This content has been automatically generated from the original PDF and some formatting may have been lost. Let us know if you find any major problems.
Text in this format is not official and should not be relied upon to extract citations or propose amendments. Please see the PDF for the official version of the document.
COMMITTEES OF THE STATES: REORGANISATION _______________
Lodged au Greffe on 30th June 1998 by the Policy and Resources Committee
______________________________
STATES OF JERSEY
STATES GREFFE
175 1 9 9 8 P . 1 5 1 (r e v ise d )
Price code: C
PROPOSITION
THE STATES are asked to decide whether they are of opinion -
to re f e r to their Act dated 11th September 1996, which charged the Policy and Resources Committee to investigate
issues regarding the reorganisation of States Committees; to receive the progress report dated 23rd June 1998 of that Committee; and to charge the Policy and Resources Committee -
(a ) to develop further the work so far undertaken on the formation, organisation and responsibilities of a Finance
and Manpower Committee;
(b ) to develop further the work so far undertaken on the formation, organisation and responsibilities of a Home
Affairs Committee;
(c ) to take immediate steps to promote the formation of an Industry Committee with responsibility for -
( i) th e lic ensing and regulatory functions of the Committee for Postal Administration under the Post
Office (Jersey) Law 1969, as amended, and the Telecommunications Board under the Telecommunications (Jersey) Law 1972, as amended;
( ii ) th e f u n ctions of the Finance and Economics Committee under the Regulation of Undertakings and
Development (Jersey) Law 1973, as amended;
( ii i) th e fu n ctions presently discharged by the Trade and Industry Sub-Committee of the Finance and
Economics Committee;
(iv ) th e fu n c tions of the Jersey Transport Authority set out in paragraph (2) of their Act dated 25th October
1994;
(v ) d e v e lo p ing further the later phases of consolidating the responsibilities of the Industry Committee as
outlined in paragraphs 37, 38 and 39 of the progress report.
POLICY AND RESOURCES COMMITTEE
REPORT
- T h e Sta tes on 11th September 1996 adopted the following proposition -
"to refer to their Act, dated 28th September 1995, recording their acceptance of the policy for the public sector as set out on
page 57 of the Strategic Policy Review 1995 - Part I (2000 and Beyond'), and their agreement of the objectives of the public sector set out in paragraph 11.12 of that Review and -"
(a ) to agree in principle -
(i ) th e c r e a tion of a new Finance and Manpower Committee; (ii ) th e cr e a tion of a new Law and Order Committee;
(ii i ) th e cr e a tion of a new Civil Affairs Committee;
(iv ) th e c r e a tion of a new Industry Committee;
( v ) th e tr a nsfer to the Employment and Social Security Committee of the functions of the Industrial
Relations Committee;
(v i ) th e tr a n sfer to the Housing Committee of the functions of the Cottage Homes Committee; (v ii ) th e d is b anding of the Occupation and Liberation Committee;
(v iii ) th e t ra n sfer of the functions of the Overseas Aid Committee to a Trust formally established for that
purpose;
(b ) to confirm the responsibilities of the Policy and Resources Committee set out in paragraphs 13 to 15 of the
report;
(c ) to charge the Policy and Resources Committee to set up a Task Force to investigate, and to report to the
States on -
( i) th e p r o posed terms of reference of the new Committees and those given additional responsibilities,
including an identification and analysis of the future discharge of the responsibilities of the Committees that will cease to exist;
( ii ) th e p r o posed constitution of each Committee given additional responsibilities, and any major sub-
committee or similar body that is proposed to support a given Committee and the political accountability of the subordinate body;
(ii i) th e p r o posed lines of communication between Committees, identifying areas for inter-Committee co-
operation;
(iv ) th e f in a ncial and manpower implications of the new arrangements;
( v ) th e le gislative changes necessary to implement the new arrangements, with an estimate of the
consequent demand on law drafting services;
(v i ) th e o p e r ational and organisational efficiencies that will accrue from the new arrangements; (v ii ) th e ta r g et timetable for implementing the new arrangements.
