States Minutes 7th October 2003

THE STATES assembled on Tuesday, 7th October 2003 at 9.30 a.m. under the Presidency of the Bailiff ,

Sir Philip Bailhache .

His Excellency the Lieutenant Governor,

Air Chief Marshal Sir John Cheshire, K.B.E., C.B., was present

All members were present with the exception of –

S e nator Jean Amy Le  Maistre – out of the Island

S e nator Christopher Gerard Pellow Lakeman – out of the Island

J o hn Baudains Germain, Connétable of St.  Martin – out of the Island P h ilip Francis Ozouf , Connétable of St.  Saviour – ill

K e nneth Alan Le  Brun, Connétable of St.  Mary–  out of the Island

J a cqueline Jeannette Huet, Deputy of St.  Helier – out of the Island

F r ederick John Hill, Deputy of St.  Martin – out of the Island

R o y George Le  Hérissier, Deputy of St.  Saviour–  out of the Island

Prayers

Subordinate legislation tabled

The following enactments were laid before the States, namely –

Civil  Service  Administration  (General)  (Jersey)  Rules  1949  (Amendment R&O 95/2003. No.  15) (Jersey) Order 2003.

Road and Sand Racing (Motor Vehicle Rally) (Jersey) Order 2003. R&O 96/2003. Road and Sand Racing (Jersey) Order 2003. R&O 97/2003. Medicines (Sale and Supply) (Miscellaneous Provisions) (Amendment No.  5) R&O 98/2003.

(Jersey) Order 2003.

Maincrop Potato Marketing (Registration of Producers and Polls) (Revocation) R&O 99/2003. (Jersey) Order 2003.

Social Security (Earnings Limit) (Jersey) Order 2003. R&O 100/2003.

Matters presented

The following matters were presented to the States –

States of Jersey Law 1966, as amended: delegation of functions – airport. R.C.43/2003. Harbours and Airport Committee.

Manpower report for the period 1st January 2003 to 30th June 2003. R.C.44/2003.

Economic Development Committee.

Shadow Scrutiny: proposed arrangements. R.C.45/2003. Privileges and Procedures Committee.

Migration Policy (P.102/2003): comments. P.102/2003. Employment and Social Security Committee. Com.(2)

Migration Policy (P.102/2003): comments. P.102/2003. Economic Development Committee. Com.(3)

Jersey Community Relations Trust (P.120/2003): comments. P.120/2003. Finance and Economics Committee. Com.

Draft  Sea  Fisheries  (Licensing  of  Fishing  Boats)  (Jersey)  Regulations  200- P.124/2003. (P.124/2003): comments. Com. Finance and Economics 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 1st October 2003, showing that, in pursuance of Standing Orders relating to certain transactions in land, the Committee had approved –

( a ) as recommended by the Harbours and Airport Committee, the lease to D.K. Collins Marine Limited of

Office (Letting No. S8), South Pier, St.  Helier Harbour for a period of 3  years from 1st July 2003, at a annual rent of £8,890.21 (representing a rate of £5.89 a square foot), to be reviewed annually in line with the Jersey Retail Price Index;

( b ) as recommended by the Harbours and Airport Committee, the lease to Mr. Mark Symons of an Alcove

(Letting No.  STC1) at St.  Catherin'es Breakwater, St.  Martin, for use as a fishing tackle shop and storage, for a period of 3 years from 1st August 2003, at an annual rent of £183.89, payable on 31st July each year, to be reviewed annually in line with the Jersey Retail Price Index;

( c ) as recommended by the Harbours and Airport Committee, the lease to Mr. Mark Symons of an Alcove

(Letting No.  STC2) at St.  Catherin'es Breakwater, St.  Martin, for use as a fishing tackle shop and storage, for a period of 3  years from 2nd June 2003, at an annual rent of£473.19, payable on 1st June each year, to be reviewed annually in line with the Jersey Retail Price Index; and,

( d ) as recommended by the Environment and Public Services Committee, the purchase from the Jersey New

Waterworks Company Limited of an area of land (measuring 3,014  square feet) forming the south- westerly extremity of Field No.  2007, St.  Ouen, required for the construction of a foul sewer pumping station, for a total consideration of £3,500 for the freehold interest in the land, inclusive of a one-off payment of £484 for the use of a temporary working area of 7,000  square feet during the construction period, on the basis that the Committee would be responsible for both parties' reasonable legal costs arising from the transaction.

