The official version of this document can be found via the PDF button.
The below content has been automatically generated from the original PDF and some formatting may have been lost, therefore it should not be relied upon to extract citations or propose amendments.
THE STATES assembled on Tuesday, 11th November 1998 at 9.30 a.m. under the Presidency of the Bailiff ,
Sir Philip Bailhache ____________
His Excellency the Lieutenant Governor, General Sir Michael Wilkes, K.C.B., C.B.E., was present
____________
All members were present with the exception of –
S e n at or Richard Joseph Shenton – out of the Island
S e n at or John Stephen Rothwell – out of the Island
E d w i n Le Gresley Godel, Connétable of St. Mary– out of the Island S h ir le y Margaret Baudains, Deputy of St. Helier – ill.
____________
Prayers ____________
Tribute to the late Mr. S.G. Robins, former member of the States
The Bailiff paid tribute to the late Mr. Snowdon George Robins, a former Connétable of St. Saviour. THE STATES observed one minute's silence as a mark of respect.
Subordinate legislation tabled
The following enactments were laid before the States, namely –
P e d a l C ycles (Jersey) Order 1998. R & O 9310.
C iv il Se rvice Administration (General) (Jersey) Rules 1949 (Amendment No. 10) (Jersey) Order 1998.
R & O 9311.
Gambling Control Committee: appointment of member
THE STATES appointed Malcolm Pollard, Connétable of St. Peter, as a member of the Gambling Control Committee.
Matters presented
The following matters were presented to the States –
St a t es of Jersey Law 1966, as amended – delegation of functions: authority to approve issues under
delegated powers – R.C.46/98.
P re s e nted by the Housing Committee.
R e g u la tion of Undertakings and Development: six-monthly manpower returns – R.C.47/98. P re s e nted by the Finance and Economics Committee.
Matters noted – land transactions
THE STATES noted an Act of the Finance and Economics Committee, dated 26th October 1998, recording the following decisions of the Treasurer of the States under delegated powers, in pursuance of Standing Orders relating to certain transactions in land –
( a) as recommended by the Health and Social Services Committee, the renewal of the lease from 23
Havre des Pas Limited of Flat 6, 23 Havre des Pas, St. Helier, for a two year period from 25th February 1998, at an increased annual rent of £8,092.66 for the first year, payable quarterly in advance, with an option to renew the lease for a further one year until 24th February 2001, on the basis that all terms and conditions would remain as in the existing lease document;
(b ) as recommended by the Tourism Committee, the lease to Mr. Richard Brian Ropert and Mrs. Harriet
Jane Ropert, née Fane, of the Gunsite Café, Beaumont Sea Wall, St. Peter, for a period of three years from 25th December 1997, at an annual rent of £1,500 in the first year, £2,500 in the second year and £3,500 in the third year, with the terms and conditions to be as specified in the report of the Department of Property Services (reference 21/1149/1);
(c ) a s recommended by the Harbours and Airport Committee, the lease to Mr. Augusto Alberto de Aguiar
Matos of the Sailor's Rest Café, New North Quay, St. Helier (N9) for a period of three years from 1st October 1998, at an annual rent of £9,997.80, subject to annual reviews in line with the Jersey Retail Price s Index from 1st April each year.
Matter noted – acceptance of tender
THE STATES noted an Act of the Finance and Economics Committee, dated 26th October 1998, showing that, in pursuance of Rule 5 of the Public Finances (General)(Jersey) Rules 1967, as amended, the Committee had noted that the Health and Social Services Committee had accepted the lowest of four fixed price tenders, namely that submitted by J.P. Mauger Limited in the sum of £636,706, in a contract period of 35 weeks, for the refurbishment and redevelopment of Le Geyt Centre, Five Oaks, St. Saviour.
Matters lodged
The following matters were lodged "au Greffe" –
D r a f t P ublic Holidays and Bank Holidays (No. 2) (Jersey) Act 199 – P.217/98. P re s e nted by the Legislation Committee.
D r a f t P roceeds of Crime (Jersey) Law 199 – P.218/98. P re s e nted by the Finance and Economics Committee.
F a lle s H oldings Limited: Hideaway and La Maison des Pres, land to the north of Rue des Pres, St. Saviour –
P.219/98.
P re s e nted by the Senator R.J. Shenton.
Mr . D . R. Manning – financial assistance (Field 1007, St. John) – P.220/98. P re s e nted by Deputy A. Breckon of St. Saviour
C o m m it tee of Inquiry: building costs in Jersey – P.221/98. P re s e nted by the Finance and Economics Committee.
J er s e y Financial Services Commission: appointment of Commissioner – P.222/98. P re s e nted by the Finance and Economics Committee.
D r a f t C onservation of Wildlife (Jersey) Law 199 – P.223/98. P re s e nted by the Planning and Environment Committee.
D r a f t Ma gistrate's Court (Miscellaneous Provisions) (Amendment No. 7) (Jersey) Law 199 – P.224/98. P re s e nted by the Legislation Committee.
T he I nn on the Park, St. Helier: purchase – P.225/98.
P r e s ented by Deputy T.J. Le Main of St. Helier. The States noted that the Finance and Economic
Committee would report on the proposition.
The following matter was lodged "au Greffe" on 27th October 1998 –
H o us ing (Jersey) Law 1949 – proposed amendments (P.171/98): amendments – P.216/98. P re s e nted by Senator L. Norman.
Arrangement of public business for the next meeting on 17th November 1998
THE STATES confirmed that the following matters lodged "au Greffe" would be considered at the next meeting on 17th November 1998 –
H o u s ing (Jersey) Law 1949: proposed amendments – P.171/98. L o d g ed: 28th July 1998
H o u s ing Committee.
H o u s ing (Jersey) Law 1949 – proposed amendments (P.171/98): amendments – P.216/98. L o d g ed: 27th October 1998.
S en a t or L. Norman.
H o u s ing Strategy 1998 – 2003 – P.201/98. L o d g ed: 29th September 1998
H o u s ing Committee.
D r a ft Public Holidays and Bank Holidays (No. 2) (Jersey) Act 199 – P.217/98. L e g is lation Committee
F a l le s Holdings Limited: Hideaway and La Maison des Pres, land to the north of Rue des Pres,
St. Saviour – P.219/98.
S en a t or R.J. Shenton.
M r . D.R. Manning – financial assistance (Field 1007, St. John) – P.220/98. D e p u ty A. Breckon of St. Saviour.
C o m m ittee of Inquiry: building costs in Jersey – P.221/98. F in a n ce and Economics Committee.
Je r s e y Financial Services Commission: appointment of Commissioner – P.222/98. (D e b ate in camera)
F in a n ce and Economics Committee.
D r a ft Magistrate's Court (Miscellaneous Provisions) (Amendment No. 7) (Jersey) Law 199 – P.224/98. L e g is lation Committee.
THE STATES acceded to the request of the President of the Housing Committee that consideration of paragraphs 2 and 4 of the proposition regarding the Housing Strategy 1998 – 2003 (P.201/98) be deferred from 17th November 1998 to a later date.
THE STATES rejected a proposition of Senator Stuart Syvret that consideration of the whole proposition be deferred to a later date.
Members present voted on Senator Syvret's proposition as follows –
"Pour" (14)
Senators
S y v re t, Kinnard.
Connétable s
S t. P eter, St. Helier, St. Clement.
Deputies
W a v e ll(S), Pullin(S), Breckon(S), Grouville , Huet(H), St. John, Blampied(H), Crowcroft (H), Vibert (B).
"Contre" (33)
Senators
H o r sf all, Le Maistre, Stein, Quérée, Bailhache , Tomes, Norman, Walker .
Connétable s
S t. L awrence, St. Brelade, Grouville , St. Martin, St. Ouen, St. John, Trinity , SSta. viour. Deputies
H . B audains(C), Le Sueur(H), Coutanche(L), St. Mary, Le Geyt(S), Trinity , Johns(H), Routier(H), Dor
(H), Layzell(B), St. Martin, Le Main(H), Rabet(H), de la Haye(B), St. Peter, Dubras(L), S. Ouen.
