States Minutes 2nd March 1999

THE STATES assembled on Tuesday, 2nd March 1999 at 9.30 a.m. under the Presidency of the Bailiff ,

Sir Philip Bailhache ____________

All members were present with the exception of –

S e n at or Frank Harris on Walker – out of the Island

E n id Clare Quénault, Connétable of St.  Brelade – out of the Island R o b e rt Lester Le Brocq, Connétable of St.  Helier – out of the Island P h il ip Roy Cabot, Connétable of Trinity – ill

D e p u ty of Grouville – ill.

____________

Prayers read by the Bailiff ____________

Visit – Conseil Général de la Manche

The Bailiff informed the Assembly of the visit on Friday, 18th June 1999 of the members of the Conseil Général de la Manche.

Subordinate legislation tabled

The following enactments were laid before the States, namely –

Is l a n d P  lanning (Tree Preservation) (Saint Lawrence) (Jersey) Order 1999. R & O 9363. T e le c o m  munications (Telephones) (Amendment No.  30) (Jersey) Order 1999. R & O 9364.

  C iv  il Se   rvice Administration (General) (Jersey) Rules 1949 (Amendment No.  11) (Jersey) Order 1999. R &

O 9365.

Matters presented

The following matters were presented to the States –

  P u blic   Lotteries: report for 1998 – R.C.6/99.

P re s e nted by the Gambling Control Committee.

  D r a f t C onservation of Wildlife (Jersey) Law 199  . (P.223/98): report – P.223/98 Rpt. P re s e nted by the Planning and Environment Committee.

  Min im u m wage legislation (P.227/98): second amendment (P.26/99) – comments. P re s e nted by the Policy and Resources Committee.

THE STATES ordered that the said reports be printed and distributed. Matters noted – land transactions

THE STATES noted an Act of the Finance and Economics Committee, dated 22nd February 1999, 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 ) a s recommended by the Housing Committee, the acquisition from the Parish of St.  Saviour, of an area

of land (measuring approximately 26,500 square feet), located at Le Geyt Road, St.  Saviour, to be incorporated in the redevelopment of Le Geyt Flats, St.  Saviour, following the extinguishment of the road linking Springfield Road, St.  Helier, with Les Grands Vaux, St.  Saviour, for a consideration o £10, with the Committee to be responsible for all reasonable legal costs involved in the transaction;

(b ) as recommended by the Public Services Committee, the acquisition from Mr.  Roger John Mitchell

and Mrs. Angela Helen Mitchell, née Thompson, of an area of land (measuring 98 square metres) in Field No. 1,095, near Belwood Farm, Trinity , for a consideration of£1,052, on the basis that the Committee would be responsible for the cost of all accommodation works, all reasonable legal costs involved in the transaction, and also the payment of an additional £125 for disturbance/inconvenience and as rent for a working area of 100 square metres for a construction period of 32 weeks;

( c ) as recommended by the Public Services Committee, in connection with the sale to G. de Z.

Investments of a party wall between No. 25/27 Hill Street and Morier House, St. Helier, for consideration of £10 in order to clarify the boundaries between those two properties, each party to be responsible for its own legal costs arising from the transaction.

Matters noted – land transactions

THE STATES noted an Act of the Finance and Economics Committee, dated 22nd February 1999, showing that, in pursuance of Standing Orders relating to certain transactions in land, the Committee had approved –

(a ) as recommended by the Planning and Environment and Housing Committees, the purchase from the

Trustees for Jersey Methodist Church Purposes of the property known as Aquila Youth Centre, Devonshire Place, St. Helier, for the purpose of redevelopment as social rented housing, in the sum of £625,000, on the basis that each party would be responsible for its own legal costs arising from the transaction;

( b ) as recommended by the Planning and Environment and Housing Committees, the purchase from

Billion Holdings Limited of the property known as Mont St. Clair Hotel, Belvedere Hill, St. Saviour for the purpose of redevelopment as social rented housing, in the sum of £1,100,000, on the basis that each party would be responsible for its own legal costs arising from the transaction.