Matters lodged

The following matters were lodged "au Greffe" –

Draft The Lloyds TSB (Jersey) Law 1997 (Appointed Day) (No.  3) (Jersey) Act P.136/2003.

200-.

Presented by the Finance and Economics Committee.

Social Security Fund: a new method of funding. P.137/2003. Presented by Deputy G.P. Southern of St. Helier, and referred to the Finance and

Economics and Employment and Social Security Committees.

Le  Rocquier School, St. Clement: redevelopment Phase 2–  construction of new P.138/2003. school – approval of drawings.

Presented by the Education, Sport and Culture Committee.

Jersey Legal Information Board: introduction of user pays' charges. P.139/2003. Presented by the Finance and Economics Committee.

The following matter was lodged on 30th September 2003 –

Bas du Mont Flats, Pier Road, St.  Helier: sale to the Christians Together in Jersey P.135/2003. (CTJ) Housing Trust. (re-issue). Presented by the Housing Committee.

Arrangement of public business for the present meeting

THE STATES granted leave to the President of the Policy and Resources Committee to defer consideration of the proposition regarding the Jersey Community Relations Trust, (P.120/2003 lodged "au Greffe" on 12th August 2003), from the present meeting to a later date.

Arrangement of public business for the next meeting on 21st October 2003 –

THE STATES confirmed that the following matters lodged "au Greffe" would be considered at the next meeting on 21st October 2003 –

School milk: provision for the years 2003, 2004 and 2005. P.7/2003. Lodged: 28th January 2003.

Deputy G.P. Southern of St. Helier.

School milk: provision for the years 2003, 2004 and 2005 (P.7/2003) – comments. P.7/2003. Presented: 18th February 2003. Com. Economic Development Committee.

School milk: provision for the years 2003, 2004 and 2005 (P.7/2003) – comments. P.7/2003. Presented 25th February 2003. Com.(2) Finance and Economics Committee. (re-issue).

Succession Rights for children born out of wedlock. P.121/2003. Lodged: 12th August 2003.

Legislation Committee.

Draft Protection of Children (Amendment No.  3) (Jersey) Law 200-. P.133/2003. Lodged: 16th September 2003.

Legislation Committee.

Draft Transfer of Functions (Environment and Public Services Committee) (No.  2) P.134/2003. (Jersey) Act 200-.

Lodged: 23rd September 2003.

Environment and Public Services Committee.

Bas du Mont Flats, Pier Road, St.  Helier: sale to the Christians Together in Jersey P.135/2003. (CTJ) Housing Trust. (re-issue) Lodged: 30th September 2003.

Housing Committee.

Draft The Lloyds TSB (Jersey) Law 1997 (Appointed Day) (No.  3) (Jersey) Act P.136/2003. 200-.

Lodged: 7th October 2003.

Finance and Economics Committee.

Le  Rocquier School, St. Clement: redevelopment Phase 2–  construction of new P.138/2003. school – approval of drawings.

Lodged: 7th October 2003.

Education, Sport and Culture Committee.

Trial Residents' Parking Scheme in St.  Helier – question and answer (Tape No.  859)

Deputy John Benjamin Fox of St.  Helier asked Deputy Maurice François Dubras of St.  Lawrence, President of th Environment and Public Services Committee, the following question –

" W  ould the President inform members of the Committee's plans in relation to the trial Residents' Parking Scheme in St.  Helier, and, in particular, state –

( a ) how successful the trial scheme has been?

( b ) whether similar schemes are to be introduced in other urban areas of the Island? and,

( c ) whether the Committee intends to keep the price of any permanent scheme to a similar level to that of the

trial scheme?"

The President of the Environment and Public Services Committee replied as follows –

" ( a) The trial scheme provides privileged parking for 172 residents in the Stopford Road area of St.  Helier. Since its inception on 4th November 2002, and a small increase in the number of paycard parking spaces on 13th December 2002, to provide for visitors to the area, there have been relatively few comments. The most frequent criticisms from residents have centred around the inadequate level of policing of the parking restrictions at nights and on Sundays. Policing during other times is carried out by the Department's Parking Control Officers, who patrol the streets frequently. All residents of the area were invited to a meeting in June, this year, to gauge the degree of success and popularity of the trial. Approximately 60 residents attended the meeting, 26 of whom returned a form recording their views on the scheme. These comments together with others who wrote into the Department generally supported continuation of the scheme. However, of the 850 invitations distributed to residents and businesses in the area, only 3.5 percent chose to comment. Statistically, this is insufficient to judge the success of the scheme. Nonetheless, the Committee has decided to proceed to the next phase whereby the trial scheme will be made permanent.