- T h e a rguments put forward by the Policy and Resources Committee for the reorganisation of Committees, which were accepted in principle by the States, are set out in P.107/96, and the relevant extract from this projet is attached as an appendix to this report.
- T h e Po licy and Resources Committee duly setup a task force, and the latter in turn set up individual sub-groupsto progress the proposals in respect of each of the new committees mentioned in the proposition.
- T h e s ub-groups engaged in a comprehensive process of consultation, which in each case gave rise to a draft report or discussion paper, which was then further discussed with the committees to be affected by the creation of the proposed new committees.
- T h e C ommittee now wishes to present to the States a report on the nature of the work carried out to date to obtain the States agreement on the way forward.
- T h e C ommittee has received reports on -
• th e creation of a new Finance and Manpower Committee;
• th e creation of a new Home Affairs Committee (it was considered that the term Home Affairs was more appropriate than that of Law and Order);
• th e creation of a new Industry Committee.
T h e C o mmittee deferred consideration of the creation of a new Civil Affairs Committee until the outcome of the
work on the other committees was known, because it was expected that the form and content of a Civil Affairs Committee would be influenced by that outcome.
- T h e p osition on the other matters agreed in principle by the States on 11th September 1996 is as follows -
• th e functions of the Industrial Relations Committee have been transferred to the Employment and Social Security Committee;
• th e functions of the Cottage Homes Committee have not been formally transferred to the Housing Committee because of legal constraints, but the membership of the Cottage Homes Committee is identical to that of the Housing Committee and de facto the two are functioning as one Committee;
• th e Occupation and Liberation Committee has been disbanded;
• th e transfer of the functions of the Overseas Aid Committee to a trust formally established for that purpose has been left for further consideration in the light of the Overseas Aid Committee's Strategic Plan.
- T h e c urrent position in respect of the proposed Finance and Manpower, Home Affairs and Industry Committees is set out in the following sections.
Finance and Manpower Committee
- T h e r eport of the Policy and Resources Committee on the Reorganisation of Committees of the States (P.107/96) proposed that the Finance and Economics and Establishment Committees should be merged to form a new Finance and Manpower Committee with overall responsibility for the management of the finance, manpower and information technology resources available to the States.
- T h e case for creating a Finance and Manpower Committee was considered to include -
(i ) av oiding duplication of effort - many reports and propositions are considered by the Finance and Economics
and Establishment Committees where the process of analysis is duplicated;
(ii ) b etter integration of Finance and Manpower budgets;
(ii i ) a "one-stop shop" for staff approvals - requests for additional staff generally include requests for additional
funding;
(iv ) be tter financial input into salary and wage negotiations;
(v ) m erging of the responsibilities for pensions, policy and administration.
T h e w o rkload of the combined committee was considered to be manageable if full advantage was taken of the power to delegate to the President, sub-committees and officers. Also the responsibilities of the combined committees would be narrowed by Financial Services becoming the responsibility of the Jersey Financial Services
Commission, and the administration of the Regulation of Undertakings and Development Law being passed to the proposed
"Industry Committee".
- T h e Sub-Group set up to consider the proposal decided that, in order to assess whether the proposed merging of the Finance and Economics and Establishment Committees into a new Finance and Manpower Committee was practical, a review of existing tasks should be undertaken concerning -
(i ) th e responsibilities of existing Committees;
(ii ) th e extent to which existing responsibilities could be delegated to sub-committees or to officers;
(ii i ) th e extent to which existing responsibilities could be transferred to other committees of the States.
12. T h e Sub-Group proposed that the following sub-committees could be formed -
• In v estment
• IS /I T
• Fin ance
• C a pital Projects Review
• M a npower
13. T h e Sub-Group also expressed the view that the sub-committees so formed could involve States Members other than those on the Finance and Manpower Committee. For example, opportunities could exist for representation from other Committees on a manpower sub-committee which would assist in the review of manpower issues cutting across the States administration as a whole.
