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.
Environment Scrutiny Panel Meeting No. 28
2nd November 2006
Le Capelain Room, States Building Public Session
Present Deputy R.C. Duhamel (Chairman) (RD)
Deputy G.C.L. Baudains (Vice Chairman) (GB) Connétable K. A. Le Brun of St Mary (KB) Deputy Le Hérissier (RH)
Deputy S. Power (SP)
Apologies
Absent
In attendance M. Robbins, Scrutiny Officer (MR) 9.35 am Meeting commenced
Ref Back | Agenda matter | Action |
1. | Minutes Minutes for the 19th October 2006 were considered and with regard to Item 2 it was agreed that the words, "and did not wish to resign" were to be removed. The Panel agreed future minutes would record times of starting and finishing the meetings with a note of who was present for each item. Present:- RD. GB. KB. SP. MR | MR |
2. (Item 2, 19/09/06) (Item 8 19/10/06) (Item 6 19/10/06) | Matters arising The Panel discussed the current working practices and the involvement Members and officers had in the reviews. It was agreed that any concerns in this area were to be considered at meetings. The Panel expressed concern that the Planning Process Review may stall if the lead officer were not ensured the time to write the report. There were pressures in relation to the Jersey Telecoms Review which he was also working on. The Panel was advised that the matter had been considered at a recent Chairmen's Committee meeting and the lead officer for the Planning Process Review had been fully released for a two-week period to dedicate time to drafting the report. The reply from Senator Legrand, Président du Conseil Général de la Manche in relation to deep ground water in the Bay of Mont St Michel was still awaited. It was understood that Deputy S.Ferguson had not received a reply and the officer was requested to follow up this matter up with Mr S. Canavan, Chargee de Mission, as a matter of urgency. Present:- RD. GB. KB. SP. RH. MR | MR |
3 (Item 7 19/10/06) | Items to note. The Panel noted the following three items: - i) Planning and Environment report on completion of test on boreholes. The Panel stated its disagreement with the statement within the report that the drilling had been completed successfully |
|
| as it was of the opinion that the drilling had not been to specification. A letter was to be written to the Minister for Planning and Environment stating the Panel's views and expressing concern over the results of the tests due to the structural difficulties of the boreholes. ii). R.67/2006 Weighbridge, Caledonia Place: Approval of New Plan was noted without comment iii) Archaeology and Planning Draft Supplementary Planning Guidance Discussion Paper. The Panel considered this to be of significant importance. This complex issue required significant discussion and the Panel requested that it be an item for the agenda at a separate meeting on 8th November 2006. Present:- RD. GB. KB. SP. RH. MR | RD / MR MR |
4 (Item 7 19/10/06) | Homes and Lifestyle. The Panel considered a choice of photographs to be displayed on the stall. It recalled that £500 had been authorised for printing and selected 2 at poster size and 2 at A3 size. The Panel enquired about photographs of Bellozanne Waste Treatment Facility and Social Housing in the Island. It was considered that these would be a more representative example of the Panels' remit than general photographs of Jersey. The Panel noted that the four passes available with the Stall Package were insufficient and that a further two would be needed. The cost of £20 to cover these was agreed. The Panel noted that badges had been ordered to give out to the public at the show. at a cost £115 for 4,800. Present:- RD. GB. KB. SP. RH. MR | MR MR |
5 | Planning Process The Panel considered that this matter had been suitably dealt with within matters arising and noted that there were no new developments. Present:- RD. GB. KB. SP. RH. MR |
|
6 (Item 9 | Design of Homes Review The Panel gave consideration to a position paper dated 26th October 2006. The Panel was advised that letters had been written to various professional and interested groups, with a document which encouraged submissions for the Design of Homes review. The Panel agreed that a copy was to be sent to the Citizens Advice Bureau. A second document was being prepared which was to be sent out to the public for submissions. Advice relating to the launch of the public submissions was being sought through Orchid to ensure the maximum benefit and focus from the media as the requests were circulated. It was noted that a large section of the public, probably 20-30 years old, might have held views which were of interest to the review. It was considered that this group might not listen to Channel Television News or read the Jersey Evening Post and in consequence, would be specifically invited to comment. In addition, certain recent housing developments were being identified for specific targeting with mail drops. Consideration was also being given to intranet drops with various companies and a simple survey with Radio 103. It was noted that the proposed dates for public hearings, being |
|
19/10/06) the 11th, 12th and 15th December 2006 clashed with
commitments of some Panel Members.
Concerning the fact finding visit to Malmo and Vienna previously agreed by the Panel, it was noted that Senator T Le Main, Minister for Housing had declined the invitation to join the Panel
on the visit. The Panel agreed that the Minister had sufficient officer support to obtain the information through his department
but the Scrutiny Panels had such limited support that they needed
to obtain any supporting information themselves. MR It was also noted that Senator F Cohen, Minister for Planning and
Environment had shown an interest in attending but had declined
as he was unavailable at the time proposed for the visit. The Panel noted his budget difficulties but considered his attendance
on the visit to be crucial and the Panel therefore agreed to rearrange the visit to enable the Minister to attend. Contact was to
be made with the Minister establishing a convenient date.
The Panel accepted that this might delay completion of the review until January or February but considered that this was an acceptable delay for the benefits involved. The Panel would decide at a later date which of its members would be available for the visit.
Present:- RD. GB. KB. SP. RH. MR 6 Waste Review
(Item 13
19/10/06) The Panel gave consideration to a position paper dated 26th
October 2006 which indicated that the proposed visit to Cardiff Materials Recycling Facility was at the same time as the Sustainable Development UK (SDUK) Conference in London. The Chairman proposed that the visit could include both venues. The Panel considered that sustainability underpinned every study which fell within it's remit particularly the forthcoming energy and transport issues, which were expected next year. The content of the SDUK Conference offered excellent preparation for Panel Members
The Panel noted that Scrutiny was specified amongst the group of invitees on the advertising leaflet for the conference which was MR
circulated to members with the agenda. The Panel felt strongly
that all Members would attend. The Panel also noted that the MR Connétable of St Helier had expressed an interest in joining the
visit for the Cardiff section. The Panel discussed an e-mail communication from the Greffier of the States relating to the visit
and dictated a reply to be sent by the officer.
The Panel recalled that it had previously authorised a cost of £300 per head for the visit to Cardiff and now authorised up to £612.50 per head for the combined visit to London and Cardiff which was to include the cost of the SDUK conference.
The Panel agreed that it would look at an Energy Review in the early part of 2007 which was a huge subject that would involve the full Panel membership. It was recognised that individual Panel members had specific interests and specialities. This suggested that areas within the energy review such as for example, transport and housing energy, would easily sit with individual members to lead. The Panel noted that resources at officer level had to be accounted for when the review was planned.
| Present:- RD. GB. KB. SP. RH. MR |
|
7 | Press Releases. The Panel considered that the forthcoming visit to the SDUK Conference in London should be publicised in the media as should the Material Recycling Facility details from Cardiff. The press should be given details both before and after the event. The Design of Homes Review was about to send out a press release to coincide with the request for public submissions. The Panel was reminded that all press releases must be approved by the Chairman. Present:- RD. GB. KB. SP. RH. MR | MR / RD SP / MR / RD |
8 | Date of Next Meeting The next meeting was arranged for 9.30 am on 16th November 2006 in the Le Capelain Room. |
|
|
|
|
The meeting ended at 1205 pm.
Signed Date ..
Chairman, Environment Panel