The official version of this document can be found via the PDF button.
The below content has been automatically generated from the original PDF and some formatting may have been lost, therefore it should not be relied upon to extract citations or propose amendments.
3.4 Deputy F.J. Hill of St. Martin of the Minister for Economic Development regarding a review of the fee structure relating to the Licensing (Jersey) Law 1974:
Given that on 26th September 2007 the States approved P.117/2007 and requested the Minister to review the fee structure relating to the Licensing (Jersey) Law 1974 and for the review to be finalised and the findings published no later than 1st August 2008, will he inform Members why the findings have not been finalised and how much revenue has been lost due to the freezing of fees in 2007?
Senator A.J.H. Maclean (The Minister for Economic Development):
The Deputy of St. Martin quotes selectively in his question regarding what the States approved in P.117/2007. That proposition asked for a review of the current liquor licensing fees and it also asks, and I quote: "To finalise the review and publish its findings no later than 1st August 2008." But interestingly it also stated that no increases should be made before these licensing fees had been reviewed. Therefore P.117 only addressed the licensing fee structure and not the rest of the Licensing Law, which is also being reviewed. During the debate on P.117 I gave an assurance to the
Deputy that no fee increases would be brought until the entire law had been reviewed. To honour that undertaking I did not seek any increases in 2009 or 2010. I accept that
the review has taken much longer than anticipated but it also has proved to be one of
entrenched and opposing views from many stakeholders. It is therefore an extremely complex area, which the Deputy will appreciate, and we are working with other departments who are also involved in the matter.
- The Deputy of St. Martin :
I know I picked up an infection last night flying back on the flight, but I think I failed to hear all the answer or maybe it was not given. I did ask what sums of money had been lost because there has not been a fee increase for the last 3 years? I did not get that answer. Is the Minister able to give it?
Senator A.J.H. Maclean:
The loss of fees is difficult to determine with accuracy because, of course, subject to the review, some fees would have gone up and some would have gone down, but we estimate in the region of about £25,000. I would also add that it is a somewhat surprising question from the Deputy because I notice that he supported Deputy Power's impôts proposition in December of last year where he stated that he did not think it was reasonable to increase taxes at this particular time when we were introducing pay freezes. So he seems to have a differing view, but that is another matter.
- The Deputy of St. Martin :
No doubt it is quite easy to say that. Would the Minister say it is £25,000 a year or £25,000 over the 3 years?
Senator A.J.H. Maclean:
£25,000 has been lost by not increasing the fees in the period stated, approximately.
- The Deputy of St. Martin :
Last year in answers there was a similar type of question, we were informed the Green Paper was due in February 2010, 8 months ago, is the Minister in a position to tell Members or, indeed, the public when this Green Paper is going to be finalised and, indeed, when the law, which was supposed to be brought back to the House in 2008 is going to be brought forward for Members to discuss?
Senator A.J.H. Maclean:
Again, as I have stated, I understand the frustration in this area. It is simply down to constraints in terms of resources. Nevertheless the consultation has now closed. We anticipate being able to publish the results before the end of this year, and then seek the law drafting time next year, hopefully to be able to bring a new law before the States by the end of next year.