Government Plan 2022-2025 Economic and International Affairs Scrutiny Panel Review

Government Plan 2022-2025:

Scrutiny Review

Economic and International Affairs Scrutiny Panel

9th December 2021 S.R.17/2021

Contents

1  CHAIR'S FOREWORD  3

2. INTRODUCTION / METHODOLOGY  5
3. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS  6

• Findings  6

• Recommendations  7

4. DEPARTMENTAL BUDGETS  8

• Departmental Budgets  8

• Departmental Heads of Expenditure  9

• Changes to Departmental Budgets  15

• Additional Investments  15

• External Relations and Financial Services  15

• Financial Crime Prevention  15

• Department of the Economy (Economic Development, Tourism, Sport and Culture)  15

• Refurbishment of Elizabeth Castle  15

• Inspiring Active Places and Sports Strategy  17

• Skateparks  20

5  EFFICIENCIES  22

• Rebalancing and Efficiencies  22

6  SUMMARY TABLES OF SCRUTINY RAG' RATINGS  23

• Previously reviewed programmes and capital projects (GP 2020-23 / GP 2021-24)  23

• Future of Fort Regent  26

• New programmes requiring additional revenue expenditure (GP 2022-25)  28

7. CONCLUSION  29

8. WITNESSES AND EVIDENCE GATHERED  30 APPENDIX 1  31

• Terms of Reference  31

• Panel membership  32

1  Chair's Foreword

The Economic and International Affairs Panel scrutinises the work of three Ministers; the Minister for Economic Development, Tourism, Sport and Culture (EDTSC), the Minister for External Relations and Financial Services and the Minister for International Development. In relation to the Government Plan 2022-2025, the Panel has endeavoured to undertake a thorough analysis of the programmes falling under the remit of each of those Ministers as allocated to it by the Government Plan Review Panel.

As indicated in the conclusion of the Panel's Report, we have focussed primarily on whether the funding sought is sufficient or excessive as well as how the funding proposals will ensure value for money. Overall, the Panel is satisfied with the majority of programmes and the rationale  for  the  2021  funding  bids,  although  it  will  be  noted  that  our  findings  and recommendations highlight a number of concerns.

The Panel made one finding regarding International Development, noting that the budget for Jersey Overseas Aid is linked to Gross Value Added (GVA). The Panel accepts this is a positive step and maintains Jersey's reputation as a good citizen on the world stage. In relation to External Relations and Financial Services, the Panel made no finding as such but noted the Minister's assurance as to the budget allowing vital work to proceed as necessary. The Panel also noted that the additional allocation would ensure Jersey continued to be a leading jurisdiction in combating financial terrorism and anti-money laundering; the Panel accepts this as a pre-requisite to maintaining the island's international reputation.

It follows from the above that our other findings and recommendations relate to matters within the remit of the EDTSC Minister, principally the Inspiring Active Places Strategy (IAP) and the provision of sports facilities generally. As noted in the report, the ultimate aim of the IAP programme is to enhance the island's sports facilities with a view to increasing the number of participants in sport, so having a positive effect on the wellbeing of islanders. Regarding the funding available in 2022, this is focused on the consultation and design stages, allowing business cases for capital (and thus delivery), to be scrutinised based on more detailed information.

Following on from this, the Panel makes recommendations as to funding in future Government Plans, for delivery of defined stages of the Inspiring Active Places project and for contingency to deal with delays to the ongoing delivery of sports projects. Also, on sports-related matters, our report records the planning permission now given for a main skatepark at Les Quennevais and questions the position regarding further applications in relation to the proposed second site at South Hill and elsewhere.

This report also includes a section on Fort Regent. The Panel was informed at a recent public hearing that the Future Fort project is a corporate project with a Political Oversight Group led by the Chief Minister and that "it is not an EDTSC project". Given that sport and music remain tenants, this explains our Finding 7 as to the current operational structure and the overall future of the Fort Regent project, being unclear in terms of responsibility and as to which the Panel has written to the EDTSC Minister.

The final item to which I refer in this foreword is the proposed refurbishment of Elizabeth Castle to be undertaken by Jersey Heritage Trust over a four-year period. As identified in our report, the Panel is extremely pleased to see investment into the refurbishment of such an iconic building forming a significant part of Jersey's heritage. Further details can be found below under the heading of Additional Investments.

I have touched here only on those items that are the subject of findings or recommendations, and further information is set out in the full report that follows. However, in general terms, I reiterate that the Panel is satisfied with the majority of programmes and the rationale for the 2021 bids.

Finally, I take the opportunity of thanking the Panel's officers for producing this report whilst simultaneously contending with other matters and also my Panel colleagues for their input and support.

Deputy David Johnson

Chair,

Economic and International Affairs Scrutiny Panel

2  Introduction / Methodology

The proposed Government Plan 2022 sets out the approach the Government of Jersey has taken in responding to COVID-19 whilst continuing to invest in the Common Strategic Policy priorities:

1. Put children first
2. Improve Islander's wellbeing and mental and physical health
3. Create a sustainable, vibrant economy
4. Reduce income inequality and improve the standard of living
5. Protect and value our environment.

