PPC Minutes 22nd August 2003

MH/KAK/247  92

PRIVILEGES AND PROCEDURES COMMITTEE (16th Meeting)

22nd August 2003

PART A

All  members  were  present,  with  the  exception  of   Deputy  C.J.   Scott - Warr en  and Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier, from whom apologies had been received.

Senator C.G.P. Lakeman Connétable D.F. Gray Deputy F.J. Hill, B.E.M. Deputy J-A. Bridge Deputy J.A. Bernstein

In attendance -

M.N. de la Haye, Greffier of the States

Mrs. A.H. Harris , Deputy Greffier of the States Mrs J. Marshall, Senior Executive Officer Miss F. Agnès, Executive Officer

M.P. Haden, Committee Clerk.

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

Minutes A1. The Minutes of the meeting held on 11th July 2003, having been previously

circulated, were taken as read and were confirmed

Matters arising A2. The Committee noted the following matters arising from its meeting held on

11th July 2003 -

Act A4(a) - Remuneration - The Committee noted an explanation received from  the  Comptroller  of  Income  Tax  regarding  his  treatment  of  States members' allowances for income tax purposes. The Committee, however, felt that the Comptroller had not addressed the main issue which was that the level of expenses allowable without any formal expense claim did not realistically cover the average expenses of States members. The Committee requested the Senior  Executive  Officer  to refer  the matter back  to the Comptroller for further consideration.

Remuneration A3. The Committee, with reference to its Act No. A4 of 11th July 2003, gave Sub-Committee - further consideration to the recommendations of the Remuneration Sub-Committee recommend- with regard to the establishment of an independent Remuneration Review Body. ations

1240/3(70) The  Committee  recalled  that  it  had  agreed  with  the  Sub-Committee's

recommendation that a proposition to abolish the existing means-tested system of Ex.Off. remuneration should be lodged as soon as possible for a debate in the autumn T.O.S. session. It confirmed its view that the effect of this abolition should be backdated to C.I.Aud. 1st January 2003. The Committee was aware that there was no funding for the F.E.C.C. likely additional cost of this proposal identified in the 2003 budget or the proposed

budget of 2004. It recalled, nevertheless, that the current budget for members'

remuneration was already inadequate for the number of members receiving income

support and expense allowance. The Senior Executive Officer was requested to

discuss the implications of this position with the Treasury.

Deputy J-A Bridge, while supporting the principle of abolishing the means-tested system, wished to record her dissent to the proposed backdating of the effects. The Committee recalled that Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier had previously indicated his dissent to the same.

The Committee further recalled that it had disagreed with the Sub-Committee's recommendation that the States should be asked to agree that all members should continue to receive an identical level of remuneration irrespective of their position of responsibility. It had also felt that the proposed terms of reference for the Review Body  were too  restrictive.   Deputy J-A Bridge clarified the  views of the  Sub- Committee which felt strongly that the Review Body should be focussed solely on the issue of the appropriate level of remuneration for elected members. This limited function  had  been  the  sole  purpose  of  the  proposition  of  Senator  E.P.   Vibert (P.26/2003) on the establishment of an independent Review Board, approved by the States as amended on 13th May 2003 and the Sub-Committee was opposed to broadening the Review Body's remit. On the question of the terms of reference, Deputy Bridge said that the Sub-Committee was seeking merely to outline the matters that should be taken into account. She pointed out that the wording of the proposition specifically stated that the Review Board should not be bound' by these considerations. The Committee, however, remained in favour of extending the Review Body's remit to include the question of responsibility payments. It was also pointed out that, it might be possible for the new Public Finances Administration (Jersey) Law currently being prepared by the Finance and Economics Committee to provide that the Council of Ministers could be empowered to decide on the level of remuneration of its Ministers.

The Committee decided to refer the matter back to the Sub-Committee for further consideration.

The Greffier of the States was directed to send a copy of this Act to the Finance and Economics Committee for information.

