Transcript - Performance and Estate Management - Director General for Justice and Home Affairs - 26 April 2021

Public Accounts Committee

Public Hearing

Witness: Director General, Justice and Home Affairs

Monday, 26th April 2021

Panel:

Deputy I. Gardiner of St. Helier (Chair) Connétable K. Shenton-Stone of St. Martin Senator T.A. Vallois

Connétable J.E. Le Maistre of Grouville Connétable R. Vibert of St. Peter

Mr. A. Lane

Mr. G. Phipps

Dr. H. Miles

Mr. P. van Bodegom

Ms. L. Pammet, Comptroller and Auditor General

Witnesses:

Mr. J. Blazeby, Director General, Justice and Home Affairs

Ms. K. Briden, Group Director for Public Protection and Law Enforcement.

[14:02]

Deputy I. Gardiner of St. Helier (Chair):

Good afternoon, everyone, and welcome to the public hearing with the Director General, Justice and Home Affairs, Mr. Blazeby. I would like to introduce the Public Accounts Committee members who are present for the public hearing. I am Deputy Inna Gardiner , Chair of the Public Accounts Committee, Constable of St. Martin , the Vice Chair is online. With me in the room, Mr. Graeme 1

Phipps , lay member, Dr. Helen Miles , lay member, Constable of St. Peter and Mr. Paul van Bodegom, lay member. Online is Senator Vallois, the Constable of Grouville and also Comptroller and Auditor General, Lynn Pammet. Would you like to introduce yourself and your team, please?

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

Thank you, Chair, and good afternoon. My name is Julian Blazeby, I am the Director General for Justice and Home Affairs and I am joined today by my colleague Kate Briden.

Group Director for Public Protection and Law Enforcement:

Kate Briden, Group Director for Public Protection and Law Enforcement in Justice and Home Affairs.

Deputy I. Gardiner :

Thank you. We will start with the questions. The first question, the first part of the questioning, will be about estates management as per the Public Accounts Committee review. The question: to what extent will you consult on the public estate strategy 2021 to 2035, what specific input did you provide and was this taken into account?

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

Thank you. In terms of the public estates strategy, and you have mentioned the dates, in my role as the Director General I am member of the executive leadership team, chaired by the chief executive. We meet regularly, most weeks, and the estate strategy, along with other similar types of strategies and policies come through that meeting structure often before they go into other governance structures, for example, the Council of Ministers. So in relation to the public estates strategy we were consulted initially late 2019 and then again in March of 2020 and again at the end of 2020. Obviously there was interruption because of COVID and I suspect we may be using that rationale for a number of delays through business over the last year, as you would appreciate. So that strategy led and brought to the meeting by I.H.E. (Infrastructure, Housing and Environment), or was G.H.E. (Growth, Housing and Environment) at the time, now I.H.E. It was brought to us, we had the opportunity as individual director generals and as a meeting structure to comment on that. To feedback, to challenge and then go away again for another iteration and further consultation and then brought back on sign off. From an individual point of view as a director general of a department I am certainly welcome of the more collaborative approach in terms of having a public estate strategy as opposed to a single department pushing forward. For example, in my department with an isolated view on estates over the next number of years to add in a more joined-up, cohesive approach. I certainly fed that back at the time. I was confident that I had the opportunity to feed back any observations on behalf of my department and felt engaged, in answer to your question.

Deputy I. Gardiner :

Thank you. Would you be able to provide any examples for the specific input needs from your department that you raised at the executive leadership team or with G.H.E. at that time that has been incorporated in the estate strategy?

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

I think overall it was because across the estates in relation to the Justice and Home Affairs Department, we have got a mix of estates as I think you probably know from property that is looked after by Jersey Property Holdings to property that is not. We have rental property and we have owned governmental property. We also have property that is starting to fail in terms of its longevity and requires renewal and refreshment. So to be able to have a conversation around how on a long- term view we can have a more cohesive and joined-up approach to estates management and the obvious example is an ambulance station that is beyond its lifespan and, indeed, the fire and rescue station. How do we ensure that our voice is heard in the longer-term Island strategy that takes into account 2 significant public buildings in relation to critical emergency services? I was able to raise those issues with colleagues and ensure that it was seen as part of the broader estate strategy and to take into account the individual needs of my department. I am confident other colleagues were in a similar position. Then, of course, as that developed and they there is a Corporate Asset Management Board that was established as well, I actually then had the opportunity to have one of my senior team representing the department at that meeting. Again, it gave us an opportunity to have our say and give feedback in relation to our long-term estate strategy where we needed it.

Deputy I. Gardiner :

Can you see any missed opportunities that were not addressed in the strategy?

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

I do not think I can identify any particular missed opportunities. As I say, because it is the first time there has been such a strategy then actually there is nothing to compare it against in relation to previously in the Island and, indeed, from previous experience I have had elsewhere. So I welcome the fact that this strategy was brought forward. I think it is really important having a number of D.G.s (director generals) working independently in siloes looking at their own individual estates as opposed to having a strategy that at least brought people together to have conversations and have a wider and longer-term approach in relation to investment, capital investment, and property was welcome. So I have not personally identified any particular gaps or missing opportunities, I am sure like any strategy it is worthy of revision because that is what strategies should be. They should be able to be reviewed and revised as it goes forward, particularly because it is a new strategy and it has nothing to be benchmarked to here in Jersey anyway.

Deputy I. Gardiner :

Yes, as a committee, we welcome the estate strategy we have been waiting for for 2½ years and I do think that as we go forward we will always tend to revise, review it and make it better but, as a start, it has started finally, we do have it. With regard to your written response to our questions prior to the public hearing about assessment of land and property department needs, we have a couple of  follow  up  enquiries. The first,  if  I  have understood correctly,  there  are  no new  property requirements anticipated in your department this coming year. However, based on learning from COVID experiences, notifications to existing sites are likely to be proposed. When will these proposed notifications be submitted?

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

As you say, Chair, in the immediate 12 months there is no requirements for any particular new property. Learning from COVID, we have had to bring in and make a number of changes to our property to enable staff to manage their well-being in a more physically distanced and appropriate way because of COVID. So we have to bring in, for example, some gazebos or some additional space into the ambulance station to enable staff and colleagues to change, to make sure their hygiene is dealt with properly. We are looking at our requirements at the moment because we are obviously still in a pandemic and although we are in a much better place now as we all know, we are using the opportunity to review the experience over the last 12, 14 months to ensure we get the right approach going forward, not just in the immediacy but for the longer term. Not yet identified in terms of what is it we need to do. A number of the services were fine and managed within their estate, particularly because, where we could, we used the opportunity as we know for colleagues to work from home or to work from different locations, so that eased any pressure in relation to physical distancing and the opportunity to keep critical business going. However, as I say, we will keep it under review and discuss it with colleagues over the coming weeks and months as to what we need.

Deputy I. Gardiner :

So currently we do not see any notifications being submitted. The only requirements for a new site for ambulance, fire and rescue, we understand that you do not anticipate any other new site requirements in the next 5 or 10 years. When do you anticipate the specific requirements for this new facility to be submitted for consideration?

