States Minutes 12th March 1996

STATES MINUTES 1 2 t h M  a r ch 1996   P ri c e : £ 3 . 0 0

T HE STATES assembled on Tuesday,  1 2th March 1996 at 9.30 a.m. under

th e P residency of Senator

R e ginald Robert Jeune , C.B.E

_ _ _ _ _ _ ______

All Members were present with the exception of -

S enator Richard Joseph Shenton - out of the I sland

S enator Terence John Le Main - ill

H arry Hall ewell Baudains, Deputy of St.

C lement - out of the Island

J ohn Nicolle Le Fondré, Deputy of St.

L awrence - ill

A lastair John Layzell, Deputy of St.

B relade - out of the Island

I mogen Stephanie Nicholls, Deputy of

G rouville - ill

P hilip John Rondel, Deputy of St. John -

o ut of the Island.

_ _ _ _ _ _ ______

P r a y e rs

_ _ _ _ _ _ ______

Subordinate legislation tabled

The following enactments were laid before the States, namely -

 1 .  Road and Sand Racing (Jersey) O  rd er 1996. R & O 8913.

 2 .  Banking Business (List of

R e g istered Persons) (Jersey) Order 1 9 9 6. R & O 8914.

 3 .  Airport Dues (Tariff) (Jersey) O  rd er 1996. R & O 8915.

 4 .  Road Traffic (Saint Helier)

( J er sey) Order 1996. R & O 8916.

Matters presented

The following matters were presented to the States -

 1 .  Public lotteries: report for

1 9 9 5 - R.C.6/96.

P r e sented by the Gambling

C o n trol Committee.

T H  E STATES ordered that the said report b e p rinted and distributed.

 2 .  Births, marriages and deaths

1 9 9 5: statement - R.C.7/96.

P r e sented by the Etat Civil

C o m mittee.

T H  E STATES ordered that the said s ta t ement be printed and distributed.

 3 .  The Jersey Electricity Company

L i m ited: annual report and accounts for t h e period 3rd October 1994 to 1st

O  ct ober 1995.

P r e sented by the Finance and

E c o nomics Committee.

 4 .  States members' remuneration

( P .3 1/96): report - P.45/96.

P r e sented by the House

C o m mittee.

T H  E STATES ordered that the said report b e p rinted and distributed.

Matters noted - land transactions

THE STATES noted an Act of the Finance and Economics Committee dated 4th March 1996, showing that, in pursuance of Standing Orders relating to certain transactions in land, the Committee had approved -

 ( a) as recommended by the Planning

a n d Environment Committee, the purchase f ro m Mrs. Joan De Quetteville Houlihan,

n é e Deacon, of the freehold of land and

b u i ldings (measuring 5.5 vergées) at

F i e ld No. 1587, Claremont Road, St.

S a v iour, for the sum of £250,000 for

t h e purpose of constructing a school

p l ay ing field and ancillary changing

r o o m facilities, together with the

p a y ment by the public of legal and

v a lu ation fees in the sum of £4,177.50. ( T h e Committee rescinded its Act

N  o . 1(a) of 3rd July 1995 accordingly);

 ( b) as recommended by the Housing

C o m mittee, the entering into of a Deed

o f A rrangement with Mr. Dominic Daniel

S u l livan and Mrs. Kerry Ann Sullivan,

n é e Murray, the owners of 51A Clearview S t re et, St. Helier, regarding the

e n c roachment of four windows and a door

o n a private lane, administered by the

C o m mittee, at the rear of Jane Sandeman C o u rt, St. Helier, to grant certain

r ig h ts (set out in an Act of the

H  o using Committee dated 19th January

1 9 9 6) for the sum of £500 plus £200 in

r e sp ect of legal costs which resulted

f ro m the transaction;

 ( c) as recommended by the Housing

C o m mittee, the sale to Mr. Vincenzo

N  ar done and Mrs. Catherine Mary

N  ar done, née Doyle, the owners of

L ' A utome, Grands Vaux, St. Saviour, of a p p roximately 200 square feet of land

a t G rands Vaux, St. Saviour , for the

s u m of £200, subject to the purchasers

b e in g responsible for all legal costs

a r is ing from the transaction;

 ( d) as recommended by the Public

S e r vices Committee, the purchase from

M  r . David John Wakeham and Mrs. Judith W  a keham, née Preece, owners of The

C o t tage, Mon Sejour, La Route de la

H  au le, St. Lawrence, of an area of land

( m e asuring 72 square feet) on the south

s id e of La Route de la Haule, St.