Matter noted – acceptance of tender

THE STATES noted an Act of the Finance and Economics Committee, dated 22nd February 1999, 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 tender received for the installation of a M.R.I. scanner and the supply and installation of radiology equipment, namely that submitted by Phillips Medical Supply Systems, in a contract sum of £2,263,638.

Matters lodged

The following matters were lodged "au Greffe" –

D r a f t C onservation of Wildlife (Jersey) Law 199 (P.223/98): amendment – P.29/99. P re s e nted by the Planning and Environment Committee.

D r a f t E ducation (Jersey) Law 199 – P.30/99. P re s e nted by the Education Committee.

So c ia l S ecurity Registration Cards – P.31/99.

P re s e nted by Deputy T.J. Le Main of St. Helier .

D r a f t A griculture (Loans) (Amendment No. 11) (Jersey) Regulations 199 – P.32/99. P re s e nted by the Agriculture and Fisheries Committee.

  G e n e t ic ally Modified Organisms – P.33/99.

P re s e nted by Deputy A.S. Crowcroft of St. Helier.

The following matter was lodged "au Greffe" on 23rd February 1999 –

  A c c e ss to the draft Public Access to Official Information: Code of Practice – P.28/99. P re s e nted by Senator S. Syvret.

Arrangement of public business for the present meeting

THE STATES confirmed that the following matters lodged "au Greffe" would be considered at the present meeting –

R e v ie w of the machinery of government: terms of reference and membership – P.13/99. L o d g ed: 19th January 1999.

P o li c y and Resources Committee.

R e v i ew of the machinery of government: terms of reference and membership. (P.13/99) – amendment –

P.18/99 (Revised).

L o d g ed: 2nd February 1999.

D e p u ty J.L. Dorey of St. Helier .

R ev i ew of the machinery of government: terms of reference and membership. (P.13/99) – second

amendments – P.19/99.

L o d g ed: 2nd February 1999.

S en a t or S. Syvret.

R e v iew of the machinery of government: terms of reference and membership. (P.13/99) – third

amendments – P.20/99.

L o d g ed: 2nd February 1999.

S en a t or S. Syvret.

Arrangement of public business for the next meeting on 16th March 1999

THE STATES confirmed that the following matters lodged "au Greffe" would be considered at the next meeting on 16th March 1999 –

D r a ft Housing (Amendment No. 9) (Jersey) Law 199 – P.262/98. L o d g ed: 8th December 1998.

H o u s ing Committee.

D r a ft Customs and Excise (Jersey) Law 199 – P.21/99. L o d g ed: 9th February 1999.

F in a n ce and Economics Committee.

D r a ft Age of Majority (Jersey) Law 199 – P.23/99. L o d g ed: 16th February 1999.

L e g is lation Committee.

D r a ft Stamp Duties and Fees (Jersey) Regulations 199 – P.24/99. L o d g ed: 16th February 1999.

F in a n ce and Economics Committee.

D r a ft Costs in Criminal Cases (Witnesses' Allowances) (Amendment No. 4) (Jersey) Regulations 199 –

P.27/99.

L o d g ed: 16th February 1999.

F in a n ce and Economics Committee.

A c c e ss to the draft Public Access to Official Information: Code of Practice – P.28/99. L o d g ed: 23rd February 1999.

S en a t or S. Syvret.

D r a ft Agriculture (Loans) (Amendment  No.  11) (Jersey) Regulations 199 – P.32/99. L o d g ed: 2nd March 1999.

A g r ic ulture and Fisheries Committee.

THE STATES noted that in pursuance of Standing Order 17(6) the following matter, which was lodged "au Greffe" had been withdrawn –

D r a ft Education (Jersey) Law 199 – P.21/98. L o d g ed: 17th February 1998.

E d u c ation Committee.

Extension of mains drains – question and answer (Tape No. 498)

The Deputy of St. John asked Senator Nigel Lewis Quérée, President of the Planning and Environment Committee, the following question –

" I n o ted that, in the recent consideration by the States of the proposition Main drains – connection to all properties: petition (P.108/97)' the majority of members of the Planning and Environment Committee voted against the proposition.

W  o u ld the President explain the Committee's policy on extending mains drains into country areas, given

that the Committee has strategic responsibility for environmental matters in the Island?"

