PPC Minutes 14th October 2002

MH/KAK/297 68

PRIVILEGES AND PROCEDURES COMMITTEE (15th Meeting)

14th October 2002

PART A

All  members  were  present,  with  the  exception  of  Senator  C.  Stein,  from  whom apologies had been received.

In attendance -

M.N. de la Haye, Deputy Greffier of the States D.C.G. Filipponi, Executive Officer P. Byrne, Executive Officer Designate A. Booth, Research Assistant M.P. Haden, Committee Clerk.

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

Visit to A1.  The Committee received an oral report, together with a draft press release, from Birmingham the delegation, consisting of the President, Vice President, Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier County Council - and  Mr.  P.  Byrne,  Executive  Officer  designate,  in  connexion  with  their  visit  to scrutiny Birmingham County Council to view their scrutiny arrangements at first hand. arrangements.

1240/22/1(9) The Committee was advised that useful discussions had taken place with Councillor

M. Olley, Chair of Scrutiny, and Mr. J. Cade, Head of Scrutiny. The delegation had

Ex.Dir. received an insight into the way issues were chosen by the Chair of Scrutiny, the

training of Committee members and lessons learnt from the Birmingham perspective. The delegation also observed a session of the Health and Social Services Scrutiny Committee and obtained information on the internet accessible database system used by  Birmingham  to  record  details  of  work  in  progress  and  decisions  made  where applicable. The delegation had taken notice of the data protection guidelines in force.

The  delegation  had  also  had  useful  discussions  with  both  the  Public  Accounts Committee and the National Audit Office in London.

Pre-poll voting. A2.  The Committee discussed the experience of pre-poll voting which was taking 424/2(2) place for the first time in the current senatorial elections.

F.C. The Committee was advised by Deputy J-A Bridge that she had recently visited the

Judicial Greffe to register her vote for the above elections. She had found that the attitude of staff was unnecessarily inquisitive and rather unhelpful. The Committee felt that voters should not have to give their reasons for choosing to vote in this way.

The President undertook to write to the Judicial Greffier in this respect..

Draft Report to A3.  The Committee, with reference to its Act No. A3 of 30th September 2002, gave the States. further consideration to the latest draft of the report it was to present to the States in 1240/22/1/6/1 accordance with the Act of the States of 26th March 2002 (P.23/2002), as follows -

(2)

(a) S ection 1: Introduction that reference should be made to the recent visit to

Ex.Off. Birmingham County Council.

States (2)

Pub.Ed. (b) S ection 2: Scrutiny - The Committee noted that Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier

had made further changes to the ordering of this section in order better to make the argument for scrutiny moving from the general to the particular, from experience elsewhere to proposals appropriate for Jersey.

In a ddition, the Committee agreed, as follows -

1. P ublic Accounts Committee (PAC) - to insert an additional paragraph indicating that it did not accept the conclusions of the Policy and Resources Committee's Working Group onthe Public Accounts Committee and Auditor Generalon the membershipof the PAC.TheCommittee agreed to pursue further discussions with the WorkingGroup in this respect andalso to seek clarification of the respective roles ofscrutinyandthePAC.TheCommitteeintendedto publish a separate report with its views in due course. In the meantime, the Committee reserved its position on the PAC;
2. C omptroller and Auditor General (CAG)- to use this title in preference to Auditor General to avoid confusion with H.M. Attorney General(AG);
3. T erms of Reference for Scrutiny Panels - to revise the draftterms of reference to clarify theproposed consultation process fordraft legislation to include both green and white papers. TheCommittee requested that flow charts, obtained from Birmingham County Council, showing the processes for Executive decision makingand the Call-inmechanismshouldbe included in the appendices to the report;
4. Regular' scrutiny - to clarify its intention that scrutiny in Jersey should encompass every major area of government on a regular basis. Itwas not, however,intended that scrutinyshould be confined to a rigid cycle inwhich every areawasexaminedaccordinglyto a pre-arranged schedule. Forward planning was necessary for budgetary purposes but Scrutiny Panelsshouldalsobe responsive to immediateissuesofconcern;
5. Accountability - to highlight the possible impact of positive endorsement of policies by Scrutiny Panels as well as their more critical functions;
6. C all-in mechanism and access to information - to accept proposed amendmentsprepared by Mr.S. Drew, Assistant LegalAdviser.The Committee agreed that Scrutiny Panels should have the powers currently afforded to Committees of Inquiry to call for people to attend and papers to be made available. It was not intended that Scrutiny Panels shouldbeheavyhandedintheirapproach;ratherco- operation was to be encouraged. However, it was important that Scrutiny Panelsshould have thepower, in the last resort, tosummon witnesses and demandrecords;and
7. Data Protection issues - that further consideration wasrequiredin this respect. TheCommittee decided to invite the Data Protection Registrar to a subsequent meeting.

