Education and Home Affairs - Approved Panel Minutes - 4 July 2016

Present

Deputy L. M. C. Doublet , Chairman Deputy J. M. Maçon, Vice-Chairman Deputy T. A. Vallois

Deputy S. Y. Mezec

Apologies

Absent

In attendance

Mr M. Robbins, Scrutiny Officer.

Ref Back

Agenda matter

Action

1.  Records of Meetings

The minutes of the meetings held on 10th, 13th, 18th, 19th and 24th May and 6th, 8th and 9th June 2016 were approved and signed.

MR

Item 2 06.06.16

2.  Conflict of Interest

There were no conflicts of interest declared.

Item 3 13.05.16

(Previously Student Loans)

3.  Higher Education

The Panel noted an email from the Jersey Student Loans Group which requested that the Panel launch a review into Student Loans. The Panel recalled that there were proposals of extra money being put into the Student  Loans  system within  the  MTFP. This was  to  be  examined alongside all other areas of the MTFP, but work might still need to be done in a separate review later in 2016.

The  Panel  also  recognised  that  there  were  other  areas  of  higher education that would need to be examined alongside the student loans, such as maintenance grants.

MR

4.  Teacher Survey

The  Panel  noted  the  Teacher  Survey  published  by  the  Education Department.  Numerous  questions  were  raised  which  could  not  be answered from the report. The Panel recognised a connection between some of the survey results and the proposal within the MTFP to reduce the salary of Newly Qualified Teachers. It required the raw data from the survey to draw its own conclusions.

MR

5.  Jerriais

The  Panel  noted  documentation  provided  by  the  Chairman  which suggested that the situation in relation to the teaching of Jerriais in Jersey schools was serious. The Panel noted the following concerns

contained within the documentation provided:

• That the methods being employed by the Minister may not be best practice.

• That the teaching of Jerriais in schools was being done as cheaply as possible.

• Whether teachers should be trained to speak Jerriais in order to teach it, or speakers of Jerriais being trained to teach it.

The Panel was to consider re-visiting this subject after the work on the MTFP had been completed. It was noted that the shortage of people teaching the subject in the schools was serious and likely to become worse unless the Minister resolved the situation.

MR

6.  Ministerial Decisions

The Panel noted five Ministerial Decisions by the Ministers within its remit and considered that no Scrutiny work was required.

Item 6 06.06.16

516/44

7.  School Starting Age

The  Panel recognised  that  the  timeline for the  School  Staring  Age review was not pressing and deferred the report writing until after the MTFP had been completed.

MR

Item 1 30.0616

 516/36(3)

8.  Medium Term Financial Plan Addition

The Panel noted arrangements for additional meetings and briefings relating to the MTFP.

MR

Item 1 14.06.16

516/45

9.  Nursery Education Fund

In accordance with Article 11.21 Code of Practice for Scrutiny Panels and PAC, the Panel held a discussion to evaluate the effectiveness of the process with a view to reporting any problems to the Chairmen's Committee where appropriate.

• The Panel agreed that the time line for the review had been too short but had been dictated by outside influences.
• All  Members had dropped anything else they  were doing to facilitate the necessary meetings for the review.
• The Scrutiny rooms had proved to be inadequate.
• The public meetings had been a great success but there was room for lunchtime meetings to allow attendance by those who could not attend in the evenings.
• The media had been engaged regularly throughout the review and had therefore maintained a public interest. The JEP had headlined the issues on several occasions with numerous other articles during the review period.

The Panel considered that the review had been effective in that it had provided  good  background  information  for  the  debate  of  P39/2016, Nursery Funding: Implementation Of Proposed Changes, which had been lodged by Deputy M. Tadier . The Panel agreed that it was to avoid such a tight timeline in any future work. The report had been hard hitting and concise, which made it easy for people to read. The Panel agreed

MR

that the single recommendation carried significant impact.

10.  Future Meetings

The  next  meeting  was  scheduled  for  9.30am  on  Monday  12th September 2016 in the Le Capelain Room.