Joint Ministerial Response - Scrutiny Review of the Government Plan - 2021-2024

Findings

Comments

1

Greater cooperation from Government prior to the Plan being lodged would have allowed for a smoother scrutiny process.

A Memorandum of Understanding (/assemblyreports/2020/r.69- 2020.pdf) was agreed between the Chief Minister and Scrutiny and was presented to the States Assembly on 10th July 2020 in order to improve on cooperation between Government and Scrutiny. This has supported improvements in co-ordination and co-operation over the

Findings

Comments

process for the Government Plan 2020-23.

2

Scrutiny requires more time in future to undertake a thorough review of the Government Plan. This year the lodging period was 9 weeks, creating a near-impossible task. The availability of Ministers for hearings was inadequate and the time pressures put upon Scrutiny Panel members and officers was unacceptable.

It  should  be  remembered  that  this  has  been  an unprecedented year for the Island and that Covid 19 has impacted on what would have been a longer engagement process. We thank the Panels for their understanding.

The Government Plan Scrutiny Liaison Team regularly met with Scrutiny lead officers to run through the draft documents and provide detailed explanations of

the layout and reading of tables. Offers were made to extend the presentations to each panel and its members. The Government Plan Liaison Team have been logged any issues, for example, delays in responding to letters.

Communication between Scrutiny and the Government has improved to ensure delays were limited and did not negatively impact on panels work. We have requested evidence of when  Ministers  did not make themselves available for hearings. The Liaison Officer is aware of 3 panel hearings that were changed – 2 at the request of scrutiny and one at the request of the Minister. Some meetings  between  scrutiny  and  Ministers  were rescheduled due to States continuations days.

It is hoped that for the next Government Plan that there will  be  closer  working  between  the  Panels  and  the Liaison  Officer  to  ensure  panel  hearing  dates  do  not clash with States Sittings and/or other conflicts.

3

Some new programmes are enhancements of those agreed through the Government Plan 2020-23, increasing the funding requested to achieve existing objectives.

New programmes included in the Government Plan all represent new pressures and funding requirements that emerged after Government Plan 2020-23 was finalised. To ensure a robust funding allocation process, each was required to submit a business case.

4

The Government Plan's formatting was at times inconsistent and some tables were erroneous, or had inconsistent and disparately labelled numeric displays, making navigation, interpretation and comparative analysis of the information in the Plan unnecessarily challenging.

The  Panel  highlighted  the  differences  between  the departmental total for Office of the Chief Executive and the Head of Expenditure total. This is not a matter of inconsistency and relates to the flexibility of the Public Finances  Law  in  permitting  different  Heads  of Expenditure to be created. However, we will consider how this distinction can be made clearer in the tables in future Government Plans.

The Panel's comments  on inclusion of row lines and inconsistency  in  presentation  of  numbers  in  the rebalancing  section  are  noted  however  some  of  their

Findings

Comments

comments may well relate to the fact that we provided them with a draft version of the plan, before type setting, in the interests of expediency.

5

It was unclear how progress on achieving the Common Strategic Priorities was measured, or how often or by whom, and how Ministers held the officers to account in terms of their performance against those measures.

We consider that, while improvements can always be made, an improved link has been made in the Government Plan 2021-24 between the Performance Framework, the Government Plan, the 6-month progress report and Common Strategic Priorities.

Officers have provided briefings to Scrutiny on the Jersey Performance Framework and will continue to assist Scrutiny with their understanding and will continue to make improvements for the next Government Plan 2022-25.

6

The Government Plan does not align to the Common Strategic Priority of Put Children First.' This is exemplified by its reduction in budgets which help children and young people.

Whilst we understand the passion of the Panel on this area and that differences of political opinion are to be expected,  the  Government  Plan  does  align  to  the Common Strategic Priority of Put Children First'. This is evidenced by the content of Appendices 3 and 4 of the Government Plan and the heads of expenditure allocated to relevant Government Department particularly in the context  of  the  significant  impact  of  Covid  on Government  finances  both  in  terms  of  income  and additional and unforeseen expenditure.

This  additional  investment  includes,  for  example, approximately  £42m  investment  in  the  Education Reform  programme  over  4  years  and  £0.9m  in  the Covid-19 Schools catch up programme in 2021.

Indeed,  the  comparison  of  2020  and  2021  budgets published by the Corporate Services Scrutiny panel in its report shows that planned spending on this priority has increased from £142.9m in 2020 to £153.5m in 2021.

The  Government  Plan  includes  over  £9m  of  new investment into this priority in 2021 alone, and in total over £50m over the 4-year period of the Plan.

The  Council  of  Ministers  also  amended  the  panels amendments to the Government Plan which reinstated the additional funding for the Care Leavers Offer and the Pupil Premium.

7

The Government Plan does not adequately align to the Common Strategic Priority of Improving Islanders'

Whilst we understand the importance to the Panel on this area and that differences of political opinion are to be expected, the Government Plan does adequately align to the Common Strategic Priority of Improving Islanders'

Findings

Comments

Wellbeing'. Jersey has an opportunity to consider innovations such as outcomes- based contracting, impact bonds and social impact investing to deliver upon these commitments.

Wellbeing'.  This  is  evidenced  by  the  content  of Appendices 3 and 4 of the Government Plan and the heads of expenditure allocated to relevant Government Department particularly in the context of the significant impact of Covid on Government finances both in terms of income and additional and unforeseen expenditure.

8

The intended level of borrowing is too high risk and one-dimensional'. The Government has relied too heavily on the fact that borrowing rates are currently good without looking at ways to reduce the cost of borrowing.

The Government Plan proposes utilising the Revolving Credit Facility in 2021, in advance of the issuance of a medium-term  debt  strategy  for  inclusion  ahead  of Government Plan 2022. The Plan also includes a number of measures to reduce the borrowing, complimented by Senator   Gorst 's  successful  amendment  to  the  Plan. Ministers  have  also  identified  a  package  of  measures within the Plan to close the fiscal gap by 2024, which has the effect of reducing the borrowing requirement over the period.

A positive consequence of the States of Jersey's strong credit rating and investment reserves is that there are unlikely to be any cheaper sources of borrowing than that taken out in the name of the States of Jersey. This is evidenced  through  our  previous  interaction  with  the public  bond  markets  in  2014  and  in  2020  when negotiating the Revolving Credit Facility.

In terms of the quantum of cost, it is only intended that borrowing  is  for  the  sums  detailed  within  the Government Plan which may well be reduced as a result of  Senator   Gorst 's  amendment  and  the  package  of measures referred to above which are designed to reduce the borrowing requirement.

9

The Government has dismissed too readily the idea of issuing a community bond to reduce the level of borrowing.

In  our  response  to  the  Panel's  amendment  to  the Government Plan Ministers have already committed to developing  the  options  around  a  community  bonds programme  for  consideration  by the  Assembly  of the medium to longer term borrowing strategy, alongside the consideration of the budget and funding of Our Hospital in Spring of 2021.

Discussions  with  our  debt  advisers  indicate  that  the issuance  of  a  community  bond  is  likely  to  be  more expensive in cost (interest rate) terms than other sources of debt available to the States of Jersey. It should also be noted that a community bond is still a form of borrowing so does not impact on the level of borrowing as the bond holders will wish to see their investment repaid at some

Findings

Comments

point in the future.

10

Approximately £28 million of assets had already been provisionally earmarked for disposal, however not as part of a joined-up approach' to the States assets, given that there would be many competing demands on sites which would need to be managed and prioritised carefully.

An  Estates  Strategy  has  been  developed  and  was presented to the Council of Ministers shortly before the Government Plan debate. Until that strategy was agreed Jersey Property Holdings could not start the work to look holistically  at  the  estate  assets  no  longer  required  by Government for their original purpose. Alternative uses will be considered for these assets prior to any decision to recommend for disposal.