The President of the Planning and Environment replied as follows –

" T h e Planning and Environment Committee did not adopt a Committee view on the proposition. The members of the Planning and Environment Committee were, therefore, free to vote on the proposition according to their assessment of the arguments for and against. The fact that the proposition was lost would suggest that the members of the Planning and Environment Committee took the same view as the majority of States members.

T h e proposition was lost, I believe, because it would have required all properties' to be connected to

mains drains. This was unreasonable from environmental, financial and practical points of view as –

I t w o u l d h ave damaged the balance of the capital programme and jeopardised other important projects

meeting social, health and environmental commitments.

I t w  o u ld have been physically impossible to carry the work out given the workforce and resources

available.

I t w o u l d h ave caused massive disruption along Island roads.

A   c o s t -b e nefit analysis would not support the connection of all properties to mains. This would be a

disproportionate response compared with the level of environmental risk presented by isolated properties which can be effectively served by alternative systems (if properly maintained) other than by a mains drains connection.

T h e P lanning and Environment Committee's policy on the extension of mains drains is best summed up

by paragraph 9.10 in the Island Plan:to have all buildings, other than relatively isolated farmsteads and similar groups, served by mains water and public sewers'. The Island Plan recognises the practical difficulties of connecting all properties and the recent States decision is consistent with the Island Plan.

T o se ek to avoid the aggravation of the situation, the Island Plan Policy SE4 states that permission will

not normally be given for new development which relies on septic tanks and soakaways or private sewage treatment plants'. This policy has been applied consistently to all proposed developments. Those applications which seek to provide new residential development are normally refused and those which relate to the extension of existing developments are required to replace such drainage systems with sealed tanks. Given the speeches on both sides of the debate last time, the Planning and Environment Committee believes that every States member would wholeheartedly endorse this policy and the Committee's adherence to it.

T h e Planning and Environment Committee is also conscious of the many objections it receives to

proposed new developments in the countryside. These often include the observation that the provision of mains drains in a rural area then leads to increased applications for new development. This argument was advanced during the recent meeting at St.  Ouen's Parish Hall about the proposal to redevelop the Holiday Camp. Whilst the Island Plan and States strategic policies seek to avoid new development where mains drains are not available, the provision of mains drains is not in itself sufficient to negate the presumption against new development in the countryside."

La Frégate Café – questions and answers (Tape No. 498)

The Deputy of St. John asked Senator John Stephen Rothwell, President of the Tourism Committee, the following question –

" I u n derstand that considerable work is being undertaken to sandblast and re-seal La Frégate Café. Would the President advise members of –

(a ) t he cost of this work?

(b ) t he reason why it has to be undertaken so soon after the construction of the building? (c ) t he life expectancy of the materials used?"

The President of the Tourism Committee replied as follows –

" (a ) The cost of the work to the States of Jersey is nil. It is a cost being borne under the contract by the contractor and the consultant.

(b ) The Waterfront Enterprise Board is not prepared to accept the standard of the external finish to the

café. WEB has insisted the original specification be met.

T h e a rchitect responsible for the design of La Frégate has stated –

T h e su r f a c e finish was found to be chemically incompatible with one of the pre-finish

impregnated fire retardant applications, and as a consequence the surface finish reacted by blistering. For this reason, the surface finish has been removed and a material compatible with the fire retardant applied.'

(c ) The new material will last in the region of three to five years. This is the normal life expectancy for

exterior decoration and thereafter normal periodic maintenance will be required."

Jersey's contribution toward services provided by the United Kingdom government – questions and answers (Tape No. 498)

Deputy Terence John Le Main of St. Helier asked Senator Pierre François Horsfall, President of the Policy and Resources Committee, the following questions –

" 1 . Would the President confirm that questions were asked in the House of Lords recently to seek to discover the contribution that Jersey pays to H.M. Government for services given to States Departments and Island residents seeking specialised social services etc. which are unavailable in Jersey?

2 . ( a) Would the President inform members of the involvement (if any) of the Committee's public

relations consultant, Shandwicks, in giving information to the Home Office to assist in the preparation of a suitable reply?

