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.
CHAIRMEN'S COMMITTEE Meeting of Chairmen held on 19th May 2006 Meeting No. 13
Present Deputy R C Duhamel, President
Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier, Vice-President
Deputy F J Hill
Deputy P J D Ryan
Deputy A. Breckon, Social Panel representative (excluding item 8 decision and item 20 onwards)
Deputy S C Ferguson
Deputy J. G. Reed
Apologies
Absent
In attendance Mrs. K. Tremellen-Frost, Scrutiny Manager
Mrs A. Harris , Deputy Greffier of the States (Items 11 and 12 only) Mr. I. Clarkson, Scrutiny Officer
Ref Back | Agenda matter | Action |
1. | Minutes of previous meetings The Minutes of the meetings of 20th April, 4th May [with one amendment below], 10th and 11th May 2006 were approved and signed. Minutes of 4th May 2006 - amendment - Item 2 para 2 "Members recalled that the draft Strategic Plan was supposed to follow detailed business plans" should read "Members recalled that the detailed business plans were supposed to follow the draft Strategic Plan". |
|
2. 20.04.06 item 18 | Scrutiny Plus Whilst recognising the Minute of Item 18 of 20th April 2006 was accurate some concern was raised regarding the naming of Scrutiny Plus. It was suggested that the word "scrutiny" should be removed from the title as it was too close to the official scrutiny function. |
|
3. 20.04.06 Item 3 | Financial Analysis of Scrutiny Reviews Deputy J. Reed informed the Committee that he had still to meet the Assistant Greffier of the States regarding the possibility of obtaining a full financial analysis of each scrutiny review including details such as staff salary, accommodation costs etc. | JR |
4. 20.04.06 Item 4 | Public Accounts Committee (PAC) budget The Committee was advised that the Comptroller and Auditor General (C&AG) had informed the Greffier of the States that it was essential for the PAC to have its own budget in 2007. This would ensure independence of the Committee from the C&AG. |
|
5. 20.04.06 Item 9 | Register of local qualified persons to assist on scrutiny reviews The Committee noted that the Scott ish parliament was believed to have established a similar register and information from that | KTF |
| Parliament was awaited. |
|
6. 20.04.06 Item 11 | Rôle of Scrutiny Officers The Committee noted that no action had yet been taken for the Scrutiny Manager to discuss the above with individual Panel Chairmen. On reconsideration of the matter, and noting that new members had never been advised of the rôle Scrutiny Officers took, it was agreed that the Scrutiny Manager should attend each Panel meeting to address this matter. | KTF |
7. 20.04.06 Item 17 | Joint Scrutiny Public Meeting - payment for venue Noting that the cost for the venue [Hautlieu School Hall ] for the above meeting was £365.00, that it was a joint meeting between the four Scrutiny Panels and PAC and that there remained a substantial sum of money in the general scrutiny budget PS0001, it agreed that payment should be made from the general scrutiny budget. | KTF |
8. 20.04.06 Item 15 | Written Questions to Ministers The Committee recalled that it had considered inviting questions from the public to put to Ministers at formal public meetings (not hearings) and that it had agreed the principle of this initiative. It also recalled that it had not approved a draft news release which had been prepared by the Communications Unit. However, it did agree that an alternative news release or advert would be prepared. The Committee noted that a draft of the above had been forwarded to Deputy Duhamel and further outcome was awaited. | RD |
9. | Corporate Services Panel meeting with Chief Minister The Committee received a paper from the Corporate Services Panel regarding the following two issues -
members or Executive only?
