Skip to main content

PPC Minutes 12th July 2002

This content has been automatically generated from the original PDF and some formatting may have been lost. Let us know if you find any major problems.

Text in this format is not official and should not be relied upon to extract citations or propose amendments. Please see the PDF for the official version of the document.

MDLH/PH/205 35

PRIVILEGES AND PROCEDURES COMMITTEE (7th Meeting)

12th July 2002

PART A

All members were present. In attendance -

M.N. de la Haye, Deputy Greffier of the States S. Drew, Assistant Legal Adviser

Note: The Minutes of this meeting comprise Part A only.

Seminar on A1.  The Committee, with reference to its Act No. A5 of 14th June 2002, noted that a scrutiny letter of thanks had been sent to Mr. C. Game following the successful seminar on transcript. scrutiny held on 1st July 2002. The Committee further noted that a transcript of Mr. 1240/22/1/6/1 Game's  comments  had  been  prepared  and  agreed  that  the  transcript  should  be

(10) circulated to all members of the States once minor editorial changes had been made to the text.

Ex.Off.

The Deputy Greffier of the States undertook to edit the text as necessary and the Executive Officer was requested to take the necessary action to circulate the transcript once it was in final form.

Formation of A2.  The Committee, with reference to its Act No. A5 of 14th June 2002, received an Scrutiny outline prepared by Deputy R.G. Le Herissier showing the proposed headings for the Committees. scrutiny section of the report the Committee was to present to the States by the end of 1240/22/1(9) August 2002.

Ex.Off. The Committee agreed that the remit of scrutiny committees should extend beyond

government departments and should include all areas where public funds were used and organisations or companies owned, in whole or in part, by the public. The scrutiny function could therefore extend to areas of parish administration where public funding was used and could also extend to companies such as the Jersey Electricity Company Ltd. or Jersey Telecom after its incorporation.

The Committee agreed that it would not be appropriate to be overly prescriptive in setting out the terms of reference for scrutiny committees as experience in UK local government had shown that an evolutionary approach was preferable with the system developing in the light of experience.

The Committee gave initial consideration to the powers that the scrutiny committees should  have  after  publishing  their  reports.  The  Committee  agreed  that  it  should propose  that  the  committees' reports  should  be  presented  to  the  States  and  the Executive  would  be  obliged  to  table  a  response  within  a  specified  timescale.  If necessary the scrutiny committees should be able to seek a debate on their reports if they were not satisfied with the response of the Executive although the Committee recognised that, in a non-party system with a minority executive, it was important to ensure that there was the correct balance of power between the executive and the scrutiny committees to ensure that the government reforms did, in fact, lead to more

effective government.

The Committee approved the proposed headings of the report and agreed that it would be possible for several people to assist with the drafting of the report. Deputy Le Herissier undertook to liaise with the Deputy Greffier of the States and the Executive Officer to make the necessary arrangements.

Accommod- A3.  The Committee, with reference to its Act No. A4 of 27th June 2002, noted that the ation, services survey on facilities had been forwarded to all members of the States as part of the and facilities for consultation process on accommodation and facilities.

States Members.

1060/5/1(18) The Committee agreed that the results of the survey should be sent for information to

Dr. Stephen Chiang, IT Director, and the Executive Officer was requested to take the necessary action.

Electronic A4.  The Committee, with Dr. Stephen Chiang, IT Director in attendance, considered Communication his paper concerning Electronic Communication' relating to the appropriate use of 871(24) information technology to assist the government reform process.

Ex.Off. The IT Director explained that, since his appointment, he had become aware of the

lack of corporate approach to IT matters throughout the States which led to extensive duplication.  There  were,  for  example,  more  than  200  separate  name  and  address databases maintained by the States. The IT Director explained that the machinery of government  reforms,  and  the  reorganisation  of  Departments,  gave  a  one-off opportunity to make the changes that were necessary as they would be more difficult to achieve at a later date. The IT Director set out the 4 fundamental projects that he believed were required -

  1. Network upgrade

T h i s  was  necessary  to  cope  with  the  increasing  volume  of  IT  traffic

throughout the network but was also important to allow new methods of working such as online meetings using video conferencing. These would become  more  important  as  departments  merged  and  staff  were  not  all working in the same location;

  1. U pgrade to Microsoft Windows/Office XP

T h e IT Director explained that 80 per cent of users on the States network

were still using Windows '95 which was no longer supported. In addition there were increasing difficulties caused by the fact that the older software was incompatible with the majority of systems used by users elsewhere and it  was  therefore  essential  to  upgrade  all  users  as  soon  as  possible  to Windows/Office XP;

  1. Electronic Workflow and Document Management

T h e introduction of an Electronic Workflow and Document Management

system would mean that services could be co-ordinated across departments and documents could be accessed wherever and whenever needed across the network subject to appropriate security safeguards to address issues of confidentiality and data protection. The system would hopefully enable electronic  methods  to  be  used  for  recording  ministerial  decisions  and maintaining a central database of these; and

  1. Business change

T h e IT Director explained that the last of the projects was not an IT project

as such but needed to be progressed alongside the others. If the other projects were to succeed and achieve the desired benefits it was necessary to ensure that changes were made in business processes throughout the States to ensure that new IT systems were maximised. It was hoped to create business change teams to assist with the change process that would be needed.