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

We have had quite a lot of work in relation to the ambulance and fire and rescue station and that has been and that has been very much involving the heads of service for both those services and staff, their senior teams and wider staff, and indeed senior colleague within the department. Of course, the Minister has made it very clear he wants to see a joint fire and rescue and ambulance station that will generate greater collaboration and integration between those 2 services, which we very much welcome. We have done a lot of preparation, detailed analysis and work because, as I am sure you would appreciate, Chair, to consider moving either of those stations is critical around response times. So there may be a preferred or different site elsewhere but actually if the response times are not at least matching the current response times so it makes things quite difficult in relation to saving lives and responding quickly to fires and those people that need medical help. But that has been quite critical in terms of our analysis and our demand driven work to identify where best the opportunities are. We have spent quite a bit of time, effort and money working with consultants and colleagues to identify a need. What we have definitely worked through is the fact that both those stations do require replacement. The ambulance station is beyond its time now, it is quite old, it is small, it is quite challenging for staff to work in there, they do a great job of managing in the current estate but it is small and difficult to use, and particularly in COVID that did rather expose that. Similarly with the fire and rescue service, that has been built around a listed building and has grown over time. So we do have a great opportunity to combine the 2, which will bring efficiencies in terms of finances and operational efficiencies. But, of course, we are constrained by planning, by ministerial decisions that, of course, are quite appropriate and, indeed, identifying the correct purpose for the current site. We have been through an evaluation process, an options appraisal and what it looks like in relation to response times, and optimum response times, to make sure the emergency service can deliver appropriately their response. The current site at Rouge Bouillon is the most appropriate site. We also understand that there are competing demands for that location through Children, Young People, Education, Skills, the schools challenge in St. Helier . So those colleagues are working through their evaluation and site preferences as well. We consulted with colleagues through the Corporate Asset Management Board, the board I referred to earlier, and we are just pausing our work while we allow colleagues in  education to work through their site recommendations before we can take it up to the Regeneration Steering Group and get some direction forward which will hopefully take us through into the planning stage. So we have funding to enable to us achieve that at the moment and realistically, depending on political decisions and the decision-making process, if the Rouge Bouillon site is chosen as the preferred site for the fire and ambulance station then we will be looking to make progress through planning later this year and then start looking to hopefully make changes next year for a full build.

[14:15]

Deputy I. Gardiner :

If I understood correctly, your preferable site is the Rouge Bouillon area because of the times of the response, but we all know that we have competitive needs. How does it work with estate management strategy? Which needs will be prioritised? The needs putting children first, the school and educational needs or - and I accept we are talking about people's lives - the ambulance and fire rescue services? How is the estate management strategy helping you to prioritise the needs?

It is a really good question, Chair. It is certainly one that we have discussed both within ourselves and indeed through the Corporate Asset Management Board and with other senior colleagues. One of the benefits for me of having the estate strategy and therefore the Corporate Asset Management Board is that we are having these conversations jointly as opposed to in a silo, in effect, because we could have forged ahead and just said: "That is what we want to do with ministerial support" and then it would have got to the stage where there would have been a little bit of a hiatus, I am sure, where politically those discussions would have had to have taken place. We, as you have rightly identified and I have articulated, looked at a number of criteria, one of the main ones being around saving lives. We looked at, for example, Warwick Farm or Bellozanne, that were quite appropriate sites but then all the analysis was carried out using some good analytical software as well as practical manoeuvres in relation to fire and ambulance on 999 blue light runs and the response times were increased if those sites were going to be used. That took us back to the current Rouge Bouillon site. The conversations we are having through the Corporate Asset Management Board and with colleagues in education is: so what does the broader picture look like for education? What is the better site for education, is it Rouge Bouillon or is there a better offer within the St. Helier footprint? I think I am right in saying from an educational point of view it is recognised it has to be within that fairly small catchment area. We are getting some positive feedback from colleagues in I.H.E. and from a estates strategy point of view that there will be enhanced opportunities other than Rouge Bouillon for an educational site for a school. As I say, we are at the stage where we have done our assessment in progress, we are now waiting for colleagues in C.Y.P.E.S. (Children, Young People, Education, Skills) to get to that position where they can come back and look at what other options are there that would generate an enhanced offer, putting children first and for education.

Deputy I. Gardiner :

I would like to hear the options because as a Deputy in this district I am thinking about the catchment area, we have the Springfield school that requires the proper renovation, we have Rouge Bouillon that we are talking about in central town with increased housing and it would be interesting which site would be considered better for the new build school. What is your second best if the Rouge Bouillon school was not going forward for fire and rescue services?

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

The alternative site would probably be Bellozanne. That would require some further activity because there are premises there at the moment, so that would probably require taking down and rebuilding, which is not a surprise in such a small area. But, as I say, that does increase response times by about one minute, 30 seconds or so. But we are absolutely cognisant of the fact that there needs to be the work done through C.Y.P.E.S. and other colleagues. I am hearing, as I say, some very

positive soundings in relation to alternatives within the area of St. Helier . I do not have that detail as you would expect but that is through I.H.E. and education colleagues.

Deputy I. Gardiner :

Thank you for your answers. I will move to the next one. Following your recent response, to date you have only flagged customs and immigration, health and safety as being under review for implementation in the foreseeable future. When will this review be completed and will you provide specific details related to this requirement? What are the specific such requirements and anticipated cost for this new facility?

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

Is that in relation to customs and immigration, did you say?

Deputy I. Gardiner : Yes.

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

I think our reference was to the fact that under the new office build for Government, as part of that project every department has been asked what can quite appropriately be brought into the new office building, the new premises that is going to be built. From a customs and immigration point of view, currently based in Maritime House with small facilities, at the post office at the airport and at the harbour. Working again with customs and immigration colleagues, it was identified that quite a lot of that service could be moved into to the new office project, into the new office building, but there would be a requirement probably for a small element of operational staff to be present particularly at the harbour. For example, there are custody services at the harbour if people are detained and they can be securely held there while they are searched or other activities. Again, we are working with colleagues in the Corporate Asset Management Board and I.H.E. to say what is that requirement, how big is that requirement? As I say, we have already got a footprint at the harbour so if we retained that could we relocate the rest of customs and immigration into the new office build?

Deputy I. Gardiner :

I understand. Okay, thank you very much. I will now pass the questioning to Graeme Phipps , who is with me in the room.

Mr. G. Phipps :

Yes, hello, Mr Blazeby. Thank you for your comments. I listened with interest of the advantages of your Corporate Asset Management Board. There are a couple of areas that sit outside of that. In

your letter to us you mentioned that the fire and rescue estates lie outside of the Jersey Property Holdings for, for example, internal maintenance. Likewise the same for the prison service estate, including the 13 domestic dwellings. Is this still the best solution? How do you consider this is handled better by having them isolated from Jersey Property Holdings rather than part of it?

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

Certainly, good afternoon. Nice to meet you virtually. Yes, it is an interesting question because I think it is fair to say, albeit I as the director general and this new department, albeit a couple of years old now, have inherited the situation you have just described. If you are asking me is it one I support and want to see continued going forward, the answer to that is no. As I say, it is one I have inherited. I am very clear across the variety of services in Justice and Home Affairs that we have quite a clear purpose in terms of our delivery and output in the Island, around keeping the Island safe, secure and supporting the common strategic priorities. Is it within my department's professional capability to manage estate? I think it is fair to say the answer is no. I would not want to argue otherwise. We are working with the Corporate Asset Management Board at the moment and colleagues I.H.E. to absolutely see how we can unpick that relationship and ensure that the fire and rescue estate, where at all possible, goes under the remit of Jersey Property Holdings. There are maybe some elements of it that due to operational reasons may be appropriate to retain it because of the skills it for example, we have a firehouse there where the firefighters train, there is lots of smoke and lots of heat and flames in it, it may be that is a specialist requirement, but, again, where it is not needed in terms of speciality then I will be very comfortable with J.P.H. (Jersey Property Holdings) overseeing that estate. Similarly with the prison service. As you say, 13 residential properties, all of which are occupied at the moment. That is very much a legacy arrangement whereby going back a number of years now, possibly decades, it was a requirement for prison officers - or a smaller number of prison officers - to be very close to the prison. When I say "close", these properties I think you can probably throw a stone at the fence. So they can get there operationally quickly. The environment has changed dramatically so that requirement is not necessary anymore now and I am very keen, along with other colleagues, where there are residential properties in departments to see what is the best way forward. Is it to continue to get a rental income from it, is it better to sell the estate, is it better to use it in some other way? So very keen to have that influence and oversight from J.P.H. We are not resistant to it, we are working with them to ensure that they can hopefully manage it.