( b ) I f th e answer to (a) is negative, would the President advise members whether the true facts of the

Island's contributions for services received from H.M.  Government have been communicated to the appropriate United Kingdom authorities?

3 . ( a) Would the President inform members of the terms of reference given to Shandwicks in relation

to protecting Jersey's interests and reputation?

( b ) W  o u ld the President inform members of the costs of employing Shandwicks on behalf of the

Finance and Economics Committee and Jersey?

4 . W ould the President give members full details in monetary terms of the current benefits H.M.

Government receives from Jersey's role as an international finance centre situated in the sterling area? If Jersey ceased to be in the sterling area and the investments that Jersey received from all over the world were to move outside the sterling area, what would be the loss to the United Kingdom Exchequer?

5 . ( a) Would the President advise the total contribution that Jersey pays to H.M. Government for all the services that we receive and what departments benefit from such services? In other words, I

would like members to be advised of all the payments, benefits, etc. made to H.M. Government.

( b ) W  o u ld the President advise members if there are any areas where Jersey receives services for

which we do not pay a contribution?

6 . W ould the President inform members if the Committee are satisfied with the manner in which Jersey

is portrayed outside the Island and, if no, what the Committee are doing to rectify the situation?"

The President of the Policy and Resources Committee replied as follows –

" 1 . The actual question asked by Lord Wallace of Saltaire was what contribution (a) the Channel Islands

and (b) the Isle of Man make to the United Kingdom central budget in return for services they receive from the

United Kingdom Government.

2 . ( a) Shandwicks have no role in providing information to the Home Office.

 ( b ) T h e Home Office are fully aware of the true facts relating to the Island's contributions for

services received from H.M. Government, for the arrangements made for those contributions (e.g. Education and Defence) have been covered in correspondence between the Insular Authorities and the Home Office.

3 . ( a) Shandwicks are engaged on a month by month basis by the Policy and Resources Committee to

provide a monitoring and intelligence service on United Kingdom Parliamentary, EU and international public affairs.

( b ) S h a n dwicks are not employed by the Finance and Economics Committee. They are employed by

the Jersey Financial Services Commission in relation to the promotion of the Island as an international finance centre. They are employed by the Policy and Resources Committee as indicated in the answer given to the previous question. The cost to the Policy and Resources Committee for the service provided by Shandwicks is a maximum of £4,000 a month, with the actual amount within that maximum being determined by the fees for the services actually rendered.

4 . T here is no longer a sterling area as this term applied to the United Kingdom and its dependent

territories when exchange controls were in force. The funds that Jersey attracts from all over the world are free to move wherever they please. However, because of the Island's close working relationship with the City of London, the majority of the much more than £200  billion worth of funds administered in Jersey are invested in or through the City of London. But because the Island is in monetary union with the United Kingdom the Island's foreign currency earnings go to benefit the United Kingdom balance of payments and invisible earnings. The United Kingdom would lose these benefits if Jersey were no longer to be an international finance centre.

5 . ( a) In the time available it has not been possible to obtain the answer to this question. Information is

readily available on the payments made to the United Kingdom Prison Service and to United Kingdom Further Education establishments, but to ensure that a complete picture is presented to members information would need to be obtained from every Committee of the States.

( b ) I c a n not give a full answer at this time for the reason given in answering the previous question.

However, Jersey receives support from a number of United Kingdom Government departments in the form of advice and guidance for which no charge is made. The Island is also dependent on the United Kingdom for international representation and diplomatic services for which again no payment is made.

6 . T he Committee is never satisfied that Jersey is being portrayed outside the Island as well as it should

be. The Committee is engaged in a number of steps to ensure the wider understanding of Jersey. For example, we have requested, and Home Office and Foreign and Commonwealth Office officials have agreed, that the constitutional statement placed before the EU Tax Code of Conduct Group, which was included in a statement I made to members on 2nd December 1998, will be circulated to all  the European  negotiators  and British embassies in Europe. Our strategy has  been first and foremost to get our message across to the United Kingdom Government so as to have them "on side" at all the various talks at which we do not have a direct voice, such as those going on in the EU and OECD, and we have seen plenty of signs that we have been successful in our endeavours."

