Letter - to Chief Minister re Quarterly Hearing follow on questions - 12 March 2021

States Greffe: Scrutiny

Senator John Le Fondré Chief Minister

By email

12th March 2021 Dear Chief Minister

Corporate Services Scrutiny Panel Public Hearing – Outstanding Questions  

The Corporate Services Scrutiny Panel would like to thank you for your participation in our public hearing of the 10th March 2021. As you will appreciate the Panel have a number of questions of public interest that it was, unfortunately, unable to pose due to time constraints, despite your gracious allowance for extra time. The Panel would be grateful if you could please consider the following questions:

Office Modernisation Project

1. It has been claimed that a delay for scrutiny could cause difficulties with the contractor, why is this, given that the current preferred bidder was only selected last month, after discussions with the original preferred bidder came to an end?
2. It has been indicated that the costs and risks of the project to the Government of Jersey were negated by the funding mechanism, in that no form of payment is required until 2024. Why, therefore, have the costs of £1 million per month of delay for public scrutiny of the final decision been brandished?

Technology Transformation Programme & Digital Identification

3. The Panel was previously informed the Technology Transformation Programme was progressing well, with only a delay of 3-months over the multi-year programme, is this still the case?
4. The Comptroller of Revenue has highlighted that some Islanders are resistant to the Yoti App currently used for Digital Identification in accessing online government services, what is being done to mitigate this? Will any additional cost be funded through existing allocations?

5. What would be the costs and implications of a "do minimal" strategy in the Integrated Technology Solutions programme, or if it were spread over a longer time frame to ease the cost implications on the public purse?
6. Has a second opinion been sought with regards the latest assumptions of the cost of this programme?
7. What benefit will the average Islander see from the Integrated Technology Solutions programme?
8. Once funding necessities of the Integrated Technology Solutions programme were approved by departmental Accountable Officers, how were they reviewed and checked by the Principal Accountable Officer to ensure funds were used economically, efficiently and effectively to ensure alignment to the requirements of the Public Finances (Jersey) Law 2019?

States Employment Board

9. 53% of staff who completed the 2020 Be Heard survey felt they were 'emotionally connected' to the organisation, is this an acceptable figure?

1. There was only a 3% rise in staff who were "engaged" over a two-year period, this would indicate a 10-year period until two thirds of employees were engaged, is this an acceptable time frame, if not what will be done to reduce it?
2. Are you worried by the 10% of respondents that stated they would leave the organisation if they had another job opportunity?
3. What were the largest areas of improvement since the 2018 survey?
4. Were there any results that cause concern?

10. In your letter to the Panel of the 9th February 2021 you indicate that the States Employment board aims to ensure there is equal pay for work of equal value but also highlight the boards mindfulness for the lower receipts into Government. Can you please elaborate on this?

1. Are pay freezes for the Public sector being considered?
2. Is the commitment of frontline employees, including nurses and frontline care givers, during COVID-19 being considered in the pay reviews?

11. An Employment and Discrimination Tribunal has recently declared that the States Employment Board failed to follow procedures relating to suspension and exclusion of a member of staff. Why were reviews of the situation delayed in the view of the Board?

1. What actions were taken to resolve the issue by the Board?
2. Are there other ongoing cases involving these procedures?
3. What actions are the board taking to ensure that failure to follow these procedures does not happen again?

4. How much has been spent on tribunals over the last three years by the States Employment Board?

12. What objectives will be set for the Interim Chief Executive Officer?

1. How will the interim look to improve results of the "be Heard Survey"?
2. Will he be tasked with reconsidering the effectiveness of One Gov, particularly in light of the staff feedback of the Be Heard survey?
3. Has a timeline for recruitment for the substantive post been proposed?
4. Why was an additional 3-month contract required for the exiting CEO?

Consultants

13. How could the information supplied in the consultant report be improved?
14. When will any improvements to the consultant report be implemented?
15. Does the consultant report highlight any areas of concern?

a.  Is the reliance on consultants, as highlighted in the increase of spend during 2020, cause concern?

Statistics Jersey

16. What actions are being taken to ensure the continued independence of Statistics Jersey?
    1. How will the Chief Statistician remain independent to the Government of Jersey?
17. Why is there a necessity to be accountable to the Government of Jersey?

1. When is it expected that census information will start to be returned to Statistics Jersey?
2. When can initial data publication be anticipated?

2020 underspends

18. How are you as Chief Minister ensuring underspends during 2020 are used effectively?

The Panel has a number of questions pertaining to the Departmental Operational Business Plans, on which we would appreciate a separate public meeting to discuss due course.

The Panel would appreciate a written response to the questions being received before or by the 26th March 2021.

Yours sincerely

Senator Kristina Moore

Chair, Corporate Services Scrutiny Panel

States Greffe: Scrutiny | Morier House | St Helier | Jersey | JE1 1DD Tel: 01534 441080 | Fax: 01534 441077 | email: scrutiny@gov.je Website: statesassembly.gov.je/scrutiny