Mr. G. Phipps :

That makes very good sense. In the meantime, while they are being managed separately, how do you ensure the economies of scale, sharing earnings, et cetera, particularly in the area of maintenance, for example, which is quite a standard procedure in general? While you are looking at the bigger question we just talked about, in the interim, how do you take advantage of some of these things?

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

Yes, and of course that can be quite challenging where it is a relatively small market in terms of some elements of those services where it is quite specialised. I know for a fact in a prison there is only one provider in the Island that can deliver a certain maintenance opportunity for a particular part of the prison estate. So that then becomes quite challenging in terms of appearance, in terms of making sure we quite rightly deal with all the rules and the commercial opportunities. We do consult our colleagues in I.H.E. because I see those as the specialists from a maintenance point of view, particularly because of Jersey Property Holdings. Indeed, we are reviewing our contracts from a best value point as well. I am keen to try and move it as quick as I can into the space of I.H.E. and Jersey Property Holdings because I recognise they have greater expertise and opportunity in terms of that delivery as you described.

Mr. G. Phipps :

Thank you, that makes very good sense, thanks.

Deputy I. Gardiner :

Thank you, Mr Blazeby, I am really welcoming your answers that the fire and rescue services and properties are looked at at the Corporate Asset Management Board level. It hopefully will be incorporated in one maintenance and management estate. Do you have any timescale when it can happen and if these properties have been added to the Concerto or would be added to the Concerto management system?

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

Chair, I am unable at the moment to give clarity in terms of that. We are very keen to use the asset management system appropriately and get everything over to Concerto as quick as possible. That project is being led by I.H.E. colleagues. The only commitment I can give to you and your panel today is that we are absolutely behind that initiative, we are not resistant to it at all and we are very keen to ensure that we can move as much as possible with the exceptions I have mentioned, because there may be some operational security issues, over to that system.

Deputy I. Gardiner :

The general approach is very, very welcome because we are all working towards breaking the siloes and to have one estate in one place. From your written answer you said you joined the Corporate Asset Management Board in January 2021, how often do the Corporate Asset Management Board met?

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

Monthly. My Group Director who is on the call, Kate Briden, she is the Justice and Home Affairs representative who attends that meeting.

Deputy I. Gardiner :

Okay. Can you please update the committee if there are specific items, objectives, of your department that were raised in January, February, March or in coming meetings of the Corporate Asset Management Board? How are the meetings going? We would like to know a bit more about the Corporate Asset Management Board's work.

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs: Sorry, you would like some detail now, did you say?

Deputy I. Gardiner : Yes, please.

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

Shall I hand over to Kate Briden who is on the panel, that might be best.

Group Director for Public Protection and Law Enforcement:

Hello, Chair. As we said in our response, I joined the Corporate Asset Management Board in January as the Justice and Home Affairs representative. It was actually at that first meeting that we presented the outcome of our feasibility study to the new ambulance, fire and rescue station project which Julian has talked about in some detail already so I will not repeat that. But the key thing for me about that Corporate Asset Management Board approach was it was a chance to, at officer level, present our project to colleagues across government. It is chaired by the Director General of I.H.E. with representatives from the major departments you would expect in terms of Health and C.Y.P.E.S. in particular, as well as I.H.E. It was a very good discussion and I think for me it was a very early indication of the benefit of the Corporate Asset Management Board in terms of it then was able to thrash out the aspects that Julian has just talked about in terms of how we need to work in partnership with C.Y.P.E.S. and the view of schools, as students discussed, and make sure that we progress hand in hand and that there is sensible solutions all round under the estate strategy for all of the government property needs. It is also in my view a very good way for officers to prepare for presenting those projects to the Regeneration Steering Group, which is the political body for oversight of the estate strategy.

Deputy I. Gardiner :

Thank you very much for your answer, it is very clear. Since you joined in January, during these 3 months, what connection and communication was between the Corporate Asset Management Board and the Regeneration Steering Group? Did something happen on the connection between the 2?

[14:30]

Group Director for Public Protection and Law Enforcement:

I am not sure I am necessarily best placed to answer in full. In terms of our project, so the combined ambulance, fire and rescue station, that was briefed to the Regeneration Steering Group in April. Again on the basis of the information that Julian has given already, in terms of the G.H.E. part of that work being completed but the C.Y.P.E.S. work will still be under way and for that particular partnership of projects, that would be due to go back to a future R.S.G. (Regeneration Steering Group) meeting. I have not been sighted on the progress of other things from the Corporate Asset Management Board to R.S.G. because other officers in other departments would have taken that forward themselves.

Deputy I. Gardiner :

Just for clarity, if you can help - and if not I understand - how does the process of communication between the Corporate Asset Management Board to the Regeneration Steering Group and back work? Are you involved or is it going through other officer level? Who is leading it?

Group Director for Public Protection and Law Enforcement:

It primarily goes from the Chair of the Corporate Asset Management Board, as the acting Director General for I.H.E., through the ministerial support unit in terms of arranging and briefing the right things into the agenda and responding to ministerial requests as well as officer suggestion, that is my understanding.

Deputy I. Gardiner :

Thank you very much. I will now pass the questioning to the Constable of St. Peter .

Connétable R. Vibert of St. Peter :

Thank you. Good afternoon, Director General. Over the last 3 years expenditure on property maintenance fell each year from £366,604 in 2018 to £201,101 in 2020. Particularly the 2020 amount seems a relatively small amount when we consider the property portfolio you have. Can you explain the reductions that have been undertaken?

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

Thank you, Connétable . I think the straightforward answer is because of the challenging last 12, 14 months, because of COVID, there has been not as much work carried out and maintenance as we would like. It has not been able to take place because of the restrictions. We have not been able to get those people in to do it. All the services have been so challenged by having to operate in a different way that it has been less easy to get the maintenance in. So essential maintenance has continued and what we are doing is we are putting a lot of focus in certainly Q1 this year to catch up where it is necessary. I am confident that where there has been essential maintenance required then that has clearly been taking place to keep critical services going but it has been, as I am sure you will appreciate, challenging to carry out more routine maintenance. I think that is the reason why there has been a significant reduction in terms of the spend in that area.

The Connétable of St. Peter :

It is a knock-on effect from COVID, in many cases.

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs: Yes, that is correct.

The Connétable of St. Peter :

I think we have the same problem in the Parish. It is catch-up in the next sort of year and 18 months. Also, have all your buildings undergone disability access assessments and are recommended provisions being incorporated into these buildings this year? I understand COVID again may have impacted that.

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

Yes, again that is the disability assessment that is being led by I.H.E. colleagues. There are 2 approaches to this, as I am sure you will understand. One is the physical estate to make sure that is compliant. I think the language is "best endeavours" in terms of legislation, particularly if we are dealing with a building that is listed, for example, it becomes quite challenging in relation to disability. But that assessment is taking place and where there is work that has been identified or things that need to be done then that is in train, so we have good support from colleagues and I.H.E. But to build upon that, the other element is the behavioural and cultural issue around the broad range of disabilities in relation to our estate both from an internal point of view and our staff, and obviously where there are customer-facing access issues. I.H.E. are working with Liberate. The business on- Island are going to support this initiative to help us give a broader cultural and behavioural disability and discrimination assessment of our estate and other departments' assessments as well. I know that next month in May they are certainly attending at least 2 of the services and they will roll that programme through to ensure all the services have been assessed so we can bring both the physical estate and the cultural and behavioural assessment together to ensure, with best endeavours, we can make the improvements necessary.