H.G.V. drivers in the public sector – questions and answers (Tape No.  498)

Deputy Gerard Clifford Lemmens Baudains of St.  Clement, asked Deputy David Leon Crespel, President of the Establishment Committee, the following questions –

" (a ) As a matter of public interest, would the President advise whether States' employed HGV drivers are compensated for their expenses in renewing their driving licences?

(b ) If the answer to (a) is yes, would the President advise the annual cost of such reimbursement, on a

department by department basis?"

The President of the Establishment Committee replied as follows –

" (a ) Those States departments which employ drivers over the age of 45 to drive Heavy Goods Vehicles met the costs for the completion of the medical form associated with the renewal of their licence. The departments did not meet the costs of renewing the actual licence itself.

T h i s  m e dical  certification  would  normally  have  been  undertaken  by  the  States  of  Jersey's

occupational health service, provided in respect of all public sector employees. However, because of the numbers involved on this particular occasion, it was necessary to ask employees to arrange the appropriate  medical  clearance  with  their  own  medical  practitioners.  As  a  consequence,  the departments reimbursed the employees for the expenses that they had incurred.

T h e D e p u ty might be interested to note that this approach was in line with a number of private sector

employers. In addition, it reflects the duty of care that the States owes both to its employees and to members of the public.

(b ) The costs associated with the reimbursement of employees, which have been notified to the States

Personnel Department, were as follows –

Public Services Department £1,600 States Fire Service £1,000 Jersey Airport £265 Jersey Harbours £234 Agriculture and Fisheries £35 TOTAL £3,134

T h e a bove costs were incurred in respect of 84 drivers.

T h e D  eputy will appreciate that the HGV licence will be valid for a period of five years and, therefore, the

costs associated with the renewal of the licences for all these drivers will not need to be incurred again until the year 2004.

Payment of compensation by the Planning and Environment Committee – question and answer – (Tape No. 498)

Deputy Terence John Le Main of St. Helier, asked, Senator Nigel Lewis Quérée, President of the Planning and Environment Committee, the following question –

" W o u ld the President inform members of the number of applications considered by his Committee since

December 1996 which have involved the payment of compensation by the Committee and of the amounts paid?" The President of the Planning and Environment Committee replied as follows –

" S in c e taking office the Planning and Environment Committee has had the duty to pay costs in a number of legal actions which were pending when it took office late in December 1996.

S h o rt ly before taking office, in November 1996, one of these legal actions which commenced in the early

1990s, had already been decided by the Royal Court. Subsequently costs were awarded against the Committee (£29,614) who with the agreement of the Agriculture and Fisheries and Finance and Economics Committees have also made an extra gratia payment (£50,000) towards legal costs which were excluded from the taxing order.

T h e C ommittee has on legal advice withdrawn four other of the pending actions from the Royal Court and

had to settle costs (total £95,423).

It h a s also reached a negotiated settlement with an applicant who 13 years ago had a consent modified by

the  Committee  of the  day,  an  action  which carries with  it  a  statutory right  of compensation  (total £90,000).

It h a s also has settled three small claims on an ex-gratia basis for amounts of compensation concerning

developments in the Island where it was alleged, but not accepted, that some action or inaction of the Committee or its department gave rise to loss. Two of these relate to defective drainage systems (£3,445) and concern events which took place many years ago, before responsibility was transferred to the department. The Committee was able to recover a contribution from the builder in one case.

I c a n advise the Deputy that none of these ten payments (total £268,482) relate to applications considered

by the present Committee."

Service reviews of States Departments – questions and answers (Tape No. 498)

Senator Stuart Syvret asked Senator Pierre François Horsfall, President of the Policy and Resources Committee, the following questions –

" 1 . Will the President inform the Assembly of the number of service reviews of States Departments completed to-date, and whether any remain to be completed?

2 . W ill the President inform the Assembly of the total cost to-date, and the projected final cost, of the

service review exercise?"