Draft Public A4. The Committee, with reference to Act No. A5, dated 29th November 2002, of Finances the Committee as previously constituted, considered a report, dated 18th August Administration 2003, prepared by the Greffier of the States, regarding the fourth draft of the Public (Jersey) Law Finances Administration (Jersey) Law 200-. In this connexion, the Committee also 200- received  a  Note,  dated  17th  July  2003,  prepared  by  Mr.  R.E.   Harris ,  States 447(1) Treasury.

Ex.Off. The Committee noted that the draft had been considered by a Sub-Committee T.O.S. consisting of the President, Vice President and Connétable D.F. Gray. It further C.I.Aud. noted that the draft had not yet been considered by the Finance and Economics F.E.C.C. Committee itself.

The Committee considered the following key issues in the draft Law -

1. P roposed budget process - The Committee received a Flow Chart, prepared by the Senior Executive Officer, illustrating the proposed budget  approval  procedure.  The  Committee  felt  that  there  were  a number of issues which should be discussed with the Finance and Economics  Committee,  in  particular:  the  interaction  between  the Annual Business Plan and the Appropriation Act; the separation of spending proposals from taxation proposals; the flexibility given to the Council  of  Ministers  to  allocate  funds  within  the  total  sum appropriated to the Executive; and the responsibility given to the Chief Minister,  rather  than  the  Finance  Minister,  to  present  the  budget proposals;
2. B udget for States Assembly - The Committee did not believe that it was appropriate to include the States Assembly alongside other bodies

described in the law as non-ministerial States' funded bodies'. It was of the

view that  separate  provisions could be included in the  Law for a budget  setting  mechanism  for  the  States  Assembly,  which,  unlike other  non-executive  bodies,  could  clearly  be  under  direct  political control, possibly through some form of States Assembly Commission or possibly through a future Privileges and Procedures Committee;

3. A mending the Annual Business Plan and Budget - The Committee noted  that  it  was  proposed  that  any  amendments  to  the  Annual Business Plan or Budget should be lodged at least 14 days in advance. It pointed out that, in that case, the Minister should be required to present the relevant documents to the States at least one month before debate to allow members time to lodge any amendments;
4. Private members' spending proposals - The Committee recalled that it had suggested that there should be a provision that would allow private  members  to  bring  spending  proposals  up  to  a  fixed  limit (£250,000 was considered);
5. Information  to  be  provided  in  propositions - The  Committee believed that it would be more appropriate for the requirement for financial and manpower implications to be set out in Standing Orders, which  were  subject  to  the  approval  of  the  States,  rather  than  in Financial Directions to be made by the Treasurer of the States;
6. Appointment of Treasurer of the States - The Committee noted that it was proposed that the Treasurer of the States would no longer be appointed  by  the  States.  The  Committee  felt  that  it  would  be appropriate to seek the views of the Attorney General on this provision in the light of the statutory independence and authority given to the Treasurer;
7. C omptroller and Auditor General (CAG) - The Committee believed that the liaison between the CAG and the Public Accounts Committee should be more clearly set out in the draft law. In addition, it felt that States  members  should  have  the  ability  to  bring  a  proposition  to remove the CAG from office, if his/her performance was considered unsatisfactory. This should not be limited to the domain of the Chief Minister as in the draft Law. There should also be certain automatic grounds for revocation of the appointment of the CAG.

The Committee decided to seek a meeting with representatives of the Finance and Economics Committee and its officers to discuss its comments on the draft Law  in  more  detail.  It  considered  a  draft  letter  setting  out  its  views and authorised the President to finalise the same, to be circulated to the Committee before being sent to the President of the Finance and Economics Committee.

The Greffier of the States was directed to send a copy of this Act to the Finance and Economics Committee for information.

Machinery of A5. The Committee considered a paper, dated 21st August 2003, prepared by the Government Greffier of the States, setting out the issues surrounding the date on which the new Reforms: ministerial system of government should be introduced. The Committee noted that Timetable of the report set out in an objective way the advantages and disadvantages of this elections. issue.

