Skip to main content

Environment - Approved Panel Minutes - 15 November 2007

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

PUBLIC MEETING Record of Meeting

Date: 15th November 2007. Meeting Number: 65

Present Deputy R.C. Duhamel (Chairman) (RD)

Connétable K. A. Le Brun of St Mary (KB)

Connétable A. S. Crowcroft (SC)

Deputy P. V. F. Le Claire.(PLC) Apologies Deputy C. Scott Warr en

Absent

In attendance Mr M. Robbins. Scrutiny Officer

Mr. N. Fox, Scrutiny Officer

 

Ref Back

Agenda matter

Action

1.

Minutes

The  Panel  received  and  approved  the  Minutes  of  the meeting of 1st November 2007.

The  Panel  received  the  Minutes  of  the  meeting  of  6th November  2007  and  requested  minor  typographical amendments.

The  Panel  received  and  approved  the  Minutes  of  the meeting of 9th November 2007.

MR

2.

Action Updates

The Panel noted a list of action updates from previous meetings.

In particular the Panel noted that-

Costs of advertising in the Jersey Evening Post were to be discussed at the Chairmen's Committee

The  Chairman  was  to  meet  officers  to  discuss Condition 8 of the conditions of the planning approval of  the  proposed  Energy  from  Waste  Plant  at  La Collette.

The Panel was still awaiting some information from Guernsey in connection with the Waste Plant review.

RD RD

3.

Matters to note

 

 

  1. Countryside Renewal Scheme

The Panel noted a document outlining the structure and purpose of the Countryside Renewal Scheme.

  1. Island Plan Review

The  Panel  noted  a  Ministerial  Decision  (MD-PE-2007- 0247)  and  attached  report  from  the Planning  and Environment  Minister  regarding  the  commissioning  of research on a review of the Island Plan.

  1. Puffins – new study on danger to the Atlantic Puffin

The Panel noted an officer report and attached information regarding  protection  of  the  puffin  colony  on  Plémont headland.

 

4.

(Item 2 -

01/07/11)

Banner Stands

The  Panel  noted  correspondence  between  officers  and Edmonds UK Ltd in respect of several quickscreen roller banner stands'. These were priced at £430 each which included the artwork and unit carrying bag and printed with a message appropriate to the Panel to be used at future public meetings. The Panel decided to delay a decision on the  purchase  until  such  time  as  a  message  had  been developed.

Panel

5.

Chairmen's Committee Briefing

The Panel was informed that the Chairmen's Committee had recently met the Chief Minister in respect of future Scrutiny of the Annual Business Plan.

Concerns  had  previously  been  expressed  by  the Chairmen's Committee that there was too much flexibility in the Business Planning system, and that funds could be transferred  between  Departmental  units  even  after  the Business Plan had been approved. The general opinion of the  Chairmen's  Committee  was  that  there  was considerable  room  for  improvement  in  the  Business Planning process.

The  Panel  noted  the  briefing  notes  of  the  Chairmen's Committee meeting of 2nd November 2007.

 

6.

(Item 3 - 01/11/07)

Jersey One World Group

The Panel welcomed Mr. D. Wimberley of the Jersey One World Group (JOWG), an organisation dedicated to raising awareness of sustainability, justice and peace.

The Panel was informed that the current objective of the

 

 

JOWG was to reduce the number of plastic bags used in the Island. This was to be achieved by engaging small and large retailers and the public.

Recently, the JOWG had held an event in connection with three local schools at which pupils manufactured their own shopping  bags,  which  were  often  made  of  recycled material. It was hoped that this would encourage Islanders to use reusable bags and therefore less plastic.

Mr. Wimberley was of the opinion that as oil production had peaked or was to peak soon, and the effects of climatic change were becoming clearer, it would be advantageous to reduce the amount of plastic used locally and globally.

The Panel commented that it had noted the display of the aforementioned bags in St. Helier .

The Panel expressed interest in the ongoing scheme, and approved  in  principle  of  the  JOWG  objectives.  It encouraged Mr. Wimberley to continue with his work and was minded to follow the development of the scheme.

 

7.

(Item 3 - 01/11/07)

Consultation Paper on Branchage from the Comité des Connétable s

The  Panel  was  informed  that  consideration  was  being given to altering the dates of the visites de branchage to accommodate occasional years of exceptional growth, and to altering the height to which greenery must be cut back from 12 to 14 feet.