L a w rence, required for footpath

i m p rovement, for the sum of £10 on

c o n dition that the Committee would be

r e sp onsible for certain accommodation

w  o rks and all legal costs involved in

t h e transaction;

 ( e) as recommended by the Harbours and A  ir port Committee, the lease to Jackson Y  ac ht Services of accommodation

( m e asuring 2,888 square feet) on the

f ir s t floor of the Victoria Pier

W  a rehouse (Letting No. V12U) for a

p e r iod of nine years from 1st April

1 9 9 6, at an annual rent of £9,097.20 ( re p resenting a rate of £3.15 a square f o o t) payable quarterly in advance and s u b ject to annual review on 1st

J a n uary;

 ( f) as recommended by the Planning

a n d Environment Committee, the entering i n to of a Deed of Arrangement with Mrs. I re n e Maud Person, née Cabot, to

c o n firm the boundary with Clairval,

M  o nt Millais, St. Helier , on the basis

t h at the Committee would be responsible f o r the payment of legal costs arising

f ro m the transaction;

( g) as recommended by the Public S e r vices Committee -

( i) the purchase from Mr. Martin

L io n e l Dodd and Mrs. Pauline

F ra n c e s Dodd, née Tuttle, of an

ar e a o f land (measuring 617 square fe e t ) a t Les Buis, La Route de

S te . M  arie, St. Mary, required for

th e co n struction of a footpath,

fo r t h e sum of £1,300, and

( ii ) the purchase from Les Buis

P ro p e r ties Limited of an area of la n d (m easuring 634 square feet) at L e s Buis, La Route de Ste.

M a r ie , St. Mary, required for the co n s t ru ction of a footpath, for

th e su m of £634;

s u b ject to the Committee being

r e sp onsible for all reasonable legal c o s ts and accommodation works;

 ( h) as recommended by the Public

S e r vices Committee, the sale to H.G.M. H  o ldings Limited of an area of land

( m e asuring approximately 96 square

f e et ) at Field No. 3, St. Clement, for

a c o nsideration of £10, on the basis

t h at the purchaser would be responsible f o r all legal costs involved in the

t ra n saction and for the cost of

r e p lacing the boundary stones;

 ( i) as recommended by the Public

S e r vices Committee, the incorporation i n to the corpus fundi of

t h e existing lease to the Jersey

E l e ctricity Company Limited of

E l e ctricity Sub-Station 601, St.

A  u bin's Harbour, St. Brelade, of a

s w i tchpoint which had been established a t t he site and which had not been

c o v ered in the original lease (Act

N  o . 2(n) of the Committee of 14th

A  u gust 1995 refers);

 ( j) as recommended by the

E s t ablishment Committee, the extension

o f t he lease from Ms. Elizabeth Ruth

C r e ighton of the property known as La F o n taine, Rue de la Blanche Pierre, St.

L a w rence, from 1st February 1996 to

3 0 t h June 1996, at the existing annual

r e n t of £8,580;

 ( k) as recommended by the Housing

C o m mittee, the annulment of the lease t o M r. Roger Ernest Bisson of No. 74 C o l omberie, St. Helier, subject to the p a y ment by Mr. Bisson of the

o u t standing rent of £8,125, plus all

l e ga l costs incurred in relation to the

t ra n saction;

 ( l) as recommended by the Health and

S o c ial Services Committee, the lease

f ro m the Parish of St. Helier of the

F a m ily Centre, St. Ewolds Residential H o me, Balmoral Drive, St. Helier , for a p e r iod of five years at an annual rent

o f £ 11,400 payable in advance from a

c o m mencement date to be agreed and

s u b ject to review after a period of

2 ½  years;

 ( m) as recommended by the Finance and E c o nomics Committee, the lease from V  ic torian Holdings Limited of Flat 1, V  ic toria House, Victoria Street, St.