1240/33/2(2)

The Committee was aware that the Policy and Resources Committee felt that the C.E., P&R new system should be introduced as soon as possible. It noted that the target dates P.R.E.O. for the legislation to come into force to implement the Machinery of Government P.R.C.C. Reforms had slipped from the original target of July 2004 to the first quarter of Ex.Off. 2005. Consequently, if the new ministerial system was to be introduced at the T.O.S. earliest possible date in March 2005, there would be at most a six month period C.I.Aud. before the elections scheduled for the autumn of 2005. The Committee did not F.E.C.C. believe that such a brief interim period would give the ministerial system the

opportunity for making the best possible start. It had been suggested that this might be considered a trial period for the new ministerial system but the Committee rejected this notion on the following grounds -

1. T he interim period would include the summer recess and the election campaign  period  when  many  members  of  the  new  Council  of Ministers would be involved in canvassing for re-election;
2. T  here was the possibility that the new Chief Minister would not be facing an election at that time, a situation which the Committee did not feel was satisfactory. It felt that it was essential that candidates for the position of Chief Minister or other ministerial positions should have the opportunity to present their policies for the endorsement of the people through a public election.
3. Me  mbers in the Scrutiny role would find themselves in a position where they could not undertake any meaningful reviews due to the short time at their disposal, yet they might feel under some pressure to make an early impact.

The Committee considered the possibility of bringing forward the elections to the Spring of 2005, thus avoiding the need for an interim period. The Committee, however, was aware that the current two-tier system of elections would be difficult to operate in the Spring when Easter and other public holidays limited the possible dates.

In connexion with the date of the election, the Committee noted correspondence, dated  14th  August  2001,  from  the  Principal  Legal  Adviser  to  the  Manager, Machinery of Government Reforms, in which the question of shortening members' terms office had been considered. It was suggested by the Principal Legal Adviser that the States had the authority to take this action if it was considered to be in the public interest. The Committee requested that, in view of the period of time since that letter was written, the Principal Legal Adviser be asked to revisit his advice to ensure that its reasoning remained in accordance with current views in respect of constitutional and human rights implications.

The Committee was also mindful that, besides the legislation programme, there were other relevant issues regarding the Machinery of Government which had yet to be determined, such as the question of a single General Election and possible changes to the composition of the States Assembly, matters properly within the remit of the Special Committee on the Composition and Election of the States Assembly.  The  Committee,  whilst  understanding  the  desire  of  the  Policy  and Resources  Committee  not  to  delay  unnecessarily  the  implementation  of  the ministerial system, was firmly of the belief that all the strands involved in the machinery of government reforms should be properly integrated before the new system was advanced. The Committee agreed that it was important to maintain the  target  dates  for  the  legislation  programme  in  order  to  keep  up  the momentum for the implementation of the Machinery of Government reforms. As regards its own workload for progressing these reforms the Committee noted the disparity in resources between its own support team, consisting of two Executive Officers and a part-time administrator on a temporary contract, and the Machinery of Government Reform team available to the Policy and Resources Committee.

The Greffier of the States was directed to send a copy of this Act to Policy and Resources and Finance and Economics Committees for information.

States Members' A6. The Committee, with reference to its Act No. A5 of 17th January 2003, accommod-ation, received a report, dated 15th August 2003, prepared by the Executive Officer, on services and the furnishing of the States members' areas of the States Building and the allocation facilities. and use of space in the same.

1060/5/1(18)

The Committee considered the recommendations contained in the report and Ex.Off. agreed, as follows -

E.P.S.C.(2)

Encl. (a) that  a  Consultation  Group  be  set  up,  chaired  by   Deputy  J.A.