The  current P30' licence  for  oversize  vehicles  set  a maximum length for these vehicles, but did not specify a height limit. Therefore these vehicles could be taller than the current Branchage height.

The Panel was aware that an increase in the height of the branchage would involve the removal of established tree branches that have not hitherto been involved.

In terms of branchage dates, the Panel noted that there was no current requirement for a landowner to wait until the branchage date to cut back greenery, so this could be done earlier as necessary even under the current system.

The Panel decided to invite Mr M. Stentiford and Mr. M. Freeman,  Principal  Ecologist  of  the Planning  and Environment Department, and a Motor Traffic Officer to the next Panel meeting to discuss the matter.

MR

8.

(Item 4 - 01/11/07)

SDUK  Conference,  QEII  Conference  Centre, Westminster

The Panel was informed that four places had been booked

 

 

for the Sustainable Development - United Kingdom (SDUK) Conference to be held on 6th March 2007.

The  Panel  agreed  that  the  following  delegates  would attend-

Deputy Duhamel Connétable Crowcroft Connétable Le Brun Deputy Le Claire

After discussion of the matter, the Panel decided that it would be appropriate to book an additional place in order that an Officer could accompany the Panel. Mrs. C. Le Quesne,  Scrutiny  Officer,  was accordingly  directed  to attend. The Panel agreed to meet the cost of one additional attendee to facilitate this, although it was acknowledged that the cost of this might be more that the £99 per person paid previously.

Officers were directed to take the appropriate action.

MR

9.

Draft Code of Practice

The  Panel  noted  that  the  central  point  of  contention between the Executive and the Scrutiny function was the provision of legal advice.

The role of H.M. Attorney General was discussed as it was deemed central to the ongoing discussions of legal advice.

It  was  also  suggested  that  if  the  primary  duty  of  H.M. Attorney  General  were  to  advise  Ministers  and  not  the States as a whole then this should be clarified in law, and that there should be clearer provision for Scrutiny panels to seek legal advice elsewhere.

The Panel concluded that an additional meeting would be required on this subject. Officers were directed to take the appropriate action.

MR

10.

Garenne Group – Community Awards

The Panel noted correspondence addressed to Senator Le Claire seeking nominations for the Community Awards.

The  Panel  noted  that  the  Garenne  Group  Community Awards were presented as part of the Jersey Awards for Enterprise.  It  discussed  the  possibility  of  sponsoring  an environmental award to be presented at this event.

The Panel considered this to be a viable use of funds, and cited the example of the recent Scrutiny Matters Newsletter as an indicator that profile-raising activities were deserving

 

 

of funding.

Officers  were  directed  to  contact  the  organisers  of  the Jersey Awards for Enterprise to discuss the possibility of establishing  a  new  award  or  group  of  awards  to  be presented to persons who had benefited the environment.

MR

11.

(Item 3 - 18/11/07)

Water Quality in St. Aubin's Bay

The Panel noted that a report on the subject was not yet available, and accordingly decided to consider this item at its next meeting.

The Panel noted, however, that the current discharge into the bay could only function at a level up to 600 litres of liquid per second instead of the 900 planned. The situation was  likely  to  worsen  as  the  waterfront  was  further developed.

 

12.

(Item 1 - 09/11/07)

Air Quality Review

  1. The Panel noted the schedule for public hearings on this  review  to  be  held  on  22nd,  23rd,  and  26th November 2007. It was noted that Mr. N. Gibault, the Ferryspeed representative, was unable to attend on  26th November. Accordingly,  officers  were directed to reorganise the schedule to cancel lunch on this day.
  1. The Panel noted that the radio advertisements for this review were finalised.
  1. The  Panel  noted  an  invoice  in  the  amount  of £1,022.45  received  from  Air  Quality  Consultants (AQC),  the  Panel's  advisor  for  the  Air  Quality Review. It also noted that UK Value-Added-Tax had not been charged. Officers were directed to remit the sum to AQC as soon as possible.
  1. The  Panel  approved  revised  questions  for  the witnesses in the planned public hearings.

MR

MR

13.

(Item 2 - 09/11/07)

Waste Plant

  1. The Panel agreed to discus members' responsibility in respect of this review at a later date.
  1. The  Panel  considered  submissions  from  three prospective advisors for further investigation into the proposed  Waste  Plant  at  La  Collette Juniper, Enviros, and AEA.