H  el ier, to provide accommodation for c o n tract employees, for a further

p e r iod of 25 months from 1st April

1 9 9 6, at the current annual rent of

£8 , 474, subject to review in April

1 9 9 6, on the existing terms and

c o n ditions.

Matters lodged

The following matters were lodged au Greffe'' -

1 . 5, 6, 7 Newgate Street, St. H el ier: purchase - P.38/96.

P r e sented by the Health and S o c ial Services Committee.

2 . Environmental Charter for J e rs ey - P.39/96.

P r esented by the Policy and R e s ources Committee.

 3 .  Draft European Communities

( A c cessions) (Jersey) Regulations 1 9 9  - P.40/96.

P r e sented by the Policy and

R e s ources Committee.

4 . Disabled transport allowance -

P . 4 1/96.

P r e sented by the Employment and S o c ial Security Committee.

 5 .  Draft Health Insurance

( A m endment No. 9) (Jersey) Law 199 - P . 4 2/96.

P r e sented by the Employment and

S o c ial Security Committee.

 6 .  Draft Health Care (Registration)

( J er sey) Law 1995 (Appointed Day) Act 1 9 9  - P.43/96.

P r e sented by the Health and

S o c ial Services Committee.

Draft Disability Transport Allowance (Jersey) Law 199  - P.159/95. Withdrawn.

THE STATES noted that the President of the Employment and Social Security Committee had withdrawn the draft Disability Transport Allowance (Jersey) Law 199  (lodged au Greffe'' on 7th November 1995) having lodged

au Greffe'' a new proposition at the present meeting (P.41/96).

Arrangement of public business for the next meeting on 26th March 1996

THE STATES confirmed that the following matters lodged au Greffe'' would be considered at the meeting on 26th March 1996 -

S tates members' remuneration - P.31/96. L odged: 13th February 1996.

S enator S. Syvret and referred to the

H ouse Committee.

5 , 6, 7 Newgate Street, St. Helier :

p urchase - P.38/96.

L odged: 12th March 1996.

H ealth and Social Services Committee.

D isabled transport allowance. P .41/96

L odged: 12th March 1996

E mployment and Social Security

C ommittee.

D raft Health Insurance (Amendment N o. 11) (Jersey) Law 199  - P.42/96 ( Revised).

L odged: 12th March 1996.

E mployment and Social Security

C ommittee.

D raft Health Care (Registration)

( Jersey) Law 1995 (Appointed Day) Act 1 99  - P.43/96.

L odged: 12th March 1996.

H ealth and Social Services

C ommittee.

Poverty in the Island - questions and answers (Tape No. 328)

Senator Stuart Syvret asked Deputy Terence Augustine Le Sueur of St. Helier , President of the Employment and Social Security Committee, the following questions -

1.  W ould the President explain to

m e m  b ers what information is

av a i la b le on poverty in the Island an d t h e methodology used in

p ro d u c ing that information?

 2 .  Would the President explain to members w  h at wealth redistribution mechanisms

c o u ld be introduced to alleviate

p o v erty?''

The President of the Employment and Social Security Committee replied as follows -

1.  T here is no doubt that poverty

ex i s ts in Jersey, as it does

el s e w h ere. However the definition

o f p o v erty' is subjective, and

m u s t c learly relate to the

en v i r o nment or location under

co n s i d eration. It is important to

d ef i n e what we mean by poverty' in o rd e r that we can decide if and

h o w it can be assessed in Jersey.

S im  il a rly when dealing with the

an s w  e r to question 2 it is

im  p o rt ant to understand what we

m e a n b y wealth'. A person can

h av e li ttle income but

co n s i d erable wealth; another

p er s o n may have reasonable income b u t v e ry large outgoings and

li tt le c apital. Indeed different

b o d ie s may well have different

d ef i n it ions of poverty.