14. T h e Sub-Group concluded that the proposed merger should go ahead, a recommendation that was supported by Price Waterhouse in their report on the service review of the finance functions of the States. With delegation to sub- committees and departments, and with the transfer of some existing responsibilities to other existing or new Committees of the States, the Sub-Group was of the opinion that -
(i ) th e remaining responsibilities can be managed more effectively by one Committee;
( ii ) th e merged responsibilities would provide for the more effective management of the States financial and
human resources;
(ii i ) th e existing staff of the Treasury and the Personnel Department could be employed more effectively working
together under the direction of one Committee.
- T h e Finance and Economics Committee agreed to support "in principle" the proposal, whilst recognising that such a move would be dependent upon the establishment and successful operation and servicing of a number of sub- committees. That Committee decided however that there was much preparatory work to be undertaken, and further details of the mechanics of the proposal to be finalised, before it would be in a position to take a final decision on the matter.
- T h e Establishment Committee decided not to support the proposal. That Committee was of the view that -
• th e workload of the combined Committee would be excessive;
• sta ff matters would take second place to financial matters;
• h u man resources were the most important resource and required particular attention;
• th e United Kingdom experience of attempting to combine money and manpower under one department was unsuccessful;
• th e re were particular issues that were currently the responsibility of the Establishment Committee - such as pensions - which required considerable expertise and time and effort and which would not get the attention
deserved with a combined Committee.
- T h e r e was general acceptance that money and manpower resources need to be addressed together but this is seen as being achievable through the two Committees working more closely together rather than that they needed to merge.
- C o n cern was also expressed as to how the sub-committees proposed would operate. However, it was recognised that the proposed delegation of function to sub-committees and to departments was fundamental to the practicality of the recommendation that the Finance and Economics and Establishment Committees should be merged into a new Finance and Manpower Committee.
Home Affairs Committee
- T h e Sub-Group set up to consider the proposal to form a Law and Order Committee quickly reached the conclusion that the term Law and Order was inappropriate, and that the term Home Affairs was more appropriate.
- I n P. 107/96 the Committee proposed that a new Committee be formed with responsibility for the following -
• Po lice
• Fir e
• Im migration
• C u stoms
• Pr o bation
• Pr is on
It w a s intended that the Committee would replace the present Defence Committee, and reflect the need for one
Committee of the States to have responsibility for those areas of the States administration which need to be brought together to provide most effectively for the development and implementation of a five-year strategy which will significantly impact upon the level and the consequences of crime in Jersey.
- T h e Sub-Group concluded that the creation of a Home Affairs Committee had much merit. It was felt that a change in the title of the Defence Committee to that of a Home Affairs Committee would facilitate and encourage the more coherent political approach which the public was seeking.
- I t w as proposed that the Defence Committee and the Prison Board would be disestablished and a Home Affairs Committee created with an extended role. The new Committee would be accountable to the States for resourcing the departments under its administration, on the understanding that accountabilities for matters of policing and probation were delegated to a Police Authority and a Probation Authority respectively.
- T h e Sub-Group recommended that the Prison Board should not be decommissioned until the Police Authority was established. It also proposed that changes involving a convergence of functions between departments should be incremental, but that the new Committee grouping would provide instant scope for joint strategic and corporate planning to start on a series of important issues.
- T h e Probation Committee, which it was proposed would be retitled the Probation Authority, would remain accountable for probation matters to the Royal Court, but would operate within a framework of corporate strategies and policies endorsed by the new Committee in which it would participate. It was also proposed that Customs would remain responsible to the Finance and Economics Committee for fiscal matters, and that the Immigration and Nationality Department would retain its constitutional link with the office of the Lieutenant Governor.
- T h e functions of the Driver and Vehicle Standards Department that are closely allied with both policing and customs functions and enforcement practices was considered to sit most appropriately under the Home Affairs Committee. The Fire Service was also considered to be suited to the new Committee because it is a uniform service with an emergency role. It is considered that if fits more appropriately under a Home Affairs Committee than the present Defence Committee.