Bernstein,  to  make  recommendations  on  furnishing  the  States members' areas of the States Building. It was further agreed to invite Senator J.A. Le Maistre and Connétable J. Le S. Gallichan to join this Group. It was felt that this Group would represent a cross-section of views to ensure that the needs to all States members were met. The Committee authorised the Consultation Group to negotiate best value deals  on  furniture  for  the  Interview  Rooms,  Library  and  common Room, once needs had been identified. (It was noted that funding for this  purpose,  in  the  sum  of £50,000,  was  currently  held  by  the Environment and Public Services Committee);

2. that expressions of interest for furnishing the Committee Rooms would be invited through advertisement in the local press. (It was noted that funding for this purpose was not available within the budget held  by  the  Environment  and  Public  Services  Committee.  It  was agreed that the required funding should be allocated from the 2003 Shadow Scrutiny budget);
3. that the Gallery to the Old Library remain unfurnished until such time as the future needs of the States members' office space had been identified. It was suggested that this area might be utilised for the  purposes of the  Shadow  Scrutiny  Panels.  (This  was  to be the subject of a further paper to be submitted to the Committee at its next meeting.) It was further agreed that the Law Society Library should be re-located  as  its  current  allocated  area  was  both  too  small  and inappropriately sited, requiring access through the Gallery to the Old Library which was within the States members' area;
4. that the Privileges and Procedures Committee office should be situated in Committee Room 3 (Old Smokers' Room) for a period of  two  years until  after  Ministerial  Government  had  been  fully implemented, in order to support States Members' services staff in the early days whilst members' long term needs were being fully assessed. It was considered doubtful that three Committee Rooms would be required  in  the  States  Building.  It  was  made  clear  that,  after  this period, the use of this room would be re-assessed in line with States members' needs and priorities at that time;
5. that one of the three interview rooms in the States members' area should  be  set  up  as  a hot  desk' facility  for  members. The Committee was advised that the middle room of the three designated Interview Rooms had relatively poor acoustics and lighting and was considered to be less suitable as a meeting room. Nevertheless this room  could  be  re-arranged  easily  for  use  as  a  meeting  room  if required; and
6. that the Environment and Public Services Committee be requested to  draft  a  Report  and  Proposition,  in  response  to  Senator  S. Syvret's amendment to P.119/2000, setting out the allocation of rooms for States members and the use of these rooms, making clear that the Privileges and Procedures Committee was not yet satisfied that

the  needs  of  the  legislature  could  be  assessed  until  the  extra  services

members would require during the Machinery of Government Reform implementation became apparent.

The Committee also considered a proposal that the room currently allocated as a Media Room be given over for the temporary use as an office for the President of the Privileges and Procedures Committee. This would enable the President to store Committee  papers  currently  kept  at  his  legal  practice  more  appropriately  and efficiently.  An  office  space  would  also  enable  the  President  to  meet  in  an appropriate environment any States members who wished to discuss matters of concern. It was suggested that the Media Room was unlikely to be used for its intended purpose as there was no ready access from the media booth overlooking the States Chamber. The Committee decided not to pursue the proposal for the change of use of this room. It requested Executive Officer to examine with the Chief Architect the feasibility of creating an access between the Media Booth and the Media Room so that the room could be used for the purpose for which it was designed.

The Committee noted that its Officers were planning to produce a newsletter for States members to inform them of the above issues together with developments regarding the installation of a simultaneous electronic voting system and options for a recording and transcription service for the Assembly and its Committees.

The  Greffier  of  the  States  was  directed  to  send  a  copy  of  this  Act  to  the Environment  and  Public  Services  Committee,  together  with  the  above  report attached as an appendix.

Royal A7. The Committee received a report, dated 25th July 2003, from the Chief Court/States Architect regarding access and circulation in the Royal Court and States Building Building: for those with a disability.

disabled access

and circulation. The Committee was advised that a tour of the building by a user of a motorised 1060/5/1(12) wheel chair and a member of the Blind Society had raised a number of issues for

disabled users. The Committee noted that, although the majority of the issues had Ex.Off. been resolved, there remained a few outstanding points of concern; in particular - E.P.S.C.(2)

1. Exterior Terrace to the east of the Podium - The Committee was advised that wheelchair users would not feel safe using this terrace as a ramp to the podium, despite the width of the terrace. For this reason, the Committee felt that the feasibility of an additional ramp to the west of the Podium should be revisited as this could incorporate railings;
2. Access to States members' area - The Committee felt that a ramp was essential to enable wheelchair access to this area and that this should be progressed as a matter of priority;
3. Mai n Staircase treads - The Committee felt that an additional insert should be incorporated; and
4. R ainwater pipe - The Committee felt that the position of this pipe was an unacceptable risk and should be resolved as soon as possible.

