Vote of No Confidence: Chief Minister

STATES OF JERSEY

VOTE OF NO CONFIDENCE: CHIEF MINISTER

Lodged au Greffe on 7th June 2017 by the Connétable of St. John

STATES GREFFE

2017  P.55

PROPOSITION

THE STATES are asked to decide whether they are of opinion

that they have no confidence in the Chief Minister.

CONNÉTABLE OF ST. JOHN

Note:  In accordance with the requirements of Standing Order 22, the following

Members are additional signatories to this proposition –

1. Deputy J.A. Martin of St. Helier
2. Deputy T.A. Vallois of St. John
3. Deputy S.M. Brée of St. Clement .

REPORT

A vote of no confidence is the ultimate sanction this Assembly can serve on any Minister or Chief Minister. For this reason, the proposition is not taken lightly.

It is important that this motion is determined on failures and not personalities. This is an important element within our political and democratic system.

When embarking on a post in public office, there are a number of principles we all sign up to, known as the Nolan Principles. These are important, as they are accepted as the stable foundation upon which elected officials carry out their office. This is the basis upon which decisions are made on behalf of the Public that can affect their daily lives.

A system which separates the Executive from the Parliament places an onus on those in public office to ensure that the appropriate checks and balances are in place to hold each other to account. The Executive are elected to a position by this Parliament to carry out the roles which are no longer the roles of this Assembly. The Executive is therefore first and foremost accountable to this Assembly and in turn to the wider public.

However,  a  position  has now  evolved  which  has Members  retreating  into a  silo mentality, waiting to be stabbed in the back, yet assuming a position of support whilst showing an unwillingness to partake because of personalities and eminent individuals making decisions behind the scenes. With such tensions, it is only right and proper that a Vote of No Confidence should not only be brought, but should also prevail.

Members must feel free to express their feelings and beliefs without fear, and in complete  transparency.  Only  under  these  circumstances  can  true  democratic government succeed.

Hospital funding

A new Hospital will be largest and most expensive project any States Assembly is expected to support in many generations. The whole process has been a fiasco and the decision-making process from finding a site to funding the project has been woefully poor. The Public have a right to expect a much higher standard from this Assembly. The most recent decision to withdraw P.130/2016, the funding for the new Hospital, without any creditable explanation, is simply not acceptable. The Minister for Treasury and Resources made a weak statement in which he said "I have agreed to withdraw this proposition ", which is illustrative of the behind the scenes' struggles that take place. In January 2017, the Assembly was told it was vital that the proposition was pushed through  without  any  scrutiny,  and  now  it  has  been  withdrawn  without  adequate explanation. Not only are the Public of the Island disillusioned, but the staff involved in the project have been most severely let down.

Human Resources

The recent annual report published by the Jersey Appointments Commission identifies a lack of proper process, and a failure to put in place procedures to ensure complete openness and transparency in appointing the best candidates for jobs within the Public Sector. This is not the first report to highlight huge weaknesses within the Human Resources process. There have been Comptroller and Auditor General reports, Jersey Appointments Commission reports, as well as numerous concerns raised by staff, the Unions and members of the Public about the way in which the system is being run. The

Chief Minister has many times vowed to resolve these problems and to put in place the necessary processes to stop repetition. Morale has now fallen to an all-time low.

Innovation Fund

The States Assembly agreed to set up an Innovation Fund with P.124/2012, as amended, in order to provide funding to new businesses to help stimulate the economy. Jersey has a record of being cautious when it comes to money, and a failure rate of 10% was set. However, 6 months after the Board was formed, the Chairman raised concerns at the lack of direction, and following a meeting, at which the Chief Minister was the only Minister present, Financial Direction FD.12 was produced. The risk of failure has increased fivefold to 50% without any reference back to the Assembly, and indeed to this day, the Assembly has yet to be told of the change. This is yet another example of the lack of transparency.

We all know the Innovation Fund has been a disaster, the Comptroller and Auditor General's report has demonstrated that. The Public Accounts Committee ("PAC") is now carrying out a review. That is the responsibility of the PAC and is part of the machinery of government. The Chief Minister, however, instead of apologising for the failure, appoints someone to carry out another review at a cost of £60,000 of taxpayers' money. This review revealed nothing new, but gave the Chief Minister the opportunity to misinterpret the report and falsely claim that it "exonerated" his Assistant Minister. This has incensed the Public and many States Members.

We in this Assembly are held in very low esteem by the Public. We are servants of the Public, and it is our duty to stand up and represent those who have put their trust in us. Those we represent want action, and I do not cower from my responsibilities, but instead stand up to be counted. This is why I bring this proposition.

Financial and manpower implications

There are no financial or manpower implications for the States arising from the adoption of this proposition.

APPENDIX

Additional signatories

We, the undersigned, are aware of the Vote of No Confidence in the Chief Minister, and would support the proposition: