estimated at a further £4.12m.

Attachments:

Large Scale Odour Plan – 2016 Existing Site Large Scale Odour Plan – 2016 Proposed Site

16. DEPUTY L.M.C. DOUBLET OF ST. SAVIOUR OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING THE MINISTERIAL SUB-COMMITTEE TASKED WITH FINDING A SOLUTION TO THE PROBLEMS OF FINANCING STUDENTS: [1(294)]

Question

Further to the presentation on 15th March 2017 of the Education and Home Affairs Scrutiny Panel's report Tertiary Education: Student Finance' (S.R2/2017), will the Chief Minister advise when his Ministerial Response to that report will be presented to the Assembly, and will he publish the terms of reference and an update about the progress of the Ministerial Sub-Committee tasked with finding a solution to the problems of financing students?

Answer

A response to the Scrutiny Panel's report will be provided shortly and before the end of the month, inclusive of the terms of reference, which covers the different options being explored, with a progress update provided later in the year.

3. Oral Questions

1. Connétable C.H. Taylor of St. John of the Chief Minister regarding thereasonswhythe Assembly was not informed of the agreement to increase the level of risk of loans from the Jersey Innovation Fund of not being repaid from 10 per cent to 50 per cent: [1(297)] Further to a meeting held in March 2014 (described on page 28 of R.45/2017 and attended by the Chief Minister), which led to the formulation of Financial Directions for the Jersey Innovation Fund and an agreement to increase the level of "risk" on loans not being repaid from 10 per cent to 50 per cent, will the Chief Minister explain why this was done without the Assembly being informed?

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

This matter was raised at a Public Accounts Committee meeting hearing last week. In that hearing it was acknowledged that the Assembly should have been informed that the Financial Direction estimated the level of risk of failure at 50 per cent. Although the timing just before an election was difficult and I do not believe any further decision was needed, a statement or report could have been provided and it was not.

1. The Connétable of St. John :

I do not feel the question has been answered but I will continue. Does the Chief Minister not agree that had the figure of 50 per cent been given when the debate took place many Members may have voted differently?

Senator I.J. Gorst :

That may be a conclusion of some Members who supported the creation of the Jersey Innovation Fund.

[9:45]

But other Members during that debate in their own comments said that they thought that while there was no agreement for a specific failure rate in the actual proposition they themselves talked about a 50 per cent failure rate. Some spoke about a 70 per cent failure rate. The Minister, when he was before Scrutiny, spoke about a 70 per cent failure rate. The question perhaps should be which - and which now with hindsight - was the correct rate. Now we see with hindsight that the 50 per cent rate that when Treasury started to look at how you could deliver this type of funding to these innovative ideas, it was going to lead to that sort of failure rate.

2. Connétable J.E. Le Maistre of Grouville

Could the Minister tell us who made the decision to increase the risk level from 10 per cent to 50 per cent?

Senator I.J. Gorst :

That is another good question. Looking through the Hansard of the Public Accounts Committee hearing - and some Members of this Assembly were there - it is clear that the Innovation Fund Board came and made the suggestion that the idea of 10 per cent or 20 per cent did not work. They proposed that it should be increased to 50 per cent, as the former chairman said in his hearing. They proposed that at a meeting that I was at. I have got to say I think that is a reasonable assessment of how these types of investments function from experience elsewhere. Then that conversation, together with further work that Treasury and Economic Development did, led to it being put into the Financial Direction.

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

Surely the criterion used to set up the Innovation Fund was not hindsight but setting up proper procedures, checks and balances within the system correctly, so that these sort of problems could be ironed out beforehand. Is that not the case? Does the Chief Minister not agree?

