Privileges and Procedures Committee 16th March 2015

TM/SC/083

PRIVILEGES AND PROCEDURES COMMITTEE (8th Meeting)

16th March 2015

PART A

All members were present, with the exception of Connétable D.W. Mezbourian of St. Lawrence and Connétable J.E. Le Maistre of Grouville , from whom apologies had been received.

Connétable L. Norman of St. Clement , Chairman Senator P.F.C. Ozouf (by video conference) Connétable C.H. Taylor of St. John

Deputy J.A. Martin of St. Helier

Deputy S.Y. Mézec of St. Helier

In attendance -

M.N. de la Haye O.B.E., Greffier of the States

L.M. Hart , Deputy Greffier of the States

T. McMinigal, 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 of 10th February 2015 (Part A), 20th February

2015 (Part B only) and 9th March 2015 (Part A only), having been previously circulated, were taken as read and were confirmed.

The Committee agreed an amendment to Minute No. B1 of the Minutes of the meeting of 10th February 2015 (Part B), and requested that the revised draft be circulated in due course for confirmation at the next scheduled meeting.

Members'  A2.  The Committee, with reference to its Minute No. A10 of 16th December facilities:  2014, welcomed the Assistant Greffier of the States in connexion with the Livelink access to  document and records management system.

information.

1240/9/1(137)  It was reported that some Members had experienced difficulties when attempting

to access Minutes, agendas and papers through the shared document area facility.

The Assistant Greffier of the States undertook to relate Members' concerns to the Information  Services  Department  in  order  that  they  might  be  resolved.  The Committee  Clerk  was  directed  henceforth  to  arrange  for  paper  copies  of Committee  Minutes  and  Agendas  to  be  sent  to  those  Members  who  had encountered issues with Livelink.

States  A3.  The Committee, with reference to its Minute No. A2 of 10th February 2015, procedures:  received an oral update from the Committee Clerk on the activities of the Standing review  Orders and Internal Procedures Sub-Committee.

465/4(14)

The Committee recalled that a second meeting of the Sub-Committee was to be convened at an appropriate time. This meeting had now been arranged for 23rd March 2015.

It was anticipated that the Meeting would consider, amongst other matters, the appointment procedures for Ministers and Chairmen and the possible introduction of  a  Business  Committee.  The  Meeting  would  also  review  the  possibility  of hosting a workshop for all States Members to discuss Standing Orders, as well as issuing a questionnaire intended for the same purpose.

The Committee further recalled that the Assistant Greffier of the States had sent electronic mail correspondence to all States Members to invite comment on the current Standing Orders. The Committee Clerk reported that only 2 replies had been received in response to this correspondence. In light of this, the Assistant Greffier of the States was requested to reiterate the invitation to States Members to remark on Standing Orders.

Composition  A4.  The Committee, with reference to its Minute No. A5 of 13th January 2015, and election of  received an oral update from the Deputy Greffier of the States on the activities of the States  the Sub-Committee on the Composition and Election of the States Assembly. Assembly.

465/1(195)  The Deputy Greffier of the States reported that the Sub-Committee had met for the

first time on 18th February 2015. The Meeting had explored a number of matters including the possible objectives, parameters and timeline of reform. The Sub- Committee had also discussed the process it might follow to progress its work on reform.

Above all, the Sub-Committee considered that all States Members should play a part in the reform process. Rather than present a fait accompli to the Assembly as with labours past, the Sub-Committee would undertake to embark on a wide- ranging consultative process, involving all Members from the offset. A series of open forum meetings would be held in which Members would discuss options for reform and vote for them informally. The process would emphasise the need for Members to compromise and cooperate given the plurality of views on reform. A preliminary  meeting  was to  be  scheduled  in  Spring  2015  to initiate  the  Sub- Committee's consultation process with all States Members.

With regard to the objectives of reform, the Sub-Committee had observed that the priority  of  any  reform  proposal  should  be  to  improve  voter  equity  and representative proportionality. The Sub-Committee had expressed the hope and belief that a modified electoral system could enhance the position of both elements whilst satisfying a majority of States Members.

The Committee noted the position and awaited further developments with interest.

States  A5.  The Committee, with reference to its Minute No. A3 of 10th February 2015, Assembly  received  a  report  which  had  been  prepared  by  the  Greffier  of  the  States  in budget.  connexion with the current budget of the States Assembly.