11

The Government Plan does not adequately align to the Common Strategic Priority of Reducing Income Inequality and Improve Standard of Living' This is exemplified by its reduction in the related budget.

Whilst we understand the importance the Panel attaches to this area and that differences of political opinion are to be expected, the Government Plan does adequately align to the Common Strategic Priority of Reducing Income Inequality and Improve the Standard of Living'. This is evidenced by the content of Appendices 3 and 4 of the Government Plan and the heads of expenditure allocated to relevant Government Department particularly in the context  of  the  significant  impact  of  Covid  on Government  finances  both  in  terms  of  income  and additional and unforeseen expenditure.

The reduction highlighted by the Panel primarily relates to the removal of the States Grant to the Social Security Fund from Revenue budgets in 2021. As highlighted in the Government Plan, this funding will be replaced by drawdowns from the Social Security Reserve Fund to maintain regular Social Security payments.

It should be noted that, in addition to the allocation to this  strategic  priority  through  the  Consolidated  Fund, there are two new areas that are being funded from 2021 onwards. These are:

Extension of parental benefits to provide a longer total period  of benefit and allow it to be claimed by both parents. This is funded by an increase in contributions above  the  standard  earnings  limit  and  will  provide benefits  of up to an additional £3 million from 2021 onwards

Introduction  of  Health  Access  Scheme.   This  scheme uses funding from the Health Insurance Fund to support primary care costs for low-income families who qualify for Income Support or the pension plus scheme. This scheme  will  provide  subsidised  care  of  up  to  an

Findings

Comments

additional £1.75 million from 2021 onwards. These 2 new schemes both support CSP4.

12

The Government Plan does not adequately align to the Common Strategic Priority of Protect our Environment' as demonstrated by its reduction in the related budget.

Whilst we understand the points the panel places on this area and that differences of political opinion are to be expected, the Government Plan does adequately align to the  Common  Strategic  Priority  of  Protect  our Environment'.  This  is  evidenced  by  the  content  of Appendices 3 and 4 of the Government Plan and the heads of expenditure allocated to relevant Government Department particularly in the context of the significant impact of Covid on Government finances both in terms of income and additional and unforeseen expenditure.

One of the reasons for the changes to the budget for this CSP  highlighted  by  the  Panel  is  the  changes  to  the profile of large infrastructure capital projects as a result of the impact of Covid-19. In many cases (for example the  planned  £4m  on  the  Sewage  treatment  works project), the spending on the capital project will still take place but in a later year.

The changes highlighted by the Panel also include the £5m  one-off  grant  to  the  Climate  Emergency  Fund included  in  GP20.  The  planned  expenditure  from  the Fund in 2021 is not included in the Panel's calculations but amounts to £4.7m in 2021.

See also Recommendation 12.

13

The Modernising Government' category, accounts for a spend in excess of £60 million to be delivered by 2024 and within this grouping are a number of disparate projects. The Government does not make clear how the current pandemic will affect the pace of implementation or the more significant structural and process change and the Review Panel is unclear about appropriate training programmes for the over21s.

Project performance is published on a six-monthly basis and includes the impact of COVID on delivery.

14

The information on which to

The performance of efficiency and rebalancing measures

Findings

Comments

drive efficiency measures is impossible to separate from rebalancing measures to offset Covid-19, and impossible to track.

is reported separately from the financial impact of COVID. Where a measure is impacted by COVID, such as the reduced or deferred delivery, this is made clear in the six-monthly reporting.

15

The communications budget is disproportionate to the other budgets which have been reduced, despite the latter budgets being more aligned to Islanders' priorities. Too much money is spent on Government reach' and not enough on commissioning surveys, collating high quality data or listening to Islanders' priorities.

A  properly  funded  and  professional  communications function  is  a  standard  feature  of  all  developed democracies and their governments.