( b ) The Committee is keen to consider the expansion of the scheme to other urban areas. However, the

design and implementation of each new scheme will require a full evaluation on an area by area basis, requiring the allocation of funds and significant staff resources, which the Committee does not have available at this time unless an alternative funding route for new schemes can be identified. Similarly, additional resources will be required to carry out enforcement on any further schemes.

( c ) The former Public Services Committee agreed to introduce the trial scheme with a subsidy on the true

cost of a parking permit, in order to gauge the level of interest in the new parking arrangements. This fact was

made known in the lead up to introducing the trial. The Committee does not possess the financial resources to continue to subsidise the parking scheme indefinitely. It is essential that the scheme becomes self-financing, to cover initial costs, running costs plus the impact on parking income. The cost to the resident of a parking permit will therefore rise on 5th November 2003. However, because the Committee is prepared to continue to partially subsidise the permit fee for a further 6 months, the true cost will not be charged until May 2004. Permit holders have been informed with individual letters of the revised permit cost. The Committee has agreed that if a significant numbers of residents or businesses find the real cost of operating a residents' parking scheme in Jersey to be unacceptable and they wish the scheme be abandoned, the Committee will re-consider its decision to continue with the scheme."

Access to the States Building and Morier House – question and answer (Tape No. 859)

The Deputy of St. John asked Deputy Maurice Françoise Dubras of St.  Lawrence, President of the Environmen and Public Services Committee, the following question –

" W ould the President inform members –

 ( a ) whether access cards will be issued to States members in respect of Morier House and the States

Building, and, if so, when?

( b ) whether the delay in issuing cards to States members in respect of these premises arises from the issue of

trust?

( c ) whether the Environment and Public Services Committee intends to hand over the management of these

premises to the Privileges and Procedures Committee, and, if so, when?"

The President of the Environment and Public Services Committee replied as follows –

" ( a) Morier House is under the administration of the Environment and Public Services Committee through the Department of Property Services. The Facilities Management Services, which include cleaning and maintenance as well as security arrangements for the building, are contracted to the Public Services Department. Currently only staff working within the building and a small number of States Members who require regular access to the building on a daily basis are issued with key cards to operate the electronic door system.

T o m a intain the strict security that is required by the Crown Officers and other legal department staff

working within the building, the issue of key cards is kept to the absolute minimum to prevent, as far as possible, any unauthorised entry or misuse. States Members who require access for meetings have only to report to the security desk on entry so that a record is kept of who is in the building at any particular time should a fire or other situation arise which requires emergency evacuation. There are currently no plans to issue these cards to each and every States Member who requires only infrequent access to Morier House.

T h e ex isting security arrangements at Morier House have been the subject of continual monitoring and

gradual improvement by Property Services in consultation with the Heads of each Department and the building's User Group since the building was first brought into use. The experience gained at Morier House by Property Services and Public Services has been successful and useful and will eventually lead to a greater degree of improved and appropriate security in all States buildings.

T h e n ewly refurbished Royal Court and States Building is managed by the Public Services Department

which, in consultation with the 3 principal users and Property Services, will shortly be reviewing the security arrangements for the building and reporting back to the Committee with its recommendations before the end of the year.

( b ) The trustworthiness of States Members is not in doubt. Key cards have been issued to the small number

of States Members who actually requested and demonstrated the need for them to gain regular access to their Departments within Morier House. Arrangements for States Members with regard to the States Building will be finalised with the Privileges and Procedures Committee.

( c ) Morier House is effectively managed by the Department of Property Services using standard facilities

management practice. If planned changes are implemented to include public access committee rooms, scrutiny and States Members facilities at ground floor level in the future, then the Privileges and Procedures Committee as a tenant will be responsible for how those particular facilities are used, together with separate arrangements for access to those facilities. It is important that the States Building and Morier House and the efficient departmental use of those offices remains within the proposed integrated property management function. There are no plans to place that function with the Privileges and Procedures Committee."