The Connétable of St. Peter :

That is excellent. You have some relatively old properties. Have you identified any other risks that we should be aware of? Or have any risks been identified in those buildings?

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

No particular risks. An obvious one that I hear about a lot since I have been in post is asbestos because of the history of the use of that material but we do not have any of those particular problems. We are obviously fortunate enough to have a relatively new police station. Maritime House is a good estate. We have already talked about the fire and rescue and ambulance station that hopefully there are moves afoot to improve so we are keeping the lights on there, metaphorically speaking. The prison is going through some redevelopment as we know. I am not aware of, and we have not had anything raised that is on our risk register, for example, that is critical and therefore generating a risk either to our staff or to members of the public, or those who use our services.

The Connétable of St. Peter : Excellent, thank you very much.

Deputy I. Gardiner :

Thank you. I will just check now with all members of the committee if we have any follow-up questions around the estate management. I will first go around the table here if anybody ... Nothing. If anybody can indicate online. No. I am grateful for the answers and we will move now to the second part of our public hearing to the performance management, and I will hand the questioning to Senator Vallois, please.

Senator T.A. Vallois:

Good afternoon, Julian. We meet again. The next line of questioning is around the performance management. You provided us with a written response around the target operating model for your department. Could you advise when this was implemented and what the most significant changes were please?

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

The target operating model has been quite a journey and interrupted by COVID. We embarked upon the first phase in the target operating model in late 2018, and that was looking at the tier 3 staff, so we carried out a consultation period and embarked upon that target operating model then. That enabled us to appoint heads of service, because we have a number of acting heads of service, and get those stabilised. We then were keen to push on with the target operating model in July and summer 2019, however we did delay that because we were looking at a joined-up business support model. So each service had a mixed approach to how administrative and other support was delivered to their services. We were keen to generate a single corporate business support that delivered a more consistent and coherent support to each service. We paused the target operating model business while we looked at the business support. That then got us to a position where we were able to consult on the business support and then of course we lost 2020 through COVID. However, credit to everybody involved across the department. We pushed on with tiers 4, 5 and 6 in early 2020 before the pandemic hit. That clearly was then stalled but we did manage to complete the consultation and indeed deliver later on that year the tiers 4 to 6. From our point of view, the target operating model has now been completed, which is good. Which enables staff ... and I know the senior teams across all the services are pleased because they want to get into a position where they can just settle the organisations down and concentrate on core business. I am pleased to say that is now happening. It has been quite a long drawn-out process but it is in place and now starting to deliver. In terms of the benefits of the model, then that is less evident at the moment because we are very close to it being completed and embedding. But there are some benefits and senior heads of service identify and recognise those already. We are seeing greater collaboration across the services. We are seeing flatter and leaner management structures that enhances greater co- ordination across each of the services, and indeed within services, and ease of communication. There is less hierarchy in the services, which means decisions are made quicker. Indeed there is greater engagement from top to bottom in terms of the teams. There are some positive benefits from that.

Senator T.A. Vallois:

Understanding how the benefits are seen, not necessarily totally evident, as you stated, but you are seeing some benefits. Can you explain or give some form of an example of how or whether the target operating model has gained any benefits for Islanders, for the public in which your department serves?

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

I can, yes. Some of them are less tangible than others but if I take, for example, people who require an ambulance or require some form of pretty low-level medical intervention, there has been some really good clarity of work in between the fire and ambulance service over the last probably ... certainly over the last year or so but probably increased over the last 6 months whereby the ambulance staff have been refreshing and training a number of firefighters at a basic level of ... it is not basic first aid, it is slightly enhanced first aid, but they deliver the training. They have been jointly training together and the fire and rescue service therefore are attending more incidents where they are helping people who have fallen out of bed, for example, or they have such a low-level medical requirement that the ambulance service can use the fire and rescue service to attend to that. That enables the paramedics in the ambulances to go to more serious incidents, and ensures they meet their response times. A combined effort in terms of training, in terms of response has worked well, and that is one example. Other colleagues, looking across training, for example, how can we bring training together because they have some generic training across all services, whether it is diversity and inclusion training, whether it is cybersecurity training, how can we start to deliver this? Instead of delivering it in silos deliver it collectively together, and there is some good work ongoing in relation to that. I am confident that the heads of service are working together to identify greater opportunities and those will ... again confident they will develop as we go forward.

Senator T.A. Vallois:

That is helpful. Just to clarify, just for my own thinking in terms of your answer. The direct benefit that you can see that you gave an example is more so to do with training. Is that a direct result of the target operating model? Would that not have happened prior to target operating model changes?

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

It partly would have done, but part of the target operating model we see is really embedding the strategic objectives of the department. For the first time the department - obviously it is a new department - has had some very clear strategic objectives. There are four and I think you have probably seen them. To create a modern and effective service that works in a collaborative and integrated way is enhanced by the training example I have given. I have mentioned the operational effects in terms of fire and rescue but there is other joint working where the prison service is working with probation; okay, they are not necessarily in my department. The customs and immigration have worked closely with the police and are working closely with the police and looking at different initiatives that would not necessarily have been developed without the target operating model. I do however emphasise it is in quite an early stage. Of course the other example I touched upon is the business support unit. Without the target operating model that would not have occurred. We had some services with a business support manager, others with no business support manager. Some services with a PA and others without. So we have brought together a number of members of staff and created one unit that delivers a greater consistency of administrative support across the department. So that is a definite benefit from the operating model.

Senator T.A. Vallois:

Considering the end time in terms of the implementation of your target operating model for your department, how much time do you deem necessary for you to give it that time to bed in and assess whether the benefits that you are seeing are a direct result of a target operating model or what would you deem effective in terms of your department?

I did mention there has also been some efficiency benefit as well as a result of the operating model, and I will come on to answer your question in terms of looking forward. So we have been able to, for example, although it has not made a huge savings but what it has enabled us to do is recruit to posts and consume that investment that has enhanced departments. That is one of the benefits of the operating model. I did mention the flatter structures. They are generating less operational tangible benefit but greater benefits for the service in terms of the way they are managing problems.

[14:45]

We see 2021, this current year, as an opportunity, as I mentioned at the beginning of this input, to really see each service within the department start to settle down, start to hopefully move away from the focus on the pandemic. Customs and immigration have got the Brexit challenges and continue to work through them but hopefully those will ease and start to ensure that the benefits can continue to be materialised. I would like to think at the end of 2021 we would be able to identify greater collaboration and integration as a result of the target operating model. Indeed each service will have examples of where, as a result of the model, they have been able to deal with different challenges or different aspects of their business in an enhanced way.

Senator T.A. Vallois:

I appreciate your department is fairly complex with the very different service models that are in place, so I do understand that, but in terms of complete implementation of the target operating model, I understand from your answer to us that there was further work on the combined control room and the police that was still ongoing. When do you envisage this being finalised and how does that affect the already embedded work that has been done so far?

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

I think it is fair to say from a technical point of view the target operating model has finished and is complete. Then, as you have rightly identified, it is a question of getting all those benefits embedded and then start to realise those benefits. But in terms of technically, the model has been completed. You touched on 2 areas there. One is the police and one is the combined control room. From a police point of view, you will be aware indeed from the conversations at Scrutiny this morning and as we well know, the police are operationally independent so I will not, hopefully you will understand, and respectfully I will not comment on the police. They are going through a staff review in terms of police staff, civilian staff, and the chief police officer will comment on that if you engage him appropriately so it is not for me to comment. Hopefully you will respect that point. In terms of the combined control room, that was an initiative that started a few years ago - time flies - and we are still working through ... we have Government Plan funding for it in terms of getting the technology

into the room that will enable hopefully one technical solution to both fire, ambulance and police calls. In that project the plan is to deliver at the end of this year, maybe slightly into Q1 of 2022, that will see us having one single platform that answers all 999 calls and calls for emergency services, which does not happen currently. We have 2 different systems albeit they are in the same location at police headquarters. Secondly, we have a staffing model that removes fire, ambulance and police personnel and has a model that enables anybody to answer any call, which will make a more efficient and effective way to handle the calls for the better service for the people who are ringing for emergency service to support them and give better outcomes for Islanders who require those services.

Senator T.A. Vallois:

You also stated that the service senior leadership team regularly review the effectiveness of their staff structures and ensure that the target operating model roles are working in practice. What mechanisms do you use? How do you measure and track this?

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

There are a number of different meetings in any organisation, as you would expect, so I have a monthly senior leadership team meeting I chair with all heads of service and we have standard agenda items, as you would appreciate. We also have a change board meeting, which is a separate meeting where we can oversee and manage change corporately. There is an example where, as a department as opposed to individual services, we are now looking across the piece making sure we can either share good practice or identify where there is overlap or economies of scale. So that happens. As part of those conversations, heads of service have identified whether there are any particular challenges or where the benefits are. As I say, we do not have a list of performance measures around the target operating model. They are maturing over time. Services obviously hold their own leadership team meetings, management team meetings on a monthly basis. Some of them do it more frequently where again they are assessing with their senior teams themselves the impact of any changes, not just the target operating model changes but of course normal operational changes or any other changes that are coming out of government to ensure they can be embraced and managed appropriately. There is good dialogue on a regular basis, both with myself as the director general with heads of service and with heads of service and their teams to ensure these things are implemented and where the benefits have been identified they can be realised.

Senator T.A. Vallois:

That is helpful. Just to clarify, in your answer you referred to a change board in your department. That is to align with the corporate framework of the T.O.M. (target operating model); is that correct?

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

Yes, that is right. Again, this is about good governance for me. There are a number of initiatives. So if I take I.T.S. (integrated technology solutions), for example, that is a significantly invested programme of work coming from Government and that has an impact on all departments. The change board I set up enables us to do 2 things. It enables us to manage programmes like I.T.S. through our own change board to make sure there is a coherent and consistent message from Government, in through my department, down to heads of service and therefore services, and where there is a requirement of us to support that, which there is, whether it is a change champion, whether we are going to embark upon a series of changes around systems then, as I say, we have a process to manage it from a good governance point of view. Secondly, services have their own projects in their own right and have their own change programmes. I am quite clear that it is not my job, as the director general of the department, to interfere with individual service's own projects and changes but where they have implications for Government or indeed across the department or other departments or where there are benefits of bringing in and highlighting those projects and changes to the meeting I chair, so we can look at where there is competing demand around H.R. (human resources) resource, whether there are some challenges around the finance, or whether there is project management resource, and then we can have a conversation and prioritise. Hence we meet monthly from a fairly high-level overview to ensure that those significant projects are on course; we are not competing for a small amount of resource and therefore we can align appropriately. Hopefully that makes sense as well.

Senator T.A. Vallois:

That does, it is helpful and helpful for the next question really. We are aware that every department has a business plan. You have particular objectives in that business plan. I just wonder how, in particular, the objectives or the measuring of those objectives are driven by the feedback by the public or through the Common Strategic Policy.

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

I will try and do that in 2 parts, if you do not mind. Probably the latter one first. We had lots of conversations in the early days with the Minister, particularly our senior colleagues around the C.S.P. (Common Strategic Policy) because, as you will well know, Senator, Justice and Home Affairs does not feature in its own right across the Corporate Strategic Policy's priorities. Our departmental business plan therefore reflects the fact in the language certainly the Minister used, and I very much support and we use is, that all the activities that Justice and Home Affairs delivers across those services underpins and is a foundation upon which the C.S.P.s can safely build upon. Because if we have an environment that was not safe, if we had an environment from a crime point of view, if we had an environment that did not allow the economy to flourish because buildings were unsafe because of fire regulation, if we had an ambulance service that was not responding appropriately then it would be very difficult, I believe, and hopefully you understand, for those C.S.P.s to flourish because it would be quite difficult. So therefore we are not called out in our own right but we absolutely are a foundation to underpin all the C.S.P.s. I think that is a strong position to lay out from the start. The second element, you might just have to remind me, Senator. Sorry.

Senator T.A. Vallois:

It is the public feedback, how the public feedback is taken into account in terms of measuring your objectives for your business plan.

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

Thank you, yes. There are a number of ways we get feedback across the different services and they all are quite different from the Independent Prison Monitoring Board or the custody visitors into custody from the police point of view. We use the customer feedback management system that Government have set up, so that does feed into us and the customer feedback strategy. We have a member of Justice and Home Affairs who sits on that group so we get reporting on a regular basis and indeed I can see that this first quarter we had 22 items of feedback; 14 of which were compliments, which is great, 4 in customs and immigration, 10 in the ambulance service, 6 were complaints. Then we make sure that we adhere to the strategy and the feedback management system in terms of the timeliness of answering those complaints and looking at the feedback, if we do need to put improvements in place to make sure we do not get repetitive complaints. We do that. Ambulance have a positional level of feedback through Health and Community Services and several other colleagues. I have a whole list of feedback from different services, I will not read them out. The important thing is, there is that connectivity with the government feedback system. There are also the various complaints elements that come into it. We absolutely recognise we need to continue to improve. The only way we will do that is by not just the complaints but by the feedback and the compliments as well.

Senator T.A. Vallois:

That is really helpful. The sole purpose in terms of the OneGov structure and the expectations set out right at the beginning was try to reduce silo mentality. Can I ask from yourself, as director general for Justice and Home Affairs, how you prevent these restructured departments from falling into that silo mentality again and whether the target operating model underpins that very value of trying to make sure the collaboration continues?

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

COVID has been an amazing example. I appreciate it has been very unique but I have said on record, and certainly I have said to the Council of Ministers and the competent authority Ministers, that without the cross-departmental working throughout COVID, I think, we would have struggled. I played quite a significant role across various different departments. It would have been much more difficult, shall I say, if we had not embraced the cross-government, the One Government principles, in terms of collaboration and removing the silos you described. I think that has been hugely beneficial. I think those foundations were laid prior to COVID and so I found it quite easy to work with my colleagues through the executive leadership team meetings and through other forums where we would share good practice where we would identify where we could work together. I am confident that will continue. There are quite a lot of examples I have got where they will be working across the services in terms of fire regulation, in terms of the Island Plan. I know the fire and rescue service has been heavily involved in working with that and colleagues. Now I sense there is more of an openness to one department does not hold all the answers to their particular challenge. There is much more benefit by going out and seeking ideas, suggestions on how we can work together. Of course that has focused our minds by the efficiency savings and additional debt that COVID has brought upon the Island and the Government. That always focuses the mind in terms of trying to be more efficient and best use of public money. I absolutely support that. But I think overall, I have seen a real can-do attitude in terms of departments, director generals, but not just D.G.s, their senior teams and indeed our front line staff. Some of our front line staff have been amazing in terms of taking on new roles, grabbing opportunities and, of course, that provides them something different as well. I think overall I would suggest it is fairly early on in terms of that maturing to something more significant. I think the early signs and the green shoots are very promising.

Senator T.A. Vallois:

Thank you very much, Julian. I am going to pass you on to lay member, Adrian, for the next line of questioning.

Mr. A. Lane:

Good afternoon. Can I start by asking you about your business performance measures that are included in your operational business plan for 2021 please? Could you just talk us through briefly the process you have used for developing the baseline for those measures?