Senator I.J. Gorst :

I am not sure what sort of problems he is wanting ironing out. The proposition did not have a failure risk percentage included in it. The report of course we know did. There were suggestions in that report of 10 per cent. The Minister for Economic Development, while at a Scrutiny hearing, suggested a 70 per cent figure, as was explained post that, would be a realistic figure for those who not only just failed but did not reach their full potential. I think it was right to say that there would potentially be a 50 per cent failure rate. The problem is, as the Comptroller and Auditor General suggested, that that was not relayed back to this Assembly in an appropriate way. Again, we know from the hearings last week that the suggestions were that both the board felt that you would not get that through prior to the election because the time period was too long, and it was therefore not acted upon. That is where the problem arose.

4. Deputy G.P. Southern :

Supplementary. The steer perhaps that the Chief Minister wants from me is that there should have been measures put in place in setting up the scheme that no political pressure could have been brought by any political members surrounding this scheme on the board members themselves because we now hear that they were subject to political pressure, did he not realise that?

Senator I.J. Gorst :

I do agree with that and I was surprised to see that in the Hansard of the hearing of the Public Accounts Committee and that is something that I am going to consider and investigate further because there should not be, in regard to individual decisions like that, political pressure. The whole point of having the expert innovative board was that they would get independent advice and then they would make the recommendation to the Minister. That should have been the point that there was ministerial involvement, not the other way round.

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

While we support new business, does the Chief Minister believe the failure rate between 50 and 70 per cent is acceptable with public funds?

Senator I.J. Gorst :

If we are not prepared, and I have not heard Members say they were not prepared to accept the 50 per cent rate, with hindsight the question is: how was the figure in the report that then a different figure was put in the Financial Direction, and the States were not informed of that, that should not have happened. But if we wanted to invest in innovative ideas, innovative companies, you have to accept that level of risk. That is what elsewhere shows us. Banks do not invest in these innovative start-up ideas for the very reason that they have a responsibility to shareholders not to put that level of risk on their funds. That is why governments set up innovation funds, like the one that this Assembly approved.

6. Deputy G.P. Southern :

To what extent does the Chief Minister believe that his inability to put into action and bring to the States his decision to transfer responsibility to the Innovation Fund to his Assistant Minister in his department, why that took 13 or 14 months to bring it to fruition? Surely the Chief Minister himself must hold some responsibility for that absence of steering the responsibility.

Senator I.J. Gorst :

It depends how one wants to think that the Chief Minister might have been responsible. With hindsight - and hindsight is a pleasant experience to have, finding fault with others - perhaps I should have pushed the Scrutiny Panel to undertake their work quicker than they did, but I wanted to work with the Scrutiny Panel. They wanted to undertake reviews. There is documentation on file where they were asking me, first of all, not to lodge the changes, then to lodge the changes so they could do reviews. They did 2 reviews. My approach is a consensual approach. I do not like to see division between Ministers and Scrutiny. With hindsight, perhaps I should have pushed for the debate and then allowed Scrutiny to review it within the 6 weeks. Of course Members can say, well, therefore I was at fault. In that regard I was at fault.

7. Senator S.C. Ferguson:

With regard to the business of political pressure, will the Chief Minister investigate that and report back to the States as to where the political pressure was coming from?

Senator I.J. Gorst :

I have already indicated that I wish to investigate that further. I am not sure whether I will be able to conclude that, bearing in mind the former chairman, when asked at the Public Accounts Committee, said that he was not prepared to issue further comment.

8. Deputy M. Tadier of St. Brelade :

The Chief Minister talks about the power of hindsight but could he talk to us about the power of foresight? Was there at any point during the establishment of this framework the foresight to see the obvious problem when you change from a relatively low risk threshold to one of 50 per cent where these companies cannot even get loans from a bank because their businesses are so risky but government will quite happily throw money at them? Is there not some foresight among Ministers at the time to see that there are obvious problems on the horizon?