- T h e Defence Committee supports the idea of forming a Home Affairs Committee as proposed. The Finance and Economics Committee in respect of the Customs Department had no objection to the idea in principle, provided that the Finance and Economics Committee remained responsible for the fiscal matters for which the Customs Department is currently responsible.
- T h e Prison Board did not support the idea of a Home Affairs Committee of which it would form a part. The Board was concerned that whereas it presently oversaw the Prison in conjunction with the other Island Authorities, its members were able to concentrate closely upon Prison matters in depth. It was felt that the proposed Home Affairs Committee would inevitably erode the present "personal approach" and lead to a less satisfactory arrangement. The view was expressed that at a time when the Prison needed to replace and expand much of its existing accommodation was not a good time to embark upon such a potentially far-reaching change as absorbing the Prison
Board into a Home Affairs Committee. The Prison Board was of the view that there was a need for support from "dedicated"
politicians who were aware of the background to the existing situation and who understood in depth the importance of the issues involved.
- T h e Probation Committee saw the need to promote greater co-ordination and communication with other agencies, but felt that this could be achieved at departmental level. The Bailiff expressed the view that the primary duties of the Probation Committee as a sub-committee of the Royal Court was to provide reports to the Court and to supervise persons referred to it by the Court. Whilst accepting that there should be closer co-operation with other agencies, he did not feel that this should be reflected in structural change. The Probation Committee confirmed its support for the view that the Probation Committee should notbe a sub-committeeof the proposed Home Affairs Committee, and stressed that the needs of the Court should be paramount.
- T h e Committee in considering this proposal has noted that one of the defects of the current Defence Committee is that it comprises five departments with no overarching executive support. Liaison between the departments, construction of the agenda and executive actions are currently undertaken by the Committee Clerk. It is proposed that the Home Affairs Committee would operate with a nucleus of executive staff available to all of the participating departments, capable of co-ordinating the activities of the department into an overall strategy, to which all of the departments would have regard in managing their own areas of responsibility.
Industry Committee
30. T h e proposed Industry Committee that was supported in principle in September 1996 was intended to act as a regulatory body for the new "trading companies" for postal services and telecommunications, and take over the responsibilities of the Jersey Transport Authority, the Trade and Industry Sub-Committee of the Finance and Economics Committee, the administration of the Regulation of Undertakings and Development Law, and the responsibility for safeguarding the public interest in respect of the public utilities (Jersey Electricity Company, Jersey New Waterworks Company) and the Financial Services Commission.
31. T h e Committee, in seeking the approval of the States in principle to the idea of an Industry Committee, also advanced the idea that representatives of the tourism and agriculture industries should have a greater role in the regulation and promotion of their industry. Accordingly the Committee proposed that in place of the present Tourism and Agriculture and Fisheries Committees there should be set up a Tourism Industry Board and an Agriculture and Fisheries Industry Board. In both cases the membership of the Board would include strong industry representation, and the Boards would be directly involved in the regulation and promotion of their industry with overall responsibility for safeguarding the public interest resting with the Industry Committee.
32. T h e Industry Committee Sub-Group in its report expressed the view that from the position of the Island's economy as a whole, the creation of an Industry Committee would be an important step towards the formation of a comprehensive industrial strategy, encompassing responsibility for economic policy as it relates to industry and the Island's workforce.
33. I t w a s suggested that the mandate of the Industry Committee should relate to strategic policies, specifically -
• th e development and promotion of all aspects of Jersey industry;
• th e exercise of a statutory regulatory function over defined areas of activity;
• th e provision of a range of specialised services;
• th e provision of political representation within the States for Jersey's industry.
34. T h e Sub-Group included the following proposals in its report.
• In due course consideration should be given to the possibility of dividing the current broad remit of the Trade
and Industry Sub-Committee into different constituent industries, e.g. the Distribution Industry Sub- Committee, the Construction Industry Sub-Committee, the IT/IS Industry Sub-Committee. The perceived advantage of creating these additional sub-committees lies in the potential for increasing industry representation at this level of the policy-making process.