3. Section 3: Code of Conduct - The Committee noted that the Bailiff had indicated that wascontent with the proposals.
4. Section 4: Facilities - The Committee agreed that an urgent meeting with the PublicServices and FinanceandEconomicsCommittees was required in order to clarify the position with regardtoprogression to PhaseIIofthe States Building refurbishment contract. The Committee alsoagreed that a briefing was required in respect ofthe provisions for PhaseIIproposedby the designteam.
5. Section 5: Remuneration - The Committee discussed the mechanism whereby the value ofmembers' remuneration might be maintained from one year to the next withoutthe need to discuss annualincreasesandother adjustments on a yearly basis. The Committee agreed that it would be appropriate formembers' remuneration to riseeach January in line with the Jersey Retail Price Index as at the previous December.Thereshouldbe a review carriedoutbythe Privileges and Procedures Committee everythree years or coinciding with the cycleof elections, with a view to rates falling significantly out ofstep with public sector pay settlements.

T h e Committee agreed to point out in its report that the primary purpose of

its recommendations was to remove the current bar on members with outside sources of income from claiming remuneration for their work as States members, rather than to seek an increase in levels of remuneration. The Committee had accepted the conclusions reached by the former House Committee in its consultation document (R.C. 33/2001) on the subject, particularly the point made following detailed comparison with other jurisdictions that Jersey was unique in discriminating with the means tested system currently in place. The Committee believed that the principle of a basic income available to all members was essential in order to encourage a wide range of candidates to present themselves for election to the States. The level of remuneration proposed was considered to be modest. It was difficult to predict whether or not there would be an overall increase in the cost to the States compared to the current situation.

6. Section 6: Next steps - The Committee agreed that its proposals on members' remuneration should bepresented to the States as a proposition for debate once its report had been published andassoonaspossiblebefore the endof the current session.Itwasconsideredimportant that the current Assembly should take responsibility for deciding the question of remuneration for the next Assembly. The Committee decided to seek a meeting at the earliest opportunity with the President of the Finance and Economics Committeeto discuss the issue. In addition, it agreed that a proposition should be prepared on its recommendations in respect of members' facilities tobe presented to the States as soon aspossible after the publicationof the report.

T h e Committee requested that a timetable identifying key actions and

responsibilities should be inserted into the final section of the report. It requested that the report be circulated to relevant Chief Officers drawing attention to this timetable.

The Committee approved the above report, subject to further minor amendments, and requested that it be presented to the States on 22nd October 2002. It was agreed that the report should be made available to the media in advance under embargo and that a pre-press conference should be held on 21st October 2002 for broadcast the following

day.

The Executive Officer was directed to take the necessary action to ensure that the report was widely available through the States Bookshop and Website.

The Committee expressed its appreciation of all those who had been involved in the preparation of the report, which gave clear evidence, especially in its appendices, of the amount of research and enquiry undertaken by the Committee and its officers.

Next Meeting. A4. The Committee agreed that its next meeting would take place on 24th October

2002, commencing at 1 p.m. in the Halkett Room, Morier House. The Committee would take an initial look at its work on the Freedom of Information, the States of Jersey Law and the Standing Orders of the States of Jersey.