Resource Plan 2004-2008 – question and answer (Tape No. 859)

The Connétable of St.  Helier asked Senator Frank Harris on Walker , President of the Policy and Resources Committee, the following question –

" W ith reference to the recently agreed Resource Plan, (P.118/2003), would the President inform members –

( a ) whether the Committee was aware that the forecast deficit figure of £22 million by 2008, as quoted in the

Resource Plan, was not cumulative; and, whether the President would agree that the forecast therefore understated the actual figure by £14 million, and, if the answer is in the affirmative, explain why this information was not revealed?

(b ) whether the Committee was aware that its Resource Plan proposition would require savings of

approximately 600 staff over the 4-year period 2005 to 2008, and, if the answer is in the affirmative, will he explain why this information was not revealed?

( c ) of the precise methodology and assumptions which underpin the forecast of a 2% increase in revenue per

annum during the Resource Plan period, and what sensitivity analysis, if any, was conducted in respect of this methodology and the assumptions made, what external professional advice was commissioned, if any, to qualify these, and whether he is prepared to state what the cumulative deficit of £36 million projected for 2008 would become if tax receipts were to grow not by 2% per annum as forecast but in the range of –3% to +3% per annum over the Resource Plan period, assuming that spending remained unchanged at 3% per annum growth?"

The President of the Policy and Resources Committee invited Senator Terence Augustine Le Sueur, Vice- President of the Policy and Resources Committee to reply, and he replied as follows –

"( a) The Committee was fully aware that the forecast deficit figure of £22 million by 2008 was not

cumulative.

T h e fo rm of presentation does not differ from previous years' financial forecasts and is the universally

accepted means to present both actual and budgeted performance.

T h e to tal deficit over the period 2004-2008, were no measures to deal with the situation introduced,

would be £71 million; however, the in-year deficit for 2008 would be £22 million, although it has always been intended that early measures would be taken to avoid this deficit occurring.

( b ) The Policy and Resources Committee did not explicitly discuss a manpower saving of up to 600 jobs in

initially considering the 2004 –2008 Resource Plan, concentrating instead upon the financial difficulties in which the committee and all of us find ourselves.

T h e C ommittee did, however, consider whether the savings required by the targets set in the Resource

Plan were realistic and further to extensive consultation not only with Committee Presidents but also including States Members, both the Finance and Economics and the Policy and Resources Committees agreed that the proposals of the Resource Plan were achievable.

U p to 600 staff savings over the period to 2008 is not an unrealistic target provided there is a political

will, and indeed is implicit given that 60% of our expenditure is staff-related.

I m u s t add of course that the estimate of up to 600 posts is just that at this stage, an estimate, and until the

Fundamental Spending Review process is further progressed, the eventual figure will not be known.

( c ) Income tax forecasts are received by the Finance and Economics Committee twice annually. The first

occasion is for the purposes of producing the Resource Plan. These figures are then revised later in the year, when more up to date information is available, for the Budget. These forecasts are then published in the Resource Plan and Budget document respectively.

A s I in dicated in a similar question earlier this year, the Comptroller bases his estimates on the previous

years' assessments, and these are broken down between the component areas of –

• so le traders,

• p artnership,

• em ployees, and

• co mpanies, including International Business Companies and Exempt Companies.

E s ti m a tes of the likely percentage increase are then factored in for each of the forecast years in respect

of –

• tr ading profits,

• co mpany profits,

• w ages and salaries,

• in vestment income, and

• p roperty rentals.

T h e ta x yield for each sector is then calculated by taking the effective rate of tax for that sector for the

previous year of assessment and applying this to the new sector charge.

B a s e d on past rates of tax collection, an estimate is made of the likely collection of tax in each sector,

year by year, and similarly for collection of tax arrears and estimates of tax repayments. Finally, an estimate of the level of early assessments, which produce an early receipt of tax revenues, is made in respect of individuals who leave the Island during the year.

T h e C omptroller will also factor into his calculations any effect on tax revenues arising from the

relocation or change in profitability of any major institutions, or indeed any new factors of which he becomes aware.

T h e in itial estimates, produced for the Resource Plan are improved later in the year by reference to the

tax assessments for the current year, which have all been issued by the end of September. It is these updated figures which will be used in the Budget Report to be published in early November.

T h e p r ocedure generally follows the way in which tax revenue forecasts are prepared in the U.K.

