PPC Minutes 28th April 2005

IC/KAK/132  62

PRIVILEGES AND PROCEDURES COMMITTEE (43rd Meeting)

28th April 2005

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 I. Clarkson, Committee Clerk

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

Minutes. A1.  The Minutes of the meetings held on 7th April (Parts A and B) and 12th April

2005 (Parts A and B), having been circulated previously, were taken as read and were confirmed.

Matters arising.  A2.  The Committee noted the following matters arising from its previous Minutes

-

1. Act  No.  A3  of  7th  April  2005 – Ombudsman – the  Committee instructed the Committee Clerk to seek clarification from the Jersey Financial ServicesCommissionregarding the status of any proposals for a financial services ombudsmanscheme;
2. A ct No. A4 of 12th April 2005 – Code of Practice on Public Access to Official  Information:  Annual  Report  2004 – the  Committee was advised that enquiries with theHealth and SocialServicesDepartment had revealed that therewasnoevidenceof a failure to comply with the Code of Practice. There had simply been a degreeof confusion as to whether  requests submitted to  individual departments were  to be processed  under the  Code of Practice or under data  protection legislation.

Public elections: A3.  The  Committee recalled  with  concern  figures  produced  in  2004  by  the voter registration Statistics Unit for the former Special Committee on the Composition and Election of campaign. the States Assembly, which suggested that almost 20,000 eligible residents had failed 1148(41) to  have  their  names  included  on  the  Electoral  Register.  It  considered  that  the

aforementioned  figure  was  far  too  high  and  should  be  addressed  prior  to  the Clerk forthcoming elections.

G.O.S.

P.R.C.C. The Committee received an oral briefing from Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier and Deputy P.R.E.O. P.N. Troy in connexion with the matter of an advertising campaign concerned with

voter registration. It was reported that, on Wednesday 27th April 2005, Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier and Deputy P.N. Troy had attended a presentation given by White Knight Public Relations. The company concerned was understood to have produced an advertising campaign for the States of Guernsey in the run up to their 2004 elections. Although the said campaign had coincided with the introduction of their new system of government, which might well have created additional public interest in the election process, it was understood that registration rates in Guernsey increased markedly  during  the  course  of  the  White  Knight  campaign.  The  company  had indicated that it could adapt existing advertising material for a similar campaign in Jersey and that the overall cost of such a campaign in Jersey would be significantly lower than that which was charged to the States of Guernsey.

The Committee acknowledged that responsibility for the election process was shared between a variety of bodies, including the Parishes, the Jurats and the Judicial Greffe, and that the Committee had yet to formally assume political responsibility for the Public Elections (Jersey) Law 2002. It further acknowledged that any decision to employ a company to produce such a campaign would generate a corresponding need for an equitable tender process. As an alternative, the Committee recalled that the Communications Unit within the Policy and Resources Department, which had been established  to  assist  all  Committees  of  the  States,  might  be  able  offer  both  the capacity  and  the  expertise  to  assist  in  this  regard.  Moreover,  the  Committee considered that a campaign might include a second phase, scheduled to take place in the autumn, with the aim of increasing actual voter turnout.

The Committee agreed that the President would write to the Communications Consultant  seeking  advice  as  to  whether  the  Communications  Unit  had  the capacity to assist with a voter registration campaign.

The Committee Clerk was instructed to take the necessary action.

The Greffier of the States was requested to send a copy of this Act to the Policy and Resources Committee for information purposes.

Data Protection: A4.  The Committee, with reference to its Act No. A7 of 3rd June 2004, recalled briefing. that  the  Data  Protection  Registrar  had  recently  run  several  seminars  for  States 939/1(61) Members on data protection legislation and that revised guidance notes for Members,

incorporating advice on parliamentary privilege and limitations on the distribution of Clerk information for Committee purposes, were to be produced.

D.P.R.

G.O.S. The Committee welcomed Mrs. E. Martins, Data Protection Registrar.

The Data Protection Registrar advised that her office had recently carried out a consultation exercise on the draft Data Protection (Elected Representatives) (Jersey) Regulations 200- and other items of draft subordinate legislation arising from the Data  Protection  (Jersey)  Law  2005.  Responses  had  been  received  from  several sources, including  the Law Society of Jersey and a law firm which did not wish its name to be released, which indicated that there was genuine concern as to whether all States Members were fully aware of their responsibilities under existing legislation. The Data Protection Registrar explained that she had some sympathy with this view and was therefore considering whether or not to recommend to the Finance and Economics  Committee  that  it  should  invite  the  Assembly  to  approve  the aforementioned Regulations. Moreover, she submitted that there was a clear need to include  guidance  notes  on  data  protection  issues  either  within  the  Members'

Handbook or within the Code of Conduct for Elected Members.