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

Thank you and good afternoon. Nice to meet you virtually as well, Adrian. I think I would like to start off by saying that the approach to performance is one that is on a journey and is maturing. It is certainly not fully mature yet by any stretch of the imagination. I certainly pay a compliment to colleagues in the S.P.P.P. (Strategic Policy, Performance and Population) who are leading on the performance framework. The actual overall performance framework, which we clearly align to because why would you not, from the Jersey Strategic Framework to the Jersey Performance Framework, both from the Island Plan right down to individual performance with "My Conversation My Goals". That golden thread, we absolutely are plugged into that. I think that strategic approach to performance is to be commended and I have worked in a number of different organisations in other jurisdictions where I have not seen it from top to bottom quite as clearly as that, albeit as I say, it is on a journey and it is very much at the start of that journey, I would suggest. That is the strategic headline.

[15:00]

 If I then go back a number of years. All the services have their own performance indicators and gather a range of performance statistics, as you would appreciate and they are all quite different, whether it is response times, whether it is number of fires, whether it how much revenue customs and immigration take each year, whether it is the amount of people that are taken from home to hospital with the ambulance service. I could go on. They have collected those in a variety of different ways but they have not always been reported in a coherent way. Indeed that was the position I inherited and the department inherited. I certainly do not say that in a pejorative or critical sense because it is just the way it has been. There has not been a huge amount of visibility and transparency in terms of annual reports from individual services, generally because there has not been a requirement. Again, I think the position we find ourselves in today is a much improved one where you reference the departmental business plan, it has much more clarity. We have then looked to form that with heads of service. We have looked at what performance measures they have used historically, where they will add value. Are they just indicators and they do not add value or is there something behind them? I think that whole process is maturing. The baseline figures you have got, and you can see in the reports, are taken from all the different services. Certainly, by any stretch of the imagination, not all of them but they are ones that we think are relevant and therefore members of the public and colleagues can see where they add value in terms of the output from the services.

Mr. A. Lane:

We should understand you filter these against the principle business objectives of the directorate.

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

That is correct, yes. There are many more indicators and stats that are generated through a variety of different systems.

Mr. A. Lane:

What drove the choice of using 2020 as the baseline for almost every measure?

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

That was done across government. That was not an individual choice in terms of the department. That was chosen across government. We clearly have previous performance activity going back before 2020, but it was chosen to baseline it 2020, so that is where we have pitched ours.

Mr. A. Lane:

Do you have any concerns about the use of 2020 in respect of your particular functions, given how odd a year 2020 was?

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

Sure, yes. I think the important thing is that we ... in fact, we were looking at our performance only last week and we have visibility. I always say I need to look back over the last 3 to 5 years of performance and we need to identify what trends are there. My colleagues will know I often ask the question: so what? So there could be some data, some indicators, some targets that we hit or miss, but what does that actually mean for Islanders? I recognise that 2020 will be an outlier in a number of ways in terms of performance, but when we are looking back at the ambulance data, for example, the trends do mirror the previous year. They will be either slightly higher or slightly less depending on the activity, but interestingly they are not dissimilar in terms of the profile over the 12-month period. I think as long as we are cognisant of the fact that 2020 was an outlier in terms of COVID and that is built into our thinking and, indeed, into our narrative, then hopefully that will not be any surprise for anybody and it is taken in the context it is meant.

Mr. A. Lane:

Do you have any specific concerns, then? You have highlighted areas where 2020 is valid. Any areas where you have concerns that it may not be valid in terms of then driving individual performance metrics to individuals?

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

I think the important part of my previous response to that question was we are alive to it and we understand it, and part of managing performance, is it not, is understanding what the data are telling you. So the fact that we can see that the data is different to the previous years, we know that there are some significant changes if I look at the operational effect. So a simple example would be an ambulance responding during the height of the pandemic last year would have to spend more time donning and doffing P.P.E. (personal protective equipment) for their staff and the protection of themselves and the patients. That is going to generate greater response times. It is understanding that and then it is about saying, okay, we removed that requirement or we are in the process of changing that requirement; what is the impact on performance? Similarly, if I look at customs and immigration, there has been quite a change in the profile of revenue if you look at tax on alcohol and cigarettes, for example, because people have not been able to travel and bring back duty free. It is understanding with the experts and colleagues the impact and then looking at this year's performance and going ahead. So, I am confident that colleagues have understood that, and the benefit of having the data last year and then looking back to the previous year enables us to achieve that.

Mr. A. Lane:

In a number of areas you note that international benchmarking is not possible, so specifically for the prison service and for customs and immigration. To what extent are you likely to be able to benchmark those in the future?

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

We are very keen to do just that and since the department has been formed we have been looking at how we can ensure benchmarking is more meaningful. One way of that is getting greater external inspection that gives us an independent view of the services. That has not happened a lot in the services in the department so we are looking at for the first time getting fire and rescue to have an inspection from Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary and fire and rescue services. That will help us in terms of benchmarking against operational standards, against a whole range of activity that we have not been able to before. The same applies to the ambulance service. We are engaging with the Association of Chief Executives in the U.K. (United Kingdom) and they are embarking upon at the moment an assessment and review of the ambulance service, again welcomed by both the Chief Fire Officer and the Chief Ambulance Officer. So, for the first time we can get some external assessment and benchmarking against those standards elsewhere. They are some examples where we absolutely want to do that and will continue to push on with the external benchmarking while we look at things like the Small Islands Forum so there is greater synergy now between the other Crown dependencies, including Gibraltar, looking at their performance and, indeed, the Isle of Wight where appropriate. So, I think it is fair and I think I said it in my opening remarks around performance, it is a journey and certainly what this department has found is it has not been that focused over a number of years previously, but I am really enthused by the individual services and service heads, who are welcoming of external inspection and welcoming of benchmarking so we can get a true reflection of the quality of the service delivered here at the moment.

Mr. A. Lane:

How will you use this to start to measure the performance or success or otherwise of individual subdivisions or, indeed, individuals?

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

I think that the whole performance management from top to bottom is looking right through from the performance framework I mentioned earlier through to the use of My Conversation and My Goals, which is the corporate performance management framework for individuals, but it applies equally to myself and to my Group Director and then through the senior teams right through to front-line staff. So, it is ensuring that there is that golden thread of performance. It is ensuring that we have the right data and the right indicators and the right outcomes are identified so we can measure it and then hold the appropriate performance conversations and make sure that the performance is certainly maintained, always aspiring for performance to be improved. The benchmarking and the external scrutiny will assist with that, making sure we are measuring the right things. We are seeking feedback from Islanders through various surveys, whether it is the Jersey online survey, J.O.L.S. (Jersey Opinions and Lifestyle Survey), or whether it is, as we said, through the complaints process, listening, taking that feedback and, therefore, adjusting services to meet the necessary demands. So, in the round, I think performance management is improving but it has some way to go.

Mr. A. Lane:

Thank you, Director General. Nothing further, Chair.

Deputy I. Gardiner :

Thank you, and back to me. Another question: how do you incorporate the lessons that are learned by other departments in improving your performance management? What mechanism do you have to learn from other departments and help to improve your performance management?

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

In a number of ways, Chair. Certainly, I mentioned - and I do not apologise for mentioning it again - the customer feedback strategy. There is a group that has been set up specifically to look across the range, and that is every department. So we are represented in that group that looks at complaints. Complaints come in all sorts of shapes and sizes across different departments, but there will be various themes that emerge from those. Certainly in my experience, often complaints are made because of people's attitude on the phone or the level of service that might be delivered is okay but it is just the way it was delivered. Thematic areas are highlighted, they are discussed at that group and then they are fed back to departments. Then through my senior leadership team and through the senior management teams in each of the services those conversations take place. Services also have their own mechanisms. They get direct feedback through their service delivery and again I know each of the services take those seriously and discuss them to see how they can improve. Of course, through the executive leadership team meeting, as the Director General, we meet regularly and we talk about a whole variety of challenges across government and where we can share and improve the practice. Indeed, that has happened not just throughout COVID but prior to and I am confident will continue to happen again. Often D.G.s come together, 2 or 3 D.G.s, to work on certain initiatives or support each other where the demand is such that one may have an expertise and experience that others do not. For me it is that one government ...

