PPC Minutes 18th October 2002

MH/KAK/291 72

PRIVILEGES AND PROCEDURES COMMITTEE (16th Meeting)

18th October 2002

PART A

(Business conducted by telephone)

All members were present.

In attendance -

M.P. Haden, Committee Clerk.

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

Machinery of A1.  The Committee, with reference to its Acts No. A1 of 2nd July 2002 and A9(i) of Government: 30th July 2002, considered a paper, prepared by the Committee Clerk, in connexion Election and with the report and proposition lodged by Senator S. Syvret on 3rd September 2002: removal of Machinery  of  Government:  Election  and  removal  of  Ministers  and  votes  of  no Ministers and confidence in Ministers (P.149/2002).

votes of no

confidence in The Committee agreed the following comment -

Ministers

(P.149/2002) -   T h e States has agreed that the Chief Minister should be able to nominate a team of comment. ministers to form the Council of Ministers. The Chief Minister is empowered to 1240/22/1(25) select a team which he/she believes will work together towards an agreed set of policies and objectives. This selection will be subject to the approval of the States.

Ex.Off.

T h e Privileges and Procedures Committee believes that the process of approval of

the Chief Minister's selection might be overly protracted in the event of the States rejecting the original panel put forward by the Chief Minister. As the panel will be presented to the States en bloc, the Chief Minister would not necessarily know the reason behind the rejection of one or more of his nominees. The process may, in theory, require a number of ballots before a clear result is agreed. There are two possible alternatives to avoid this situation -

1. M  embers vote on each individual member proposed for the Council, but in a secret ballot, the results of which remain confidential exceptto the Chief Minister. The Chief Minister will then beableto revise his selection inthe knowledge that certain of his nominees appearednot to be acceptable to the States; or
2. A ftertwounsuccessfulnominations the ChiefMinister's proposed ministers are  put forward for  individual  approval by  the  States.  Individual nominations continue until the requirednumberof approved ministers is obtained. (This system was originally used bytheTynwaldin the Isleof Man when  the  ministerial system was first  introduced  in 1986.  It  was discontinued  in 1991 but has been  recommended for  re-adoption by  a recent SelectCommitteeReportonMinisterialGovernment.)

T  h  e Privileges and Procedures Committee has examined the position regarding

the dismissal of ministers in other jurisdictions with a ministerial system of

government. The procedure proposed by the Policy and Resources Committee, whereby the Chief Minister has the power to dismiss an individual minister, is consistent with practice in Westminster, Scotland and the Isle of Man. Individual ministers in these jurisdictions are not subject individual votes of no confidence by the parliament. The Committee agrees that the option of a vote of no confidence in the entire Council of Ministers is a drastic option and unlikely to be used to express dissatisfaction in the performance of any particular minister or department. However, it notes that individual ministers will be held to account under a strong scrutiny system, which will be established alongside the ministerial form of government. In this way it will be possible to bring pressure to bear on individual ministries which might be considered to be failing.

A n alternative proposal put forward by a minority of the Committee is that the

States should be asked to confirm the proposed dismissal of a Minister. Otherwise, there are very weak checks and balances in the system.

The Greffier of the States was directed to take the necessary action to present the above comment to the States.