PPC Minutes 14th October 2004

SAL/KAK/303 264

PRIVILEGES AND PROCEDURES COMMITTEE (24th Meeting)

14th October 2004

PART A

All members were present.

Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier Senator P.V.F. Le Claire Connétable D.F. Gray Deputy P.N. Troy Deputy C.J. Scott - Warr en 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 (for a time) Miss. S.A. Lewin, Committee Clerk (for a time)

Mr. P. Monamy, Senior Committee Clerk (for a time)

Note: The Minutes of this meeting comprise Part A and Part B.

Minutes A1.  The  Minutes  of  the  meetings  held  on  15th  July  2004  (Part  B)  and  21st

September (Part B), having been previously circulated, were taken as read and were confirmed.

Draft States of A2.  The Committee, with reference to its Act No. A1 of 5th October 2004, with Jersey Law 200- H.M.  Attorney  General  and  Mr.  R.W.  Whitehead,  Principal  Legal  Adviser  in Senator S. attendance, considered Senator S. Syvret's draft amendments to the draft States of Syvret: Jersey  Law  200-, lodged au  Greffe' by  the  Committee  on  29th  June  2004 amendments. (P.124/2004).

450(1)

Having  agreed  to  give  due  consideration  to  the  Senator's  amendments,  the Committee was mindful that they had yet to be finalised by Senator Syvret and approved by the Bailiff and, as such, it was unable to provide definite comments until they were finalised.

Having  considered  each  amendment  in  turn,  the  Committee  requested  the Greffier to prepare preliminary comments in line with its discussions for their consideration in preparation for the debate proposed for 9th November 2004.

On a related matter, Deputy J.A. Bridge requested the Greffier to prepare a file containing all cross references and amendments to the draft States of Jersey Law 200- .

Scrutiny of States A3.  The Committee, with reference to its Act No.A4 of 15th July 2004, with Mr. C. Business Plan Ahier ,  Scrutiny  Officer  in  attendance,  received  a  report  in  connexion  with  the

and Budget. scrutiny of the States Business Plan and Budget. 502/5/5(1)

Members recalled that it had commissioned an investigation into the process required F.E.C.C. to scrutinise the States Business Plan and Budget and in this accord the Committee T.O.S. noted the proposed aims of the scrutiny function –

1. to apprise Statesmembersof the processes involved;
2. to suggest improvements totheprocesses;
3. t o evaluate the outcomes;
4. t o assess the impactofproposals on States strategic aims;and
5. t o assist States memberstoevaluate the StatesBusiness Plan andBudget.

The  report recommended that the  Scrutiny Panels shadow  the  whole process  of formulating the said documentation and it was in this respect that a two phased scrutiny approach had been proposed as follows –

1. s crutiny of the real-timeprocessthroughshadowing;and
2. s crutiny ofthe outcomes of the process duringthe period prior to the debate of the proposition.

Further, it was suggested that the Committee should consider the instigation of a Scrutiny Panel dedicated solely to reviewing the States Business Plan and Budget.

Following discussion it was agreed that the scrutiny function should be an ongoing process and that it should not be confined to a six week period rather it was agreed that  the  Panel  should  be  involved  throughout  the  budgetary  process.  It  was particularly noted that the budget should be predictable and in this regard it would be possible to examine the process and figures in advance of this six week period. It was suggested  that  each  year  a  particular  area  of  the  budget  could  be  scrutinised meticulously  and  a  practical  theme  established,  for  example,  the  family  or pensioners. The President endorsed a combined thematic and process approach to scrutiny and recognised that transparency would be fundamental to the success of this method. It was agreed that where there was the need for confidentiality, the scrutiny process could be conducted later.

Following  careful  consideration,  the  Committee  approved  a  thematic  and process approach to scrutiny and requested that further examination of other jurisdictions be undertaken in this regard.

The Scrutiny Officer was directed accordingly.

Public Elections A4.  The Committee considered correspondence, dated 22nd September 2004 from (Jersey) Law H.M. Attorney General regarding the Public Elections (Jersey) Law 2002 and, in 2002: sale of particular, the sale of electoral registers either in a full or "sanitised" format.

electoral

registers. In this regard, the Committee noted Act No. A9 of 30th July 2004 of the Legislation 424/2(21) Committee and correspondence from the Comité des Connétable s dated 13th May

2004.

C.des C.

The Committee recognised that the United Kingdom produced a "sanitised" electoral  register  for  general  sale  but  it  agreed  that  this  would  not  be  a favourable approach for Jersey. Accordingly it endorsed the view of the Comité des Connétable s.

The Greffier of the States was requested to send a copy of this Act to the Comité des Connétable s.

States members' A5.  The Committee, with reference to Act No. A8 of 16th September 2004, gave car parking further consideration to the issue of States members' parking arrangements. arrangements.

1240/9/1(115) Members were concerned to note that no satisfactory solution to this matter appeared

to have been identified by the Environment and Public Services Committee. In this light it was agreed that a dedicated, secure area should be found as soon as possible for members use.

It was agreed that correspondence should be sent to the President, Environment and Public Services Committee requesting an update on the current situation in light of the imminent loss of the Island Site.

The Greffier of the States was requested to draft the appropriate correspondence

Christmas A6.  The Committee agreed that a Christmas lunch should be held together with Celebrations: members of the Legislation Committee on 6th December 2004.

proposal.

The Greffier of the States was requested to take the necessary action.

Correspond-ence A7.  The Committee noted five letters of correspondence issued by the President for noting. and the Committee Clerk during the period 24th September 2004 to 5th October

2004.

Items for A8.  The Committee noted the following matters for information – information

1. A  ct No.A4 of the Environmentand Public ServicesCommittee,dated 29th July 2004, regardingtheworksofart for the atrium of the Royal Court / States Building;
2. A  ct No.A19of the Health and SocialServicesCommittee,dated 1st September 2004, regarding the proposed changes to theCode of Practice on PublicAccess to OfficialInformation;
3. Act  No. A4 of the  Finance  and  Economics  Committee, dated  16th September2004, regarding the draft States of Jersey Law200-;
4. Act  No. A3 of the Finance  and  Economics  Committee, dated  30th September2004, regarding the draftPublic Finances (Jersey)Law200-; and
5. a fax, dated 18th September 2004, from Deputy P.J.Rondelregarding the oral question time process.

Shadow Scrutiny A9.  The Committee agreed to invite Deputies G.P. Southern and J.L. Dorey to its Panels: need of next meeting for discussion regarding the need for confidentiality in relation to the con -fidentiality. work of the Shadow Scrutiny Panels.

502/1(29)