I t s h o uld be noted that the 2004 Income Tax revenues will be based on income earned in 2003, and

business profit earned in 2002. As a result, a reasonable indication of the levels of tax revenues likely for 2004 can be made prior to the budget being set, due to the time lag in the existing tax structure.

B e c a u se of the confidential nature of certain information, the forecasts are prepared primarily by the

Comptroller of Income Tax. However, recognising the ever increasing importance of these forecasts, particularly given our current funding difficulties, the Finance and Economics Committee has commissioned the building of a more detailed tax forecasting model in order to further improve the process.

T h e C omptroller's estimates are indeed subject to a compounded annual +/–3% forecasting variance,

within which recent forecasts have proven to be accurate.

H o w  e ver, given the uncertainty inherent in forecasting tax receipts far into the future, the range of

variation is only applied as far forward as 2005, by which time the range covers an upper end of £437 million and a lower limit of£343 million resulting in a financial forecast of anything between a deficit of £57 million and a surplus of£37 million.

H o w  ev er, I should like to stress that these would be the very outer limits of our current forecast, and as

the Committee revises forecasts twice yearly, much more robust figures within a narrower range would be available well in advance."

Proposed 2004 Budget – question and answer (Tape No. 859)

The Connétable of St.  Helier asked Senator Terence Augustine Le Sueur, President of the Finance and Economic Committee, the following question –

" W ould the President inform members which of the possible extra taxes outlined at the top of page 4 of the Policy and Resources Committee's 2004-2008 Resource Plan are likely to be brought forward in the 2004 Budget proposals of the Finance and Economics Committee to cover the forecast deficit of £7 million?"

The President of the Finance and Economics Committee replied as follows –

" T he tax measures referred to in the question, being –

• higher rates of income tax on households;

• adjustments to personal tax exemptions and allowances;

• the introduction of a new tax on spending; and,

• higher rates of social contributions,

a r e all measures which are being considered to address the medium to long-term funding issues, which I

remind members are arising largely from the E.U. tax package and demographic pressures.

T h e Committee will be coming forward early next year with a more specific package of measures.

T h ese changes will be vital to the future competitiveness of our financial services sector and thereby crucial

to the future of Jersey's economy, prosperity and standard of living.

I c an, however, confirm that none of these measures are intended to be employed to tackle the deficit of 2004.

C h anges to current taxes will be announced in this year's Budget document and considered during the budget

debate, in the usual and accepted way."

Guernsey fishing licensing scheme – question and answer (Tape No. 859)

The Deputy of St. John asked Deputy Francis Gerald Voisin of St. Lawrence, President of the Economi Development Committee, the following question –

" A s the Guernsey fishing licensing scheme came into effect as from 1st October 2003, would the President advise members –

( a ) of the number of Jersey fishermen who have informed the Sea Fisheries Department that they have been

unsuccessful in obtaining a licence to fish in Guernsey waters? and,

(b ) what action, if any, the Committee is taking to resolve the situation to the satisfaction of all the

unsuccessful fishermen, if any, and whether any meetings between the Islands' authorities have been held in this respect since 9th September 2003?"

The President of the Economic Development Committee replied as follows –

" ( a) The Department was advised by the Guernsey Sea Fisheries Committee following that Committee's meeting on 10th September 2003, that of the 76 Jersey applications for a Guernsey licence only 8 licences were granted; 27 applicants were asked to provide further information and 41 had their applications rejected. It has not been obligatory for individual fishermen to inform the Sea Fisheries officers of their failure to obtain Guernsey licences; however, close contact has been maintained with the industry.

( b ) On Monday 22nd September 2003, Senator Walker and I, accompanied by H.M. Attorney General and

supporting staff met with Guernsey Deputies Laurence Morgan, Claire Le  Pelley and Lyndon Trott at their officers in Guernsey. The outcome of the meeting was that the applications of Jersey Fishermen would be reviewed on 15th October 2003, and that they may continue fishing in the waters adjacent to Guernsey until 31st October. Each unsuccessful applicant would then have a further 28 days in which to lodge a formal appeal against that decision. Following the meeting, it is understood that all Jersey applicants received a letter from the President of the Guernsey Sea Fisheries Committee advising them of these arrangements.

W h i l st the Jersey delegation was successful in obtaining a short term delay to the impact of the Guernsey

licensing system on Jersey fishermen and in obtaining a more realistic appeals process, there is still real concern for the final outcome. However, in the meantime, the Jersey authorities are exploring how our licensing scheme may be changed to resolve the current problems."