Extraordinary meeting
THE STATES agreed that they would meet in extraordinary session on 18th November 1998 if the business set down for 17th November 1998 was not completed on that day.
Listing of Sites of Special Interest – questions and answers – (Tape No. 475)
Deputy Philip John Rondel of St. John asked Senator Nigel Lewis Quérée, President of the Planning and Environment Committee, the following questions –
"1 ( a) Over the last nine years successive Planning and Environment Committees have attempted to introduce a full listing of sites of special interest. Would the President let members know what lists
have been produced to date, to what extent they have been published and which (if any) of these lists are official?
(b ) O ver the same period of time a number of buildings have been classed as listed buildings and graded;
would the President inform members whether or not these lists are open to public scrutiny and if so, where this information is available?
2 . I s the President aware that considerable disquiet is being felt by residents of St. John, including a
number of genuine local families, whose homes have been included in a proposed list of S.S.I.s within the parish. Is the President and Committee satisfied that proper consultation has taken place with regard to the preparation of the list?"
The President of the Planning and Environment Committee replied as follows –
" 1 ( a) The former Island Development Committee published its Register of Buildings of Architectural and Historical Importance in Jersey in August 1992. This official document is now being comprehensively reviewed and the 1992 edition was withdrawn at the end of 1997 when stocks were exhausted. It remained available for inspection until July 1998 when the amended Register was printed. Copies of the amended version of the Register will be widely circulated before the end of the year. This is the only list of Historic Buildings which is recognised by the Committee. There are three categories of building within the amended Register –
S i te s o f S p e c ia l Interest, or S.S.I.s, that have already been designated.
P r o p o s e d S . S .I .s which are subject to the continuing designation programme.
B u il d in g s o f L ocal Interest, being buildings which contribute to the character of the Island but
which do not possess such intrinsic architectural or historic interest as to warrant designation as Sites of Special Interest. The review being undertaken at the moment is likely to result in a significant overall reduction in the number of buildings included in the Register. The criteria for the selection of buildings has been codified in order to ensure consistency of approach. The review of the Register is being undertaken by the Jersey Building Heritage Sub-Committee under the Chairmanship of Deputy A. Layzell.
( b ) The term "Listed Buildings" is not recognised in Jersey. Buildings which are included in the
Committee's Register are called Registered Buildings and fall into one of the three grades as I have just described. The original Register has been available for public scrutiny since it was first published in 1992 and the amended Register can be inspected at the Planning Department. Owners who have requested a legal property search will have been notified of the category of their property. Queries can also be dealt with in writing or by telephone. Architects, Surveyors, Estate Agents and others involved in development are fully aware of this and make regular use of this service. Over 200 copies of the new Register are shortly to be issued free of charge to those involved in the building, development and property industry and it will be available on the Department's website within the next few months, as well as in the Public Library and Parish Hall s. Amendments and updates to the Register will be issued automatically.
2 . A rticle 9 of the Planning Law prescribes the consultation process that the Committee must follow before reaching a decision on the designation of any property as a Site of Special Interest. In relation
to the 56 properties in the Parish of St. John which are proposed as Sites of Special Interest, all occupiers were
contacted individually towards the end of 1996 and again during the first half of 1997. Formal Notices of Intention were served on the owners and other interested persons in August of this year. The Committee has not yet considered these representations and it would therefore be premature to make comment on individual properties at this time. However, I am entirely satisfied that the consultation process, which is not yet concluded, is being properly conducted in accordance with the requirements of the Planning Law. However, what I can say is that a very significant majority of the persons upon whom Notices of Intention have been served have either made no objection to the principle of designation, or indeed have positively welcomed it. Only a very small proportion of those consulted have raised objections in principle. To say more at this stage would be inappropriate as the Committee has not yet had the opportunity to consider the representations in detail."
Elizabeth Marina – questions and answers – (Tape No. 495)
Senator Stewart Syvret asked Senator Vernon Amy Tomes, President of the Public Services Committee, the following questions –
" 1 . Would the President inform members of the distance between the entrance of the Elizabeth Marina and the foul sewage overflow at the Weighbridge?
2 . W ould the President inform members why the original design of the Elizabeth Marina was amended
to reduce the number of gates?
