Public Finances (Administration) (Jersey) Law 1967 - capital expenditure

PUBLIC FINANCES (ADMINISTRATION) (JERSEY) LAW 1967: CAPITAL EXPENDITURE _______________

Lodged au Greffe on 4th May 1999 by the Policy and Resources Committee

______________________________

STATES OF JERSEY

STATES GREFFE

175             1 9 9 9    P . 5 8          

Price code: A

PROPOSITION

THE STATES are asked to decide whether they are of opinion -

  (a ) to agree that the Public Finances (Administration) (Jersey) Law 1967 should be further amended to provide

for the States programme of capital expenditure to be approved by the States at the time of considering the States' Resource Plan each year, instead of during consideration of the Budget;

( b ) to charge the Finance and Economics Committee to prepare the draft amendment and to agree that the

drafting of the amendment should be included in the 1999 Legislation Programme.

POLICY AND RESOURCES COMMITTEE

Note: T he Finance and Economics Committee supports this proposition.

Report

1. A  rt ic le  16of the Public Finances (Administration) (Jersey) Law 1967 states that in Novemberor December in each year the Finance and Economics Committee shall present to the States the Budget, which shall contain an estimate of the transactions of the Capital Fund as recommended by the Finance and Economics Committee for the next financial year. This estimate should, amongst other matters, setout capital expenditure. When taking the Budget into consideration, the States may wholly orin part allow or disallow, or increase, the amount of any item in the estimate of capital expenditure of any Committee of the States.
2. T h e P olicy and Resources Committee presents its recommendations regarding the Capital Programme to the States in June/July of each year in its Resource Plan. These recommendations are made following consultation, usually in the form of a decision conference which allows for the capital projects to be prioritised. However, the Public Finances (Administration) (Jersey) Law 1967 does not allow for the States when it debates the Resource Plan to formally approve the Capital Programme. The Policy and Resources and the Finance and Economics Committees consider it to be undesirable that the Capital Programme, having been agreed by the States in its Resource Plan debate, can be altered as late as Budget Day itself without any prior warning.
3. Sta te s members will recall the difficulties that have arisen during the past two budget debates because of this state of affairs, and members have indicated that they wanted these difficulties to be avoided in the future. Both the Policy and Resources and Finance and Economics Committees are therefore of the opinion that it is desirable that an amendment to the Public Finances (Administration) (Jersey) Law 1967 is drafted, which would allow for the States to approve the Capital Programme when it receives and considers the Programme in the annual Resource Plan in June/July.
4. T h is   p roposed item of amending legislation is not included in the current Legislation Programme. The Policy and Resources and Finance and Economics Committees consider it to be of such importance that the Policy and Resources Committee has invoked the procedures for dealing with any urgent and unforeseen requests to determine this item's relative priority. The procedure for advancing urgent and unforeseen requests for new or amending legislation  is  that  the participative  group  of  politicians  that  produced  the  decision  conference  model and  the recommendations for the Legislation Programme should be requested to assess the relative priority of any such requests. In addition, any proposed changes to the agreed programme should subsequently be formally endorsed by the States. The Policy and Resources Committee, having consulted the participative group of politicians, is of the opinion that, subject to States approval, an amendment to the Public Finances (Administration) (Jersey) Law 1967 should be inserted into the 1999 Legislation Programme.
5. I n th  e event, the Law Draftsman has given his opinion that, though this amending legislation cannot be considered to be "minor", it should not require in excess of five days to draft, and, as such, the legislation could be achieved with little orno effect on the existing programme.