Policy for the temporary release of prisoners at H.M. Prison, La Moye – statement

Senator Wendy Kinnard, President of the Home Affairs Committee, made a statement in the following terms –

" M embers will be aware that there have been instances recently of prisoners failing to observe the conditions of their temporary release under Rule 73 of the Prison Rules. In view of the public interest in these occurrences and the concern expressed by some States members, I should like to make a statement about the temporary release scheme and the conditions under which it operates. By so doing, I hope to be able to put into perspective the few occasions recently on which prisoners have broken the conditions of their release.

M  embers will recall that H.M. Prison La Moye had its first inspection by Her Majesty's Chief Inspector of Prisons in 2001. The subsequent report made 147 recommendations, 114 of which have been implemented.

Of those that have not, 14 are linked with the redevelopment of the prison estate (12 of which will be implemented during this and next year's building programme); 7 are areas outside of the Prison Governor's control such as the setting up of a Prison Ombudsman, transferring prisoners to court, the Island's provision for mentally ill offenders, the introduction of parole and a sex offender register; and the remaining 12 have yet to be actioned mainly because of their resource implications. A number of recommendations referred to

the resettlement of prisoners. The Chief Inspector was concerned that, with only one Prison, La Moye had to fulfil

all the responsibilities that in the U.K. would be divided among a range of establishments of graduated levels of security. In the U.K. a prisoner will invariably begin his or her custody on remand in a secure local prison and will usually spend a short time there after sentence before being allocated to an establishment which best fits his or her need for secure or open conditions. The Chief Inspector recommended that temporary release and outside work should be made available in Jersey for short sentenced prisoners, where previously only those serving in excess of 18 months were considered including women and young offenders. In the U.K., a prisoner will progress from closed secure conditions to less secure training establishments and eventually finish their sentence in an open or resettlement prison. We do not have such an infrastructure in Jersey and it is a requirement that La Moye performs all these functions.

I n the U.K., the timing of these moves through to open conditions is governed by risk assessments carried out

as a part of the sentence planning process. A system of risk assessment was already in place at La Moye at the time of the inspection. The inspection team were impressed with the risk assessment system at La Moye and took away examples of the documentation used as an example of best practice. They were concerned, however, that sentence planning was not co-ordinated with temporary release; consequently, the Prison Governor has been carrying out the necessary training and support for prison staff in order that sentence planning could be brought in earlier this year.

Q  uite clearly, temporary release for prisoners will not always be successful and the expected recall rate in

U.K. prisons is between 2% and 5%. Anything better than this is considered to be a demonstration of success. The recognised method of measuring temporary release performance is by counting the number of days upon which prisoners were released. During 2002, there were 5,436 days of temporary release in Jersey with only 5 incidents involving failure to report or the committing of a further offence. This was a success rate of 99.9%. For 2003, up until the end of August there had been a total of 6,318 days of temporary release. Of these, similar breaches occurred on 10 days giving a success rate of 99.85%. The Prison Rules acknowledge that breaches may occur by giving the Committee the power to recall prisoners who transgress. The only guaranteed way of eliminating potential failures is not to let prisoners out at all. However, this would severely frustrate the resettlement aims of the prison and has the potential to create an unhealthy atmosphere in which prisoners would have nothing to work towards and hence no motivation to conform to the rules or regime available or to prepare for the time when they will need to fit back into society.

A t this point, I should like to apprise members of the severe overcrowding problem with which the

Committee and the prison authorities are having to grapple, although I hasten to add that overcrowding is not a criteria taken into account when considering eligibility for temporary release. The prison has an operational capacity of 149 inmates in a prison that was designed to house prisoners for a maximum period of 18 months. It was envisaged that prisoners sentenced to longer terms would be transferred to the United Kingdom. The prison population has been rising steadily for several years – due mainly to the substantial custodial sentences given in respect of drug trafficking offences – and reached a peak in August this year of 187. The present prison population stands at 177 but is set to exceed 200 by the end of the year. There are an additional 56 prisoners accommodated in U.K. prisons, 31 of whom the Island pays for at a cost in the region of £38,000 per prisoner per annum.

