PPC Minutes 5th April 2006

PH/vnl/113  34

PRIVILEGES AND PROCEDURES COMMITTEE (9th Meeting)

5th April 2006

PART A

All members were present, with the exception of Deputy J. Gallichan, from whom apologies  had  been  received.  Senator  S.  Syvret  and   Deputy  C.H.  Egré  were  not present for Item No. B1.

Connétable D.F. Gray of St. Clement - Chairman Senator S. Syvret

Senator M.E. Vibert

Connétable K.A. Le Brun of St. Mary

Deputy G.C.L. Baudains

Deputy C.H. Egré

In attendance -

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

Miss P. Horton, Clerk to the Privileges and Procedures Committee Note: The Minutes of this meeting comprise Part A and Part B.

Minutes. A1.  The Minutes of the meetings held on 2nd March 2006 (Part B only), 8th March

2006 (Parts A and B) and 20th March 2006 (Part A only), having been previously circulated, were taken as read and were confirmed.

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

1. M inute No. A6 of 8th March 2006 - States Members' parking - The Committee noted that Deputy Baudains had not been the onlymember to receive a parking permit, several members had been issued with them and more permits were duetobe issued in the future. TheCommittee was concerned to note that Transport and TechnicalServicesvehicles had been parking in the spaces allocated for States members in Sand Street CarPark. It had also been noted that somememberswereparking in the allocated spaceson States days whentheirpermit did not allow for this. The Committeerequested that a letter be sent tothe Minister for Transport and TechnicalServices outlining the problemsand requesting that they be addressed; and
2. M inute No. A4 of 8th March 2006 - Candidate's registration fee to receive the Electoral Register - The Committeewas advised that the statutory requirement was notification under the Data Protection (Jersey) Law, 2005. Notification provided a mechanism for data controllersto publicise details oftheir processing activities and served the interest of individuals by assisting them to understand how personal data wasbeing processed by data controllers.

Scrutiny - A3.  The Committee, with reference to its Minute No. A4 of 8th February 2006, potential split of received and considered a report dated 29th March 2006, prepared by the Greffier of the Social Affairs the States, regarding the proposed split of the Social Affairs Scrutiny Panel and Panel. welcomed Deputy R.C. Duhamel, President of the Chairmen's Committee, to the 516(1) meeting in connexion with the same.

The Committee recalled that an informal meeting of the Chairmen's Committee had been held in December 2005 at which consideration had been given to the workload of the Social Affairs Panel. Various options had been discussed including splitting the Panel into two. The alternative of forming a permanent Sub-Panel had also been explored. At that time the Chairmen's Committee had agreed that the Social Affairs Panel would remain unchanged until the end of March 2006 although the matter would be kept under review.

Deputy Duhamel advised the Committee that, at its meeting held on 17th February 2006, the Chairmen's Committee had agreed that it wished to initiate steps to create a fifth Panel by splitting the current responsibilities of the Social Affairs Panel. Deputy Duhamel further advised that the workload of all the Panels had been analysed, each of the other three Panels had responsibility for two departments and it had been concluded  that  this  was  a  sufficient  workload.  The  Social  Affairs  Panel  had responsibility  for  five  departments  and  there  was concern  that  it  would  not  be possible for this Panel to achieve proper scrutiny oversight of the areas within its remit as they were so extensive. The possibility of creating a sub-panel had also been considered  however  it  was  felt  that  without  extra  resources,  both  in  terms  of manpower and finance, this would only result in the current resources being spread more thinly and it was unlikely that any significant increase in the work programme could be achieved. The Chairmen's Committee was of the opinion that the only solution would be to divide the Social Affairs Panel into two and create a fifth Scrutiny Panel.

The Committee noted that it was being asked to decide if it supported the proposal to split the Social Affairs Panel, and if it did, whether it would be willing to take the matter to the States. The resource impact of the proposal would be an increase in the scrutiny budget of £188,348 from 2007 onwards, with an additional two staff being recruited. If the Committee supported the proposal the additional funding would need to be inscribed in the estimates which the Committee would submit to the States in the Annual Business Plan as part of the overall estimates for the States Assembly and its services. If a fifth panel were to be created it would be necessary for amendments to Standing Orders to be drafted and the States would need to address the issue of resources.

The  Committee  advised   Deputy  Duhamel  that  it  would  be  preferable  for  the Chairmen's Committee to bring a proposition to the States asking them to agree to the principle of a fifth Scrutiny Panel and, if it was agreed, request the Privileges and Procedures Committee to bring the necessary amendments to the Standing Orders for the creation of an extra Panel and also to include the additional funding required in the Annual Business Plan for members' approval.

Code of Practice A4.  The Committee received and considered a report entitled Code of Practice on on Public Access Public Access to Official Information: Annual Report for 2005.

to Official

Information: The  Committee  recalled  that  a  report  concerning  the  operation  of  the  Code  of Annual Report Practice  on  Public  Access  to  Official  Information  was  presented  to  the  States 2005. annually.  It was noted  that a  total of 62 applications  under  the Code  had been 955(32) recorded by individual departments of the States, the majority of which had been

made to departments administered by the Health and Social Services Committee. The  Committee  approved  the  Code  of  Practice  on  Public  Access  to  Official Information: Annual Report for 2005 and agreed that it should be presented to the States at the next available opportunity.

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

Appointment of A5.  The Committee received and considered a report dated 30th March 2006, States Members prepared by the Greffier of the States in connexion with the appointment of States to public bodies. members to public bodies.