It is responsible for:

• Enhancing the public's understanding of Government by working with the media to ensure the timely supply of information (both proactively and reactively),

• The delivery of public awareness and social advertising campaigns,

• Researching target audiences and deciding how best to communicate  with  them  to  achieve  agreed  policy outcomes,

• Managing  internal  communications  in  a  way  that supports staff to do the best job they can.

There  have  always  been  communicators  within  the Government of Jersey. Prior to the reorganisation, they were embedded inside departments, working to siloed priorities,  occasionally  contradicting  one  another  and often incurring greater costs due to bidding against one another for the same advertising space.

Like  any  public  service  legal,  procurement,  or  HR function,  the  corporate  communications  directorate supports  Ministers,  the  wider  public  service,  and Islanders as a means to an end, and not as a political or organisational priority or end in itself. The growth bid in the  Government  Plan  gives  the  communications directorate the budget it needs in order to work on the greater  demand  for  proactive  behaviour  change campaigns that the Government has set.

The  commissioning  of  surveys,  collating  high  quality data and listening to Islanders' priorities does not wait until  policy  is  ready  to  be  communicated  by  the

Findings

Comments

corporate  communications  team.  Rather,  this  process begins much earlier when policy is being formulated and is therefore managed by the individual policy unit within the  department  supported  by  their  head  of communication.

The  communications  directorate  supports  on  the advertising and marketing of surveys and consultations and spends a significant proportion of any advertising spend  on  channels  that  allows  for  two-way communications.   Each  of  the  department's  head  of communications uses a blended approach to make sure they receive, process and disseminate to Ministers the feedback  they  receive  from  these  communication moments.  This  can  include  discussions  with  staff, comments on social media, letters to the JEP, round table discussions with senior and informed stakeholders (e.g., Chamber  of  Commerce),  and  quarterly  meetings  with editors. Recently, the directorate has set up its own Facebook  Group  Have  Your  Say'  and  has  been supporting  SPPP  with  two  new  platforms  for  public engagement Citizen Space' and Dialogue'.

Recommendations

To

Accept/ Reject

Comments

Target date of action/ completion

1

The Council of Ministers should share information on the structure and presentation of the Government Plan at an earlier stage.

CM

Neither accept nor reject

A Memorandum of Understanding

(/assemblyr

eport s/2020/r.69-2020.pdf) was agreed

between the Chief Minister and

Scrutiny and was presented to the States

Assembly on 10th July 2020 in order to

improve on cooperation between

Government and Scrutiny. This has

supported improvements in co-

ordination and cooperation over the

process for the Government Plan 2020- 23.

The Council of Ministers looks forward to working with Scrutiny to find further reasonable improvements for the next Government Plan 2022-25.

Recommendations

To

Accept/ Reject

Comments

Target date of action/ completion

2

Consideration must be given to extending the time available to Scrutiny to properly scrutinise the Plan and its associated Proposition in 2021 beyond a 15- week period and Ministers must make themselves readily available for briefings and public hearings at short notice.

CM

Neither accept nor reject

As referenced earlier Covid affected on the  lodging  period  and  we  thank  the panels  for  their  understanding  in  this matter

The Council of Ministers will seek to find  reasonable  improvements  in respect of Ministerial availability for the next Government Plan 2022-25.

3

If a programme is unachievable due to budget constraints, or if its aspirations are enhanced, a new business case for that programme should be presented, as opposed to creating a new programme requiring further tracking.

CM

Accept

New  programmes  included  in  the Government  Plan  all  represent  new pressures and funding requirements that emerged after Government Plan 2020- 23  was  finalised.  To  ensure  a  robust funding  allocation  process,  each  was required to submit a business case.

The recommendation is accepted, and it is already normal practice for a revised business case, or an addendum, to be prepared  where  additional  funding  is required for an existing programme or where  an  enhancement  to  that programme is requested. In both cases, any additional budget approved would be allocated to the existing programme.