 M  embers ought to be aware that Jersey's prison population is in the upper quartile of European prison

populations. In terms of the rate per 100,000 population, our average prison population was 208 in 2001, 226 in 2002, and is expected to be 257 by the end of this year. This puts Jersey on a par with Eastern European states such as Armenia, Romania and the Czech Republic and significantly higher than Guernsey and the Isle of Man.

T h e prospect of overcrowding was one of the drivers for the Committee's prison redevelopment programme and the introduction of electronic monitoring. Funding was provided through the 2003 capital programme for

the construction of a 37-cell accommodation block which is currently under construction and will be ready for occupation in mid-December. Further funding is available in 2004 for the construction of a replacement female wing and the prison also has a place in the 2006 capital programme. As a shorter term measure, in April the Committee brought in electronic monitoring, otherwise known as tagging, and there are currently 14 low-risk prisoners on this scheme. To date, tagging has been operating very successfully. The Finance and

Economics Committee has assisted the Home Affairs Committee in dealing with the more immediate problem by

providing additional funding to allow further prisoners to be sent to U.K. prisons.

T emporary release can take the form of home leave or work experience and is normally restricted to

sentenced prisoners. Before any prisoner is allowed temporary release for either home leave or work experience, they will have had a number of escorted home leaves with a prison officer. Information from these escorted home leaves is used to inform the decision making process. Occasionally remand prisoners have been granted escorted home leave if there have been strong compassionate reasons such as a family illness or death. The criteria for temporary release were reviewed by the Committee at its meeting on the 22nd May 2003. They are detailed and vary with the length of sentence being served; however, I am happy to provide any member with a copy of the criteria should they wish.

U  nderstandably, recent breaches of the conditions of temporary release have attracted much media attention.

As often happens in such cases, in the course of informing the public media reports have tended to sensationalise the facts. The most recent of these was the Jersey Evening Post article of the 2nd October 2003, which referred to "the deepening prison home leave crisis". Given the success rate for this year of 99.85% the manner in which individual breaches have been reported has tended to distort the overall picture. That is not to say that the Committee has been complacent in not taking such incidents seriously. After a prisoner on escorted home leave escaped from his escort on the 14th September 2003, the Committee suspended all home leave, other than for prisoners on the outside work scheme, until it could discuss the situation fully at its meeting on 26th September 2003. On the 26th September, the Committee had a day long meeting at which it discussed the temporary release scheme as its last item. The Committee decided to suspend all forms of home leave, other than escorted releases on compassionate grounds, pending a review of the eligibility criteria. Unfortunately, that evening a young offender who was already on home leave is alleged to have become involved in the assault on the Esplanade which resulted in the hospitalisation of another youth. However, no charges have been laid against this young offender at present. Because of that incident, the Home Affairs Committee held another meeting on Friday the 3rd October 2003, to discuss the situation further. As a result, the Committee has decided to commission an independent report which will look at the procedures and criteria for granting temporary release, the risk assessment process, and the circumstances surrounding recent breaches of temporary release licence. Upon receipt of this report, the Committee will review the eligibility criteria and take any other action that might be deemed appropriate. The Committee believes that it would be in the public interest for this report to be compiled by a person independent of the Home Affairs area. The Committee would like to be able to consider a report by the end of October so I am taking steps to identify an appropriate person for the task in the next few days. The report will be made available to the States once the Committee has considered it. During the reporting period, home leave will remain suspended. Outside working for those currently on the scheme will continue, although the Committee will be reviewing the list of participants.

I n the longer term, the Committee is making determined efforts to look at the way we currently deal with

prisoners in the Island and whether the present arrangements are in the best interests of the community at large and the prisoners themselves. We are doing this through the development of a criminal justice policy which has never before been laid down by a Committee of the States. In drawing up the new policy we will consult all the people with an interest including members of the public. We have yet to decide what form the public consultation will take but are taking steps to identify the most effective means of creating that engagement. Amongst other things, the policy will look at the various steps in the process from an offence being committed to an offender being dealt with, the interaction of criminal justice agencies during that process, the sentencing options available to the courts and the management of offenders sentenced to a period of custody.

I n conclusion, I should like to stress that any breach of a temporary release licence is of serious concern to the Committee, and I believe that it has responded appropriately when these breaches have occurred. However, I would ask members to bear in mind the longer term value to both prisoners and the community of being able

to operate a temporary release scheme. Taking into account the overall number of days spent on temporary release, the conditions of licence have been strictly observed by the vast majority of prisoners admitted to the scheme. It is creditable that this has been achieved against the backdrop of prison overcrowding and under- funding that I have described. I will report to the States again once the independent report the Committee has

commissioned has been received."