P o v erty is not an absolute term. It

d e s cribes a condition of inadequate

f o o d or money, and is therefore not the

s a m e as having low income. In places

s u c h as Jersey, it is suggested that

r e al poverty is rare but relative

p o v erty where a comparison is drawn

w  it h an average person is possibly more p r e valent. Even relative poverty is

d i ff icult to measure given that it is a

f u n ction of expenditure as well as

i n co me. For example a person on average i n co me with a relatively high rent and

h i g h medical costs for a sickly child

w  o uld be relatively poor in comparison

t o a single person paying no rent and

w  it h no children, on the same income.

R e c ently an income figure of

£7 , 500, approximately half average

e a rn ings, has been suggested as a

s u it able threshold to define poverty.

T h i s is a simplistic measure of

p o v erty, as it has no relation to

e x p enditure or indeed the minimum

a m o unt of money needed to live in

J e rs ey. Like many other countries, a

m  in imum level of subsistence in Jersey h a s not been defined although the

p a r ish welfare level is normally taken

t o b e the level of subsistence.

A  s you may recall from my Committee's r e v iew of the Social Security and

H  ea lth Insurance Schemes in Jersey, we w  er e able to draw on information

a v a ilable to my Department and

e l se where, albeit incomplete, and reach s o m e general conclusions on poverty in t h e report Continuity and Change'

w  h ich was published last year.

T h e issue is a very complex one and the r e p ort tries to address the many

a s p ects of this problem. For example

t h er e is a section in the report on the

c o n cepts of Preventing Poverty Vs

A  ll eviation of Poverty' (page 67) and

a n o ther on the role of the parish

w  el fare system which is the final

s a fe ty net of financial assistance in

t h e Island (page 66). The report also

s u g gests certain reforms to the Social

S e c urity system which should ensure

t h at more of the population is insured

i n f uture for loss of earnings power,

a n d therefore be less likely to suffer

f in a ncial hardship. There are proposals f o r a new in work' benefit to help

t h o se on genuine low incomes which is w  h ere, we suspect, there is a real need n o t being fully met by either the

c u r rent Social Security scheme, housing b e n efit or parish welfare system.

I t is impossible to cover every aspect

o f s uch a complex subject by responding t o a question such as this and I would

r e co mmend that Senator Syvret revisit

t h e report which deals with these

m  at ters in more depth. For the present,

I w  ill simply report briefly on the

i n fo rmation currently available but I

w  o uld stress that most of this

i n fo rmation is derived from data on

g r o ups who are already receiving some d e g ree of financial assistance.

N o relevant information can be drawn f ro m beneficiaries receiving

c o n tributory benefits as these benefits a r e based solely on a person's

c o n tribution record and not income.

L i m ited information is available on t h o se receiving non-contributory

b e n efits, which are not linked to any c o n tribution payment, as follows -

F a m i ly allowance

T h is is the most important non- co n t r ib utory benefit targeted to lo w i n come families. It is based

o n a h i storic means test (the last

i n c ome tax return). The basic

p h il o so phy of family allowance was th a t t h ose on the allowance who

ar e al l below the tax threshold

sh o u l d be treated as least as

eq u i t ab ly as those above the tax

th r e sh o ld who gain through

in c r e as e in tax allowances. This

p ri n c ip le was lost when the tax

th r e sh o lds were re-aligned in the

la t e 1 9 80s. For the present, there

ar e 2 ,3 29 families in receipt of

v ar y i n g rates of family allowance,

d ep e n d ing on income and I attach

at A p p endix A' an update of the

ta b l e p ublished on page 173 of

C o n t i nuity and Change'.

A t te n d ance allowance, invalid care al l o w a nce, disabled child

al l o w a nce, disabled adults

al l o w a nce

T h e se non-contributory benefits

ar e p ai d to help disabled people

an d t h eir carers. There is an

in c o m e bar of £31,539, above which th e y ca nnot claim. Current numbers in re c e ipt of these allowances,

an d t h erefore having an income of le s s t h an £31,539 are as follows -

A t te n d a n ce allowance 6 3 8 In v a l id c are allowance  1 21 D i sa b l e d child allowance 101 D i sa b l e d adult allowance 195

H e a lt h insurance scheme exception

T h is is a means tested benefit to

h el p lo w income families by

p ro v i d ing free medical and

p h ar m  aceutical care. It is

b as i c a lly paid to family groups

w h o s e incomes are up to 20 per

ce n t a b ove parish welfare levels.