3 . W ould the President inform members whether the brief given to the consultant undertaking hydraulic
testing at the design stage of the Elizabeth Marina sought details of the flow on the highest tidal curve?"
The President of the Public Services Committee replied as follows –
"1 . At times of heavy rainfall foul sewage may overflow into the large concrete surface water culvert, via
a special chamber at the Weighbridge. This culvert discharges to sea at a point 130 metres south of the gates at the Marina entrance.
2 . D uring the course of the design for the entrance to the proposed Marina, several options were
considered for the boat entrances.
A t th e r e quest of the Harbourmaster, via the P70 group, numerous interested parties were consulted
about alternative gate and entrance positions, including the two major yacht clubs. In order to enable the maximum number of berths to be provided and to keep construction costs to a minimum, it was decided by the project design group that the most efficient and cost effective solution was to select the scheme using one 15 metre width gate.
3 . H.R. Wallingford provided estimates of velocity through the Marina entrance for the Highest
Astronomical tide (HAT) and the Mean High Water Spring Tide (MHWS).
C o m m e n ts made to the Public Services Committee and to the Harbours and Airport Committee on
whether or not the most appropriate tidal curve had been used by H.R. Wallingford related to the use of the MHWS tide.
T h e H A T occurs only a few times a year and therefore the velocity predictions from the MHWS tidal
curve were seen as the most relevant for assessing navigation conditions which would occur reasonably frequently. Perhaps it would have been more useful to have used a somewhat higher tide than the MHWS to assess these operational conditions.
H o w e v e r , the flows that might have been predicted would not have been as high as the maximum
measured velocity of 3.6 knots as the prediction of H.R. Wallingford on the HAT was only three knots."
Airport redevelopment costs 1984 – 1988 – questions and answers – (Tape No. 475)
Senator Stuart Syvret asked Deputy James Thomas Johns, President of the Harbours and Airport Committee, the following questions –
" 1 . In A Chronology of the Airport Development 1984 – 1998 (R.C.45/98) it is stated that in 1989 a masterplan report was produced for the development of the airport, which was judged too expensive at between £40 million and£50 million, and that this plan included the removal of the 1937 building. Will the President –
( a ) i n fo r m members what proportion of this cost – at 1989 prices – would have been attributable to
the removal of the 1937 building?
( b ) p r o v ide members with a detailed explanation of how this figure is derived?
2 W ould the President inform members if the Harbours and Airport Committee has ever discussed
whether to prioritise expenditure on operational/safety works at the airport over non- operational/safety works, and if so what conclusions were reached?
3 . T he projet, Jersey Airport: Future Status and Financing (P.213/98) seeks the agreement of the States
to the writing off of a capital dept of approximately £10 million. Would the President provide members with a detailed explanation of precisely how this debt has been incurred and provide a breakdown of the total debt into separate areas of expenditure?"
The President of the Harbours and Airport Committee replied as follows –
" 1 ( a) I assume that the Senator is asking for the cost of the demolition and the relocation of the facilities in the 1937 building and not just the cost of removing the building. The 1937 building contains the Airport operational departments together with the Arrivals hall.
T h e 1 9 8 9 masterplan included the Arrivals facility (currently in the 1937 building) within a new
combined Departures and Arrivals building and the construction of a new separate Operations building.
T h e e s ti m ated cost to demolish the 1937 building was £245,000. To construct a new operations block
was £4,000,000.
A s a l re a d y mentioned the Arrivals facility would have been included together with Departures in a
new Terminal Building the estimated cost of which was £20,540,000.
T h e t o ta l project cost including roads, car parks, services, apron alterations etc., was estimated at
£44,400,000. These are all at 1989 prices.
( b ) The cost estimates prepared by the British Airports Services were broad order planning estimates
derived from the cost per unit area prevailing in Jersey at that time.
T h e e st i m ates for unit rates were as follows –
Terminal Building (Departures and Arrivals)
Aprons and Taxiways Roads
Operational Block
£1,000 a square metre
£70 a square metre £50 a square metre £750 a square metre
2 . A ll expenditure at the airport is prioritised and operational safety works are given the highest priority
following International Civil Aviation Organisation and United Kingdom Civil Aviation Authority procedures. However, budgetary considerations also have to be taken into account and it should be noted that the guidance laid down by the above authorities is seldom retrospective, and this applies to the location of the 1937 building.