465/1(74)

The Committee was advised that concerns had been expressed regarding the manner in which States members were approached to serve as Directors of the Waterfront Enterprise Board and to sit on the Legislation Advisory Panel. It was recalled that with regard to the British-Irish Inter-Parliamentary Body the Committee had agreed to  invite  all  States  members  to  participate  in  the  selection  of  Jersey's  two representatives.  The  Treasury  and  Resources  Minister  had  also  written  to  all members seeking expressions of interest to sit on the Law Revision Board.

The Committee agreed that the current procedures should be amended so that all States  members  were  given  the  opportunity  to  put  themselves  forward  to  be appointed to a public body. The Committee further agreed that the matter should firstly be considered by the Council of Ministers as it was noted that at present the majority of appointments were made on the recommendation of Ministers.

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

States members' A6.  The Committee, with reference to its Minute No. A10 of 8th February 2006, remuneration. considered correspondence received from Senator P.F. Routier, Minister for Social 1240/3(80) Security in connexion with States members' remuneration.

The Committee recalled that it had requested Senator Routier to clarify the position of States members claiming sickness benefit and the definition of work for members who were unwell. Senator Routier was also requested to consider whether a change in the relevant legislation could be made to enable States members to be treated as employed' which would resolve the double tax issue relating to the reimbursement of Class 2 Social Security payments.

Senator  Routier  had  outlined  what  would  constitute work' in  relation  to  States members who were receiving Short Term Incapacity Allowance (STIA). It was noted that work' would include attending States meetings and work of a voluntary or honorary nature. It was further noted that meeting a constituent at home to take on States matters would be undertaking the work' of a States member and the meeting should  be  rescheduled  or  the  person  referred  to  another  member.  However, depending on the nature of the incapacity a claimant might be capable of reading a States report whilst recuperating at home.

With regard to the situation whereby States members who were claiming benefit could also receive remuneration, Senator Routier advised that this was a contractual matter between the members and their paying authority. It was common practice with many employers both in the private and public sector for the employee to hand over' the benefit payment to their employer who would then pay the employee their normal wage. The Committee requested that the matter be raised with Treasury to establish the abatement procedures they applied to all public sector employees in relation to salaries and benefit payments.

The Committee recalled that it had requested Senator Routier to consider amending the Law so that all States members could be treated as employees for the purposes of social security contributions. This request had come about as a result of the partial refund by the Treasury of member's Class 2 contributions being treated as income for income tax purposes. This meant that income tax was effectively paid twice on the amount involved, firstly on the original income amount and again on the refund. The Committee noted that Senator Routier maintained that he could see no reason to amend current Social Security legislation to change the classification to treat States members  as employed'. The  Committee  agreed  that  it  would  therefore  bring  a proposition to the States itself requesting that the relevant Order be amended so that States members could be treated as employees for Social Security purposes.

The Committee further agreed that the Treasury and Income Tax departments should be consulted on the abovementioned matters and that advice should be sought on the appropriate steps to be taken to close any loopholes which could allow members of the States to avoid income tax liability on the remuneration they received as members and to lessen their liability for social security contributions.

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

Composition and A7.  The Committee received and considered a report dated 30th March 2006, election of the prepared  by  the  Greffier  of  the  States,  in  connexion  with  the  composition  and States. election of the States.

1148(40)

The  Committee  discussed  the  issue  of  low  voter  turnout  at  elections  and  noted turnout figures for the Senatorial elections since 1999 and turnout figures for the 2005 Deputies elections. The Committee agreed that low voter turnout was a real issue  which  needed  to  be  addressed  and  decided  that  it  would  be  beneficial  to establish the reasons behind the low voter turnout by conducting a questionnaire to determine the public's views on the matter. It was agreed that it would be appropriate to determine the cost that would be incurred if a professional company were to carry out an official questionnaire on behalf of the Committee.

The Committee considered the matter of election expenses and reiterated its previous decision to carry out a questionnaire of all States members regarding the amounts spent on their election campaigns. The Committee agreed that if it were to fix a limit on campaign expenditure it would be beneficial to require candidates to declare the total  amount  they  had  spent  on  their  respective  campaigns,  the  source  of  their election  funding  and  how  the  money  was  utilised.  The  Committee  agreed  that consideration would be given to the possibility of allowing candidates to post any communication relating to their campaign free of charge either according to a certain weight or the number of pages enclosed and it was further agreed that the issue of negative campaigning would addressed.

The Greffier of the States was directed to take the necessary action. Matters for A8.  The Committee noted the following matters for information -

information.

1. correspondence, dated 14th  March  2006, sent  to the  Chief  Minister regarding the Draft Strategic Plan 2006-2011;
2. c orrespondence, dated 14th March 2006,sent to Mr.LindsayHoyleM.P. regarding the All-Party Parliamentary Channel Islands Group;
3. c orrespondence,dated17th March 2006, sentto the Presidentof Jersey Bankers Association regarding the Electoral Register;

4. correspondence, dated 17th March 2006, sent to the Comité des Connétable s regarding the Electoral Register;
5. c orrespondence,dated 17th March 2006, sent to Equifax PLCregarding the ElectoralRegister;
6. c orrespondence, dated 24th March 2006, received from Equifax PLC confirming receipt oftheabovementionedcorrespondence;
7. c orrespondence,dated 17th March 2006, sent to Experian regarding the Electoral Register;and
8. correspondence, dated 28th March 2006, sent to all members of the States regarding the British-IrishInter-Parliamentary Body.