T h e re are currently just under

4 ,0 0 0 claimants, the majority

b ei n g pensioners, and I attach at

A p p e n dix B' an update of the

t a b le p ublished on page 210 of the C o n t i nuity and Change' report.

T h r ee sources of information

a r e available to derive information on

i n co me distributions -

T h e h o usehold expenditure survey E a rn i n gs related contributory

d et a il s

D e ta i ls of wages and salaries from in c o m  e tax returns

T h e re are a number of

d e ta iled statistical tables on pages 94

a n d 95 of the Continuity and Change'

r e p ort which cover income distribution i n t he Island in some detail. Basically

t h e work carried out for the review

i n d icated that over half of all

h o u seholds in Jersey have annual

i n co mes of less than £20,000 and

s u g gests that a significant number of

p e o ple have to live on relatively low

i n co mes. However, the report points out t h at these assumptions should be viewed w  it h some caution. Income tax and

s o c ial security information in the

a n a lysis is based on earnings'

i n fo rmation. The household expenditure s u r vey is geared more to expenditure'

a n d not income'.

T h e report goes on to say that, if we

a r e to attempt to define poverty, it

h a s been suggested that it would apply t o h ouseholds with less than half

a v e rage income - around £7,500 in

J e rs ey in 1993. The full rate married

p e n sion in 1993 amounted to £7,122

w  h ich is assumed to be above basic

s u b sistence levels. From the Household E x p enditure Survey, approximately 12 p e r cent of households fall below this

l e ve l. However, again these figures

s h o uld be viewed with caution as there a r e dangers in using averages

s ta t istically in such a small

p o p ulation, and also no real work has

b e e n done on minimum subsistence

l e ve ls. As I said previously, the main

in c ome support' benefit administered

b y my Department is family allowance w  h ere there were 2,329 families

r e ce iving this allowance whose income i n 1 994 was less than £7,500. Again, I w o uld stress that we are already

a l le viating poverty for this particular

g r o up.

W  e also have some information from a r e ce nt social security customer survey w h ich was published in the Continuity a n d Change' report. The main relevant c o n clusions drawn from this were -

T h e m  ajority agreed that the range an d l ev els of social security

b en e f i ts and pensions were

ad e q u a te.

Ju s t o v er half said that the cost

o f s ee i ng a doctor stopped them v is it i n g or calling the surgery.

O v e r 8 0 per cent wanted the Social S e cu r i ty Health Scheme to be

ex t e n d ed to cover some of the

co s t s of seeing a dentist or

o p ti c ia n.

It c a n therefore be assumed that

h ea l th care costs can be a problem fo r m  a ny but it is impossible to

as s e s s the reasons for this

w i th o u t available data.

F i n ally, one of the main sources of

i n fo rmation on poverty should be

t h ro ugh the parish welfare system.

U  n fortunately, information has not been

k e p t uniformly by all parishes in the

p a s t and we are at present discussing

w  it h the Connétable s ways of building

u p a database for the future. It is

i m p ortant for my Committee to know who i s s lipping through the social security

n e t, and why, in order to make plans

f o r the future. However, parishes have

h e lp ed us put a general pen picture

t o g ether on welfare claimants and I

w  o uld be happy to pass on the full

r e p ort to any interested members.

B a s ically, the information we obtained

i s a s follows -

T h e re has been a

si g n if i cant increase in

ex p e n d iture on parish welfare

d u ri n g the period 1989 - 1995 from

£3 .5 m illion to approximately £7.5 m i ll io n .

T h e re has been a growth

in e x p enditure in all but one of th e p ar ishes (the largest in St.

S a v io u r - approximately 311 per ce n t , th e lowest in St. Mary where ex p e n d iture has been reduced).

O f t h e total expenditure, just

o v er £ 5 million is spent on native w e lf a r e and £2.5 million on non- n at i v e expenditure.

M o s t o f the money is paid

to p e n sioners (37 per cent),

fo l lo w  ed by lone parents (25 per ce n t ) a nd the incapacitated (12 p er c en t).