3 . W ith regard to the projet Jersey Airport: Future Status and Financing (P.213/98), the full details of
how the debt has been incurred with a breakdown item by item of expenditure is contained in the projet on page 5 appendix 1".
Airport Development Loan – question and answer – (Tape No. 495)
Senator Stuart Syvret asked a question of Deputy James Thomas Johns, President of the Harbours and Airport Committee, the following question –
" W o uld the President provide members with a detailed description of the agreement by which a £12 million development loan was secured for the Airport; in particular will he inform members of the terms and conditions of any lease which may exist, and of the details of any penalty clause that may become effective in the event of any default or early payment on the loan?"
The President of the Harbours and Airport Committee replied as follows –
" T h e £12 million development loan for the Airport was secured from the Midland Bank International Finance Co-operation Limited (MBIFC). The piece of land upon which the Departures Terminal building is constructed has been leased to MBIFC for a peppercorn rent.
M B IF C appointed the Harbours and Airport Committee as its agent to construct the Departures Terminal
building worth £12 million. The Harbours and Airport Committee is paying to MBIFC the fixed sum of £1.4 million per annum for a period of 15 years. At the end of that period, both parties have agreed tha they wish to end the arrangements between them and that will take place in the Royal Court. MBIFC and the States registered all the appropriate documentation and the leases in the Royal Court on 21st June 1996.
In t h e event of any default in payment MBIFC would have recourse to normal legal process for recovery
of a debt.
I t s h ould be noted that my Committee is not asking the States to write off this £12 million funding
arrangement and therefore the question of early repayment is not being considered."
Weighbridge to town centre, St. Helier, surface water link and storage tank project – statement The President of the Public Services Committee made a statement in the following terms –
"I n t ro duction
It w a s agreed in the States on 6th October 1998, that I would make a statement regarding the status of the
St. Helier Surface Water Link and Storage Tank Project.
It i s d ifficult to know how long to make a statement – make it short and people say it has not given enough
information, put in all the information and people say it is too long. As I gave a lot of information in my statement on 9th December 1997, I decided to try to make this one as brief as possible, but even so, to give the necessary information will take quite a few minutes.
T h e Public Services Committee has been reporting on this project to the Finance and Economics
Committee at regular intervals, and has agreed to report to the States on the final cost of the project, at the appropriate time.
B a c k ground
T h e d ecision to adopt the scheme which included the storage tank or cavern was taken by the Committee
in March 1993 under the Presidency of Deputy J. Le Gallais, and the decision to accept the lowest tender for the scheme was taken by the Committee in January 1994 under the Presidency of Deputy D. Carter.
In m y statement in December 1997, I reminded members of the purposes of the project, which, briefly, are
as follows –
(1 ) to reduce the amount of surface water entering the overloaded foul sewers in St. Helier, by providing
a large surface water tunnel from the town brooks at the Gas Works area to the Weighbridge, to join the existing surface water outfall.
(2 ) to alleviate flooding in the central area of St. Helier, from Bath Street to King Street, caused by foul
sewage overflowing from the overloaded foul sewers during high-intensity rainstorms.
( 3 ) to prevent the overflow of foul sewage, which occurs at times of heavy rainfall, from the
Weighbridge via the surface water outfall which discharges to the sea, some 130 metres south-east of the entrance to the new Marina.
T h e c onstruction of sewage storage tanks is the type of solution which is used in many towns and cities,
two examples being Brighton and the Isle of Man. The alternative of digging up the centre of towns is not a viable option, due to the disruption involved and the total costs involved.
C a r e ful consideration was given as to the most suitable location for the storage tank. In addition to the
location finally adopted beneath Fort Regent, two other options were investigated in detail. One involved the construction of a series of storage tanks beneath the car parks along Victoria Avenue, together with a connecting tunnel from the foul overflow at the Weighbridge to these tanks. The second involved the construction of a large diameter storage tunnel between the Weighbridge overflow and First Tower. Both these options were ruled out not only because the costs were far in excess of the scheme beneath Fort Regent but also because of the severe disruption they would have caused in the most heavily trafficked area of the Island.
