Scrutiny of planned Government efficiencies

WQ.124/2020

WRITTEN QUESTION TO THE CHIEF MINISTER BY DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER

ANSWER TO BE TABLED ON MONDAY 9th MARCH 2020

Question

Further to his correspondence dated 25th February 2020 to me as Chair of the Government Plan Efficiencies Review Panel, will the Chief Minister –

1. explain how, if background material to the 29 efficiencies listed in R.130/2019 "is largely in the public domain", suggesting that there is no further such material of relevance, there exists a meaningful audit trail for the decisions underpinning these efficiencies;
2. explain how his statement that the obligations arising from the adoption of P.88/2019 require him to publish a 6-monthly assessment of the efficiencies is consistent with the wording of the proposition to request the "the Scrutiny Liaison Committee [] to undertake, commission or oversee detailed 6-monthly assessments";
3. explain what is intended with the development of "a sustainable wellbeing impact assessment" that may be applied to existing efficiencies and those for 2021 to 2024;
4. explain what assessment he has made of how meaningful scrutiny could be undertaken by the Review Panel in light of his response to the Panel's Terms of Reference; and
5. reconsider the position he has set out in that letter?

Answer

1. Besides the details provided to Members and the public in R.130/2019, internal governance is provided through the One Government Political Oversight Board, the Council of Ministers (CoM), and through the Assembly and Scrutiny (who are able to request papers from CoM meetings).  
2. It is a reasonable interpretation of the requirements set out in P88/2019 that, to enable the assessments detailed in part (a), the government should publish a  six-monthly report which includes impact assessments of the current efficiencies plan.
3. Following the passing of the Public Finances (Jersey) Law 2019, we are developing our thinking on the process and tools that might be used to support the Council of Ministers to take into account the sustainable well-being (including the economic, social, environmental and cultural well-being) of the inhabitants of Jersey over successive generations' (para 9a).

During 2020, we will develop and trial an integrated sustainable wellbeing impact assessment tool for use in a number of areas including policy development, spend proposals and efficiencies. This affords an easy-to-use summary assessment tool, which upon completion highlights where further consideration, and more detailed impact assessment work is required.

The development of this approach is still at early stages and we will share progress with Scrutiny during the course of the year.

4. Reference has been made to both the Panel's Terms of Reference and the key issues set out on the Panel's website. These have been considered alongside the plan to publish a six-monthly update on efficiencies covering certain impact assessments and the current assumptions on how this will be completed. I consider that the published report should address the requirements set out by the Panel and enable meaningful scrutiny to be undertaken.

The background material referred to in the Panel's letter of 7 February 2020 is as referred to in my response of 25 February. However, I have requested officers to engage with the Panel to identify what supporting material might be of assistance.

5. The position, as set out in correspondence with the Panel dated 25th February 2020, remains as proposed. We have not had a response from the Panel to my letter, however if there are any specific concerns the Panel would like to raise, I would be happy to discuss them more fully.