Skip to main content

Draft 2015 Budget - Ministerial Response - 16 September 2014

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.

STATES OF JERSEY

r

DRAFT 2015 BUDGET (S.R.12/2014): INITIAL RESPONSE OF THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES

Presented to the States on 16th September 2014 by the Minister for Treasury and Resources

STATES GREFFE

2014   Price code: A  S.R.12 Res.

DRAFT 2015 BUDGET (S.R.12/2014): INITIAL RESPONSE OF THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES

Initial Ministerial Response to:  S.R.12/2014 Review title:  Draft Budget 2015 Scrutiny Panel:  Corporate Services

The Minister and Assistant Minister for Treasury and Resources thank the Corporate Services Panel for its report.

Whilst the Treasury has not always been able to agree with the views of the Panel, it is recognised that Scrutiny has provided valuable contributions to a number of financial and budget debates. This work has been able to focus minds on the important policy options for States members ultimately to decide upon. The ministerial team sincerely thanks and recognises the time and effort spent on reviewing numerous Treasury propositions and proposals over the last 3 years. Panel members should be recognised for the time and effort they have spent on their work. The Minister would also like particularly  to  recognise  the  work  of  the  Scrutiny  Officers,  who  have  worked co-operatively  and  diligently  with  Treasury  officials  to  support  the  Panel  and ministerial team in researching many background papers and in drafting reports.

The Panel Adviser from CIPFA has also provided some useful insight over the last 3 or 4 years, which has informed and influenced the Treasury's work.

It is pleasing to note that many of the Panel's recommendations have already been identified as opportunities for further improvement. The move to 3 year fixing of spending limits has been widely welcomed. The Minister is immensely proud that Jersey's Public Finances Law is held up as a model for other jurisdictions to follow, and the Panel who encouraged that approach should be recognised for its important support and contribution to this work.

As with all new innovations, there are always a number of improvements to make based on experience. The Minister is as committed as the Panel is to ensure that the experience of this first MTFP is used positively to make the next MTFP even more robust.

As  members  will  have  seen  from  the  Long-Term  Revenue  Plan  Review  report published today, work on implementing a number of the suggested improvements to MTFP 2, which will fix expenditure levels for the period 2016 to 2019, is already underway.

A detailed response to all the Panel's key findings and recommendations will be circulated by close of business on Friday 19th September, or earlier if possible.

Whilst  signalling  concurrence  with  the  majority  of  the  Panel's  views,  there  are, however, 2 issues which need addressing immediately:

  1. Proposal in Budget 2014 to reduce the marginal taxation rate from 27% to 26%

The Minister wishes respectfully to remind the Panel it was in full possession of all the latest forecasts and supporting papers prior to the debate of the Draft Budget 2014. All but one member of the Panel voted in favour of part (a) of that Budget proposition which authorised the rate reduction.

The Minister signalled very clearly that the aim of this measure was carefully and specifically  designed  to  put  money  into  the  pockets  of  middle-  to  low-income Islanders.  Moreover,  this was  at  a time  when  both  households  and  the  economy needed further support. In addition, as clearly explained, this was an important step in simplifying the marginal rate system of taxation.

The Minister and Assistant Minister strongly maintain their position on this important and landmark decision. They have also signalled their desire to go further to a rate of 25%, with the full support of a majority of Ministers, including strong support from the Chief Minister and Assistant Chief Minister (Senator P.F. Routier).

For that reason, Ministers are disappointed that the Panel has now chosen to be critical of this important measure. Had it felt so strongly that this proposal was wrong, or should be reversed, then an amendment could have been brought to the Draft Budget 2015.

None has been brought, and the Minister for Treasury and Resources is surprised and disappointed by this criticism.

  1. The suggestion that an additional Budget may be required This has now also been the subject of a high-profile media report.

Under the Finance Law, any new Minister for Treasury and Resources could bring alternative  proposals  upon  his  or  her  appointment  for  an  additional  Budget, notwithstanding the potential serious negative effects this could have on stability and business confidence.

A supplementary Budget should not be necessary or required. The very raising of the suggestion could unintentionally send out a message of a lack of strength in Jersey's financial position. The opposite is the case. Whilst income projections have been reduced  following  a  continued  international  recession,  Jersey's  finances  remain incredibly strong. This is in part due to the Panel's own endorsement of Treasury policy of prudent fiscal and Treasury management.

The majority of the Panel's concerns appear to relate to measures designed to ensure that  there  is  a  sufficient  unallocated  balance  on  the  Consolidated  Fund  to  fund expenditure designed to secure an economic recovery.

The majority of these measures do not form part of the Budget 2015 report and proposition.  It  could  be  argued  that  the  current  legal  arrangements  for  the Consolidated Fund, which often has a balance in excess of £100 million, are overly restrictive. The requirement to have the cash immediately available even before a capital project gets underway, and that it should be held before a project is even tendered, needs review in the context of a medium-term financial planning model.

Page - 3

S.R.12/2014 Res.

There should be no compromise on financial prudence. However, the current practices may not reflect best value or best use of taxpayers' cashflow.

In any event the Schedule, which is provided for the States' information, could be altered by a new Council of Ministers.

In addition, it should be remembered that should income levels recover or improve over the cautious estimates, then some of the currently proposed initiatives may not be required.  The  Minister  has  continued  a  policy  of  prudence  and  transparency  in decision-making, based on independent economic advice.

The  Minister  respectfully  suggests  that  instead  of  making  somewhat  polemical recommendations, the majority view of the Panel should endorse an approach that seeks more efficiency from States departments, puts more money into the pockets of lower-  and  middle-income  earners,  and  does  everything  possible  to  secure  a sustainable economic recovery.

For these reasons, whilst accepting the majority of the Panel's recommendations, the majority  of  Ministers  stand  by  proposals  as  being  not  only  deliverable,  but representing the best Budget possible for Jersey in 2015.

In making his full response, the Minister and Assistant Minister will, as always, after taking advice and consulting the Chief Minister and ministerial colleagues, seek to agree recommendations wherever possible.

The Minister is encouraged by the fact that the Panel had clearly considered the Budget  2015  proposals  in  detail,  and  that  none  of  the  Panel's  key  findings  or recommendations  indicated  alternative  proposals.  Notwithstanding  the  Panel Chairman's continued criticism, no amendments have been made by her to alter the key proposals in Budget 2015. The Minister has no alternative but to conclude that the Chairman does not have an alternative approach.

In addition, given that now the Corporate Services Scrutiny Panel, the Fiscal Policy Panel (FPP), and States Members, have reviewed the measures contained in Budget 2015, and with the exception of 2 members who have proposed amendments, none have suggested an alternative course of action.

The  FPP  has  endorsed  the  Minister's  approach,  and  the  Minister  and  Assistant Minister hope that this gives members, and the wider Public, confidence that the proposed way forward is the right one.