E x p e n diture on pensioners and lone p ar e n t s is perceived by the

p ar i sh e s to be major areas for

in c r e as ed benefit expenditure in

th e fu t ure.

T h e u n employed is the client group w i th th e greatest variation of

tr e a tm  ent.

S o m e genuine claimants appear to b e d a u nted by having to approach th e p ar ish.

T h e v a riation of treatment between p ar i sh e s offers some clients a

cr e a ti v e service attuned to need

y et , o n the other hand, results in

o th e r c lients in identical

ci r c u m stances in the same or a

d if fe r e nt parish receiving

d if fe r e nt treatment unrelated to

th e i r n eeds.

I w o u l d stress that these are

g ro u p s of people receiving

fi n a n c ial support to alleviate

p o v er t y. We do not know how much h ar d s h ip exists amongst those who d o n o t claim welfare support, or

an y o f the other benefits that

ex i s t s uch as social security

b en e f i ts, housing benefit and

ed u c a t ional grants. Nor do we know h o w m uch financial support is

g iv e n by the charities, to whom

an d f o r what reasons.

 2 .  As previously mentioned, we need to be c l ea r what we mean by wealth', and

w  h ether this relates to income,

c a p ital, a mixture of both or some

o t h er yardstick.

T h e social security contributory scheme i s n ot a suitable means for

r e d istribution of wealth, being more in

t h e nature of an insurance based scheme w  h ereby benefits are related to a

r e co rd of contributions. To the extent

t h at wage-earners are on low incomes

( i. e below the earnings ceiling) some

r e d istribution occurs by way of

s u p plementation of contributions from g e n eral revenue. In this context it is

w  o rth pointing out that out of an

I s la nd workforce of approximately

4 5 , 000 there are 31,000 persons (or 69 p e r cent) earning less than the ceiling

( c u rrently £20,400) and the average

a n n ual earnings of a person is in the

r e g ion of £14,500 to £15,000.

M  e mbers are aware that the whole of

s o c ial security is under review, and I

h o p e to bring to the States the first

p h a se of our recommendations, dealing w  it h the contributory scheme, during

t h e next few months. However, our

r e se arches show clearly that the public a r e anxious to retain the scheme

b r o adly in its present form, and whilst t h er e will be scope for some

i m p rovements they are unlikely to have a n y significant effect on the causes

o r a lleviation of poverty.

I n o ur report, Continuity and Change', ( p a ges 38/39) various types of social

s e c urity programme are classified. The c l as sification appropriate to wealth or

i n co me redistribution is the transfer

p r o gramme' which inevitably centres on t a xa tion. In simple terms the theory

b e h ind transfer programmes are that

t h o se able to pay more, not just

e a rn ers, should pay for the benefits of

t h o se who are poor.

S e v eral tax mechanisms exist throughout t h e world which seek to effect a more

e q u al distribution of income. For

e x a mple personal income tax, wealth

t a x, property tax, import tax and taxes

o n luxury goods all exist in various

d e g rees and forms. However, it has to

b e s aid that throughout the world the

u s e of general government revenue has a t tr acted most attention recently. The a r g ument runs that if a government has s e tt led upon the most socially

a c c eptable distribution of the burden

( i. e . its tax structure), it is not

u n r easonable to look at general

r e v enues to pay for social transfer

p r o grammes.

I n J ersey, family allowance and non-

c o n tributory disablement benefits are

f u n ded from general revenues, whereas p a r ish welfare is funded through the

r a te s (property tax) for native welfare c a s es and general revenues for non-

n a ti ve cases.

I n r ecent years, working parties have

b e e n set up through the Finance and

E c o nomics Committee to look at ways of i n cr easing revenue, including a close

s c ru tiny of the taxation system.

A  lt hough many ideas were brought

f o rw ard and considered, the general

t a xa tion system has been maintained as

t h e most suitable for current needs.