S ta t u s of the Project
T h e c onstruction of the storage tank was completed in February 1997 and the tunnel in August 1997, and,
after installation of mechanical and electrical equipment, the storage tank was commissioned on 12th May 1998. The storage tank, which has a total capacity of 5.5 million gallons, collected the discharges of untreated foul sewage from the Weighbridge overflow on four occasions, thus preventing a total of ten million gallons of sewage from discharging to sea during the period from 12th May until the problem with the sewage pipes coming loose inside the surface water tunnel was discovered in August 1998. The tank and the tunnel have had to be taken out of commission, until the pipes have been fixed back in position. This work is being carried out by Balfour Beatty at present, and is due to be completed in December 1998.
M em bers will, no doubt, be aware of the fact that discharges of foul sewage to sea have occurred since
August. It has been given lots of publicity, even though it is little different from the situation which had existed for the last thirty years or so. Overflows of foul sewage have occurred seventeen times since August 1998. Once the pipes have been fixed, the whole system will be back in operation, preventing the overflow of foul sewage to sea except in extreme circumstances which exceed the storage capacity of the cavern. On average the cavern's capacity would be exceeded once every ten years.
C o n s truction of the overflow shaft, to alleviate flooding in St. Helier, has now been designed to be
constructed in Phillips Street. The latest advanced computer modelling techniques for hydraulic design have made this possible. It had been planned to start this work in November 1998 but a problem has arisen with the funding.
F in a n ce
T h e f unds voted for the whole project were £10,300,000, and inflation on this amount took the total funds
to £12,953,100. Not allowing for inflation in the original cost of a project was the standard approach adopted by the States on all capital projects. Various grants of additional funding have been made by the Finance and Economics Committee, to cover additional costs, and a transfer has been made from my Committee's own Capital Vote for Sewer Reconstruction, to take the total funds voted, to date, to £18,863,300.
T h e t otal expenditure to 30th September 1998 was £18,780,378, composed as follows –
- Civil Engineering Contract, Balfour £14,378,132
Beatty
- Mechanicaland Electrical Contract,WHS £1,200,584 Ltd. (This was a separatecontract)
- Site staff costs, which include the Chief £1,590,376 Resident Engineerandhissupport staff,
all of whom acted on behalf of the
Committee.
- Miscellaneous costs(lossof car park £305,952 revenue, etc.)
- Advisors' Costs £1,305,334
T h e r easons for the increased costs on the Civil Engineering Contract have been reported previously. The
amount already paid includes £3,257,292 for agreed claims. There are still a large number of claims to be resolved, and the Contractor's final submissions of these has begun, but will not be completed until about February 1999. Attempts have been made at reaching a negotiated settlement on the claims, but the gap between the Contractor's expectations and the Employers offer has remained too large. Therefore, the process of resolving these claims will have to continue.
I w o uld like to explain at this point, that the Contract for the construction of the works is a binding
contract between the Employer, i.e. the States of Jersey via the Public Services Committee, and the Contractor, Balfour Beatty Civil Engineering Limited. The Engineer is the person nominated in the Contract to resolve issues, by making decisions in his professional capacity and in an impartial manner. If the decisions of the Engineer are challenged, then the Contract provides for recourse to arbitration. In this case, it was decided, acting on legal advice, from Merricks our specialist construction lawyers, to request Professor J. Mulready to continue in this position, after leaving the employment of the Department. There were sound reasons for doing so, the main one being his involvement throughout the project. In addition he has considerable previous experience of such matters. He is now employed through the University of Leeds, on a part-time basis, purely for the purposes of this Contract, and works on average four days per month.
In o r der to deal with the claims it has been necessary to extend the contracts of some of the Site Staff, to
retain their detailed knowledge and expertise, and to appoint various specialist advisors, to deal with the complex specialist issues involved. The Contractor has its advisors, and it is imperative that the Committee has equivalent advice available to protect the interests of the States. This has resulted in considerable additional expenditure, but there is no choice we have to see the process through. For these reasons, my Committee now finds itself short of funds to complete the construction of the overflow shaft at Phillips Street, and, without it, the risk of flooding will remain.