Senator I.J. Gorst :

That question gets to the fundamental heart of whether governments are going to step in and support innovation in a way that the private sector does not and cannot for the reasons that I have suggested. The board were quite clear and again the former chairman was quite clear appearing before the Public Accounts Committee last week, that had one taken what was in the report, the figure of 10 per cent, as I say, not in the proposition, rather than a more appropriate in-depth look at what the potential failure rate would be, which the Treasury function then undertook, one would not be supporting innovation. It is a straightforward decision. The board said that. They came and told Ministers and officials that and experience elsewhere shows that. So some Members were not in favour of supporting innovation; that is absolutely right. But these types of companies, this type of approach, we should expect that rough percentage of failures.

Deputy M. Tadier :

Can I raise a point of order? Just for the record in future, I do not wish to pick a fight here, but for future reference, and we do only have 10 oral questions today. I think there has been a previous ruling by a previous speaker that supplementaries should be allowed because it is within the supplementary questions from individual Members that one teases out the information. I just wanted to put that on record.

The Bailiff :

I do not think it was a position of generality that was being expressed on the last occasion. I think it was expressly being said in relation to the election of Ministers or panel chairmen, I forget which, and it is not a point of general application.

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

Could the Chief Minister, given his earlier comments, confirm that even at the end of April 2015, which is some 5 months after his initial proposals for the transfer of functions, the Corporate Services Scrutiny Panel was still seeking clarity from the Chief Minister as to what his final proposals were?

Senator I.J. Gorst :

It is not going to be useful for the chairman and myself to argue across the Assembly. Of course there was a change, and that is quite clear from the Q.C.'s (Queen's Counsel) report, that I had initially intended to create the post as a ministerial post within the Chief Minister's Department. That would have been my ideal situation. That came across those people who did not want to deliver that and said: "Why not just do an Assistant Minister?" But the chairman knows that they, in Corporate Services Scrutiny Panel, if my memory serves - and I could be corrected - had sight of the proposed changes prior to that date.

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

In hindsight, can the Minister remember when this chaos was going on nobody knew who was running the show, did not one of his Ministers, or Assistant Minister who should have been in charge, come to the Chief Minister and say: "This is not working"? And if it was not working why did the Chief Minister not put in the right person with the responsibility at the time until the rules were changed? Why did he ignore it and just keep going as it was?

Senator I.J. Gorst :

I did not ignore it. I think it is clear from the confusion in the Q.C.'s report that I tried to ensure that responsibility was clarified but legally we were at the position that we were at, and it is not just about a legal position of course, it is the working of officers within a department that were sharing information and providing information to only one of those individuals rather than what would have been appropriate, the 2 of them, so that they could have made properly informed decisions. It is quite clear from the report. The Chief Minister works with goodwill and persuasion when he is outside of the legal responsibilities. So I was trying to work to alleviate that situation but it is quite clear from that report that that confusion, because of what I have just said about who was being given information and from whom information was being withheld, it continued.

11. The Connétable of St. John :

The Chief Minister has accepted responsibility for not reporting back to this Assembly over the increase in risk. You said there was a failure. There was also a failure to put into place the ability for the fund to benefit from equity growth in those businesses that were successful. Again, another failure. The Chief Minister, or any Minister, is responsible for his Assistant Ministers and as his Assistant Minister was responsible for the fund would the Chief Minister therefore accept that it was ultimately his responsibility and may I suggest he think carefully what he does about it?

Senator I.J. Gorst :

We can quite easily use this report for political point scoring, for personality beating up, for suggesting that the Chief Minister should act in a presidential style across all departments, and that the Chief Minister's word should be the writ of law, as the Constable has just tried to do by suggesting that I should have said that departments and officers in departments should have done something and when they have not done it, despite what the law says, I personally should be responsible.

