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.
2019.03.26
4 Senator S.C. Ferguson of the Minister for Infrastructure regarding the
appointment of a training company for the purposes of the Road Works and Events (Jersey) Law 2016: [OQ.78/2019]
Was the appointment of a training company required for administration of the Road Works and Events (Jersey) Law 2016 (i.e. to satisfy the road work supervision and qualification policy) put out to competitive tender; and, if not, why not?
Deputy K.C. Lewis (The Minister for Infrastructure):
As part of the road work supervision and qualification policy, GAT is seeking to broaden out its training opportunities for Jersey road work supervision and operatives by addressing current training limitations. The U.K. (United Kingdom) street work qualification system in use in the Island puts emphasis mainly on utility-type digging works, but does not fully cover Jersey's specific requirements. GAT intend to bridge this gap and overcome the prohibitive cost of delivering the U.K. qualification locally; therefore GAT has developed a new cost-effective, one-day, basic road work safety course by professionals carrying out non-utility work, such as operating mobile cranes, scaffolding, exterior office cleaning, repairing roadside walls and tree felling, based around the Jersey code of practice currently under final consultation called Working Safety on Jersey Roads. Final course development and validation requires that practical experience is gained and feedback received through the course trainers and GAT's own work inspectors. Local training provider, 4Safety Limited, have permission to pilot the course while its design and content is validated and the new code's requirement integrated.
- Senator S.C. Ferguson:
The Minister has not answered the question. I asked why was it not put out to tender? I presume the Minister received relevant papers with the question. Was there a valid business case for picking this one particular firm?
Deputy K.C. Lewis :
They were the only suitable course provider at the time. There are other people, in similar brackets, but they were the best one decided on by the department.
- Deputy M.R. Higgins of St. Helier :
Just following up on what the Minister has said. For the avoidance of doubt, did your department put out this tender to other firms and give them the opportunity to tender, or have you just put it out to the one you thought you wanted to deliver?
The Deputy Bailiff :
Through the Chair please. Did the Minister's department ...
Deputy M.R. Higgins:
I accept your correction. I think the Minister knows now what I should have said.
Deputy K.C. Lewis :
Yes, several companies were interviewed regarding this, is my information.
- Senator S.C. Ferguson:
I would suggest that the Minister checks on that, because my information is that it was decided on without discussion ...
The Deputy Bailiff :
Senator, it has to be a question, not a statement.
Senator S.C. Ferguson: I am getting to it, Sir.
The Deputy Bailiff :
Perhaps you could get to it straightaway. Senator S.C. Ferguson:
We have 4 excellent firms in the Island, surely it would have been preferable to allow the actual firms operating in the roadworks area to select their own training company and would be better than the department making what might be considered an ill-considered judgment.
The Deputy Bailiff :
I think the question is: do you agree with that proposition? Deputy K.C. Lewis :
No, the company 4Safety Limited have extensive experience and involvement in road works and utility section. They were the best company and they were selected.
Senator S.C. Ferguson:
I am sorry, the Minister has not answered the question. Would he like to check that the other firms were not ...
The Deputy Bailiff :
I am sorry, Senator, but ... Senator, I am afraid I had to pose the question at the end of the day. You did not actually ask a question when you made your statement a little bit earlier. That was the final supplementary and we are moving on to the next question.