Chairmen's Committee - Approved Committee Minutes - 17 December 2009

Present

Deputy  R.G.  Le  Hérissier,  Vice-President   [Chairman  of  meeting  in absence of President]

Senator A. Breckon

Senator S.C. Ferguson

Deputy P.J. Rondel

Deputy M.R. Higgins

Connétable J. Refault [representing the Public Accounts Committee

Apologies

Senator B. E. Shenton, President

Absent

In attendance

Mrs K. Tremellen-Frost, Scrutiny Manager

Ref Back

Agenda matter

Action

1. Minutes

The minutes of 12th November 2009 were approved and signed.

2. Panel Activity reports These were noted.

515/1(24)

3. Economic Affairs- proposed workload

The proposed large number of reviews for Economic Affairs for 2010 was considered and the Chairman apprised that these would be reduced and prioritised.

513/1(32)

4.  Corporate  Services  Scrutiny  Panel  and  Public  Accounts Committee [PAC] work duplication and overlap

Given  that  there  were  a  number  of  areas  where  there  could  be duplication between the Corporate Services Scrutiny Panel and the PAC it was agreed that communication between the two bodies should be improved. The Corporate Services Panel was planning a review into HR policies in 2010 and this conflicted with the PAC review into Sickness Levels

512/5(8)

5. Public Accounts Committee: sickness levels review

It  was  noted that  this review  was  on  hold  until  the  Comptroller  and Auditor General had considered the matter. It was noted that background information on this matter had been sought on behalf of the PAC but that subsequent to this no scoping document nor Terms of Reference had been brought to the Chairmen's Committee. It was important for this to occur in a timely manner so that any perceived duplication could be discussed at the Chairmen's Committee meeting before a review was launched.

1444/4(18)

6. Comprehensive Spending Review

The Committee considered that scrutiny needed to plan its approach in preparation to scrutinise this. This would be an item for discussion at the away-morning.

KTF

515/16(8)

7. Economic Affairs: Draft Sea Fisheries (Bag Limits) (Jersey) 2001

The report on this was currently being finalised, despite the Assistant Minister having withdrawn this without advising scrutiny in advance. This matter would be included in the report as evidence of the disregard of scrutiny. Consideration was given to whether this was withdrawn due to public pressure.

515/3(6)

8. Economic Affairs: review into Harbours and Airport

The Committee considered a proposal by the Chairman of the Economic Affairs  Scrutiny  Panel  to  review  the  Harbours  and  Airport  on  which Deputy Rondel had been invited to sit. The latter expressed a potential conflict of interest in reviewing Harbours and the Committee considered a potential conflict of interest of Deputy Higgins in reviewing the airport. The latter advised the Committee that he had expertise in aviation law and that the Greffier of the States had advised him at the start of the year that he would not be conflicted in reviewing the airport as all reviews were evidence-based and others would be involved on a Sub-Panel to ensure no conflict. The Chairman was advised to check this again with the Greffier of the States.

MH

510/1(35)

9. Officer allocation to Panels & officer support.

The Committee noted that allocation of officers was the responsibility of the Scrutiny Manager in accordance with the Job Description and the Code of Practice to Scrutiny Panels and the Public Accounts Committee (12.1). The Scrutiny Manager was also responsible for ensuring that newly appointed officers were allocated in such a manner to enable them to train as quickly as possible. With regard to recent re-allocation of a newly appointed officer, the Scrutiny Manager advised that she could have advised the Chairman of the Economic Affairs Scrutiny Panel prior to reallocation but this was not a prerequisite.

The Committee noted that the officers were obliged to work within the procedures adopted by the States ie: Standing Orders and the Code of Practice for Scrutiny Panels and the Public Accounts Committee and were unable to undertake work which fell outside this.

510/1(5)

10. Code of Practice for Scrutiny Panels and the Public Accounts Committee

Given the number of concerns regarding the restrictive nature of the Code of Practice for Scrutiny Panels and the Public Accounts Committee it  was  agreed  that  a  review  of  the  document  was  required.  The Committee considered that this might best be undertaken by Members elected at the last elections who were new to the Code. The matter would be discussed at the away-morning on 14th January 2010.

KTF

515/3(7)

11. Jersey Competition Regulatory Authority [JCRA]

The Committee noted that the Chairmen of the Corporate Services and Economic Affairs Scrutiny Panels would jointly consider how a review into the JCRA could be best undertaken.

513/3(5)

12. Economic Affairs: Intellectual Property

The Chairman of the Economic Affairs Scrutiny Panel advised that the Economic Development Department wanted Intellectual Property to be the subject of a scrutiny review. The suggestion to take this forward was to employ an expert in the area to undertake work on behalf of the Panel and subsequently decide whether it was worth scrutinising on the back of the expert's report.

