Submission - Population and Migration - Jersey Hospitality Association - 1 July 2019

Jersey Hospitality Association – 1st July 2019

1. We understand that the current levels of inward migration are unsustainable in the long term of the island and would agree that reducing the reliance on inward migration would be a sensible way forward. We would however emphasise the importance of the ability to bring in both seasonal staff and those coming to fulfil the roles which, even after concerted and collaborative local recruitment and training programs, can't meet the demand from the local market. Above all, Jersey requires a balanced society to enable it to be sustainable.
2. A) This concept in principle seems sound, but we would ask that the quality of life afforded to residents by hospitality be taken into account. The industry delivers more value to those living and working in Jersey than the traditional measures of GVA.

2. The concept could put pressure on recruiting essential employees as it becomes another hurdle for potential staff to overcome when considering the island to work on island. There also needs to be a fair opportunity for essential staff to be able to bridge to permanent residency.
3. An understanding of the severity of the criminal record would be good to know. Does anyone with a record instantly get turned away? While we understand a desire to keep people who have committed some bad crimes out of the island, speeding or parking fines can become part of a record too.
4. I can't foresee an issue with this

3. Currently, the ageing demographic (b) the associated costs and the need to fund these through taxation seem to be driving fiscal policy (a). If tax revenue is primarily from individuals then it will drive a (selective) population increase with cost implications for all of the other listed considerations (c-i). It also creates an even bigger problem down the road. However, if tax revenue can come from sources that do not require a growth in population, then the vicious-cycle can be broken. We suspect that most of Jersey's competing islands are encountering the same problem.

1. It needs to factor in the quality of life our industry provides to the island, not just the financial aspect.
2. An aging demographic will lead to less of the island of working age, as well as an increase of demand on those working. It should also be noted that there is currently an emphasis on personal tax to provide for them, with corporate tax not helping to support the aging demographic.

h) Work and housing controls. Work controls currently are currently denying all applications for registered permissions as a standard response. This extra pressure on our industries is beginning to cause significant problems, with the island moving to a state similar to guernsey where venues are shutting through lack of staff. Housing goes hand in hand with this, where available affordable housing doesn't exist.

4. We emphasise the need to not use a financial measure to gauge importance of industry or where the restrictions are put in place. Historically, the island has used migrants to staff its industry. 50 years ago the figure was 80%, now it is about 30%. We are moving strongly towards a more local staffing measure, but we do still rely on outside skill and labour coming into the island to staff our facilities. If we lost this workforce, and the ability to operate our hospitality venues, the level of life we enjoy, from food and drink offerings, to attractions, and importantly connectivity off island would be lost. The island would become winter all year round or worse. Long term thi9s would damage other industries who attract essential employees here with the lifestyle they can enjoy. To conclude, we would ask the Terms of Refence to consider what a balanced and sustainable population would look like and also make reference to Future Jersey.