The Plan outlines the investment proposed in each of these five strategic priority areas and also includes a number of proposed efficiencies within the Government.

The Government Plan Financial Annex has also been lodged which contains supporting information for the Government Plan 2022-2025.  

The Scrutiny review of the Government Plan has taken a thorough approach, looking at the projects identified for additional revenue expenditure and capital expenditure last year, as well as new projects requiring additional revenue expenditure and capital expenditure in 2022. The Panel has undertaken this review in as much detail as possible with the information provided by Government.

A summary table of all business cases is provided in Chapter 6, along with the Panel's RAG rating.

In line with the methodology used during previous reviews, all Scrutiny Panels have agreed to use a common system to report on the status of each business case, as follows:

The Panel has reviewed the background information and is satisfied with the business case.

The Panel has reviewed the business case and either has concerns or considers that it needs more work, or further detail should be provided. It might also mean that the Panel considers it too early to make an informed decision. This may or may not lead to recommendations and/or amendments.

The Panel has reviewed the business case and is not satisfied or does not agree with the proposal. This may or may not lead to an amendment.

As part of its evidence gathering, the Panel initially wrote to each of the respective Ministers under its remit asking for responses to written questions. The Panel used the responses from these questions to formulate more in-depth questions which it then used at Public Hearings. It should be noted that the Panel did not undertake a Public Hearing with the Minister for External Relations and Financial Services as it considered the responses to the written questions sufficient for the purposes of this review.

3  Findings and Recommendations

Findings

FINDING 1

The budget for Jersey Overseas Aid (JOA) is linked to Gross Value Added (GVA) and will increase/decrease annually in line with how GVA performs.

FINDING 2

During part of the refurbishment process of Elizabeth Castle, there is a reliance on Jersey Heritage having historical knowledge of the make-up of the building and an understanding of the quantity of work required for the refurbishment. The Panel is concerned that the breadth of experience required to undertake such a project may not fully meet the remit of the Jersey Heritage team and, as a result, additional expertise may be required. This may result in unforeseen situations and risks occurring which have not been planned or budgeted for.

FINDING 3

The figure of £814,000 allocated to the Inspiring Active Places project for 2022 relates to initial design and consultation. The delivery of the project will begin once this has taken place.

FINDING 4

The Panel found the consultation process on the Inspiring Active Places project to be extremely comprehensive and targeted all age groups and demographics.

 FINDING 5

The refusal of planning permission at Oakfield Sports Centre and the lack of progress on the refurbishment of Springfield Sports Centre may both have a detrimental effect on the delivery of the Inspiring Active Places sports strategy.

FINDING 6

Planning permission has been granted for the skatepark at Les Quennevais Fields. It is unclear when a planning application will be submitted for the second proposed skatepark at South Hill, or for any proposed satellite skateparks around the island.

FINDING 7

The responsibility for both the current operational structure and the overall future of the Fort Regent project remains unclear, which may result in the lines of Ministerial accountability being blurred and progress delayed.

Recommendations

RECOMMENDATION 1

The Minister for Economic Development, Tourism, Sport and Culture should ensure a full risk assessment is carried out prior to any works being undertaken on the refurbishment of Elizabeth Castle. The Minister should also ensure that Jersey Heritage have the required experience to undertake any works due and should include responsibility for oversight of these works within the risk assessment. A contingency plan should also be put in place with a clear budget for each aspect of the refurbishment.

RECOMMENDATION 2

The Council of Ministers should ensure that funding is clearly defined in future Government Plans for the delivery of the Inspiring Active Places project. This should include detail around delivery of each stage of the project together with the funding stream required to deliver the strategy.

RECOMMENDATION 3

The Minister for Economic Development, Tourism, Sport and Culture should ensure a contingency is in place to deal with delays to the ongoing delivery of sports projects on the Island. This could cover aspects such as planning refusal, delays, and spiralling costs.

RECOMMENDATION 4

The Minister for Economic Development, Tourism, Sport and Culture should ensure that detailed information is provided to States Members and members of the public regarding the timeline of any planning application, in addition to any consultation process that will be carried out for future skateparks. This should cover, not only South Hill, but all future States funded satellite skateparks, with Parish Connétable s being consulted on any key decisions affecting their Parishes.

4  Departmental Budgets  

Departmental Budgets

The Economic and International Affairs Panel scrutinises the work of three Ministers: The Minister for the Economic Development, Tourism, Sport and Culture, the Minster for External Relations and Financial Services and the Minister for International Development. Therefore the project policy work contained in the programmes and capital projects assigned to the Panel predominantly sit under:

Minister for Economic Development, Tourism, Sport and Culture Senator Lyndon Farnham

Minister for External Relations and Financial Services Senator Ian Gorst

Minister for International Development Deputy Carolyn Labey

Departmental Heads of Expenditure

In the Government Plan 2022-2025, the States Assembly has been asked to approve the proposed amount to be appropriated from the Consolidated Fund for 2022, for each head of expenditure.

