This content has been automatically generated from the original PDF and some formatting may have been lost. Let us know if you find any major problems.
Text in this format is not official and should not be relied upon to extract citations or propose amendments. Please see the PDF for the official version of the document.
STATEMENT TO BE MADE BY DEPUTY G.P. SOUTHERN OF ST. HELIER, ONE OF THE CHAIRMEN OF THE SCRUTINY PANELS
ON 10th MAY 2005
In undertaking a review of the proposals in P.25/2005, Migration: monitoring and regulation', in February 2005, the Scrutiny Panel, which I chair, was conscious that the Policy and Resources Committee was keen to request a date for debate in the States in April 2005. The Panel gave an undertaking to the Committee that it would set itself a tight timetable to report to the States on its review within two months, at the beginning of May 2005.
The Panel was grateful that the Policy and Resources Committee was prepared to defer its request for a debate in order to give it the opportunity to conduct its review.
In the event, the Panel has found that its programme for public evidence sessions has taken longer than originally anticipated. In part, this was due to the fact that the planned schedule of meetings immediately before Easter proved unrealistic for both Panel members and witnesses, given the States' workload during the same period. The Panel also felt, after carefully examining the transcripts from the witness sessions, that it was necessary to call further witnesses in order to clarify a number of issues arising from the evidence sessions.
The Panel has made very effort to keep within its promised deadline. However, it believes that it is essential to deal fully with the issues raised in the review and that it would ultimately be unhelpful to the States to produce a report which failed to examine key concerns with sufficient rigour.
The Panel is aware that the Policy and Resources Committee intends to ask for a date for debate on its proposals of 7th June 2005, and it will do all it can to finalise its report for presentation to the States two weeks before that date, namely 24th May 2005, in order to give members sufficient time to absorb its findings. I am aware, however, that this deadline will give members no opportunity to lodge any amendments to the proposition should they choose to do so.
I should like to add one further comment. At present we are in a Shadow Scrutiny phase, which is designed to help members prepare for the full establishment of the Scrutiny function within the new ministerial system of government. An important lesson that has been learned during this period is the need to build sufficient time into the Executive's programme for Scrutiny to examine key policy initiatives. Scrutiny should not be left as an afterthought but be made aware in good time of the Executive's future plans so that work programmes can be planned in advance and adequate time allocated to in depth enquiries.