The Committee noted that modifications to the historic States Building had been carried out in accordance with existing bye-laws. However, it felt that these bye- laws should be updated in line with latest standards on disabled access. It was recognised that implementing the adaptations considered necessary for improving disabled access and circulation would incur some additional costs. However, the Committee  felt  that  it  was  important  to  ensure  that  access  for  all  was maximised  as  far  as  possible.  It  requested  the  Environment  and  Public Services Committee to identify a source for the required additional funding

within its budget or, if necessary, seek additional funding.

The  Greffier  of  the  States  was  directed  to  send  a  copy  of  this  Act  to  the Environment and Public Services Committee.

States Building A8. The Committee received correspondence, dated 11th August 2003, from the Maintenance and President  of  the  Finance  and  Economics  Committee  in  relation  to  the  States Service Charges Building Maintenance and Service Charges for 2004.

2004

1060/5/1(42) The Committee noted that the Finance and Economics Committee had given an

assurance that the cost of maintenance and service charges would be met in 2004 Ex.Off. but  it  had  recommended  that  the  Committee  put  forward  a  bid  in  the  2005 T.O.S. Fundamental Spending Review process for the shortfall in future funding for this C.I.Aud. purpose.

F.E.C.C.

The Committee further noted that the Finance and Economics Committee intended to negotiate Service Level Agreements with tenant departments with transparency in the cost of charges. It was advised that a draft Service Level Agreement had been received and was being examined by its officers.

The Greffier of the States was directed to send a copy of this Act to the Finance and Economics Committee to acknowledge the above.

Electronic A9. The Committee, with reference to its Acts No. A9 of 25th April 2003 and A2 Voting/ of 30th May 2003, received a report, dated 15th August 2003, prepared by the Hansard - Executive Officer, with regard to comprehensive ICT options for a simultaneous comprehensive electronic voting system and the recording and transcription of the States Assembly ICT options. and its Committees.

1240/22(8)

1240/10/1(1) The Committee was aware that, following the adoption by the States of its Report

and Proposition on a Simultaneous Electronic Voting to replace the appel nominal Ex.Off. (P.10/2003), much work had been done to identify the best system available. It was T.O.S. advised, however, that, on recent consultation with the IT Director of Computer C.I.Aud. Services  and  the  e-government  team,  concern  had  been  expressed  as  to  the F.E.C.C. compatibility of the proposed product with the existing States network. Work was States (2) now being carried out to ensure compatibility but this would inevitably delay the

installation of the new system.

The Committee was advised that the above discussions had raised further concerns about the piecemeal approach which had been adopted with regard to purchasing of IT  systems.  It  had  been  suggested  that  with  further  consultation  between  the Officers  of  the  PPC  and  Computer  Services,  the  States  Members' business requirements with regards to ICT, present and future, should be identified as a whole before any more individual products were purchased. It was very likely that a bespoke system could be created which would cater for all of the requirements rather than lots of smaller products from different companies which would lead to higher  management/maintenance  costs.  This  was  likely  to  lead  to  overall  cost savings.

The Committee was further advised that the new digital audio recording system which had been installed in the States Chamber had the option of a "Bolt on" facility  which  would  allow  the  audio  to  be "streamed" on  the  existing  States Assembly website allowing the Public, Civil Servants and Politicians alike to listen to the debate live or to archive audio files. Although demonstrations had been hosted by the e-government team at Computer Services in the "Webcasting" (Video streaming with linked audio and transcription) of debates it was recognised that in the current financial climate the States could not justify the Video streaming of the debates especially with Public demand unknown. The Committee charged the Executive Officer to investigate instead the option of enhancing the current Audio product to allow debates to be linked to the existing website, where demand could be monitored for the time being, as well as ensuring that in the future if a Video output was required that it too could be added to the existing system.