[10.00]

We do not have a prime ministerial or a presidential system. I do not for one minute think that the Constable wants that system because he has voted against changes and suggested he would not support changes to the ministerial system. If the Constable reads the report, and I think he was .. and reads the hearing of Hansard of the Public Accounts Committee, he will see that that quite clearly shows that there were failures of the officers in the Economic Development Department. The reports say that. Although we have now published the report into ministerial responsibility and action has been taken, there is further report into the responsibility of officers in that regard. Just because somebody comes into my office and has a conversation with me and asks my opinion, as they did about the risk of failure, it does not mean I am the decision maker. Under the law others are the decision maker. People ask my opinion on all sorts of things but I am quite clear about where legal responsibility and who is the decision maker absolutely lies. In both of those points that the Constable .. I see others shaking their heads. This is the system that we work in. If Members want to see a different system then I say let them propose it. I have seen from this report the changes that I think need to be made to this system to improve it and I ask Members to get behind those changes.

2. Deputy M. Tadier of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding whether he would require the Medical Officer of Health to issue an apology and correction following a statement to BBC Radio Jersey in relation to Cannabis: the Evidence of Medical Use': [1(298)]

Given the contents of Cannabis: the Evidence for Medical Use (in particular pages 31 to 33), will the Minister require the Medical Officer of Health to issue an apology and a correction following the Medical Officer's statement to BBC Radio Jersey on 3rd May 2017 that: "There is no evidence [in the Barnes Report] that smoked cannabis is effective"?

Senator A.K.F. Green (The Minister for Health and Social Services): No.

1. Deputy M. Tadier :

It is unfortunate that the Minister gives such a short response in the negative because be under no illusion that the Medical Officer of Health went on the radio and misled the public by stating something which was categorically false, either because she had not read the report and understood

it correctly or otherwise. Now this is a very serious matter given the fact that 8.15 in the report, quite early on, states clearly that: "Smoked marijuana, including other forms of it, have all been shown to be efficacious to various extents in a variety of pain settings in good quality studies." They concluded: "There is good evidence for efficacy of cannabis for pain relief in various formulations and in a number of settings (my emphasis) including smoked marijuana." So given the fact that it is demonstrable that the Medical Officer of Health has misled the public and circulated an email clarifying to States Members, would she not put on record publicly her correction and her apology?

Senator A.K.F. Green:

The Medical Officer of Health is an independent person. She has absolutely nothing to apologise for. In fact, I thank her for her advice and her other professional colleagues that have provided through the Misuse of Drugs Advisory Council, that advice has enabled me to propose removing the legal barrier currently preventing the medicinal use of cannabis. As a fully qualified specialist in public health medicine, she is entitled, and in fact I think required, to express her own independent review. I would not expect otherwise. It is very convenient to quote parts of the Barnes Report, however in the conclusion it stated that medical recommendation would be that cannabis should not be taken as a smoked product.

2. Deputy M. Tadier :

Of course no current Medical Officer is going to suggest that it is smoked. But that is not what she said. While she might be entitled to her own views she is not entitled to her own facts. The fact is that the report said there was clear evidence that smoked marijuana is effective in a variety of settings for pain relief and it cited 4 good quality studies. Yet, she went on the radio publicly, in the name of the Minister, to say that there was no evidence in the Barnes Report that it was effective. It is categorically untrue. This is not a political issue. It is a matter of fact which she needs to correct publicly. She stated incorrectly publicly one thing and she should be going on record to state and clear up that misapprehension. Is that not simple in the mind of the Minister?

Senator A.K.F. Green:

The simple matter is that the Medical Officer of Health has a professional view. She equates it to mean it would be just like .. there are only 5 studies not 4. Five very small studies on smoking and the evidence of the effectiveness of this was very clearly explained and summarised in the end report. The reason there is so little scientific evidence about the effectiveness of smoked cannabis is because among 20,000 references reviewed by the Barnes Report is because it is considered unethical to do trials where people are required to consume a substance that is recognised as harmful, that is the smoke, which is known to be carcinogenic. It would be just like doing trials of alcohol consumption and saying: "Well, it made their pain improve" as well it might have done, albeit while they were intoxicated. But that would not be good grounds for doctors to start recommending alcohol as a safe and acceptable treatment for pain control.