The President of the Policy and Resources Committee replied as follows –

" 1 . The States, when considering the 1996 Strategic Policy Review and Action Plan, approved the recommendation of the Establishment Committee that –

S t a te s d e p a r tm ents will be subject to an independent service review over the next three years, co-ordinated, monitored and supported by the corporate strategy unit, with priority being given to those departments which are affected by the restructuring of States Committees.'

T h e n u m b er of service reviews which have been completed to date is 12.

A  n o th e r e ight reviews are in progress, with some nearing completion, and five have yet to commence.

2. Total cost to date has been  £1,149,000

This is made up of –

1. The  costs of the  12  completed

reviews £865,000

2. Payments already made in respect of

reviews which have commenced but

have yet to be completed £284,000 £1,149,000

The remaining costs for completing

the  service  review  programme  are

estimated to be £551,000 Therefore the projected final cost

of the reviews is £1.7  million

A fu l l review of the service reviews is being undertaken by the Policy and Resources Department now that

the Corporate Strategy Officer is in post and should be presented to the Policy and Resources Committee by June 1999. The Policy and Resources Committee will report the findings of this review to the States."

International conventions and agreements – questions and answers (Tape No. 498)

Senator Stuart Syvret asked Senator Pierre François Horsfall, President of the Policy and Resources Committee, the following questions –

" T h e  International  Conventions  and  Agreements  Progress  report  for  the  period  1st  April  to  30th September 1998 (R.C.2/99) informs us of a variety of agreements and conventions dealt with by the Policy and Resources Committee.

1 . W  ill the President inform the Assembly how many of the agreements referred to in R.C.2/99 have

received a full and detailed consideration of their text by the Committee?

2 . W  ill the President explain the scope and scale of professional advice received in respect of these

conventions, and will he in particular inform the Assembly of how frequently, if ever, second opinions are sought?

3 . D  oes the President accept that some of these international conventions and agreements may have

significant implications for the Island?

4 . W  ill the President give an undertaking to the Assembly that in future any introduction of, agreement

to, or variation in, any international convention will be brought to the States for approval?"

The President of the Policy and Resources Committee replied as follows –

" 1 . Contrary to the statement made in the preamble to the question all the agreements and conventions referred to in the progress report are not dealt with by the Policy and Resources Committee. The Committee has overall policy responsibility for international matters concerning the Island and it is in this context that it presents the six monthly progress report to the States. A number of the agreements and conventions referred to in the report will have been dealt with by the Law Officers or by the committee that is responsible for the matters covered by the agreements and conventions concerned.

T h e P o l ic y and Resources Committee, to the extent that it is involved with individual agreements and conventions, relies on its officers, the Law Officers and the other Departments of the States involved

in the matters concerned for advice on those aspects of the agreements and conventions that require

the Committee's attention. Where it is considered appropriate to do so the Committee will consider the text in

full. Examples from R.C.2/99 where this was the case are the British/Irish Agreement on Northern Ireland in respect of the formation of the British-Irish Council, and the Energy Charter Treaty.

2 . T he Committee receives professional advice from the Law Officers who on occasion will obtain a

second opinion. The Law Officers or the officers of the Committee also will exchange views with their counterparts in Guernsey and the Isle of Man to ensure that there is consistency of response, where it is appropriate for this to be done. Where technical matters are concerned (e.g. conventions and agreements dealing with environmental issues) the Committee has the benefit of professional advice from its officers (e.g. the Environmental Adviser) and these officers will frequently obtain views and/or information from non-States individuals or bodies. In some cases, where it is appropriate to do so, the Committee will also consult with individuals and organisations in the Island.

3 . Y es. The Committee and its advisers are keenly aware that individual international conventions and

agreements can have significant implications for the Island. Where such significant issues arise the matter is always referred to the Committee, or to another Committee of the States where the matter falls within that Committee's area of responsibility, for a political view on whether the international convention or agreement concerned should be extended to the Island.