The Council of Ministers has formally agreed that, from January 2022, the Department for the Economy will leave the Office of the Chief Executive and become its own distinct Government Department. The Department's directorates, which have all been operating within the Office of the Chief Executive since February 2020, are:

• Local and Digital Economy: supporting rural and marine; arts, culture, heritage and sport; retail and visitor; growth and trade; aviation; the digital economy; and high value residency engagement

• Financial Services: developing policy and legislation to further advance Jersey's position as a reputable, responsible and compliant international finance centre

• Financial  Crime:  providing  national  strategy  and  co-ordination  to  fulfil  Jersey's international obligations for combatting financial crime and terrorist financing

• Economic Advisory: providing independent analysis and advice to Ministers, States Members, and across the Government of Jersey.

Ministerial accountability remains with the Minister for Economic Development, Tourism, Sport and Culture (Senator Lyndon Farnham ) and the Minister for External Relations and Financial Services (Senator Ian Gorst ).

The tables below provide a summary of the proposed "Heads of Expenditure" allocated to the Departments for 2022 and estimates produced for 2023-2025:

A further breakdown of these figures was provided on page 20 of the Annex to the Government Plan 2022-24:[3]

As discussed previously, from January 2022, the Department for the Economy will leave the Office of the Chief Executive and become its own distinct Government Department. The Department of the Economy is listed separately within the table below in the same way as it is displayed in the Government Plan.

External Relations and International Affairs

In its letter to the Minister for External Relation and Financial Services, the Panel asked how confident the Minister was that the ongoing work of Financial Services could be delivered under the allocated budget, to which he replied:

Minister for External Relations and Financial Services

"I am satisfied at the current time that this budget allows the vital work of External Relations and Financial Services to proceed as necessary, ensuring our work in the

UK, Brussels, France, Europe and our target global markets can continue to move forward with our strategies".[5]

The Minister also informed the Panel that additional funding had been allocated to ensure Jersey continues to be a leading jurisdiction in combating financial terrorism and anti-money laundering. This is discussed in more detail under the additional investments' section of this report.

Economic Development, Tourism, Sport and Culture

The Panel questioned the Minister for EDTSC regarding the overall expenditure focusing predominately on the various sports projects that are ongoing. This is discussed in more detail under the additional investments' section of this report.

International Development

The Panel was advised that the budget for Jersey Overseas Aid (JOA) is linked to Gross Value Added (GVA) and will increase/decrease accordingly year on year in line with GVA. The Panel probed this further with the Minister for International Development at its recent Public Hearing and asked if the Minister believed the linking of JOA to GVA to be sufficient to carry out the services required in providing overseas aid. The Minister informed the Panel that it was a good universal  measure  which  was  consistent  with  other  nations  and  enables  Jersey  to  be measured against other countries.

The Deputy of St. Mary :

"The basic one is do you consider the linking of overseas aid to G.V.A. (Gross Value Added) to be sufficient to carry out the services required to enable Jersey to be considered a good global citizen?

The Minister for International Development:

Yes,  because  the  O.E.C.D.  (Organisation  for  Economic  Co-operation  and Development) measure aid by G.V.A., so it is consistent with other nations. The fact that we are at 0.26 per cent this year enables us to measure ourselves with other countries, for example the U.K. (United Kingdom) 0.5 per cent, and some countries who achieve the target of 0.7 per cent, and some beyond. It is a good, universal measure.[7]

The Deputy of St. Mary :

As the Deputy pointed out to me yesterday the U.K. Government froze their contribution for a while and they reckon they will hit their 0.7 per cent in 2025, I think.

The Minister for International Development:

In 2024 they hope to go back up to 0.7 per cent, because they dropped to 0.5 per cent during the pandemic.

The Deputy of St. Mary :

That is on the basis that they see their income increasing over the next few years. How do you see Jersey's position in that context?

The Minister for International Development:

Jersey is very stable and so hopefully, as it has done in recent years, not the last year, G.V.A. has gone up. The benefit of linking our budget with G.V.A. is if the economy shrinks then so does our budget. We would like to think it is based on what the jurisdiction, what Jersey, can afford.[8]

The Panel was keen to understand the perception of Jersey globally with regards to what it contributes to overseas aid. The Minister explained the good work which was ongoing in Africa and explained that Jersey had a reputation that was gathering pace.

The Minister for International Development:

We are certainly obtaining a reputation that is gathering pace. Certainly, the work that we are doing in Africa, and because we have chosen 3 specific themes that play to Jersey's strengths, so it is not just writing a cheque for grants, we feel that we can bring a value-added to the table. For example, financial inclusion, we have the financial infrastructure in Jersey International Finance Centre, dairy, obviously Jersey, with the Jersey herd, we are regarded as forerunners in the field of genetics and dairy, and the last theme is in conservation livelihoods, so we use Durrell as a source and resource in our projects[9]

The Minister, together with the Head of Programme of JOA went on to explain comparisons with other developed countries with regards to overseas aid. It was explained that whilst Jersey was going in the right direction, it was still slightly off where most developed countries would consider the benchmark.