Prisoners' release policies at H.M. Prison, La Moye – questions and answers (Tape No. 859)

The Connétable of St.  Helier asked Senator Wendy Kinnard, President of the Home Affairs Committee, the following questions –

" 1 . Will the President explain the Committee's policy in relation to the early release from custody of persons convicted of offences which cause harm to other members of our community and sentenced to imprisonment?

2 .  Would the President inform members at what stage of their sentence prisoners become eligible for the

day work release scheme?"

The President of the Home Affairs Committee replied as follows –

"1 . Early release can take the form of outside work or home leave which can be either escorted or

unescorted. Prisoners are currently eligible for consideration for the outside work scheme after having served half of the custody period. In the case of a sentence of 3 years this will be after 12 months (al prisoners are released after serving two-thirds of the sentence with one third being allowed for remission). Where there is a clearly identifiable victim, contact is made with the victim by the Probation and After-care Service to inform them that the prisoner's application for early release is being considered. If prisoners who have offended are going to be successfully reintegrated into the community they need to have the opportunity to secure work and eventually accommodation prior to release. The outside work scheme has been doing this successfully since 1995. Following an incident when a prisoner escaped from his escort, both escorted and unescorted home leave in respect of adult prisoners was suspended on the 14th September 2003. The Committee discussed the matter again last Friday and decided that prisoners currently on the outside work scheme could continue but the Committee would review a list of those participating. No new applications would be approved for the time being. Home leave remains suspended.

2 .  Prisoners become eligible for consideration for the outside work scheme after serving a half of their

custody period subject to a ceiling of 16  months. Prior to July 2002, when the scheme was reviewed, this 16-month ceiling did not apply. The Committee will be reviewing the criteria prior to approving any further placements on the outside work scheme.

I s h a ll be making a more detailed statement about temporary release and other matters concerning H.M.

Prison, La Moye, following Questions."

Communications links at the St. Helier Harbour – questions and answers (Tape No. 859)

The Deputy of St.  John asked Senator Leonard Norman, President of the Harbours and Airport Committee, the following questions –

" 1 . Over the summer considerable diving activity has taken place within the harbour to lay fibre optic cables. Would the President advise members –

(a ) t h e cost of these works?

(b ) h o w many tenders were received to do the work and from whom? and,

(c ) t h e price of each tender?

2.  Would the President advise members whether or not alternative methods of making the necessary

communications  link  on  the sea bed across  the Victoria  and Albert Pier Heads were  investigated,  such as

microwave links?

3 .  Would the President advise members whether all existing I.T. equipment using the fibre optic link will be

compatible with other I.T. equipment across other States departments, once the installation is complete, and, if not, explain the reasons why?"

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

" 1 .(a) T he work carried out by divers during the summer forms part of a project to provide a secure communications ring around St. Helier Harbour. Once the network is completed, savings in excess of £80,000 per annum are anticipated. The cost of the diving is one part of a larger scheme and it would take considerable administration time to extract these costs from the past time sheets as all the work between the pier heads was undertaken by harbour staff; a rough estimate could be made, but could not be substantiated for accuracy.

( b ) N o tenders were received for this work, as Jersey Harbours have the only Health and Safety

Executive qualified dive team on the Island. To bring in a dive team from the U.K. was considered unnecessary and expensive.

(c ) N  ot applicable given the answer to (b).

2 .  Yes. Alternative methods were considered and successful tests were carried out in 2002 using microwave

links between Maritime House and Port Control; indeed Jersey Harbours already use microwave and radio links for transmission of data and will continue to do so, but the fibre optic link was considered to be the most resilient, satisfactory and secure.

3 .  Yes, all our systems run off the same I.T. platforms."

Disbandment of the Telecommunications Board – question and answer (Tape No. 859)

The Deputy of St.  John asked Senator Paul Francis Routier, President of the Telecommunications Board, the following question –

" W ould the President advise members when the Telecommunications Board will be disbanded with all functions transferring to the Board of Directors of Jersey Telecom Limited?"

The President of the Telecommunications Board replied as follows –

" A ll functions relating to the operational and commercial decisions of Jersey Telecom were transferred to the Board of Directors of Jersey Telecom Group Ltd. on 1st January 2003.