The Committee clarified that it had not been made aware of the existence of the draft Data Protection (Elected Representatives) (Jersey) Regulations 200- and it invited the Data Protection Registrar to submit the draft Regulations to the Committee  for  consideration,  together  with  a  report  outlining  the  concerns raised by consultees.

With regard to the general issue of Members' responsibilities under data protection legislation, the Committee agreed that it would be beneficial to include appropriate guidance notes within the Members' Handbook. The inclusion of specific provisions within the Code of Conduct was thought likely to give rise to confusion as to whether a potential breach of data protection legislation was a criminal matter or one for the Assembly to address. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Committee considered that the matter of when parliamentary privilege and public interest took precedence over data protection principles had yet to be clarified. It also noted that there was genuine confusion as to whether an e-mail sent to 53 States Members could or should be considered  confidential. It  therefore  agreed  that  it  would  be  premature  to sanction the inclusion of data protection guidance notes within the Members' Handbook until such time as the foregoing issues had been clarified.

The  President  agreed  to  write  to  the  Data  Protection  Registrar  outlining  the Committee's position.

The Committee Clerk was instructed to take the necessary action.

Public Elections A5.  The Committee, with reference to its Act No. A11 of 12th April 2005, recalled (Jersey) Law that it had requested clarification from the officers of the Judicial Greffe as to the 2002: level of vulnerability of the existing postal voting system to fraud. It further recalled amendments that, on 19th April 2005 and during the course of oral question put by Deputy M.F. regarding Dubras of St. Lawrence, several Members had expressed reservations in connexion proposals for with the proposals to relax the rules on access to a postal vote.

change.

424/2(13) The Committee received a report, dated 22nd April 2005, from the Greffier of the 424/2(27) States, in connexion with reform of the Public Elections (Jersey) Law 2002, together

with corresponding legal advice from the Law Officers' Department.

Clerk

G.O.S. The Committee welcomed Deputy M.F. Dubras of St. Lawrence.

L.D.

C.des C. Deputy M.F. Dubras submitted that removing the requirement to provide a specified

reason for requesting a postal vote in the absence of additional measures to help ensure the privacy of a postal vote might compromise the integrity of the postal voting system. He also urged the Committee to reconsider its plan to put back the opening time for polling stations to 10.00 a.m. on the grounds that a turnout during the 2002 Senatorial Elections of 12 per cent between 8.00 a.m. and 10.00 a.m. was relatively  significant and that there had been too few elections since the introduction of the 8.00 a.m. start to allow for an effective analysis of the effect of the revised opening  hours  on  voter  turnout.  Further  to  the  foregoing,  he  requested  that  the Committee give consideration to improving pre-polling facilities for voters in the forthcoming election of Senators, perhaps by setting up pre-polling stations in several supermarkets. Finally, he invited the Committee to clarify whether students might be entitled to apply for a postal vote several months prior to the date of an election, so as to reduce the likelihood that delays in the postal system would cause problems for voters studying abroad.

Deputy J-A Bridge concurred with the views expressed by Deputy Dubras on polling station opening times and further suggested that the Judicial Greffe might wish to consider locating portable accommodation in the Royal Square for the purposes of advertising the postal and pre-poll voting facility and processing applications.

The Committee agreed to defer its recommendation that polling station opening times should be amended, so as to allow for further analysis of voter turnout during the 2005 elections. It further instructed the Committee Clerk to liaise with officers of the Judicial Greffe with a view to  establishing whether the remaining proposals put forward by Deputy Dubras and Deputy J-A. Bridge were viable.

Standing Orders A6.  The Committee, with reference to its Act No. A8 of 12th April 2005, received of the States of the recommendations of the Code of Conduct Working Party in connexion with the Jersey: declaration and registration of Members' interests.

declaration and

registration of The Committee noted that a variety of reforms had been proposed, based primarily Members' on practice in the United Kingdom House of Commons and the Scott ish Parliament. interests. It further noted that the Working Party had recommended publication of the Register 1240/4(171) on the Web site of the States Assembly.

1240/4/2(2)

The Committee deferred consideration of the matter to its next meeting.

Clerk G.O.S. L.D.

States Members' A7.  The Committee received a report, dated 22nd April 2005, prepared by the remuneration. Greffier  of  the  States,  in  connexion  with  the  work  of  the  States  Members' 1240/3(76) Remuneration Review Body.

Clerk The Committee was advised that the Remuneration Review Body would need shortly G.O.S. to commence work on its recommendations concerning Members' remuneration for

2006.

The Committee decided to invite members of the Remuneration Review Body to attend its meeting on 19th May.

On  a  related  matter,  the  Committee  acknowledged  that  it  had  received  several representations from Members concerning the possible introduction of severance pay and pension schemes. It agreed to discuss the aforementioned matters with the Remuneration Review Body at its next meeting.

Date of next A8.  The Committee agreed to meet at 2.00 p.m. on Tuesday 3rd May 2005 in order meeting. to consider the remaining items on its agenda for 28th April.