Head of Programme, Jersey Overseas Aid:

"Based on how we compare to other countries, the benchmark would be the O.E.C.D. average, which puts overseas development at 0.31 per cent, so our current contribution is at 0.26 per cent. While that is going in the right direction it is a little bit off where most developed countries would say that is the benchmark with which to achieve.

The Minister for International Development:

Yes. In 2015 we were 0.25 per cent, but from 2015 to 2019 our economy went up, but our financial contribution remained the same, so in percentage terms against G.V.A. our per cent went down, which is not a good look if we want to play on the international stage. We feel by fixing our budget to G.V.A. as I said before it enables a good benchmark to allow us to go up when the economy expands but also by going up by 0.01 per cent per annum we are going in the right direction to hopefully reach the O.E.C.D. average by 2030.

The Deputy of St. Martin :

In the numbers we have in the Government Plan we know that we are going from a £13.3 million budget in 2022 to a £16.7 million budget in 2025, which is a 25 per cent increase, yet the percentage of G.V.A. is going from 0.26 per cent to 0.3 per cent, which is only a 15 per cent increase. Is that because you expect the G.V.A. of the Island to increase?

The Minister for International Development: Yes"[10]

The Panel is of the opinion that for Jersey to continue its reputation as a good citizen on the world stage, JOA linked to GVA should be viewed as a positive step.

FINDING 1

The budget for Jersey Overseas Aid (JOA) is linked to Gross Value Added (GVA) and will increase/decrease annually in line with how GVA performs.

The 2022 resources allocated to the Ministers which fall under the Panel's remit are as follows:

Changes to the Departmental Budget[12]

Changes to Departmental Budgets

Changes to departmental budgets totalled £1.192million. This is made up of £91,000 for the Department of the Economy and £1.1million for Jersey Overseas Aid. The increase of £91,000 for the Department of the Economy is due to changes across the following six areas:

• Cyber Security Growth

• Heritage, Arts and Culture

• Digital Jersey Growth

• Promoting Jersey

• Rural Economy Strategy

• Jersey National Park

The increase for Jersey Overseas Aid is due to the link in GVA.

Additional Investments

External Relations and Financial Services Financial Crime Prevention

A letter from the Minister for External Relations and Financial Services informed that the additional investment of £1.8million in Financial Crime Prevention would be allocated to Anti Money Laundering projects to continue combating the financing of terrorism. The remaining £504,000 would be allocated to continue to update the financial services industry.

Department of the Economy (Economic Development, Tourism, Sport and Culture) Refurbishment of Elizabeth Castle

The previous Government Plan committed to provide funding to the repair and maintenance of Elizabeth Castle in 2022 and 2023. This additional expenditure will total £9.2 million over the four-year period of the Government Plan, with additional expenditure in 2022 estimated to be £2.5 million.

The proposed works comprise three specific projects that will be delivered as part of a strategic works programme to address the fabric and services of Elizabeth Castle during the life of this Government Plan:

• Renovation of Victorian Military Hospital as a visitor attraction and a venue for hire

• Renovation of Coal Store as a multi-purpose function facility

• Renovation of Officers' Quarters as rental self-catering accommodation

Active conservation management is required to ensure responsibilities of stewardship are met. The Castle provides significant open space which forms part of public realm of St Helier. The Castle comprises more than 35 structures and forms part of the rich heritage of the Island.[13]

The Panel is extremely pleased to see investment into the refurbishment of such an iconic building which forms a significant part of Jersey's heritage. It did however have concerns around the ambitious nature of the refurbishment and raised this as a concern in its letter to the Minister for EDTSC on 6th October 2021.

Do you have any alternative funding arrangements or contingencies in place should the repair and maintenance phase of the building not go as planned?  

In order to minimise the risk of unforeseen events, it is critical to ensure that the work is properly and professionally scoped. Some contingency would usually be built in at project level although any additional need would be subject to a request to Treasury in the usual way.[14]

The Panel raised the question again at its Public Hearing with the Minister for EDTSC to ascertain more detail around funding for risks and contingency.

The Deputy of St. Martin :

"Moving on swiftly to Elizabeth Castle. We note that there is repair and maintenance on the castle to be done in 2022 and 2023. Can I just start off by saying is that repairs and maintenance over and above that which would normally be done on an annual basis?

Assistant Minister for Economic Development, Tourism, Sport and Culture (2):

The 2022-2023 repairs and maintenance, that is specifically, as I understand it, for the redevelopment of the hospital, coal bunker and the military quarters.

The Deputy of St. Martin :

Has a specific amount of money been allocated for that project?

