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.
1240/5(6722)
WRITTEN QUESTION TO THE CHIEF MINISTER
BY DEPUTY S. PITMAN OF ST. HELIER
ANSWER TO BE TABLED ON TUESDAY 21st FEBRUARY 2012
Question
Following his answer to an oral question on 31st January 2012 in which he stated that there was no formal contract with Matt Tapp Associates for the work undertaken at the request of the Chief Executive, would the Chief Minister outline how this situation came about and inform members whether the Chief Executive had discretion to commission work with no contract and, if so, state whether this decision not to conform with standard procedures was discussed with anyone else and explain why this decision taken?
Answer
As the Minister for Home Affairs explained in an answer to an oral question asked on 31st January 2012 Matt Tapp Associates were originally commissioned by the States of Jersey Police to conduct a review of external communications relating to Operation Rectangle for which terms of reference were agreed.
Following a meeting with the former Chief of Police it appears that Mr Tapp was of the view that his position had become untenable and his contract had effectively been terminated.
Subsequently, as I explained in my answer to a similar question on this issue asked on 31st January 2012, the former Chief Executive commissioned Matt Tapp Associates to produce a report with the following terms of reference:
To make an assessment of the external communications activity pertaining to the Haut de la Garenne investigation (February 2008 to October 2008).
This work was agreed by correspondence between the former Chief Executive and Matt Tapp Associates. The former Chief Executive, as Accounting Officer, had the authority to procure this work and there was no requirement for a formal written contract for this relatively low monetary value which was in accordance with Financial Direction 5.7 Purchasing of goods and services.