T h e o n-going costs of advisors will have to be met, and, if my Committee has no other choice, will have to
be met from our Capital Votes for Sewer Works.
S ir , a s I have said earlier these matters have been reported to the Finance and Economics Committee, and
will be fully reported to the States, at the appropriate time. However, I must emphasise that the discussion of aspects of sensitive contractual issues in public, while negotiations are continuing, could seriously prejudice the interests of the States in these matters.
I h a v e previously extended an invitation to Senator Syvret and any other member, that if they wish to have
further details they are welcome to meet with the officers of the Department. However, such detailed discussions would have to be given the confidentiality necessary for the reasons I have just given. I trust this statement has been helpful but the invitation remains if any member would like to have further information.
Jersey Airport: future status and financing – P.213/98
THE STATES, adopting a proposition of the Harbours and Airport Committee –
( 1 ) agreed that Jersey Airport become financially self-sufficient in 1999 and thereafter, and that this
objective would be achieved by means of –
( i) i n cr e ased airport charges with effect from 1st April 1999; and
( ii ) w ri t ing off the existing capital debt of the Harbours and Airport Committee in respect of Jersey
Airport;
(2 ) c harged the Finance and Economics Committee to take the necessary steps to secure the writing off of
the capital debt (presently £11 million) of the Harbours and Airport Committee in respect of Jersey Airport;
(3 ) approved, in principle, the incorporation by 2002 of Jersey Airport Limited, as a company wholly
owned by the States, and charged the Harbours and Airport Committee to present the necessary proposals to the States for approval in 1999.
Members present voted as follows –
"Pour" (38)
Senators
H o r sf all, Le Maistre, Stein, Quérée, Bailhache , Tomes, Norman, Walker . Connétable s
S t . Lawrence, St. Brelade, St. Peter, Grouville , St. Martin, St. Ouen, St. John, Trinity , St. Savi
St. Clement.
Deputies
W a v ell(S), H. Baudains(C), Le Sueur(H), Coutanche(L), St. Mary, Le Geyt(S), Pullin(S), Johns(H
Duhamel(S), Routier(H), Dorey(H), Layzell(B), Grouville , Le Main(H), Blampied(H), Rabet(H), Vibert (B), de la Haye(B), Dubras(L), St. Ouen.
"Contre" (9)
Senators
S y v re t, Kinnard. Connétable
S t. H elier.
Deputies
B r ec k on(S), Huet(H), St. Martin, St. John, Crowcroft (H), St. Peter.
Electoral law reform – P.207/98, P.212/98 (Revised), P.215/98 and P.226/98
THE STATES commenced consideration of a proposition of the Legislation Committee concerning electoral law reform.
THE STATES accepted an amendment of Deputy Maurice François Dubras of St. Lawrence that, at the end of sub-paragraph (a) of the proposition, there should be inserted the words", except that in sub-paragraph (b) of Recommendation 3 after the worddate' there should be inserted the words and resident again in the Island for a minimum of six months immediately preceding that date';".
THE STATES adopted an amendment of Stanley John Le Cornu, Connétable of St. Clement, that at the end o sub-paragraph (e) of the proposition there should be inserted the words", except that in Recommendation 24 for the word Saturday' there should be substituted the word Wednesday';".
Members present voted as follows –
"Pour" (25)
Senators
L e M aistre, Stein, Quérée, Norman, Walker .
Connétable s
S t. B relade, St. Peter, Grouville , St. Helier, St. Martin, Trinity , St. Saviour, St. Clement. Deputies
S t. Mary, Trinity , Dorey(H), Huet(H), St. John, Le Main(H), Blampied(H), Rabet(H), Vibert (B
de la Haye(B), St. Peter, St. Ouen.
"Contre" (17)
Senators
B a il h ache, Syvret, Tomes, Kinnard. Connétable s
S t. L awrence, St. Ouen, St. John. Deputies
H . B audains(C), Coutanche(L), Pullin(S), Johns(H), Duhamel(S), Routier(H), Breckon(S), Grouville ,
Crowcroft (H), Dubras(L).