Assistant Minister for Economic Development, Tourism, Sport and Culture (2): Yes.

The Deputy of St. Martin :

How much was it? Sorry to push you.

Assistant Minister for Economic Development, Tourism, Sport and Culture (2):

So £750,000 was allocated last year. Next year it is £1.25 million followed by slightly over £2 million.

The Deputy of St. Martin :

I take it you go out and get quotes for this work. I just want to make sure that the tender processes are properly scoped.

Assistant Minister for Economic Development, Tourism, Sport and Culture (2):

This work is being undertaken by Jersey Heritage Trust. So basically, the money is passed again to the tenders, et cetera. It is not sort of my ...[15]

The Deputy of St. Martin :

Do they build in a contingency for this work given the monthly increases in building materials at the moment? I presume there would be a large contingency.

Assistant Minister for Economic Development, Tourism, Sport and Culture (2):

I have spoken to them about this. The normal contingency that you expect in a project of this nature but also speaking to them they said one of the things that gives them comfort - prior to the current inflation - is that they know these buildings very well. They have been surveyed over many years. So what they are saying is that this is a very known quantity of work. It is not something where often with heritage buildings and refurbishments you find new things, as you dig deeper. They are very confident that they know these buildings extremely well. They are not expecting anything unexpected with that side of it. The other element is that if the Government is providing £5.7 million over 4 years, starting last year, the requirement [off mic] themselves and there is also an area where if there were a need for gross contingency that [off mic] because Elizabeth Castle is an income for Heritage. So Heritage feel that they have [off mic]"[16]

FINDING 2

During part of the refurbishment process of Elizabeth Castle, there is a reliance on Jersey Heritage having historical knowledge of the make-up of the building and an understanding of the quantity of work required for the refurbishment. The Panel is concerned that the breadth of experience required to undertake such a project may not fully meet the remit of the Jersey Heritage team and, as a result, additional expertise may be required. This may result in unforeseen situations and risks occurring which have not been planned or budgeted for.  

RECOMMENDATION 1

The Minister for Economic Development, Tourism, Sport and Culture should ensure a full risk assessment is carried out prior to any works being undertaken on the refurbishment of Elizabeth Castle. The Minister should also ensure that Jersey Heritage have the required experience to undertake any works due and should  include  responsibility  for  oversight  of  these  works  within  the  risk assessment. A contingency plan should also be put in place with a clear budget for each aspect of the refurbishment.

Inspiring Active Places and Sports Strategy

The Inspiring Active Places Sports Strategy (IAP) was launched in September 2020. The aim of the project is to develop a broad approach to improve the physical activity of children and adults across the whole of the Island.

The ultimate goal of the programme is to enhance the Island's sports facilities, providing venues and community hubs that will further increase the number of participants in sport and have a positive effect on the well-being of Islanders.

The wider development of this project is ongoing. It involves consideration and development of strategies to upgrade the Island's sporting infrastructure over the coming years, where funding  can  allow  individual  projects  to  be  undertaken.  The  Government  Plan  already contributes funding to this overall goal, with activities being undertaken across the Island. The funding available in 2022 is to enable this broader strategy to be enhanced and to allow for the development of projects that will deliver on this goal.[17]

The Panel was concerned that the allocation of funds within the Government Plan for 2022 totalled £814,000 and did not see this as sufficient for delivery of a project of this scale. When questioned, the Minister for EDTSC informed the Panel that this figure relates to the project activity planned purely 2022 and is focused on consultation and design.

This will cover the required development funding for 2022 to ensure more feasibility and detailed design work can be progressed on the early projects, Le Rocquier Sport and Wellbeing Hub in particular. This will allow the case for capital to be made based on more detailed information.[18]

The table below highlights the projects and various stages which have taken place in 2021 and are planned for 2022.

The Panel was keen to know who the Government of Jersey engaged with during the consultation phase of the project and the specific groups which had been targeted (age groups, demographics, ability etc.).

The  Panel  was  provided  with  a  document  covering  the  consultation  process  from  its commencement in 2017 with the Sports Facilities Delivery study, showing a list of key stakeholders  and  organisations  who  were  consulted  with  on  a  face-to-face  basis.  The document also listed Sports Associations and key clubs which were also consulted with on a face-to-face basis, either individually, or via a range of workshop sessions held at Fort Regent.

The Panel, following review of the consultation document, was reassured that specific groups had been targeted and the process was wide reaching. The Panel is of the opinion that the consultation process undertaken was satisfactory and looks forward to this much needed project being delivered.

FINDING 3

The figure of £814,000 allocated to the Inspiring Active Places project for 2022 relates to initial design and consultation.

FINDING 4

The Panel found the consultation process on the Inspiring Active Places project to be extremely comprehensive and targeted all age groups and demographics.

RECOMMENDATION 2

The Council of Ministers should ensure that funding is clearly defined in future Government Plans for the delivery of the Inspiring Active Places project. This should include detail around delivery of each stage of the project, together with the funding stream required to deliver the strategy.