4 .   I am not prepared to give such an undertaking for there are a large number of agreements or

conventions, on which a view is sought from the Insular Authorities, which are in accord with declared States policy, and which involve technical adjustments to existing agreements or conventions. There are other occasions where the Insular Authorities are called upon to make decisions in a time frame that does not provide for a report and proposition to be brought to the States for debate, where it is clear to the Committee and/or its advisers what that decision should be, often because the Insular Authorities are committed to join with the United Kingdom (e.g. sanctions against Serbia). There are however international conventions that have a greater significance where it is considered that the matters call for a States debate. In such cases the Committee will have no hesitation in bringing the matter before the States for approval. For the most part, however, the decision called for is whether in principle the United Kingdom's ratification of an international agreement or convention should be extended to the Island, and for this decision to be made effective in due course necessary insular legislation would need to be enacted. That legislation would be subject to States approval.

T  h e S t a te s have given the Policy and Resources Committee overall responsibility for dealing with

international matters. What the Committee has done for the past few years is to present the States six monthly reports on international conventions and agreements which are in the course of being considered, so that if there is any convention or agreement so identified that individual States members are concerned about they can raise questions with the Committee. Over the years the Committee has received very few requests for information on the matters being considered.

T h e C o m  mittee has also presented to the States copies of the reports that the Insular Authorities are

required to prepare from time to time in accordance with the terms of particular conventions and agreements.

F i n a ll y th e Committee has arranged for the production of a catalogue of conventions to which the

Island is a party so that interested States members can raise questions about any of the matters included in the catalogue which is available at the States Bookshop and the Public Library."

Constitution of the Jersey Arts Trust – question and answer (Tape No. 489)

Senator Stuart Syvret asked Senator Patricia Ann Bailhache , Vice-Chairman of the Jersey Arts Trust the following question –

" W i l l the Senator provide for the Assembly a detailed explanation as to why the Jersey Arts Trust chose recently to proceed with controversial changes to its constitution notwithstanding the apparent prior agreement of all concerned parties to accept an independent review of the administration of the arts in Jersey?"

The Vice-Chairman of the Jersey Arts Trust replied as follows –

" I a s sume that Senator Syvret's reference to controversial changes' refers to public comments made by the Jersey Arts Centre who found one change questionable. The Jersey Arts Centre was given the opportunity of presenting their objections at a meeting at Education (4th December 1998). I would point out that the changes were not considered to be controversial by the Education Committee, nor on the whole by the members of this Assembly. All members received a copy of the new constitution and six members made varying comments before the Education Committee approved it. The Law Officers' Department also found the changes acceptable.

T h e Education Committee considered the constitution at three meetings on 25th November 1998, 9th

December 1998 and 13th January 1999 and examined it on the grounds of reasonability. The Jersey Arts Trust was created to further all arts and crafts on the Island and, as such, it is best that the Jersey Arts Trust is perceived to be independent and fair, without giving preference to the single interest of any one body. It did not seem fair, reasonable or logical to have a major recipient of funds acting as both payer and payee. Nor did it seem fair or reasonable for that recipient to have three members out of nine on the Jersey Arts Trust as this indeed was numerically disproportionate.

A m e mber of the Jersey Arts Trust must act as a Trust member and in the experience of the Jersey Arts

Trust some members have had difficulty with the concept of distinguishing the objectives of the Trust from the interests of the organisation from which they are appointed. Until a conflict of interest arises, even the appointee may not identify or understand this difficulty. It has been clear that this causes problems elsewhere as shown by the quotation from the Review of Jersey Heritage Trust Constitution and Structure report and proposals approved by the Jersey Heritage Trust last year (pages 9 and 10) –

A lt h o u g h it is an independent body, the (Heritage) Trust is not in control of its own board

membership....'

A p p o i n t ed representative trustees may not always put the interests of the Trust first. Their primary consideration may be to the concerns of the ......... Committee which appointed them.'

O n e must make it clear that considerable changes have taken place within the arts world with St.  James

and the Opera House coming on line within the next 18 months. It is illogical to have representatives from one venue-based organisation voting on the funding to be made available to another venue-based organisation.