Deputy I. Gardiner :

I am sorry to interrupt. I am trying to bring it to the easy, understandable level maybe for myself and for the public. For example, the customer feedback group identify that across 3 departments there are complaints on the way that people responded on the phones. Does it mean that you have one protocol that should be implemented across all departments and the same team will be facilitating or training different departments, or basically you identify that this is the problem and now each department deals separately with this and how they need to approach it, how they need to deal with it?

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

If you do not mind me saying, Chair, that is an excellent example. That is exactly why C.L.S. (Customer and Local Services) are leading on the customer feedback strategy. That department is leading on the good practice and identifying good practice. So, I know, for example, there has been instances where, as you say ... well, the first thing is Customer and Local Services has been saying where we have front-facing customer areas in each of the departments, why are they not all under C.L.S.? So, I have had some people dealing with passport applications through customs and immigration, who moved them into La Motte Street, and when a member of the public goes in for a social security enquiry, for example, if they need to get their passport renewed or they have a passport enquiry, they can have a greater customer service delivered to them there and then to save them having to go to a different premises at a different time. So, those sort of issues are led by customer and local services. An example of handling phone calls or the management of anything to do with those thematic areas of complaints will be driven by C.L.S. through the customer strategy group. Where they are recognised as being a corporate problem, i.e. they are more than one department, then they will share that through the executive leadership team or through initiative and we will deploy that across every department.

Deputy I. Gardiner :

If I was asking you what are the 3 top corporate problems that were identified by the customer feedback, what would they be that you are going to work on in 2021?

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

Good question. I do not have those at my fingertips. I know through my experience over the years and indeed through my recollection of the data here it will not maybe surprise you that the way customers are treated is often an area, whether that is incivility, whether that is politeness, whether it is just timeliness. I know those are often fairly high up there in terms of customer complaints. I can get that information for you, Chair. I do not have that at my fingertips.

Deputy I. Gardiner :

It would be really good to learn what are the corporate objectives to improve customer service going forward in 2021. I will go to recommendation tracker. It really was very welcome that the Government followed the C. and A.G.'s (Comptroller and Auditor General's) recommendation and created the tracker so now we can look into the recommendations together. How many outstanding recommendations remain for your department?

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

I think it is fair to say that we do not have any outstanding recommendations at the moment. There have been a number of recommendations from the C. and A.G. report in 2018 that was around police governance. Those have all been, one, accepted by the Minister and, secondly, they are all in stages of scrutiny and then being lodged because they require legislation changes. So we do not have any outstanding recommendations in relation to the tracker.

Deputy I. Gardiner :

Do you have recommendations in other departments that may impact your department? Do you know of any recommendations that will impact your department?

[15:15]

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

I am not aware of any at this stage. I would like to think colleagues would engage with me if there are any that directly impact on the department per se, but I am certainly not cited on any through the tracker or through the conversations we have had through meeting with the Internal Audit colleagues.

Deputy I. Gardiner :

Going forward, if and when it will be new recommendations based on your previous experience, what is the process of accepting a recommendation? When you read the recommendation, what engagements or what decision-making process are you having before you accept recommendations, or not accepting or rejecting?

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

Obviously, if we get C. and A.G. recommendations, for example, then the process we went through was to look at those recommendations, discuss those with policy colleagues, with legislators, with the Minister, with the Assistant Minister, and identify whether there has been any changes since the review and report, and whether those changes would be accepted. If they were accepted, what would the implications be? Is it a legislation change? Would it be a resource issue? Would it be a financial issue? We work through all that, as you would expect, do that analysis and then those decisions would be made. So, in relation to the 2018 example I mentioned, the C. and A.G. report, the Minister having had those conversations and talked to the relevant stakeholders was very pleased to be able to accept those recommendations. Then we put all the activity into place. It has taken some time, obviously, in terms of legislation changes. I think we would take that same approach with any recommendations, whether it is Internal Audit, whether it is P.A.C. (Public Accounts Committee) recommendations. I always, in previous roles and, indeed, in this role, welcome reviews, always welcome recommendations, because having that external scrutiny has to add value. As I say, not all recommendations can sometimes be accepted, and you will of course understand that.

Deputy I. Gardiner :

You  mentioned  the  2018  report  about  Jersey Police  Authority  and, for  example,  one  of  the recommendations there was to review States Members on Jersey Police Authority. What was the process taken to review it, because the recommendation was accepted?

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

Yes, you are right. The Minister accepted those recommendations. I know there were discussions between the Minister and I was involved in discussions with the Chair of the Police Authority and maybe some of the Members. I was not privy to all those conversations. I do know now that Scrutiny are involved as well. There may be some amendments to that suggestion going forward.

Deputy I. Gardiner :

I am looking back and what I am asking about this specific one, for example, there are models that were reviewed around Scotland but maybe not Gibraltar that is more similar to us. There are different nuances for the particular recommendations. This is the reason I am the recommendations, one the policy put forward that completely trust Scrutiny that they can scrutinise and to find a way forward. What is interesting for me is to coming back, for example, would it be good to discuss with C. & A.G. to understand more the things that are written in the report, I am just raising it as a question, or how we are reviewing to make sure that the review is 360 degrees review and not one direction one.

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

My observation on the 2018 report, at the time I was consulted because I was running the police at the time, before I changed role, was that the C. & A.G. at the time was quite comprehensive in her report and indeed in her recommendations and the rationale for it as well. There are examples in the report looking at the Scott ish Police Authority and other police authorities as well. From my point of view, professionally, the recommendations were quite clear and evidence-based and quite sound in terms of the thinking behind removing States Members from the Police Authority per se. Of course, that is just my professional opinion and that is for others to determine otherwise. For me, therefore, the Minister wanted to engage with the Chair of the Police Authority, following that recommendation and have those conversations. As I say, he was keen to accept the recommendations because he thought they were suitable. It is for others in the States Assembly, if it comes to that, to comment going forward.

Deputy I. Gardiner :

I am not questioning, by the way, about the States Members. This is not about the policy question. It is about the process when accepting recommendations, how can we ensure that the whole picture about this recommendation is involved and is there for them to consider, accept, reject or to partially accept.

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

Thank you for that clarity, Chair. Let me say, if we had a similar example again going forward, it would help the situation with greater involvement of our Scrutiny Panel, for example, talking through the recommendations, if we did need to sit back down. In fact, we did have one or 2 meetings with the C. & A.G., and indeed with the police and the C. & A.G., and the Police Authority post the report prior to the Minister accepting the recommendations. We were fairly comprehensive, but having said that, greater involvement with Scrutiny in private hearings, discussing it with colleagues, States Members, is always going to add some value. Going forward maybe we could do that as well. Thinking about it now, there was quite a lot of engagement with various stakeholders.

Deputy I. Gardiner :

Thank you. I will pass to Senator Vallois for some follow-up questions.

Senator T.A. Vallois:

Sorry, Julian, it is me again. Quickly to follow-up on what the Chair was asking. The Police Governance Law in particular, not all of the recommendations that were accepted will be resolved via the legislation, so can I ask whether the recommendations will stay open that are required for operational changes to be made, therefore, a requirement for yourself and your department to put into place once the legislation is either approved or rejected?

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

Very good question, Senator, because you are right, it is not all legislative changes that will deal with it. Where it does not require legislative changes then those changes have been made already and indeed were made a while ago.  