The Panel feel it important to highlight the recently rejected planning application for Oakfield Sports Centre. The proposals included building of a new multi-sport facility - including 12 undercover badminton courts and a 3G floodlit pitch. The Planning Committee concluded that  the  proposed  site  was  too  big,  would  have  an  "imposing  impact"  on  the  local environment and had concerns around the traffic congestion.

The refusal of planning for this facility concerns the Panel as it may have a knock-on effect to the future delivery of sports projects on the Island. The Panel understands that the plans will be re-designed to make the Oakfield site more in tune with the current landscape, however, a timescale for this has not yet been agreed.

The Panel is also aware that there are delays to the refurbishment of Springfield Sports Centre, in addition to the Oakfield site. Both these projects are funded through the Fiscal Stimulus Fund and are integral to the decant and redevelopment of Fort Regent.

FINDING 5

The refusal of planning permission at Oakfield Sports Centre and the lack of progress on the refurbishment of Springfield Sports Centre may both have a detrimental effect on the delivery of the Inspiring Active Places sports strategy.

RECOMMENDATION 3

The Minister for Economic Development, Tourism, Sport and Culture should ensure a contingency is in place to deal with delays to the ongoing delivery of sports projects on the Island. This could cover aspects such as planning refusal, delays, and spiralling costs.

Skateparks

The Skatepark project began in 2020 and has been disrupted by the impact of Covid-19. Funding allocated by previous Government Plans, the Jersey Development Company and Ports of Jersey is being used to provide the core funding for the delivery of a large skatepark in the Island which will become a permanent home for the sport. Further funding is provided to enable the completion of  the large skatepark and the future development of further skateparks where needs are identified.

This project fits alongside the Inspiring Active Places Sport Strategy and works towards the development and regeneration of Island's sports facilities. There are currently two skateparks being discussed. One main skatepark at Les Quennevais Fields and one at South Hill. These are discussed in more detail below.

It is noted that funding in excess of £1.2million was approved by the States Assembly in early 2021 for the skatepark projects. Additional funding of £500,000 is included within the Government Plan for 2022 and the Panel was informed that this funding was in addition to what was previously approved by the States Assembly. The total project costs are currently estimated to be around £1.8million. The additional funding of £500,000 is made up of contributions from The Jersey Development Company and Ports of Jersey as follows:

• The Jersey Development Company - £425,000

• Ports of Jersey - £75,000

The Panel asked if this figure of £1.8 million covered both skateparks and was informed that:

Director General, Infrastructure, Housing and Environment:

"It covers the main skatepark.

The Deputy of St. Mary :

The main being?

Director General, Infrastructure, Housing and Environment:

The main one being the current planning application we have in at Les Quennevais playing fields. So that is in at the moment. We are scheduled to go to the Planning Committee in November on that one. Then we are anticipating further facilities within the Island. So we have further monies in the Government Plan going into 2023, 2024 of a further £500,000, but there is £750,000 in the Government Plan. We are expecting further spend in St. Helier itself. We are currently looking at the South Hill proposal, for instance, at the moment; the size and shape of that. We are also looking at whether we have another satellite facility either in the east or in the north.

The Deputy of St. Mary :

That deals with Les Quennevais. What about the South Hill one? Where are we with the planning application on that one?

Director General, Infrastructure, Housing and Environment:

We do not have a date. It is probably going to be, if anything, early 2022 at this point. The team's efforts have been firmly put against the Les Quennevais project to make sure that that proceeds, and we have done a lot of design work and some redesign

work on that site. The team has been focusing on that and they have not not done any work on South Hill but I think we want to see how the master plan for Fort Regent is also developing, to see how skate and scooters and other outdoor urban activities factors into that activity corridor. It might well be that we have a smaller skatepark and different scooter facilities. So we are just trying to go through that with the team to make sure we are filling the sensible uses in the right places"[19]

At the time of drafting his report, planning permission has been approved for the skatepark at Les Quennevais playing fields.

FINDING 6

Planning permission has been granted for the skatepark at Les Quennevais Fields. It is unclear when a planning application will be submitted for the second proposed skatepark at South Hill, or for any proposed satellite skateparks around the island.

RECOMMENDATION 4

The Minister for Economic Development, Tourism, Sport and Culture should ensure that detailed information is provided to States Members and members of the public regarding the timeline of any planning application, in addition to any consultation process that will be carried out for future skateparks. This should cover, not only South Hill, but all future States funded satellite skateparks, with Parish   Connétable s  being  consulted  on  any  key  decisions  affecting  their Parishes.

5  Efficiencies

The Government Plan 2020-2023 set out the ambition to achieve £100 million of efficiencies, with the first £40 million to be achieved in 2020. The plan for £40 million in 2020 was published in October 2019 and a performance update was included in the Government 6-month report, published in August 2020. The Government Plan 2021 – 2024 set out the 2021 plan to deliver £20 million of efficiencies and other rebalancing measures.