With regard to (a) above, it was noted that Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier was to ask a question in the States about this matter. With regard to (b) above, the Committee agreed that the establishment of any links with Guernsey on the part of the non- executive must not give the perception of opposition government. It was agreed that Deputy Duhamel should liaise with Deputy J. Pritchard, Scrutiny Panel Chairman, States of Guernsey. There were some reservations expressed, however, that such contact should not be through the Chairmen's Committee but through individual Panels on a working basis as political scrutineers. |
|
10. | Centre for Public Scrutiny - attendance |
|
20.04.06 Item 21 | The Committee noted that Deputy Duhamel had attended a Social Affairs Panel meeting of 2nd May 2006 at which he had advised that Panel that no firm commitment had been made by the Chairmen's Committee at its meeting on 20th April 2006 as to the number of members who should attend. The Committee, noted the approved minute of that date which stated that it had been agreed that "three members should attend, with two of those being new members and a third being a more "established" member." Having reconsidered this, the Committee agreed to rescind the decision above and agreed that one member per Panel should be able to attend. From the names which had been forwarded, it was agreed that the following members should be invited to attend - Deputy Pitman (Social Affairs) Deputy Ryan (Corporate Services) Deputy K. Lewis (Economic Affairs) Deputy Reed (PAC) It was noted that no names had been forthcoming from the Environment Panel and Deputies Duhamel and Le Hérissier put their names down in reserve. | KTF |
11. 20.04.06 Item 22 | Draft Code of Practice for Scrutiny Panels and PAC The Committee received correspondence, dated 4th May 2006, from the President, Privileges and Procedures Committee, requesting that the Chairmen's Committee proceed with the lodging of the draft Code of Practice for Scrutiny Panels and PAC, irrespective of the issue of legal advice not having been finalised. The Committee agreed that the matter had caused the lodging of the draft code to be delayed for some considerable time, and agreed that it should be given its final consideration and lodged forthwith. The Committee considered some proposed amendments to the draft Code of Practice put forward by the Greffier of the States and having made decisions on these amendments agreed that a finalised copy should be forwarded to all members of the Chairmen's Committee, then all scrutiny members prior to lodging. | KTF |
12. 20.04.06 Item 6 | Social Affairs Panel - proposed split The Committee considered correspondence dated 15th May 2006 between the Chairman, Social Affairs Panel and the Greffier of the States regarding the draft report and proposition for the proposed split of the Social Affairs Panel. The Committee agreed to the draft proposition with the exception of the naming of the two Panels which it concurred would be preferable to be named Social Affairs Panel 1 and Social Affairs Panel 2. Following some discussion as to whether it would be the |
|
| Chairmen's Committee or the Privileges and Procedures Committee which would put forward the necessary changes to Standing Orders, it was agreed that this matter would be dealt with by the Deputy Greffier of the States together with the Scrutiny Manager. | AH/KTF |
13. 20.04.06 Item 2 | Scrutiny Website Action Group [SWAG] The Committee received and approved a record of the SWAG meeting held on 3rd May 200. The Committee noted that Deputy G.C.L. Baudains was interested in joining this group and it was agreed that both he and Deputy J. Gallichan, who had expressed an interest earlier, would be invited to the next meeting. |
|
14. 20.04.06 Item10 | Communication flow - Briefing Notes from Chairmen's Committee meetings for Panels. The Committee recalled its previous decision that briefing notes would be prepared on the Chairmen's Committee meetings for circulation to Panels as soon as practicable after the Chairmen's Committee meetings. The Committee considered approved minutes dated 2nd May 2006 of the Social Affairs Panel at which Deputy Duhamel had been present for a time. It was noted that in those minutes, Deputy Duhamel had advised the Panel that it had been agreed to disseminate copies of the Chairmen's Committee's minutes to Scrutiny Panels. By way of clarification, it was agreed that briefing notes could be produced more efficiently and at greater speed. These could generally be with officers to place on the next panel agenda. The Committee agreed to retain its previous decision. |
|
15. 20.04.06 Item 17 | Joint Scrutiny Public Meeting - evaluation The Committee considered the success of the joint scrutiny public meeting which had been held the previous evening in Hautlieu School Hall . The Committee was of the opinion that in the main it had been a successful evening although some concerns were expressed about the venue. The frequency of such meetings was discussed and it was decided that monthly meetings would be too frequent - this would have an overkill effect and the organisation for public meetings appears to be resource intensive from a staffing perspective. The Committee received Email correspondence, dated 19th May 2006, from Deputy S. Power in which he expressed concerns about marketing scrutiny in general. Deputy P.J.D. Ryan advised the Committee of the interest one of his Panel members, Deputy J. Gallichan, had in raising the profile of scrutiny with the public. After some discussion, it was agreed that Deputies Le Hérissier, Reed, Ferguson and Power should form a Sub-Group and meet with the Scrutiny Manager to give some consideration as to how to progress the matter of public engagement and the how to improve communication with the media. |