The  Panel  was  aware  that  the  three  prospective advisors would bring different sets of skills to the project.  It  would  therefore  not  be  appropriate  to

 

 

make a decision at this stage.

The Panel noted that all three of the companies had operated in the past in Guernsey. The Chairman was  delegated  to  visit  that  island  to  gather information. Mr. M. Robbins, Scrutiny Officer, was also directed to attend.

c) The Panel noted that it was currently negotiating an advertising package' worth £4056.20 with Channel 103, a local radio station. This would acquire the Panel  a  build-up  of  advertising  exposure, culminating in an event hosted by a Channel 103 presenter.

  1. The Panel noted that the timeline for the review had been  amended  to  account  for  the  Christmas holidays. It was now to be completed prior to the end of March 2008. It was therefore intended that the report would be presented to the States by the last meeting before Easter.
  1. The  Panel  was  informed  that  it  would  receive documents  in  relation  to  Condition  8  of  the conditions of the planning approval of the proposed Energy from Waste Plant at La Collette at a later date.

RD MR

MR

14.

Materials Recycling Week' Meeting

The Panel recalled that a conference was being held on 4th  December  2007,  hosted  by  a  publication  entitled Materials  Recycling  Week - Recycling  and  Waste Management News and Information'.

It was anticipated that Wrap' (a quasi-autonomous non- governmental  organisation  working  on  behalf  of  the  UK government) would be detailing the outcome of its food waste collection trials at this event (see Item 19).

The  Panel  decided  to  direct  Mr.  M.  Robbins,  Scrutiny Officer to attend. Mr. A. Andrews , an officer of the Parish of St. Helier was also to attend at the Parish's expense.

MR

15.

Christmas lunch

The Panel noted that there had been no movement on this topic.

Officers  were  instructed  to  gather  menus  and  other relevant information for the Panel's consideration.

 

16. (Item 8 -

Tidal Energy Summit

The Panel noted that a summit on tidal energy was to be

 

27/07/07)

held on 28th and 29th November 2007 at the Marriot Hotel in London.

The  Panel  agreed  in  principle  that   Deputy  Duhamel, Connétable s Le Brun and Crowcroft and Deputy Le Claire should attend. It approved the necessary expenditure with additional funding for travel and incidental costs as might become necessary.

The Panel agreed that this matter would be finalised by an e-mail conference once the costs had been established.

MR MR

17.

Contact with Schools

The Panel noted that only three schools had taken up the offer  of  the  One  World  Group  to  participate  in  the production of Eco-friendly bags (see Item 7).

The Panel noted as a matter of general principle that it should contact schools at the appropriate time of year to discuss making provision for consideration of recycling and other environmental concerns.

 

18.

(Item 8 - 27/07/07)

Waterfront Development

The Panel recalled that it had received a document entitled Masterplan  for  the  Esplanade  Quarter,  St.  Helier' and associated  briefing  from  Hopkins  Architects  on  14th November 2007.

The  Panel  discussed  the  content  of  the  document  and briefing and expressed concerns that-

There  was  no  clear  understanding  of  what  would happen  to  the  vacated  office  spaces  in  the  town centre.

The effect on existing landlords was unknown.

The  resultant  increase  in  migration  and  effect  of infrastructure had not been properly considered.

Having a single developer might be anti-competitive.

The  insurance  situation  of  the  preferred  developer was unknown.

 

19.

Weekly Food Waste Collection

The Panel noted a report in the UK media that 17 Local Authorities had recently undertaken a food waste collection trial, in which approximately 30,000 households took part.

The Panel also noted that 4 out of 5 households in the trial area had taken part in the trial with the average household

 

collecting 6 to 7 pounds of food waste.

The Panel was minded to discuss these matters at the forthcoming Materials  Recycling  Week' conference  (see Item 14).

Officers  were  directed  to  scan  this  report  and  copy  it MR electronically to the Panel.

20. Future Meetings

The Panel noted that its next meeting had been scheduled

for 9.30am on 29th November 2007 in the Le Capelain Room,  States  Building.  Due  to  the  Panel's  planned attendance at the Tidal Energy Summit, it was agreed to MR postpone this meeting for a date to be arranged. (see Item

16).

Signed Date: ..

Chairman Environment Panel