4

Consideration must be given to clear presentation of tables and their contents and project codes should at all times be allocated in a consistent manner across documents.

CM

Accept

This is noted.

5

The Government should reconcile the Performance Framework, Government Plan and the 6-month Progress Report more directly with Common Strategic Priorities and

CM

Neither

We consider that, while improvements can always be made, an improved link has been made in the Government Plan 2021-24  between  the  Performance Framework, the Government Plan, the 6-month progress report and Common Strategic Priorities.

Recommendations

To

Accept/ Reject

Comments

Target date of action/ completion

demonstrate measurable progress against them.

Officers  have  provided  briefings  to Scrutiny  on  the  Jersey  Performance Framework and will continue to assist Scrutiny  with  their  understanding  and will continue to make improvements for the next Government Plan 2022-25

6

The Government should halt any efficiencies which negatively impact on children and young people.

CM

Neither accept nor reject

By  definition,  efficiencies  will  not reduce services – they will enable the same services to be provided with less or a  greater level of service with the same resources. Delivering efficiencies in these areas enables more investment in expanding the provision of services and is entirely separate to the specific investment in  priority  areas  agreed in the Government Plan.

Impact assessments will be carried out before measures are proposed to ensure they  align  with  Common  Strategic Policies.

7

The Government should halt any efficiencies which negatively impact on vulnerable and disadvantaged groups and develop its final approach to a sustainable wellbeing impact assessment as a matter of urgency. The Government should also explore innovations such as outcomes-based contracting, impact bonds and social impact investing to deliver upon its commitments.

CM

Neither accept nor reject

As 6.

The Government is committed to working with businesses and voluntary organisations in identifying and implementing novel approaches to addressing social issues and creating new ways of funding projects and services.

The Homelessness Strategy exemplifies this approach. Funded by the Ocorian Trust, the strategy has been developed by charities, arms-length bodies and government departments working together to identify key recommendations to address homelessness issues in Jersey.

8

The Government should commit to seeking to reduce the level by combining borrowing with other strategies.

CM

Reject

Commitments to reduce the level of borrowing were included in the Government Plan (page 120) and this commitment was further strengthened through the Assembly's adoption of

Recommendations

To

Accept/ Reject

Comments

Target date of action/ completion

This includes creating the conditions for local investment in a community bonds programme and making appropriate use of the considerable assets of the States of Jersey by realising their value, or at least taking urgent steps to identify assets that can be repurposed to better suit the needs of Islanders, and/or disposing of unnecessary assets, all the while vigilantly tracking borrowing rates and reporting back regularly.

Senator Gorst 's amendment to the Government Plan.

Ministers have committed to developing the option of a community bonds programme ahead of consideration by the Assembly of the medium to long term strategy, alongside the consideration of the budget and funding of Our Hospital in Spring of 2021.

Ministers do not support the sale of Statesowned assets at this time. However, an estates strategy has recently been agreed by ministers. Officers will be charged with delivering the strategy, which will include the consideration and agreement of which sites Government wishes to dispose of. The receipts from those disposals will be used to reduce the borrowing requirement.

9

The Government should commit to exploring the option of developing a community bond to help reduce the level of borrowing.

CM

Accept

Ministers  have  already  committed  to developing  the  options  around  a community  bonds  programme  for consideration  by the  Assembly  of the medium  to  longer  term  borrowing strategy, alongside the consideration of the budget and funding of Our Hospital in Spring of 2021.

10

The Government should commit to delivering asset and estate strategies as a matter of urgency in order to deliver ways to reduce the level of borrowing.

CM

Accept

An Estates Strategy has been developed and  was  presented  to  the  Council  of Ministers  shortly  before  the Government  Plan  debate. Until  that strategy  was  agreed  Jersey  Property Holdings  could  not  start  the  work  to look holistically at the estate assets no longer required by Government for their original purpose. Alternative uses will be considered for these assets prior to any  decision  to  recommend  for disposal.