The Committee, mindful that it had lodged its proposition P.81/2003 ("Hansard") containing its recommendations for a recording and transcription service for the States Assembly and its Committees and that this proposition would form the foundation for any new product, decided to request that the proposition be debated by the States at the earliest opportunity.

The Greffier of the States was directed to send a copy of this Act to the Finance and Economics Committee for information.

States members' A10.  The Committee, with reference to Act No. A6, dated 24th May 2002, of the access to Committee as previously constituted, considered e-mail correspondence, dated 16th Committee June 2003, from Deputy J.L. Dorey relating to concerns relating to States members' Minutes. free access to Committee minutes.

1240/1/2(18)

The Committee recalled that the current policy in this respect was based on the Ex.Off. 1987 ruling of the then Attorney General that members were entitled to access

Committee minutes and other papers in the custody of the Greffier of the States in

connexion  with  matters  connected  to  their  States' duties.  Members  were  not

required to refer a request to consult papers to the Committee concerned, but the

normal practice was for members to inform the relevant President as a matter of

courtesy.  The  Committee  further  recalled  that,  in  view  of  concerns  regarding

possible breaches of confidentiality, data protection and human rights, it had written

to  all  Committees  requesting  them  to  review  their  practices  in  relation  to  the

inclusion of names in Committee minutes, particularly where sensitive personal

details were involved, as in the case of applications under Regulation 1(1)(g) of the

Housing  Regulations  or  applications  for  medical  retirement  to  the  Human

Resources Sub-Committee. The Committee was aware that some Committees, such

as the Health and Social Services Committee, had introduced a coding system to

replace individual names in matters such as applications under the Mental Health

(Jersey) Law, 1969. Other Committees, however, such as the Housing Committee,

had not changed their practices in this respect.

The  Committee  decided  to  refer  the  issue  to  the  Freedom  of  Information Working Party for further consideration.

Deputy F.J. Hill, B.E.M., withdrew from the meeting for this item. The Committee wished to record that no impropriety on his part had been alleged or found against him.

On a related matter and mindful of the recent circumstances in which the former Senator R.J. Shenton had been refused access to the Minutes of the Policy and Resources Committee in connexion with meetings he had attended where the matter of the claim by Les Pas Holdings to the St. Helier Foreshore had been discussed, the Committee received a copy of the United Kingdom Civil Service Guidance on Access by Former Ministers to official Papers. The Committee decided to refer this matter also to the Freedom of Information Working Party for further consideration.

States Members A11.  The Committee, with reference to its Act No. A2(c) of 21st March 2003, remuneration: considered  correspondence,  dated  17th  July  2003,  from  Mr.  D.  O'Callaghan, Social Security Director,  Compliance  and  Governance,  Employment  and  Social  Security classification of Department, in connexion with the implications, advantages, disadvantages and States members. costs involved should all States members be reclassified as Class 1 employees for 1240/3(63) Social Security liability purposes. In addition, the Committee was advised of the position if States members continued to be liable for Class 2 but with the income

Ex.Off. bar removed so that all members could receive re-imbursement of the employee's Emp.SSC(2) portion of the Class 2 contribution.

The  Committee,  aware  that  in  the  United  Kingdom  legislation  had  been introduced in order to classify Members of Parliament as employees', decided to  request  the  Employment  and  Social  Security  Committee  to  consider similarly  amending  the  Social  Security  (Jersey)  Law,  1974,  to  reflect  the actuality of States members' position as employees' of the States of Jersey.

The  Greffier  of  the  States  was  directed  to  send  a  copy  of  this  Act  to  the Employment and Social Security Committee accordingly.

2004 Budget A12.  The Committee received a draft submission in respect of its contribution to Book Submission the 2004 Budget Book of the Finance and Economics Committee.

465/2(5)

The  Committee  noted  that  the  narrative  detailed  the  proposed  Finance  and Ex.Off. Economics  transfers  to  its  budget  with  effect  from  1st  January  2004  and T.O.S. information on the 2004 Fundamental Spending Review outcomes, inherited from C.I.Aud. the  Finance  and  Economics  Committee,  rendering  an  overall  Cash  Limit  of F.E.C.C. £3,966,950.