THE STATES adopted an amendment of Deputy Maurice François Dubras of St. Lawrence that at the end of sub- paragraph (f) there should be substituted a semi-colon for the full stop and the following additional paragraphs inserted –
"a n d approved, in principle, that –
( g ) the Electoral Register computer system should be capable of producing the Register both in
alphabetical order of the names of persons on the register and in street order of the addresses of such persons;"
( h ) the entitlement to a postal vote should be extended to include persons prevented from voting on
polling day on religious grounds or because of scheduled working arrangements;
Members present voted on sub-paragraph (h) as follows –
"Pour" (24)
Senators
L e M aistre, Stein, Quérée, Bailhache , Syvret, Kinnard. Connétable s
S t. P eter, St. Helier, St. Ouen.
Deputies
H . B audains(C), Trinity , Johns(H), Duhamel(S), Routier(H), Dorey(H), Breckon(S), Grouville , St. John
Le Main(H), Blampied(H), Crowcroft (H), Vibert (B),St. Peter, Dubras(L).
"Contre" (14)
Connétable s
S t. L awrence, St. Brelade, Grouville , St. John, Trinity , St. Saviour, St. Clement. Deputies
C o u ta nche(L), St. Mary, Pullin(S), Huet(H),Rabet(H), de la Haye(B), St. Ouen.
THE STATES rejected an amendment of Deputy Dubras of St. Lawrence that at the end of sub-paragraph (h) of the amended proposition there should be inserted the following sub-paragraph –
" (i ) it should be the duty of the parishes to confirm receipt of the electoral return form and that the elector's name had been entered on the electoral register, giving the elector's unique serial number."
Members present voted on sub-paragraph (i) as follows –
"Pour" (15)
Senators
S te i n , Quérée, Bailhache , Syvret, Kinnard. Deputies
J o h n s(H), Routier(H), Dorey(H), Breckon(S), Grouville , St. John, Crowcroft (H), Vibert (B), St. Peter
Dubras(L).
"Contre" (22)
Senator
L e M aistre.
Connétable s
S t. L awrence, St. Brelade, Grouville , St.H elier, St. Ouen, St. John, Trinity , St. Saviour, St. Clement. Deputies
H . B audains(C), Coutanche(L), St. Mary, Trinity , Pullin(S), Duhamel(S), Huet(H), Le Main(H), Blampied
(H), Rabet(H), de la Haye(B), St. Ouen.
Deputy Alan Simon Crowcroft presented to the States the proposition "Electoral law reform: third amendment". At the request of Senator Stuart Syvret the proposition was lodged "au Greffe" (P.226/98).
THE STATES thereupon agreed to defer further consideration of the third amendment and the amended proposition on electoral law reform until 17th November 1998.
Overseas Aid: funding – P.211/98
THE STATES, adopting a proposition of the Overseas Aid Committee, received the report, dated 25th September 1998, of the Overseas Aid Committee; and
(a ) a greed that funding for the Overseas Aid Committee should be increased as follows –
Year Percentage of taxation revenue
1999 1.00 per cent 2000 1.05 per cent 2001 1.10 per cent 2002 1.15 per cent 2003 1.20 per cent;
(b ) a greed to review the funding of Overseas Aid in 2003;
(c ) a pproved the appointment of the equivalent of one full-time administrator, the duties of which would
be fulfilled by a maximum of three part-time administrators.
Members present voted as follows –
"Pour" (28)
Senators
L e M aistre, Stein, Bailhache , Kinnard.
Connétable s
S t. B relade, Grouville , St. John, Trinity , St. Saviour, St. Clement. Deputies
H . B audains(C), Coutanche(L), Trinity , Pullin(S), Johns(H), Duhamel(S), Routier(H), Dorey(H), Breckon
(S), Grouville , Huet(H), St. John, Le Main(H), Blampied(H), de la Haye(B), St. Peter, Dubras(L St. Ouen.
"Contre" (0)
THE STATES rose at 6.50 p.m.
G.H.C. COPPOCK Greffier of the States.