• T h e Jersey Transport Authority should be a sub-committee of the Industry Committee with an unchanged remit. The Chairman should be a member of the Industry Committee, and the sub-committee could include
non-States members if required.
• B e aring in mind the importance of the role of the Regulation of Undertakings and Development Law in
controlling the level of demand for labour within the Island's economy, and taking account also of the emphasis placed at a strategic level upon providing an appropriate infrastructure for delivering the training and business development needs of local employers, it was felt that political responsibility for the activities of the Training and Employment Partnership, and for employment relations, would be more sensibly located with the Industry Committee than with the Employment and Social Security Committee.
- A c o nsiderable amount of consultation, detailed analysis and subsequent implementation work will be required to translate the "in principle" proposals for an Industry Committee into reality. The Committee believes this should be undertaken by an "organising" Committee which would be seen as an embryo Industry Committee.
- Fo r a first phase, it is envisaged that the States would, as proposed by the Sub-Group,be asked to agree to -
• tr a nsfer to the Industry Committee the licensing and regulatory functions of the Telecommunications Board and Postal Administration;
• ch a nge the status of the Jersey Transport Authority to make it a sub-committee of the Industry Committee;
• tr a nsfer political and executive responsibility for the Regulation of Undertakings and Development Law from the Finance and Economics Committee to the Industry Committee;
• tr a nsfer political responsibility for the Trade and Industry Sub-Committee from the Finance and Economics Committee to the Industry Committee.
- T h e Industry Committee itself would then give subsequent consideration, as an extension to the first phase; to -
• th e transfer of political responsibility for the Joint Advisory Council from the Finance and Economics Committee to the Industry Committee;
• th e transfer of political responsibility for training and employment, and employment relations, from the Employment and Social Security Committee to the Industry Committee;
• th e change in the status of the Gambling Control Committee to a sub-committee of the Industry Committee.
- I n a second phase, it is envisaged that the Industry Committee, in conjunction with the Agriculture and Fisheries and Tourism Committees, would consider whether to take to the States a detailed proposal or proposals, for relating the activities of the latter two committees and their respective departments, to the activities of the Industry Committee.
- A th ird phase would include plans for the absorption of any executive functions of the Harbours and Airport Committee, and to consider a long term organisation structure of the Industry Department.
- T h e need of a Committee to carry out a regulatory/licensing role in respect of telecommunications and postal services is supported by the Telecommunications Board and the Committee for Postal Administration. Both of these Committees wish a regulatory body to be in place as soon as possible. In the meantime they have sought to establish a separate regulatory body within the ambit of the existing Committee. The Telecommunications Board, however, is of the view that establishing a sub-committeeof the Board will not provide sufficient separation of the regulatory and commercial aspects when the need arises, to give impartial consideration to the introduction of competition. The Board believes that the establishment of independent regulation is a matter of urgency and has pressed the Policy and Resources Committee for some indication of what progress is being made with discussion on the establishment of an Industry Committee.
- T h e Finance and Economics Committee supports the proposal to establish an Industry Committee in general, although it recognises that the details of what is proposed in a number of areas will require further careful thought, particularly as regards the scope of responsibilities as between regulation and political accountabilities. The Finance and Economics Committee has agreed that political responsibility for the Trade and Industry Sub-Committee and political and executive responsibility for the Regulation of Undertakings and Development Law could be transferred to the Industry Committee.
- T h e Jersey Electricity Company has not expressed any opposition to the suggestion that the Industry Committee should take over the responsibility of the Finance and Economics Committee for "safeguarding consumer interests" providing this doesnot imply any greater political interference than under the present arrangements. A similar conclusion can be reached in respect of the Jersey New Waterworks Company, where the Industry Committee would take over the responsibility of the Public Services Committee for "safeguarding consumer interests".
- T h e Jersey Transport Authority does not support the idea that it should become part of an Industry Committee, although recognising the need to work closely with the Industry Committee, including sharing executive resources.