A s f ar as the Senator's comment that the changes were proceeded with notwithstanding the apparent prior' agreement of all concerned parties to an independent review, this is not true. The Jersey Arts Trust identified that its constitution needed to be amended in light of developments since its creation in January

1993 and a sub-committee made up of interested parties, Arts Centre and Education as well as Trust representation, was set up on 1st April 1998. The sub-committee reached its conclusion and produced its recommendations on 21st October 1998. The Jersey Arts Trust then fully debated the recommendations in a specially convened meeting on 10th November 1998 and amendments were agreed. The proposed new constitution was then referred both to the Education Committee, as required, and the Law Officers' Department on 20th November 1998. Further amendments were made at the recommendation of both the Education Committee and the Law Officers' Department and, as previously mentioned, the document was circulated to all States members for comments. The final form of the document was ready in January 1999 and indeed the Education Committee, having considered the comments made by the six States members who replied and those of the Jersey Arts Centre, approved the new constitution on 13th January 1999, leaving the mere formality of registering the document in the Royal Court. The new Jersey Arts Trust constitution was therefore approved before the proposal for an independent review of the arts and

crafts as put forward by the Finance and Economics Committee in a letter to the Trust dated 26th January 1999.

T h e J ersey Arts Trust and the Education Committee all agreed that the new Jersey Arts Trust constitution

was desirable and this fact has not changed in light of the proposal for an independent review. The Jersey Arts Trust has wholeheartedly welcomed and supported the proposal for the independent review but it has a duty to the States and ultimately the taxpayer to undertake the work it has been given. It would not be to the advantage of the arts and crafts in the Island if the Jersey Arts Trust were to put its work on hold until this review has been completed. Indeed it would not be beneficial to the arts if the Jersey Arts Centre were to put its work on hold either. The terms of reference of the review have not been confirmed and we wait to hear who will be carrying out this review. Members are aware that reviews do take many months to complete and therefore work both at the Jersey Arts Trust and Jersey Arts Centre must continue as normal during this time.

A s I am sure members must be aware, no constitution is set in stone. Should the review find reason for the

new Jersey Arts Trust constitution to be changed, then this can be undertaken.

F in a l ly, as I have mentioned earlier, the terms of reference for the independent review are not finalised and

it appears the Senator has assumed that the review is to concentrate on the administration' of the arts. My understanding is that the review will be far wider than this. It will be a complete review of all the arts and crafts needs and resources on the Island, and whilst this will obviously include the administration of the arts, it will not be limited to such a narrow topic."

Sale of fuel at Elizabeth Marina and the bookmaking operation at the Airport – questions and answers (Tape No. 489)

Senator Stuart Syvret asked the Deputy of St.  Mary, President of the Harbours and Airport Committee, the following questions –

" 1 . Will the President inform the Assembly whether any recent changes have been introduced to the agreement between the Committee and the Jersey Electricity Company Limited in respect of the concession for the sale of fuel at the Elizabeth Marina and, if so, what those changes are?

2 . W ill the President inform the Assembly whether the Committee has agreed to reduce the rent paid by

Stanley Leisure Limited in respect of their bookmaking operation at the Airport and, if so, the reasons for this decision?"

The President of the Harbours and Airport Committee replied as follows –

"1 . Before replying to the Senator's specific questions, I would like to address a generic point concerning

all Trading Committees and their commercial relationships.

T h e S t a te s have created the Trading Committees of Harbours and Airport, Telecommunications and

Postal and changed their status in order that they should act commercially. The extension of this first step is to turn them into limited liability companies, albeit wholly owned by the States. There is a direct contradiction between telling the Trading Committees to act commercially and then requiring them to disclose publicly the details of transactions that they have entered into in good faith with third parties. To do so would jeopardise the whole basis of commercial confidentiality as between the parties.

I f t h e S t a tes do not have faith in those that they have chosen to run these commercial enterprises, then

the remedy is in the hands of members. However, I can assure members that every transaction negotiated and entered into by my Committee will be based on sound commercial principles that are in the best interests of all concerned.

T o r e tu r n to the specific question asked by the Senator, there have been no changes to the agreement

entered into between the Harbours and Airport Committee and the Jersey Electricity Company Limited in respect of the fuel concession at the Elizabeth Marina.

I w o u l d like to add that, whilst I remain as President of the Harbours and Airport Committee and

Chairman of the Jersey Electricity Company Limited, I will take no part whatsoever in any discussions or negotiations that involve both parties.