Senator T.A. Vallois:

Okay. One of the responses that the Scrutiny Panel did receive today stated that you would not be able to make one of those changes until the legislation was approved. I am just trying to understand, maybe there is some miscommunication somewhere. I just wanted to ask you, more general I suppose, where there are requirement for significant legislative changes through C. & A.G. recommendation that has been accepted and then maybe the operational side of things, to make sure that the recommendation tracker stays open until that item is completed.

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

Sure. If I could build on that, I completely support that statement, where if they are not legislative changes but we have been proactive in putting some measures forward to either enhance the recommendations or make sure those recommendations do not require legislative changes, we should absolutely record those as well. I give you an example, there is an policing protocol been signed by myself, the Chief of Police and the Minister that makes it very clear around operation independence. That was one of the themes from the C. & A.G. Report around operation independence, which from my point of view has never been an issue. We agreed, and it is not a recommendation, that we would per se draw up an operation protocol that we could all sign up to. It makes it very clear about the role of the Chief of Police, my role, the role of the Minister, all signed and done and dusted. Your point is, and it is a very good point, that if we have not documented that and recorded that on the tracker then it would add value to do so.  

Senator T.A. Vallois:

Thank you very much. Just 2 quick follow-ups from your answers earlier, we were talking about the complexity of your department and a number of different services that particularly feed into yourself as Director General. In terms of the openness and transparency side of things, whether that is performance or insuring that the service is improving, around external inspections, I know that they have not been as regular as required in all services over the years. However, it looks like things are changing. Will these be published for the public and for Members to see?

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

Thank you, you are absolutely right in your assessment. One of my ambitions when I took on the job, having identified the fact that there were, in some cases, no external inspection and in others rather sporadically - indeed, the Minister was very supportive as well - that we did embark upon a programme of external inspections to get every service inspected first and foremost and then continue with a routine of inspections going forward. We are doing that. The ambulance inspection has commenced already. Fire and rescue will hopefully be inspected later this year. Again, it has been slightly delayed because of COVID-19. Police had their first inspection 18 months ago, thereabouts. We are just engaging with Immigration and Borders in the U.K. to try and get an inspection for customs and immigration. We are really keen to do that. I cannot speak for the Minister, but from my point of view, professionally, those inspections have to be public. They should be transparent. Apart from any operational security issues that should be redacted then inspections should be put in the public domain. They are public services, paid for by taxpayers' funding and we should not have anything to hide. Certainly in my experience in the U.K., all the inspections I have been privy to, other than operationally sensitive ones, are subject to publication.  

Senator T.A. Vallois:

That is really helpful and that is really good to hear. I look forward to seeing them, once those inspections are carried out. Any historic inspections, if there are reports, would be useful to have public as well. Finally, one final follow-up before I pass on to the Chair. You mentioned, with regard to operating models, efficiencies were made. Could you explain how much those efficiencies were?

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

Yes, I can. They were split into different areas. In phase 1, the efficiencies were around about £450,000 and they were split up between some savings in customs and immigration due to reductions in senior posts and through a number of posts in the prison service. That was in phase 1. In phase 2 there was around about £80,000 in terms of savings. Overall, not significant savings, but I mentioned earlier on, we have also been able to absorb some cost pressures without having to increase the budget. We were able to absorb either posts that were not funded or create new posts as part of the target operating model. They amount to £317,000 worth of posts, that had we not been able to make savings then there would have been additional cost pressures.

Senator T.A. Vallois:

In terms of the points of sustainability and viability of your services moving forward and considering the efficiencies that you have just described there through the T.O.M., the Government Plan for this year had an increase of £314,000 for tiers 1 and 2, as I understand, and there was also mentioned in your response to us that there may be a need for increased funds due to Brexit. Going forward, in terms of thinking about doing efficiencies, how is sustainability taken into account for your service to provide value for money?

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

Every government department is under pressure, understandably, because of the challenge in the fiscal situation that we find ourselves in. Brexit has brought a unique challenge to the Island and certainly to customs and immigration. To be fair, customs and immigration have done a great job in terms of managing the whole transition from Day 1 No Deal, no further negotiated outcome and then finally the U.K. leaving the European Union. The reference to Brexit is that there are still further challenges emerging. This will continue throughout the year. Going back to your point about sustainability, we are being prudent in making sure they can manage the legislative changes and

the technical changes across the Customs Union, which is why we are looking to put an additional bid in. Overall, we are going through a zero-based budgeting process. Are the budgets right? Have we got the right level of detail? Have we got the right income levels predicted? Can we continue to sustain and manage the demand that is coming in through the services? We are very much working with our finance colleagues and others, and indeed obviously the services and the service heads, to say: have we got the budget right for this year? Is that sustainable over the next 2 to 3 years? What do we need to do if not? Part of that is: how can we do things differently? How can we get leaner and more efficient? At the same time we are quite realistic that if demand is starting to become more challenging or indeed the environment changes as such that the service needs tot then change - and probably customs and immigration is the best example - because of Brexit, then we will absolutely be confident to go into the Government Plan process saying we do need additional resources, if appropriate. Of course, it would not take much for me to do that, because the Minister would absolutely be behind that and driving it, quite rightly.  

[15:30]

Senator T.A. Vallois:

Thank you very much, Julian. I am going to pass you on to Graham, he has a couple of follow-up questions. Thank you.  

Mr. G. Phipps :

Thank you. Building on this theme of performance improvement, the public would be interested in your views looking forward over the next 5 to 10 years. What are your most important performance improvements for your division? What would success look like? How would you track this to ensure that they are achieving it?

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

That is a good exam question. What does success look like and what does performance look like in 5 to 10 years? For me, it goes back to the common strategic priorities that Jersey, from a strategic point of view, is a very safe and secure place to live, to work and to visit. That is quite a strategic grand statement, but that is really important for the sustainability of the Island, the well-being of the Island and indeed for the attractiveness of the Island, whether it is the economy, the tourism sector or indeed for people to thrive on-Island and to grow and putting children first to grow and advance. Those services that sit within Justice and Home Affairs are absolutely the foundation that I believe for the success of a very secure and safe Island going forward. Having very low crime rates; having a very low fire and rescue rate; and also at the same time having a very good fire and rescue service that can respond to a whole range of activities, either water-based or cliff-based, let alone fire-based; having an ambulance service that supports the Jersey Care Model, that deals with more people at home or on the street and takes less people into the hospital estate is a good outcome going forward. This generates better outcomes for individual Islanders, because we know people who stay at home and have less time in hospital have better well-being and better outcomes. That is a good outcome. Having a border that is secure; making sure that we can deal with migration and immigration safely and without any additional risk; making sure that the importation of legal substances is managed appropriately and that we target those individuals who are trying to exploit the Island for what it is worth. All those things add up to making sure that we have a safe place where people can live, work and visit. Those are measured in a variety of ways. One of the significant ways is, as I mentioned earlier on, the Jersey Online Survey. How do people feel? Do people feel safe when they are out and about during the day, when they are out and about at night? Do they feel comfortable, as a female, walking on their own? There are a number of significant factors in surveys that will demonstrate whether the services across the department are delivering, in its broadest sense, for those strategic outcomes that sit within the Island Plan, sit within the Strategic Performance Framework. I think they are really important measures that the department contribute towards.

Mr. G. Phipps : Thank you very much.

Deputy I. Gardiner :

It is back to me. Thank you very much for your answers. Obviously we will follow up the points that were raised. Before I close the public hearing, I would like to ask if there are any points connected to performance management or estate management that you would like to bring to the committee's attention that we did not ask about.

Director General, Justice and Home Affairs:

Thank you for your offer, Chair, but I do not think so. Thank you very much.

Deputy I. Gardiner :

Thank you very much, the pubic hear is closed now. Thank you.

[15:34]