The Government, as per 8 above, has already committed that receipts arising

Recommendations

To

Accept/ Reject

Comments

Target date of action/ completion

from the estate's strategy will be used to fund the borrowing requirement.

With  regards  to  other  Government assets,  Ministers  are  not  closed  to potential opportunities in the future but they do not feel that this is the  right time to "fire sell" the investments it has that provide the strength to our Balance Sheet.

11

The Government should halt any efficiencies which negatively impact vulnerable and disadvantaged groups and should consider options such as living wage, outcomes-based contracting, impact bonds and social impact investing to deliver upon its commitment to the Common Strategic Priority of Reducing Income Inequality and Improve Standard of Living'.

CM

Neither accept nor reject

As 6.

By definition, efficiencies will not reduce services – they will enable the same services to be provided with less or a greater level of service with the same resources. Delivering efficiencies in these areas enables more investment in expanding the provision of services and is entirely separate to the specific investment in priority areas agreed in the Government Plan.

The Government Plan 21-24 commits to a review of the process by which the statutory

minimum wage is set. The Jersey living wage is a voluntary programme run by Caritas Jersey. The living wage has been increased in January 2021 to £10.96 p/h

The Government is committed to working with businesses and voluntary organisations in identifying and implementing novel approaches to addressing social issues and creating new ways of funding projects and services.

The Homelessness Strategy exemplifies this approach. Funded by the Ocorian

Recommendations

To

Accept/ Reject

Comments

Target date of action/ completion

Trust, the strategy has been developed by charities, arms-length bodies and government departments working together to identify key recommendations to address homelessness issues in Jersey.

12

The Government should halt any efficiencies which negatively impact the environment and reconsider the proposed 26% reduction of investment to Protect our Environment' in 2021 against the 2020 allocation, to deliver upon its commitment to this Common Strategic Priority.

CM

Neither accept nor reject

By definition, efficiencies will not reduce services – they will enable the same services to be provided with less or a greater level of service with the same resources. Delivering efficiencies enables more investment in expanding the provision of services and is entirely separate to the specific investment in priority areas agreed in the Government Plan. Impact assessments will be carried out before measures are proposed to ensure they align with Common Strategic Policies.

The Environment, Housing and Infrastructure Scrutiny Panel have noted in Finding 29 of their Government Plan Review that "There are no efficiencies assigned to the Minister for the Environment, only a joint efficiency with the Minister for Infrastructure and Minister for Economic Development, Tourism, Sport and culture in relation to the Target Operating Model for the Infrastructure, Housing and Environment Department." This, combined with increased funding across three separate bid areas for the government plan period), sees the potential for positive rather than negative impact on the island's environment through dedicated and previously unfunded workstreams. The successful bids covered expenditure in the area of the natural environment funded by increases in revenue budgets but also with funding from the Climate Emergency Fund, and for Brexit from funds held separately by treasury in reserves

Recommendations

To

Accept/ Reject

Comments

Target date of action/ completion

Rather than looking at funding as a 26% reduction in funding against the previous year, it might be better to view the successfully requested bids as those which the Officers and Ministers of the department consider appropriate to spend to address the key priorities in the appropriate timescales that they have carefully considered.

13

The Government should make it easier to track, analyse and assess what the Covid impact has been on the workforce, both in the private and public sector, and improve opportunities for training and skills.

CM

Neither accept nor reject

The  implementation  of  the  Integrated Technology  Solution  (ITS)  will  make future reporting on the workforce, and associated impacts, easier.

Data indicating the impact of COVID on  the  workforce  continues  to  be collected through the various Business Support Measures.

14

Transparency is needed about how an efficiency is defined and how efficiencies are tracked and monitored for progress and their impact on society.

CM

Neither accept nor reject

Definitions were clearly set out in the Efficiencies  Plan  2020  and  each individual  measure,  in  both  the  2020 and  2021  plans,  are  classified  within these definitions. In addition, the status of each measure as either a reduction in expenditure or increase in income and whether  it  is  one-off  or  recurring  is included.

