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.
3.3 Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier of St. Saviour of the Chairman of the Privileges and Procedures Committee regarding the removal of in camera debates in relation to appointments:
Would the Chairman advise the Assembly of the progress made, if any, in implementing P.205/2009, Appointments made by the States: revised procedures', which removed the need for in camera debates in relation to appointments and state when he expects the agreed actions to be fully implemented?
Deputy J.M. Maçon of St. Saviour (Chairman, Privileges and Procedures Committee):
As the Deputy will know, my committee came into being in July this year and has not had a chance to fully consider this matter. However, I am advised that from the decision of adopting P.205/2009 in February 2010, that instructions were given to the Law Officers' Department in order to make this decision come into force. I am advised that while that initial work was undertaken, there was a problem with the way in which when people are appointed to the panels, how they are dismissed, and that created a new tranche of work that had not been envisaged at the time. This has meant that it has had to go back to the Law Officers' Department for further consideration and, as the Deputy will know, there is a huge tranche of work that is within the Law Officers' Department with which they are progressing and, at this time, I am unable to tell the Deputy when this will come to final fruition.
[10:00]
- Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:
As the Chairman would know, this has now taken 4 years. Is he saying that the hold-up is with the Law Officers' Department or with the Law Draftsmen or with P.P.C. (Privileges and Procedures Committee) itself? I wonder if he could clarify where the actual hold-up is and what steps he is taking to overcome them.
Deputy J.M. Maçon:
Just to clarify, I am advised that it is with the Law Draftsmen and that progress is ongoing and I am advised by the Greffier, as the officer looking after this particular matter, that it is under constant review. Again, the only way to advance this particular matter would be for it to be given priority during the law drafting process. The only way to achieve that would be to get the Chief Minister or another Minister to agree to defer another piece of work and while I have not asked them to do that at this stage, I am sceptical about whether that would occur.
- Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:
Given that, in fact, there was a very good proposition produced by the P.P.C. of 2009, would the Chairman fully commit himself to progressing the results and has he, for example, looked at the notion of an omnibus law rather than a vast series of individual laws to amend every appointment procedure?
Deputy J.M. Maçon:
As I began, my committee has not managed to have been able to consider this particular matter so therefore the suggestion that the Deputy makes, while he is welcome and we would be happy to discuss it, certainly under the work that P.P.C. is currently considering, I certainly cannot make any commitment before 2013 Christmas to progress this particular matter, though I am happy to meet with the Deputy to discuss this matter come the New Year.