A.G.O.S.

The Committee approved the draft submission, subject to further revision by the President, and authorised the Assistant Greffier of the States to forward all relevant information to the Treasurer of the States. The Greffier of the States was directed to send a copy of this Act to the Finance and Economics Committee for information.

Matters for A13. The Committee noted the following matters for information - information.

1. t hat further work was being done on a draft Report and Proposition on proposals to improve the implementation of the Code of Practice on Public Access to Official Information;
2. a paper, dated 17th July 2003, from the Greffier of the States regarding issues raised by the Treasurer of the States and the Chief Executive of the  Policy  and  Resources  Committee  in  connexion  with  the  time required by Departments to deal with States members' questions. The Committee requested that the matter be referred to the Working Party on the arrangements for Public Business in the States;
3. a  request by Senator P.V.F. Le Claire to consider requesting the Policy and Resources Committee be requested to provide all States members with the full legal advice given to it in respect of its proposition on Migration Policy (P.102/2003). The Committee agreed to consider this issue at its next meeting;
4. that  comments  had  been  expressed  to  the  President  regarding  the appearance of a special role being created for the senior member of the States. The Committee, having noted that the President was a member of the Bailiff 's Consultative Panel was of the view that it would be appropriate for the matter to be raised in that Forum;
5. the  President  undertook  to  prepare  a  report  on  the  work  of  the Tribunals Working Party for the next meeting; and
6. the  date of the next meeting to take place on Friday 19th September 2003, commencing at 9.30 a.m., in the Halkett Room, Morier House.

Acts of other A14. The Committee noted the following Acts of other Committees -

Committees.

1. Act  No.  A7,  dated  3rd  July  2003,  of  the  Policy  and  Resources Committee in connexion with the establishment of Scrutiny Panels;
2. A  ct No. A4, dated the 2nd July 2003, of the Finances and Economics Committee in connexion with establishment of Scrutiny Panels;
3. A  ct No. A13, dated the 4th July 2003, of the Legislation Committee in connexion with the Freedom of Information Working Party;
4. Act  No.  A6,  dated  10th  July  2003,  of  the  Policy  and  Resources Committee  regarding  the  Establishment  of  Scrutiny  Panels  and  its response to Senator Syvret's amendments;
5. A  ct No. A6, dated 6th August 2003 of the Finance and Economics Committee  in  connexion  with  increased  charges  levied  by  the Environment  and  Public  Services  Committee  on  the  tenant departments of the States Building; and
6. A ct No. B3, dated 2nd July 2003, of the Finance and Economics Committee in connexion with the Fundamental Spending Review.

Board of A15.  The  Committee,  with  reference  to  its  Act  No.  A6  of  25th  April  2003, Administrative received  Mr.  R.R.   Jeune ,  C.B.E.,  to  mark  his  retirement  as  Chairman  of  the Appeals. Administrative Appeals Panel.

1386(3)

465/1(30) The Committee acknowledged Mr. Jeune 's rôle in establishing an independent

appeals system.

Mr.   Jeune  maintained  that  the  need  for  a  system  of  review  by  Boards  of Administrative  Appeals  remained  valid  today.  The  present  system  had  been approved and validated by the British and Irish Ombudsman Association. Its main advantages were that it was presided over by a lawyer; it met in public; there was little expense to the taxpayer; and there was little delay. Committees were not obliged to accept the recommendations of the Board but public influence could be brought to bear on any Committees which refused to change a decision. The main change he would advocate regarded the removal of the Greffier of the States from the decision whether or not to submit a case to the Board. He felt that States members and the Public should be educated in the potential advantages of using the present system.

The Committee presented Mr. Jeune with a retirement gift.

Media attendance A16.  The  Committee  congratulated  Mr.  B.  Querée,  who  had  been  present at meeting. throughout the meeting, on his recent appointment as Political Editor at the Jersey

Evening Post