Public Accounts Committee - Approved Committee Minutes - 26 November 2007

PM/KAK/397 72

PUBLIC ACCOUNTS COMMITTEE (23rd Meeting)

26th November 2007

PART A

All members were present, with the exception of Connétable T.J. du Feu, Connétable D.J. Murphy, Deputy A. Breckon and Advocate A. Ohlsson, from whom apologies had been received.

Deputy S.C. Ferguson, Chairman Senator L. Norman

Deputy J.G. Reed R. Bignell C. Evans A. Grimes M. Magee

In attendance -

P. Monamy, Clerk to the Public Accounts Committee

Note: The Minutes of this meeting comprise Part A only.

Comptroller and A1. The Committee noted that Mr. C. Swinson, O.B.E., Comptroller and Auditor Auditor General: General, was unable to attend this meeting because of illness.

unable to attend

through illness.

Minutes. A2. The Minutes of the Meeting held on 29th October 2007 (Part A and Part B)

and the Notes of a meeting held on 24th September 2007, having been previously circulated, were taken as read and were confirmed.

Drug Trafficking A3. The Committee, with reference to its Minute No. A3(a) of 29th October and Criminal 2007, recalled that the views of the Minister for Treasury and Resources and the Offences Treasurer of the States had been sought on the report of the Comptroller and Confiscation Auditor  General  (CAG)  on  the  Drug  Trafficking  Confiscation  Fund  and  the Funds: report by Criminal Offences Confiscation Fund.

CAG.

512/2(6) It was agreed that the formulation of the Committee's comments on the report

would be held in abeyance until such time as responses had been received from the  above-mentioned  Minister  and/or  the  Treasurer  of  the  States.  The Chairman indicated that in any event some of the recommendations which had emanated from the CAG's report had already been incorporated in the plans for a further Civil Assets Confiscation Fund in the recent Law brought to the States on 20th November 207

Away Day' A4. The Committee, with reference to its Minute No. A5 of 29th October 2007, proposed. agreed  that  further  consideration  should  be  given  at  its  next  meeting  to  the 512/1(14) desirability of holding an away day' meeting at which the methodology for follow-

up work on reports and recommendations could be discussed. It was noted that there should be a theme and an agenda for the ;away day.' It was suggested that it might be useful to consider such issues as the methodology for following-up report and recommendations.

The Committee agreed that it was not feasible for the away day' to be held before Christmas 2007 and therefore likely that consideration would be given to arranging for it to be held at the end of January/beginning of February 2008. This would depend on the progress of the Spending Review.

States of Jersey A5. The Committee, with reference to its Minute No.B1 of 29th October 2007, Accounts for recalled that it had envisaged that further public hearings would be held in due 2006: course on issues arising from the States of Jersey Accounts for 2006, at which the further public Treasurer of the States and Accounting Officers from a number of major spending hearings. departments would be interviewed.

512/1(10)

It was further recalled that the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) had been asked to provide an explanation to the Treasurer of the States of the Committee's aims and objectives in relation to the States' Accounts 2006, prior to pursuing arrangements for a further hearing or hearings. In view of the present indisposition of CAG, it was agreed to await his return to health, and also to link discussion of the  States' Accounts  2006  with  the  summary  of  any  action  which  remained outstanding from recommendations made by CAG in reports he had issued to date.

Summary of A6. The Committee, with reference to its Minute No. A3(c) of 29th October findings and 2007,  received  a  briefing  paper,  dated  November  2007,  prepared  by  the recommendations Comptroller  and  Auditor  General  (CAG)  summarising  the  findings  and in reports recommendations in reports published by him during the period Spring 2006 to published by Autumn 2007.

CAG:

Spring 2006 - The Committee noted that the briefing paper did not include observations made in Autumn 2007. reports that were not published, including private briefings to the Committee such 512/2(7) as those on a review of arrangements surrounding the appointment of Accounting

Officers and the effectiveness of the States' internal audit arrangements. It was recalled that the private briefings to the Committee had, for example, covered subjects and issues which had arisen from the audit and publication of the Annual Report and Accounts of the States and of the various Social Security Funds. It was recognised that the paper reproduced the findings and recommendations sections of the reports as they had been published, except in the case of the report on control of aggregate  expenditure  where  the  whole  report  had  been  reproduced  as  no recommendations had been made.