516/17(8)

13.  Education  and  Home  Affairs:  evaluation  of  Prison  Board  of Visitors Review

Concern was expressed that pressure may have been put on the Minister for Home Affairs in respect of his ministerial response to the Panel's review recommendations.

514/9(8)

14. Environment: Ramsar review - budget increase

The Committee noted that due to the necessary extension of the contract of the expert adviser the budget estimate had increased from £25,000 to £28,000.

517/5(8)

15. Health, Social Security and Housing: Long Term Care for the Elderly

The Committee noted that a confidential paper had been received from the Social Security Department in respect of the Long Term Care for the Elderly Review. The previous adviser had been employed to consider this and the issue might need revisiting.

512/1(16)

16. Public Accounts Committee: Emerging Issues

The Committee noted the scoping document and Terms of Reference for Emerging Issues- States Spending Review. It also noted a fact-finding visit of the Committee to the Jersey Meteorological Department. The Chairman of the Economic Affairs Panel explained that that Department would come within the Panel's review of the Airport.

510/1(3)

17. Chairing training: evaluation

Given that there was general disappointment with the training on chairing skills,  with  the  exception  of  a  few,  it  was  agreed  that  it  would  not generally be appropriate to use trainers whose background was linked to Local Government. Most successful training providers had been identified by other jurisdictions or had come from other jurisdictions themselves.

510/1(46)

18. Scrutiny : Ministerial Government

The  Committee  considered  that  a  number  of members  believed  that Ministerial  Government  and  scrutiny  weren't  working  and  some  non- Executive  Members  believed  that  it  was  preferable  to  work  as  an independent member as opposed to serving on scrutiny as more could be  achieved.  As  the  majority  of  Members  were  not  involved  in  the decision-making process it meant more matters were debated in the Assembly.

The alternative view was given that the most recently elected members needed to spend longer learning what the job entailed before attempting to  change  it.  Also  the  Committee  considered  that  nothing  happened quickly in the Executive nor would it merely because of the change from the Committee system to Ministerial Government.

The Committee again considered blanket confidentiality of documents when only a number actually needed to remain confidential.

The difficulty of constantly monitoring the implementation and follow-up to report recommendations when new work was underway was considered and reference made to the new template.

510/1(47)

19. Away-morning

The Committee considered a draft outline format for the away-day given the limited number of Member's responses to a request for agenda items. It was agreed that it would not be appropriate to have a presentation from the  Chief  Executive  on  the  Comprehensive  Spending  Review  at  the away-morning but that the opportunity should be taken to discuss the

strategy scrutiny wished to adopt in order to scrutinise this. It should be suggested to the Chief Executive that he identified an alternative date to show the presentation to all non-Executive Members.

The  Committee  agreed  that  the  Vice-President  would  work  with  the Scrutiny Manager in finalising a schedule which would be circulated to all Members.

KTF

510/3(5)

20. Executive flyers in Scrutiny Matters newsletter

This could be appropriate dependant on the content of the Executive material. If a flyer were to be included, it should be mentioned within the content of the appropriate Panel page. Consideration should also be given to a financial contribution from the Executive Department.

510/1(50)

21. Annual Report

This would be drafted over the Christmas period with the intention of the draft being considered at the meeting of 28th January 2010

KTF

511/1(9)

22. Panel/Committee hearings: quorum

The Committee considered that hearings were formal meetings of the Panel/Sub-Panel or Committee in order to receive oral evidence. As such they must be quorate otherwise protection against legal action would be lost. As this matter had arisen in recent days, a paper would be prepared for a subsequent Chairmen's Committee for consideration.

KTF

511/1(9)

23. Future Chairmen's Committee meetings - public or private?

The Committee needed to be able to hold open and frank discussions and in order to do this it was necessary to include more items on a private (Part B) section of the agendas, with attention being drawn to which were open to the public or not. This was agreed as of 28th January 2010.

It was noted that this would leave very few items on the public (Part A) agenda.

510/1(15)

24. Scrutiny of Budget

The Chairman of the Environment Panel expressed concern about the limited amount of scrutiny of the budget. The Committee noted that other work had taken priority and that there was insufficient time and resources for scrutiny to fulfil this in any meaningful way.

25. Dates of future meetings

The Committee noted the following meetings:-

14th January 2010 - 9.30-12.30 away-morning - all scrutiny members [private meeting]

28th January 2010 commencing 12.30-2.30, Le Capelain Room The 2010 meeting schedule for the Committee was reconfirmed.