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.
3.6 Deputy M. Tadier of St. Brelade of the Minister for Home Affairs regarding an independent inquiry into the financial probity of the Haut de la Garenne Inquiry.
Will the Minister inform Members why and when he commissioned an independent inquiry into the financial probity of the Haut de la Garenne inquiry, how much it has cost, where the funding has come from and when the report will be presented to the States?
Senator B.I. Le Marquand (The Minister for Home Affairs):
A report was first approved by my predecessor and I reaffirmed the decision that such a report was necessary because there was some evidence of serious financial mismanagement. It is desirable that such matters be looked at by accountants in addition to being looked at, as they have been, as part of certain disciplinary matters. The ambit of the matters are also wider than purely disciplinary matters because they also look at the role of the Home Affairs Department as well as the role of the police in relation to financial management of Operation Rectangle. It has cost £64,000 and has been paid, so I am told, out of P.91/2008 historical abuse inquiry and P.83/2009 which was in Article 11(8). These are matters which clearly arise out of the historical abuse inquiry because they are matters of inquiry in relation to serious financial mismanagement relating to those inquiries. The redacted report will go to the P.A.C. (Public Accounts Committee) as soon as I can get a redacted version of the report, and I hope to include it in briefings on disciplinary matters which I hope to hold shortly.
- Deputy M. Tadier :
The Minister seems to have answered the £64,000 question. Could he explain what he means by the redacted version, what the redaction will entail and will the P.A.C. be able to see the unredacted and redacted versions if necessary?
Senator B.I. Le Marquand:
The purpose of redaction in relation to reports is to remove information relating to the names of individuals, they might be individual witnesses, they might be individuals who are implicated in some way and who are not public facing. This is a standard process. I am led to believe the normal process in relation to such matters is to first provide a redacted version and then to seek undertakings of confidentiality from a committee when they can then have the full version.
- The Deputy of St. Martin :
I would be interested to know really why it has taken so long for this particular report ... I know of course £64,000, but can the Minister explain why it has taken so long for that report to be produced and indeed go to P.A.C. because quite clearly once it has gone to P.A.C. there will be an understandable delay in their scrutiny of it, so could the Minister say why? Also really is it not a fact that it is the Chief Officer of the Home Affairs Department that has responsibility for the overall financing of the police budget and not the Police Chief Officer, so maybe the wrong person has been suspended?
Senator B.I. Le Marquand:
I do not know why it has taken so long. I received a draft version of this quite a long time ago. The final document is a shorter document, more punchy, more direct, with less detail. I simply do not know. These reports do seem to take a very long time to produce. I am able to confirm that the Accounting Officer, both for the States of Jersey Police and for other aspects of Home Affairs matters, is the Chief Officer of Home Affairs and not the Chief Officer of Police. There are comments made in various reports as to whether that is appropriate but that is the current position.