The Committee noted that the paper referred to the following reports -

1. Sickness Absence Levels (May 2006);
2. Jersey Child Care Trust (September 2006);
3. Battle of Flowers (October 2006);
4. 2007 Property Plan (November 2006);
5. Jersey Financial Services Commission (February 2007);
6. Control of Aggregate States' Expenditure (March 2007);
7. Overseas Aid Commission (March 2007);
8. Jersey Opera House (September 2007); and
9. Confiscation Funds (September 2007).

Additionally, it was further noted that under-mentioned reports were currently in preparation -

1. Public Employees Contributory Retirement Scheme;
2. Teachers' Superannuation Fund;

3. Review of the Planning and Environment Department; and
4. Review of the Department for Education, Sport and Culture.

The Committee noted that any further comment on the "Sickness Absences Levels" report awaited information regarding the implementation of a new computer system, which the States' Human Resources Director had recently indicated was likely to be installed in January 2008.

Following the recent appointment of Director, States' Property Holdings Department, it was considered that it might be appropriate for Mr. David Flowers to be invited to outline to the Committee in due course the current position and way ahead for the future.

It was recognised that the recommendations arising from the review of the Jersey Opera House were for consideration by the Trustees of the Phoenix Trust, which was a private Trust and quite separate from Jersey Opera House Limited and, as such, were matters entirely within the discretion of the Trustees.

As referred to in Minute No. A3 above, it was recalled that it had been agreed that the formulation of the Committee's comments on CAG's report on the Drug Trafficking Confiscation Fund and the Criminal Offences Confiscation Fund would be held in abeyance until such time as responses had been received from the Minister for Treasury and Resources and/or the Treasurer of the States.

It was noted that there needed to be a formal framework for follow-up so that recommendations made by the Committee in its reports did not get forgotten. The Chairman noted that the Draft Code of Practice for Scrutiny Panels provided for the Minister to reply to the recommendations made by a Scrutiny Panel within a fixed period of time and it was suggested that perhaps a similar provision should be extended to the reports of the Public Accounts Committee.

The Committee, having noted the content of the above-mentioned briefing paper, asked to be provided with a report which summarised the recommendations emanating from reports issued by the Committee so that these could be followed-up with the relevant departments.

Jersey Spending A7. The Committee, with reference to its Minute No. A4 of 29th October 2007, Review' project: received an oral report from the Chairman regarding the progress being made on the progress. Jersey Spending Review' project.

512(3)

The Committee noted that the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) had engaged the services of an officer from the National Audit Office (NAO) who was presently working alongside CAG at Morier House. It was explained that a Departmental Projects Report' prepared by CAG was presently in draft and that it was envisaged that each project would commence with a standard pack' of material including the relevant sections of the current Strategic Plan and key policy documents, etc. In addition, it was noted that the relevant Scrutiny Panels were in the process of producing reports indicating appropriate areas for examination as part of the review.

It was further noted that Chief Officers had produced some initial lists of prospective reductions within their departments. It was recognised that the review would also take into account the savings of £35 million which had been announced by the Council of Ministers, as well as the information which had been provided through review work undertaken by Mr. Kevin Keen.

It was recalled that CAG had already carried out a review of the Department for Education, Sport and Culture, and also the Planning and Environment Department; and that a review of the Law Officers' Department was planned for the near future. Additionally, it was intended that a team would be brought in shortly to review the Health and Social Services Department. Work was also to be undertaken in various cross-cutting expenditure areas, such as I.T. infrastructure and overhead costs.

The Committee, having accepted that work on the review was inevitably taking up a significant amount of the time available to CAG, agreed that it was important for the Committee to pursue the matters covered by the review. The Chairman reported that the 3 Assistant Ministers who were initially to have participated in a working group with 3 members of the Committee, had subsequently withdrawn from such involvement. However, it was confirmed that the 3 members of the Committee appointed for the purpose, namely, the Chairman, Deputy Reed and Mr. Magee would where appropriate consider the reports to be produced under CAG's remit prior to their referral to the Committee.

The Chairman reported that details of the amount and source of the necessary funding to meet the cost of the review were in the process of being finalised. It was hoped to complete the major review before the debate on the 2009 Business Plan. It was recognised that the basis the for the Jersey Spending Review' was rather different to that for the Service Reviews' which had previously been undertaken by the departments themselves, particularly since an improved financial management system ("JD Edwards") had been put in place.

The Committee noted the position.