- T h e Employment and Social Security Committee agree that there is a need to form a strong relationship between the Industry Committee, if it is formed, and the other "industry" type committees such as Finance, Tourism and Agriculture, as well as those with some interest such as the Employment and Social Security and Education Committees. It also agreed that the division of responsibility should be reviewed as a clear strategic direction emerges from the new Industry Committee. However, in the short term, the Employment and Social Security Committee is of the view that employment matters should be left with them, and that as the new one-stop employment and training shop was beginning to work well, and social security and employment policies were being integrated and training strategies beginning to have an impact, this would not be a sensible time to start splitting up all the functions again. At the same time the Employment and Social Security Committee sawno difficulty in including a representative from the new Industry Committee on the Training and Employment Partnership Board, alongside those from Education and Employment and Social Security, to continue the "partnership" approach already adopted by the Training and Employment Partnership.
- Pr e lim inary consideration has been given to possible moves at a later stage towards the incorporation into the Industry Committee of the overall responsibility for Tourism, Agriculture, the Airport and the Harbours, in conjunction with the creation of separate trading entities or industry boards where appropriate.
• T h e Harbours and Airport Committee are generally supportive of the proposal.
• T h e Agriculture and Fisheries Committee are not supportive as a Committee.
• T h e Tourism Committee was not opposed in principle but reserved its position.
- T h er e was a general view that a strategic Committee for Industry was required, and that this could be achieved initially without the loss of independence for the Agriculture and Fisheries and Tourism Committees. Information received from representatives of the tourism industry and of the agriculture industry would suggest, however, that there are those who are supportive of the idea of an Industry Board being set up for each industry, with the Industry Committee acting in a regulatory capacity, and acting as a spokesman for each industry in the States.
- T h e r e was some concern as to whether an Industry Committee could serve as both a regulatory body and as a body promoting the economic interests of the Island. However the responsibilities could be separated administratively, and the Industry Committee as the regulator for Telecoms Limited and Postal Limited would have no responsibility for promoting the business of those companies.
- T h e Committee is aware that the States in 1996 supported the reorganisation of Committees, with a view to reducing the number of Committees and streamlining the administration. This does not sit easily with the creation of a new Committee in the form of an Industry Committee, which undoubtedly will require manpower. Some of the staffing of the Industry Committee could come from the moving of staff associated with transferred activities, but some additional staff will be required to cover the regulatory functions of the Committee. However, on the assumption that these functions need to be carried out as an essential support for the concept of the incorporation of Jersey Telecoms and Jersey Post, the resource requirements in this respect are unavoidable.
General conclusion
- T h e Committee has considered the way forward for the proposals. There are those who believe that much more detail is required on the resource implications of the reorganisation of Committees before any decisions can be taken. It can be argued, however, bearing in mind the experience of the merging of the Resources Recovery Board and the Public Works Committee into a Public Services Committee, that what is required is for a general commitment to be established, and for the new committee and its executives to be required to work up the proposals further. Should insurmountable problems be confronted, then the matter could be returned to the States for further consideration.
- T h e Industry Sub-Group argued that it would be premature to attempt to quantify operational and organisational benefits of the creation of the Industry Committee in manpower and costs terms at this stage. The view expressed by Peats in their Review of The Machinery of Government in 1987 that fundamental restructuring of the Committee system should be undertaken in the first instance to improve the effectiveness of the machinery of government, and that manpower and cost savings would then follow, provided that performance criteria was established, is supported.
- T h e Committee on the basis of the Sub-Group reports it has received, and to which this report has referred, is not in a position to determine exactly what the detailed staffing and other resource arrangements would be. Before doing so, the Committee would wish first to obtain confirmation from the States that the reorganisation of Committees approved in principle in September 1996, and expanded on further in this report, is still supported.
- T h e Committee is therefore seeking either a mandate from the States to proceed further with the proposals set out in this report, embracing the formation of a Finance and Manpower Committee, a Home Affairs Committee and an Industry Committee, orto know that there is no support for proceeding further with one or all of the proposals.