Rebalancing and Efficiencies

The Government Plan proposes £21 million of rebalancing measures in 2022, with the intent that a further £40 million of savings will be delivered across 2023 and 2024. The table below shows the efficiencies and rebalancing totals for each Minister under the Panel's remit:

The summary description of proposals reviewed by the Panel for each Minister are set out in the table below:

The  Panel  is  content  that  the  efficiency  and  rebalancing  summaries  as  set  out  in  the Government Plan are achievable and realistic. On review of these measures the Panel agreed no further action would be required at this stage.

6  Summary tables of Scrutiny RAG' ratings

The Panel has undertaken review of the various programmes and capital projects that were assigned to it by the Government Plan Review Panel, and passed comments were necessary. Following its review's Terms of Reference, the Panel carried out scrutiny of projects based upon the following guideline criteria:

• Where funding over £500,000 has been allocated

• Where funding has been withdrawn or decreased significantly from the previous year

• Where funding has been increased significantly from the previous year

• Projects which the Panel consider are of most concern (as a result of, for instance, delays, deferrals, overspends or because they are not in keeping with Common Strategic Priorities)

• Projects which have been identified as of concern by stakeholders

• Projects which are contentious and/or in the public eye.

• Projects where insufficient information has been provided and more information is sought

• Concern is held on the project's alignment with Common Strategic Priorities, social impact and impact upon children.

This section provides a summarised overview of the Panel's RAG ratings assigned to both previously reviewed programmes (GP 2020-23 / GP 2021-24) and new ones which have been identified in the Government Plan 2022-25.

Previously reviewed programmes and capital projects (GP 2020-23 / GP 2021-24)

The tables immediately below identify the programmes included in previous iterations of the Government Plan, which will continue to be invested in in 2022, and indicates whether the projects are Complete', On Track', Reduced', Delayed', Deferred' or subject to Partial Deferral'.

This section also includes previously reviewed programmes and capital projects.

*The Panel wishes to list the following projects which form part of the Heritage, Arts and Culture development:

• Jersey Opera House Refurbishment

• Jersey Heritage Hamptonne - Agricultural Museum

• Jersey Heritage La Hougue Bie - Gallery & Workshop

• Jersey Consumer Council Consumer Confidence & Data Security

• RJA&HS Grounds Refurbishment  

• Jersey Arts Centre Renovation

Future of Fort Regent

In a letter to the Minister for Economic Development, Tourism, Sport and Culture the Panel asked questions regarding the recently published findings on the survey undertaken with regards to the future of the Fort. The Panel was informed that:

"the Future Fort project is a corporate project, with a Political Oversight Group led by the Chief Minister. IHE are the delivery department with Director General Andy Scate as the Senior Reporting Officer. It is not an EDTSC project"[22]

The Panel was further informed that Sport are a current tenant of the building, along with other tenants such as the music service.

The Panel was slightly surprised that the Chief Minister had overall responsibility for the future of the project and raised the issue of responsibility for the future of the Fort at a recent public hearing with the Minister for EDTSC.

Senator S.W. Pallett:

"Whether it is the Minister or Assistant Minister, what is the responsibility of the department in the overall Fort Regent project?

Assistant Minister for Economic Development, Tourism, Sport and Culture (2):

I have to say that is a very good question and it is something that I have pondered on as well because there are quite a few diversities from Jersey Sport to the development that David Curtis is doing with regards to the Fort and what we are doing with the tenancies within the Fort. The biggest problem we have is every time we move forward, as you know, Senator, we have been sort of caught back. I know we keep using it but we need to know when we can get hold of the Fort again and that is the basis of everything at this present time.

Senator S.W. Pallett:

What are this department's specific responsibilities at the current time?

Assistant Minister for Economic Development, Tourism, Sport and Culture (2):

My responsibility, as far as I am concerned, is that we look after the people that were in the Fort that have been there for some time to make sure that they are not just, let us use the words "pushed out" and we find them a base which they want to go to. That is sport and tenants because there are 7 different tenants in there. I did ask the question yesterday because we are going to P.O.G. (Political Oversight Group) next week. I did not catch up with you with regards to it following discussions that you had in the morning. So we are going to P.O.G. because I want to know exactly where they are coming from with regards to the Chief Minister's view because he is running that side of the affairs"[23]

The Panel has written to the Minister for EDTSC asking what responsibility the Department of the Economy will have for the future of the Fort from 1st January 2023 when the new Department of the Economy is launched.

FINDING 7

The responsibility for both the current operational structure and the overall future of the Fort Regent project remains unclear, which may result in the lines of Ministerial accountability being blurred and progress delayed.

New programmes requiring additional revenue expenditure (GP 2022-25)

The table below identifies the programmes that will receive first-time investment in 2022 and were therefore not included in previous iterations of the Government Plan.