|
16. | Strategic Plan 2006-2011 |
|
20.04.06 Item 8 | The Committee was informed that the Greffier of the States had advised that all amendments in respect of the draft Strategic Plan 2006-2011 must have financial and manpower statements. It was noted that this was not possible as the Strategic Plan had not provided detailed financial and manpower statements for the plan. In consequence it was therefore impossible to prepare such a statement. There was some consideration of what action to take next. The Committee noted that there was a supplementary Chairmen's Committee meeting scheduled for 24th May 2006 to which all non-executive members, both scrutiny and non-scrutiny members had been invited. |
|
17. | Corporate Services Panel report The Panel was currently reviewing the financial framework of the Strategic Plan and had formed a Sub-Panel for this piece of work having invited two additional members to join them. The Sub- Panel comprised all Panel members with the exception of Connétable Gallichan and included Senators Norman and Shenton. It had agreed not to put forward amendments to the strategic plan from the Panel but as individual members. This was considered a pity as it would not present the image of united Scrutiny Panels. It was felt that it would be appropriate for individual members to put forward amendments but in the name of the Panel where possible. The Panel had formed two Sub-Panels one looking into Zero/Ten and the other GST. The former Sub-Panel was being chaired by Senator Perchard and comprised Senator Shenton, Deputies Ryan and Southern . Brian Curtis was acting as a local adviser. The latter comprised Deputy Ryan as Chairman, Connétable s Murphy, Gallichan and Jackson . There was concern that Standing Order 139 regarding the formation of Sub-Panels did not allow for a full Panel to invite further members onto it. There was also concern that there was not the provision for Assistant Ministers to sit on a Sub-Panel reviewing an area in which the Assistant Minister was not involved. These were noted for consideration at a future meeting. |
|
18. | Economic Affairs Panel The Panel's report on Postal Incorporation would be printed on 22nd May 2006 and be with Members by Tuesday 23rd May. The draft, exclusive of recommendations and key findings, was currently with stakeholders. It was anticipated that an evaluation of how the review had gone would be carried out and the findings brought to the Chairmen's Committee. |
|
19. | Social Affairs Panel The Panel was progressing with its consideration of the draft Strategic Plan. |
|
It had interviewed Senator Kinnard about the prison service and would be following this up by speaking to a representative of the Board of Visitors.
Concern was expressed about the progress of the Home Affairs Minister with the Sexual Offences (Jersey) Law 200- due to an apparent lack of consultation on the part of Home Affairs. There was a difference of opinion amongst Panel members as to whether the matter should be reviewed and if it were to be reviewed it would be an extremely large topic which would incorporate emotive issues, irrespective of how narrow the Terms of Reference were. It was agreed that a statement in the House would be appropriate.
GP out-of-hours review had been delayed due to a delay in the production of the JCRA report.
Income Support Sub-Panel's work was underway as was the review into the Centeniers-Magistrates Court.
- Environment Panel
A review of the Strategic Plan had been undertaken. Three reviews had work in progress.
Regarding the review into Waste Management, there were a number of waste related propositions due for debate, together with other ongoing developments, including possible litigation concerning the composting operation at La Collette 2. These might result in some confusion amongst States members. Deputy Duhamel was considering making a statement to clarify the views of the Environment Panel.
- Livelink Training
27.01.06 The Committee received a paper dated 19th May 2006, Item 7 prepared by the Scrutiny Manager in respect of Livelink Training which had been organised for scrutiny members and officers. In
09.03.06 view of the fact that Oriel House was no longer available for Item 6 training, an alternative venue had been found at Overdale CoM Training Room. A number of sessions had been planned for minutes members to select one session which best suited their diaries.
The Committee decided, however, that it would be more appropriate for one or two members to evaluate both the training and the appropriateness of access to Livelink prior to it being offered to other scrutiny members or officers.
Deputies Duhamel and Ferguson undertook to do this. RD/SF Signed Date:
.. .. President, Chairmen's Committee