I n s ummary, the principal mechanism

f o r redistribution of wealth is through

t h e tax system, be that by consumer

t a xe s, taxes on income or capital taxes

( w h ich at present we do not impose in

a n y meaningful way, and which in any

e v e nt in my view are not an efficient

t a x -gathering mechanism). My Committee d o e s redistribute some of this wealth

t h ro ugh the non-contributory benefit

s y s tem, which is funded from general

r e v enues and targeted principally to

t h o se in poverty or most in need. The

e x te nt of this redistribution depends

o n the funds available at budget time

a n d the conflicting demands of various

a g e ncies. A further mechanism for the

r e d istribution of wealth is through the

p a r ish rate system, whereby owners and

o c c upiers pay rates which are then used

f o r the general benefit of

p a r ishioners, including those in need.

I n d ealing with the question and

a n s wering what further measures could

b e t aken to redistribute wealth, it is

m  y view that rather than introduce new

m  ea sures we should build on and improve t h o se already in existence. It is not

t o ta lly within the remit of the

E m  ployment and Social Security

C o m mittee to achieve this, but I can

r e p ort that my Committee, through its C o n troller, has set up a working party

o f o fficers from those Departments

p r im arily concerned with these matters ( In c ome Tax, Housing, Parish Welfare, S o c ial Security, Economic Adviser), to a s s ess the inter-relationship of

b e n efits and the elimination of the

p o verty trap' where by an increase in

a p e rson's earnings can sometimes

a c tu ally leave him (or her) with less

i n t he pocket.

M  y Committee is also firmly committed t o t he principle of a hand up not a

h a n d out' and to that extent we are

a n x ious to ensure that benefits, both

t h o se administered by Social Security

a n d other agencies, are given in such a w  ay as not to discourage people from

b e tt ering their position by their own

e f fo rts and seeking employment.

F i n ally, it is important to recognise

t h at every civilised society needs a

sa f ety net' or source of ultimate

f in a ncial support in time of need. That

r o le has traditionally been played by

t h e parishes, and whilst there might be

r o o m for some improvement I would not w  is h to abandon the policy of localised

s u p port.

H  o wever, this is very much a matter of

I s la nd policy, and there is at present

a w  orking party in existence, in

s u c cession to the Working Party on

N  ee d, chaired by myself but composed of a n u mber of representatives from all

w  al ks of life, looking at the present

w  el fare benefit system, and we are

a s k ed to report to the House on this

s u b ject before the end of this year. As

a r esult of that report there may be

s o m e scope for a States' debate on the

w  h ole issue of poverty and support. In

a d d ition, there are outstanding

p r o positions from both Senator Shenton a n d Deputy Matthews on related issues, w  h ich ought to form part of the overall

d e b ate.

I a l so believe that it is important to

l o o k at the broader issue of

e r ad ication of poverty rather than

s im  ply the redistribution of wealth,

a n d this is the responsibility of all

S t a tes members. We are fortunate in

t h is Island in having a healthy economy a n d virtually full employment, and

w  h ilst this may accentuate the gap

b e tw een the haves' and the have-

n o t s', we should be conscious of the

f a ct that without a sound economy it is m  o re difficult to achieve better social

p r o vision.

  A  P P E N  D I X A

F AMILY ALLOWANCE STATISTICS

N  u m ber of children in family Families   C h i l d re n  

1 2 3 4 5  6 7

  0-6,500 654 398 160  44 7 4 0  1,267  2,165

 -8,500 160  68 30  5  3 0 0  2 66

  421

  -10,500 171 129 28 9  1 0 0  338 5 54   -12,500 190 117 29 15 5 1 1  358 6 09   -14,500 161 140 47 13 1 1 0  363 6 45   -16,500 102 122 52 11 6 0 1  294 5 83   -18,500 51 80  33  5  2  0 0  1 71  3 40

  -20,500 34 34  16 10  3  0 0 9 7  2 05

  -22,500 17 11  10  1  0  0 0 3 9 7 3

  -24,500 10 11 2  2  1  0 0 2 6 5 1

  -26,500 7 9 4 1  0  0 0 2 1 4 1

  -28,500 5 3 0 1  0  0 0 9 1 7

  -30,500 2 0 1 0  1  0 0 4 1 0

  -32,500 1 2 0 0  0  0 0 3 7  

  -34,500 0 0 1 1  0  0 0 2 7  

  -36,500 1 0 0 0  0  0 0 1 1    -38,500 0 0 1 0  0  0 0 1 3  

Total 1,566 1,124 414 118 30 6 2 3 2,260 5,728''

