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.
3.15 The Deputy of St. Martin of the Chief Minister regarding the recommendations of the Review of the Roles of the Crown Officers': Following the in-committee discussion on the Review of the Roles of the Crown Officers (R.143/2010) on 30th March 2001, will the Chief Minister inform Members how it is intended to address the review's recommendations?
Senator T.A. Le Sueur (The Chief Minister):
The very clear message from the in committee debate was that the present arrangements were not under serious threat at this time and that, therefore, no action should be taken at this stage on the key recommendations about the role of the Bailiff . In due course, this aspect could be considered by the new Assembly. This option would not prevent work being done now to pursue the other recommendations, many of which are not controversial, as and when appropriate. Further discussion on this issue will shortly take place at forthcoming meetings of the Council of Ministers and the Privileges and Procedures Committee.
The Bailiff :
Deputy of St. Martin , do you wish to have a supplementary?
The Deputy of St. Martin : I have got one, I just ...
The Bailiff :
I always turn to the Member who asked the question first.
- The Deputy of St. Martin :
Can I have an assurance from the Minister that, as the States has a history of carrying out reviews and then ignoring the recommendations, this will not be an occasion again with this last review?
Senator T.A. Le Sueur :
I made it clear that those aspects of the review which are relevant and can be implemented swiftly will be addressed by the Council of Ministers and the Privileges and Procedures Committee. In respect of the role of the Bailiff and matters relating to that aspect, the outcome of the debate was very clear and that has given us a steer as to the way forward. Times may change and international views may change but, at this stage, that was the view coming out of that meeting.
- Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:
On a rating of one to 10 - 10 being the highest - what is the Chief Minister's personal enthusiasm for the recommendations of Carswell?
Senator T.A. Le Sueur :
Lord Carswell's review gave something like 15 recommendations and I have varying views on each of those 15. Many of them I think are very sensible recommendations and I rate them 9 and 10. Others I think are less acceptable and I rate them maybe rather lower, but that is my personal view. The purpose of this was to have a view of the Assembly and we have now had that.
- Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:
Given that the Chief Minister's views will be influential, what is his rating of the recommendation re. the Bailiff 's role?
Senator T.A. Le Sueur :
The recommendation, on my personal rating, would not be very high. I would rate it at certainly below 5. I think it is not adequately thought through as to the consequences that might flow from it but that, as I say, is very much my personal view.
- Deputy S. Pitman:
Given the importance of this issue, will the Chief Minister agree that the Council of Ministers meetings that have taken place shortly to discuss this matter will be available to all States Members and not put on the Part B' Agenda Minutes?
Senator T.A. Le Sueur :
The Deputy says "this matter". I refer to meetings which the Council of Ministers would be holding in respect of some of the non-controversial aspects. I am not sure if the Deputy understood my answer clearly because that was the matter and that, no doubt, will come on to an agenda in the fullness of time. The role of the Bailiff , which is a more controversial issue, was debated in the States Assembly in committee and is not scheduled to come on to the Council of Ministers agenda in the near future.
- Deputy S. Pitman:
Sir, a supplementary. He has mentioned that the Council of Ministers will be discussing the non-controversial issues. Does that mean that they will not be discussing controversial issues?
Senator T.A. Le Sueur :
I think the short answer is yes. In the current limited time we have available to discuss matters, controversial issues such as that of the role of the Bailiff is not something which will be useful use of the Council of Ministers' time, whereas other less controversial matters which could be implemented and maybe should be implemented quickly, are more appropriately addressed.
- The Deputy of St. Martin :
I think the Chief Minister and I may have a disagreement about the outcome of the debate, and that may also be shared by other Members who were here in the House. But will the Chief Minister maybe give consideration - and I think it was something that was mooted maybe by Senator Routier during the debate - that maybe there could be a subcommittee formed of a cross-section of Members of this House with a view to looking forward to or seeing how some of the recommendations could be addressed and then report back to the Council of Ministers and to P.P.C.? That may well be a sensible way forward.
Senator T.A. Le Sueur :
That may be a way forward and certainly I agree with the Deputy of St. Martin that we may have different views on this matter. I take the view that the expressions of Members of the States during that meeting on 30th March was quite clear in its general direction, and I base my answers and future proposals on the outcome of that meeting.