7  Conclusion

The Government Plan 2022-25 was lodged on 21 September 2021 and notwithstanding a short and challenging timeframe, over the last 12 weeks, the Panel has endeavoured to undertake a thorough analysis of all the programmes allocated to it by the Government Plan Review Panel.

Our review has focussed primarily on whether the funding sought is sufficient or excessive, as well as how the funding proposes to ensure value for money. In addition, we have also scrutinised the progress and spend to date for programmes agreed in previous Government Plans.

Overall, the Panel is satisfied with the majority of programmes and the rationale for the 2022 funding bids, with none being assigned a red RAG' rating. 3 programmes have been assigned an amber rating and 17 have been assigned a green rating.

The Panel would like to highlight the time taken in relation to the submission of planning applications to approval stage for each of the Skateparks. The delays to this process caused the Panel to write to the Minister for Infrastructure on 11th May requesting an update, as well as raising the issue on numerous occasions in Public Hearings with the Minister for EDTSC. Whilst the Panel is pleased to see that the main skatepark at Les Quennevais Fields has now received planning permission, the road to achieving this was not a smooth one and with no clear answers as to what caused the delays.

8 Witnesses and Evidence Gathered

Public hearings were held with the following Ministers:

• Minister for Economic Development, Tourism, Sport and Culture

• Minister for International Development

Responses to written questions were received from the following Ministers:

• Minister for Economic Development, Tourism, Sport and Culture

• Minister for International Development

• Minister for External Relations and Financial Services

Appendix 1

Terms of Reference

Government Plan 2022 - 2025 Terms of Reference

1. To undertake a review of the sections/projects of the Government Plan 2022- 2025 which are most relevant to the remit of the Economic and International Affairs Panel, using the following criteria as a guide:

• Where funding over £500,000 has been allocated

• Where funding has been withdrawn or decreased significantly from the previous year

• Where funding has been increased significantly from the previous year

• Projects which the Panels consider are of most concern (as a result of, for instance, delays, deferrals, overspends or because they are not in keeping with Common Strategic Priorities)

• Projects which have been identified as of concern by stakeholders

• Projects which are contentious and/or in the public eye.

• Projects where insufficient information has been provided and more information is sought

• Concern is held on the project's alignment with Common Strategic Priorities, social impact and impact upon children.

2. To determine whether those projects align with Ongoing Initiatives, Common Themes and, ultimately, Common Strategic Priorities.
3. To consider whether the resources allocated to the projects is sufficient or excessive.
4. To review of the success or otherwise of projects agreed in the previous Government Plan for 2021.
5. To assess the expected impact on the ongoing delivery of public services, by Minister, through rebalancing of Government finances.

Panel membership

The Panel comprised of the following States Members:

Deputy David Johnson , Chair

Deputy Steve Luce , Vice Chair

Senator Steve Pallett

States Greffe | Morier House | Halkett Place |St Helier | Jersey | JE1 1DD T: +44 (0) 1534 441 020 | E: statesgreffe@gov.je | W: Statesassembly.gov.je

[1] Government Plan 2022 – 2025 Table 13 p.126

[2] P.90/2021 Summary Table 5(i) p.19

[3] Annex to the Government Plan 2022-25, p.20

[4] Annex to the Government Plan 2022-25, p.36

[5] Letter from MERFS to EIA Panel – 13.10.21

[6] Annex to the Government Plan 2022-25, p.26

[7]7Transcript  –  Public  Hearing  -  Government  Plan  2022-2025  (Witness:  Minister  for  International Development) – 29th October 2021

[8]  Transcript – Public Hearing - Government Plan 2022-2025 (Witness: Minister for International Development) – 29th October 2021

[9]  Transcript – Public Hearing - Government Plan 2022-2025 (Witness: Minister for International

Development) – 29th October 2021

[10]  Transcript – Public Hearing - Government Plan 2022-2025 (Witness: Minister for International Development) – 29th October 2021

[11] Government Plan 2022 – 2025 Table 14 p.127

[12] Annex to the Government Plan 2022-25

[13]13Annex – Proposed Government Plan 2022-2025

[14] Letter - Minister of EDTSC to Panel – 18th October 2021

[15] Transcript – Public Hearing – Government Plan 2022-2025 (Witness: EDTSC Minister) – 27th October 2021

[16] Transcript – Public Hearing – Government Plan 2022-2025 (Witness: EDTSC Minister) – 27th October 2021

[17] Government Plan 2022 -2025

[18] Letter - EDTSC Minister to Panel – 18th October 2021

[19] Transcript – Public Hearing – Government Plan 2022-2025 (Witness: EDTSC Minister) – 27th October 2021

[20] Government Plan 2022 -2025 Table 1 p.84

[21] P.90/2021 Summary Table 6 - Efficiencies and Rebalancing Measures 2022 - Summary Proposals p.21

[22] Letter - Minister for EDTSC to Panel – 18th October 2021

[23] Transcript – Public Hearing – Government Plan 2022-2025 (Witness: EDTSC Minister) – 27th October 2021