 Progress  monitoring  is  established through  the  monthly  budget  monitor process  with  published  reports  on performance on a six-monthly basis.

Impact assessments are carried out as part  of  the  approval  of  the  proposed measures  and  impacts  are  further assessed  on  a  six-monthly  basis.  The methodology  of  assessing  impact  will continue to be developed over 2021.

15

More attention should be given to commissioning and collating better quality and more frequent

CM

Reject

Please refer to finding 15.

Last  year  the  communications

Recommendations

To

Accept/ Reject

Comments

Target date of action/ completion

survey updates on a range of issues with less money spent on the Government reach'.

departments and policy leads led on a number of surveys and consultations to monitor the opinions of Islanders. This is  alongside  the  daily  monitoring  of specific  sentiment  on  traditional  and social media, feedback from stakeholder groups, and Ministerial correspondence. Some of the surveys and consultations are  detailed  in  finding  15.  A  few  of which are detailed in finding 15. As part of the Government Plan the Council of Ministers, working in collaboration with Deputy Pamplin, agreed to put forward an amendment to the Government Plan to  allocate  an  additional  £150,000  in 2021 to provide for additional surveys and analysis to support the Living Costs and Household Income Survey. Below are  some  further  examples  of  the surveys that have been produced across departments

CYPES

The  department  ran  the  Children  and Young People survey this year with the Children's  Commissioner's  Office.  In this  survey, A total of 2,105 children and young people in Jersey shared their thoughts  and  feelings  about  the coronavirus  pandemic.  A  survey  was sent directly to the 1,200 students on the Student Finance database and promoted on Government social media channels to reach overseas students. The survey asked  all  overseas  university  students how  they  planned  to  travel  back  to Jersey and how they planned to isolate.

IHE

The department has carried out surveys in  the  following  areas:  DVS  –  PTI centre; single use carrier bags; aviation meteorology;  the  Access  Strategy; Waterworks  Valley;  Hill  Street  cycle path; FB Fields; Active Travel; Midvale Road;  Les  Quennevais  stake  park;  St

Recommendations

To

Accept/ Reject

Comments

Target date of action/ completion

John's  Road  zebra  crossing;  Le Rocquier safer routes to school; ; Active Membership Survey.

T&E

For  the  policy  development underpinning  Prior  Year  Basis  (PYB) Tax Reform, a survey was set up (and analysed in-house). Including hard copy printing  and  translation  services. Thirteen focus group sessions were also conducted.

SPPP

The department has carried out surveys in  the  following  areas:  sustainable transport  survey;  St  Brelade's  Bay; Cyril  Le  Marquand  House  use;  Our Hospital draft supplementary guidance; South Hill use.

 A survey and two focus groups were commissioned to understand behaviours and  views  of  Islanders  during  the second  wave  of  the  pandemic.  This ranged from mask-wearing to the best forms of communications.

2020 Island Plan Review

In  2020  Island  Plan  Review  has "commissioned surveys, collated high- quality data and listened to Islanders' priorities"  through  the  support  of  a communications  lead  supporting following  workstreams.  : Call  for Sites,  St  Helier  Urban  Character Appraisal, St Brelade Urban Character Appraisal,  Employment  Land  Study, Infrastructure  Capacity  Study, Integrated  Landscape  and  Seascape Character  Appraisal,  Coastal  National Park  Review,  Public  Realm  and Movement  Strategy,  Historic Environment Review.

Recommendations

To

Accept/ Reject

Comments

Target date of action/ completion

Our Hospital

Alongside  the  regular,  and  copious, correspondence  received  by  the programme team from Islanders, there have  been  two  Islandwide  calls  for action  (sites  for  the  hospital  and nominations for the Citizen's Panel), a survey on shortlisted sites and a virtual public exhibition.