A P P E  N D I X   B

A N A LYSIS OF HIE CLAIMANTS - JANUARY 1 9 9 6

A  g e M a le F e male  T ota l

U  n der 16  3 78 3 6 7 7 4 5 1 6 - 65 3 5 5 8 0 6 1 ,161 O  v er 65   5 63 1 , 391 1 ,954 T o t al 1 ,296 2 , 564 3 ,860

S t a tu s M ale F e male T ota l

S i n gle 6 7 0 8 4 7 1 ,517 ( in c ludes 745

c h il dren)

M  a rried 4 46 4 9 6 9 4 2 W  id owed 9 6 8 6 3 9 5 9 S e p arated  8 4 3 5 8 442

Minimum wage and redundancy payments - question and answer (Tape No. 328)

Deputy James Thomas Johns of St. Helier asked Senator Corrie Stein, President of the

Industrial Relations Committee, the following question -

  Would the President inform members of the  p rogress of the report of the Industrial

 R elations Committee on Senator R.J.

 S henton's proposition regarding minimum

 w age and redundancy payments which was

 l odged au Greffe'' on 23rd March 1993?''

The President of the Industrial Relations Committee replied as follows -

  Senator Shenton's proposition was in

 t hree parts. The first part related to a

m inimum wage of £3.50, the second to

m inimum periods of notice and the third to

 r edundancy payments where an employer has  b een declared en desastre'.

T aking these in reverse order, the third

p art was referred specifically to the

F inance and Economics Committee. However, t he Industrial Relations Committee

p resented a discussion paper to the States i n November 1993 entitled Redundancy T hrough Insolvency.

T he second part has been dealt with by

t he Termination of Employment - Minimum P eriods of Notice (Amendment) (Jersey)

R egulations 1994, in which the present

C ommittee secured States approval for the d oubling of minimum periods of notice.

T he Finance and Economics Committee

p resented a report to the States in

D ecember 1993, entitled Minimum wage and r edundancy payments' (P.199/93). The final

p aragraph of this report says -

T h e conclusion to be drawn from this r e p ort is that the case for a statutory

m  in imum wage is not proven'.

T he Industrial Relations Committee was

n ot satisfied with this conclusion and has

c ontinued to research and discuss the

m atter. The Committee's Consultative Group c omprises representatives of the Chamber of C ommerce, the Institute of Directors, the

S mall Business Association, the Institute

o f Personnel and Development, the Citizens' A dvice Bureau and the Transport and General W orkers' Union. In addition, a Working

G roup has been formed under the

C hairmanship of Mr. Brian Le Marquand. The C ommittee has carried out an extensive

s urvey of employment conditions in the

I sland, including minimum pay, and the

r esults are currently being analysed.

T he Committee has held discussions with

t he Employment and Social Security

C ommittee and that Committee is in the

p rocess of producing a report on minimum w age systems. My Committee will examine t his at the earliest opportunity but it has

a lready been made clear by the Employment a nd Social Security Committee that the

i ntroduction of a minimum wage is not

r egarded as a high priority. The Employment a nd Social Security Committee takes into

c onsideration the total income received,

i ncluding benefits, rather than the concept

o f a fair day's pay for a fair day's work.

M embers will appreciate that this is a

c omplex subject which the 1993 report of

t he Finance and Economics Committee covers i n some detail. The Finance and Economics C ommittee is of the opinion that the case

f or a statutory minimum wage is not proven. T he Employment and Social Security

C ommittee does not consider this to be a

h igh priority for the reasons mentioned

e arlier.

D espite the views of the Finance and

E conomics and Employment and Social

S ecurity Committees, the Committee believes t hat there is sufficient evidence from a

n umber of sources to show that low pay is a

r eal issue which should be tackled.

T herefore, the Committee will -

( a) continue its programme of education for em ployers and employees. For example, t h er e will be a seminar in May or June

o n good employment practice; and

 ( b) continue to gather and analyse

i n fo rmation from all available sources w  it h the intention of reporting back to t h e States as soon as possible.''