The IT Director explained that the total cost of the proposed projects would amount to some £10 million over 3 years although the cost could be even greater if the projects were  not  centrally  co-ordinated.  At  the  present  time  it  was  almost  impossible  to ascertain what the total expenditure on IT was throughout the States as there was no such co-ordination. It was difficult to quantify what savings would be achieved from the 4 projects as some potential savings were intangible but once the necessary IT platform was put in place it would be possible for on-line services and transactions to be introduced and these could lead to substantial cost savings.

The Committee thanked the IT Director for his helpful presentation and agreed that it fully supported the steps being taken to update the IT infrastructure of the States.

States Members A5.  The Committee, with reference to its Act No. A8 of 15th May 2002, and with Dr. Business Stephen Chiang, IT Director in attendance, gave further consideration to the future Communication provision of IT facilities for States members.

Package

871(24) The Committee recalled that all States members had been offered the use of a leased

laptop computer and dedicated high speed telephone line to access the States network. Ex.Off. The  former  House  Committee  had  accepted  political  responsibility  for  the  policy

oversight of the project and the Committee agreed that it was willing to take over this

role. The day-to-day administration of the scheme would continue to be undertaken

through  a  partnership  between  the  States  Greffe  and  the  Computer  Services

Department with the latter taking full responsibility for all technical aspects of the

project  including  training,  connection  and  maintenance  of  the  equipment.  The

Committee noted that the on-going costs were considerable and agreed that these

needed to be included in its report to the States on facilities for members. The IT

Director undertook to make available the necessary information.

On an associated matter the Committee discussed with the IT Director the provision of IT  facilities  for  the  scrutiny  committees  and  the  States  Greffe  following  the introduction  of  a  ministerial  system  of  government.  The  Committee  noted  that responsibility  for  corporate  IT  matters  would  rest  with  the  Chief  Minister's Department and it would be necessary to ensure that there was sufficient independence in the service provided to scrutiny committees whilst avoiding the need to create expensive alternative IT provision for scrutiny. The IT Director explained that he viewed the services provided by his Department as independent but undertook to prepare a report for the Committee setting out how the necessary level of independence could be guaranteed.

Simultaneous A6.  The Committee, with Dr. Stephen Chiang, IT Director in attendance, considered electronic voting e-mail messages from Deputy P.F. Routier and former Deputy D.G. Filleul seeking the 1240/22(8) Committee's views on the introduction of electronic voting in the States to replace the

current system of voting by appel nominal'. The Committee noted that these enquiries Ex.Off. and similar comments from other members, had arisen following the request of one

member of the States to change his vote having asserted that he had voted in error at

the conclusion of the debate on the Population Policy on 4th July 2002. The Committee received for information a copy of Act No. 7 of 6th July 1995 of the House  Committee  together  with  a  copy  of  P.115/95  concerning  simultaneous voting/enhances sound systems in the States Chamber. The Committee noted that the proposition, which had sought to seek the approval of the States to the introduction of simultaneous electronic voting, had been rejected by 33 votes to 16 on 24th October 1995.

The Committee agreed that it wished to consider this matter in the context of the overall review of States' procedures that it was undertaking although it recognised that there were some members of the States who believed that the current system of voting by appel  nominal' had  certain  advantages.  The  Committee  requested  the   Deputy Greffier of the States to obtain the tape of the debate held on 24th October 1995, and agreed that the Administrator would be requested to transcribe the tape once it was available. The Deputy Greffier of the States informed the Committee that the necessary wiring  to  enable  an  electronic  voting  system  was  already  in  place  in  the  States Chamber and the IT Director were requested to obtain information on the technical requirements for the introduction of a system of simultaneous electronic voting.

Proposed States A7.  The Committee, with reference to its Act No. A7 of 27th June 2002, received a meeting dates draft report and proposition the purpose of which was to ask the States whether they 2003. were of opinion to suspend Standing Order 4(1) to enable the States to meet on the 1240/2(60) dates fixed for the holding of meetings in ordinary session in 2003. The Committee

noted that the 2 dates that did not comply with Standing Order 4(1) were 8th April Ex.Off. 2003 and 20th May 2003, both dates being proposed in an attempt to ensure a regular

pattern of meetings.

The Committee approved the draft report and proposition and requested that it be lodged au Greffe' on 23rd July 2002 for consideration early in the autumn session. The Greffier of the States was requested to take the necessary action.

Outstanding A8.  The Committee, with reference to its Act No. A12 of 14th June 2002, received for Committee items. information an updated list outlining its outstanding items.