APPENDIX
REPORT
Background
- T h e Sta tes in approving the Strategic Policy Review 1995 requested the Policy and Resources Committee to bring proposals to the States no later than June 1996 for reducing the number of States Committees.
- T h e Po licy and Resources Committee in carrying out this remit has borne in mind the following -
(i ) th e support that clearly exists among States' members for the principle of reducing the number of States
Committees, reflected in members' approval of the action requested of the Committee in para. 11.13 of the Strategic Policy Review 1995;
( ii ) th e views of States' members. While there were some differences in the views expressed on how the
functions of the States should be allocated, those who responded to the Committee's invitation all supported the idea of reducing the number of Committees;
(ii i ) th at the more Committees there are the more overlap and duplication of functions can be expected to occur;
(iv ) th at if States' members were called upon to sit on fewer Committees they would have more time to give to
those Committees of which they are a member, more time for States' business, and more time for considering the decisions of Committees of which they are not a member;
(v ) th e following views which were expressed by the Policy and Advisory Committee's Committee Structure
Sub-Committee when it reported in 1983 -
"o n e o f th e p o in ts most frequently made to us was that the large number of Committees and the
haphazard distribution of functions was time consuming and labour intensive, and aggravated the problems of co-ordination ... Such a regrouping will not in itself of course reduce the total volume of business to be transacted. We believe that such a regrouping will simplify the process of formulating policy and expedite the transaction of public business and, therefore, save money";
( v i) th e views expressed by KPMG (Peats) in their report on "A review of the machinery of government"
presented to the States on 8th December 1987 -
" 7 . 5 - w e s e t o u t in section three a number of overall criticism of the present structure, which we recap
here -
th e s tr u c tu re d o e s n o t a p p ear to relate closely enough to particular policy or programme areas;
th e s tr u c tu re a p p ea r s to h a ve grown as a result of particular events, not in relation to a thought out
plan; the last attempt to rationalise the structure failed;
th e la rg e n u m b e r o f C o m m ittees leads to fragmentation of responsibility;
th e re s u lt is th a t th e r e is overlap of responsibilities in some areas; and other areas where there
appear to be gaps. There are also misunderstandings between Committees about respective responsibilities.
7 . 6 - w e b e lie v e th a t the time is now right to look again at the overall Committee structure and begin a
process of change towards a structure which would have the following features -
f e w e r m a in C o m m i tte e s, w ith greater spans of responsibility;
c l o se r a li g n m e n t b e tw e e n Committee responsibilities and programmes;
c l e ar e r d e f in iti o n o f re m its and responsibilities;
m o re d e le g a tio n o f c a se w ork to officials within agreed policy frameworks;
g r e a te r u s e o f Su b -C o m m ittees;
C o m m itte e s w h o s e jo b is in effect finished, and which are purely advisory, put outside the main
structure".
- T h e C ommittee in its deliberations also has taken account of the following -
(i ) m any of the minor Committees do not have sufficient administrative support. However it is not considered to
be a good use of the States' limited manpower resources to build up the administration of the minor Committees. The better course it is believed would be for such Committees to become part of a major Committee, and have access to the manpower resources employed by that Committee;
(ii ) th e decision of the States in principle, made during the 1995 Strategic Policy debate, to incorporate' Jersey
Postal Service, Jersey Telecoms and Jersey Airport;
( ii i) th e decision of the States in principle, in October 1995, to set up a Financial Services Commission, to
supervise and promote the finance industry, made up of States and non-States members;
( iv ) the previous decisions of the States to give overall responsibility for strategic policy to individual
Committees of the States (e.g. traffic policy - Public Services; environmental policies - Planning and Environment; social services policy - Health and Social Services) to ensure more effective policy co-ordination and decision taking, and the case for extending this approach to other strategic policy areas;
(v ) th e pressure on the States' manpower and financial resources and the need for Committees generally to use
their resources more effectively and produce better value for money.