422/10/1(92)

The Committee recalled that the preparation of the second Medium Term Financial Plan had commenced at the States Treasury and that the Council of Ministers had set savings targets for States funded bodies. At its last meeting, the Committee had agreed to the savings targets identified in respect of the States Assembly budget. The proposed annual breakdown of savings was as follows –

8th Meeting 16.03.15

The  Greffier  of  the  States  presented  a  full  breakdown  of  States  Assembly expenditure for consideration by the Committee. After the removal of the 2% saving for 2015 (£98,000), the total net revenue expenditure budget for 2015 was £5,137,927. The allocation of this sum was divided across following areas –

The Committee was informed that the 2015 savings had been partly achieved by removing the post of Personal Assistant to the Greffier of the States upon the retirement  of  the  previous  incumbent.  The  remainder  had  been  located  by apportioning some of the savings from the reduction in the overall membership of the States by 2 elected members.

The  Committee  noted  that  work  had  commenced  to  identify  potential  future savings.  The  Greffier of the  States suggested  that, if the  political willingness existed,  the  Committee  might  consider  adjusting  the  Scrutiny  budget.  It  was reported that whilst several reductions had already been made, Scrutiny continued to consistently underspend with year end balances averaging some £200,000. In light of this, the Greffier of the States advised that the current level of Scrutiny activity  could  undoubtedly  be  maintained  within  a  reduced  budget.  It  was recognised  that there  had nevertheless  been understandable political resistance from the Chairmen's Committee in the past not to reduce the Scrutiny budget any further.

The Committee recalled that it had previously discussed the implications that the achievement of savings might have for potential growth items such as the web- streaming of meetings of the States. The Greffier of the States indicated that he was confident that web-streaming could be delivered within the proposed reduced budget.

Senator P.F.C. Ozouf expressed the view that if the Scrutiny function was to be effective, it should be resourced appropriately, both financially and in terms of the skill-sets of its officers.

Connétable C.H. Taylor of St. John stated that he had been impressed with those officers he had worked with on the Corporate Services Scrutiny Panel, the Public Accounts Committee and the Privileges and Procedures Committee. Deputy J.A. Martin remarked on the quality of officer work and added that the performance of Scrutiny panels also depended on the energy and direction of its Members.

The Committee noted the Greffier's report. The Committee Clerk undertook to refer the above comments to the Chairmen's Committee for their consideration.

Reports of the  A6.  The Committee, with reference to its Minute No. A11 of 15th November States of  2013,  recalled  that,  in  accordance  with  Article  9(9)  of  the  Administrative Jersey  Decisions (Review) (Jersey) Law 1982, it was required to present reports of the Complaints  States of Jersey Complaints Board to the States in the Report series.

Board.

1386/6/1(1)  The  Committee  agreed  to  grant  standing  authority  to  any  such  reports  to  be presented to the States upon receipt, with the Committee to be notified accordingly.

Ongoing work A7. The Committee reviewed its ongoing work programme. programme.

Members noted that the Committee had been elected to pursue an enthusiastic agenda. The Committee was satisfied with the progress of its initiatives in connexion with the review of States procedures, reform of the composition and election of the Assembly and the web-streaming of meetings of the States.

The Committee, with reference to its Minute No. A6 of 10th February 2015, recalled that work on the Public Elections (Jersey) Law 2002 was ongoing. Members further recalled that the Deputy Judicial Greffier had undertaken to write to the Committee to outline potential enhancements to the law as identified by the Jurats, the Law Officers' Department and the Judicial Greffe. To date this correspondence had not been received. The Greffier of the States informed those present that he would remind the Deputy Judicial Greffier of his undertaking.

The Committee, with reference to its Minute No. A8 of 16th December 2014, also recalled that it had considered the role of the Bailiff as the Presiding Officer of the States Assembly. Specifically, it had discussed a proposal to amend Article 3(2) of the States of Jersey Law 2005, so that if the Bailiff was unable to preside at a meeting of the States, a senior Member would be chosen as Presiding Officer in his/her place. The Committee had been unable to reach a majority decision on the above matter.

Whilst Members' views varied, the Committee acknowledged that this matter would remain prominent on the political agenda for the foreseeable future. Consequently, the Committee considered that it should formally review the role of the Bailiff as President of the States. In order that the matter might be evaluated judiciously, officers were requested to prepare a paper detailing the implications of the Bailiff no longer acting as Presiding Officer of the States Assembly. Upon completion of the report, the Committee would adopt a formal stance on the topic.

The Committee agreed that the above described report should give specific consideration to the role of the Bailiff as both civic head and Presiding Officer of the States Assembly, the role of the Speaker in other jurisdictions and the practical and financial implications of replacing the Bailiff with an elected Speaker. The paper would also give background as to the findings of the Review of the Roles of the Crown Officers' (R.143/2010 refers) and the Review Panel on the Machinery of Government in Jersey'.

The Committee considered that the report should be shared with the Chief Minister, together with an invitation to attend its next meeting to discuss the Bailiff 's position within the States Assembly. The Committee Clerk undertook to make the necessary arrangements.