Common Strategic Policy 2026 – 2030 (P.75/2026): fifteenth amendment. Discontinue plans for St. Helier Campus

COMMON STRATEGIC POLICY 2026-2030 (P.75/2026): FIFTEENTH AMENDMENT

____________

1  PAGE 2 –

After the words "report accompanying this Proposition" insert the words –

", except that –

1. on page 11 of the report, action 5.2 should be deleted; and
2. on page 11 of the report, paragraphs four, six and seven should be deleted.".

DEPUTY A.F. CURTIS OF ST. CLEMENT

Note:  After this amendment, the proposition would read as follows –

THE STATES are asked to decide whether they are of opinion

in accordance with Article 18(2)(e) of the States of Jersey Law 2005, to approve the statement of the Common Strategic Policy of the Council of Ministers as set out in the report accompanying this Proposition, except that –

1. on page 11 of the report, action 5.2 should be deleted; and
2. on page 11 of the report, paragraphs four, six and seven should be deleted.

REPORT

The Common Strategic Policy 2026 – 2030 (the CSP) proposes as Action 5.2

Progress a new campus for higher and further education in the heart of St Helier for delivery  in  2032,  releasing  the  land  at  Highlands  College  for  new  homes  and development opportunities.

When deciding what our education estate should look like, it is reasonable to start with the fundamental questions of;

"What is our higher and further education strategy?"

"What are our functional and non-functional requirements to deliver this?"

The need for land and buildings comes out of a clear plan for higher and further education. The choice of where' is the end of the process in defining our higher and further education provision, not the beginning.

From the conversations I have had around this topic, it has been accepted that the provision  of  a  new  campus'/new  facilities  will  have  to  be  subject  to  the  actual requirements – yet to be fully scoped.

The proposal to deliver a new campus in the heart of St. Helier ' therefore puts the cart before the horse'. The Assembly has not agreed a strategy or plan for higher and further education that can be mapped to the proposal for this campus. It has also not seen a business case for siting a new campus in the heart of St. Helier '.

Importantly, it has not seen the financial and economic case.

Government does not own plenty of sites in the heart of St. Helier that would provide the space for a "campus". Indeed, there are few sites of a size that could replace even a subset of Highland's current service provision. It may therefore be highly costly to deliver a campus' in town, with no clear benefits provided as part of the CSP.

Further, the few examples of why a town location may help included that it would offer a shopfront for the public facing parts of courses such the restaurant and hair & beauty services.[1]

Not only are these services already well used at the current site, but there is also no reason an alternative delivery model could not provide a smaller shopfront' for these in town, without the wholesale relocation of the campus.

Lastly, a large amount of focus is given in the CSP narrative to the benefits of releasing the land for housing. Again, there is no costing or reasoned benefit associated.

Conclusion

This amendment does not remove the opportunity to deliver some, or all, of Highlands' current and future education provision in St. Helier . What it seeks to do is remove the presupposition that a heart of St. Helier campus' is the correct solution to our higher

Page - 3

and further educational needs. Members should expect more information and clarity on this before signing up to such a large scheme.

Financial and staffing implications

There  are  no  immediate  financial  or  staffing  implications  that  arise  from  this amendment. The CSP as drafted seeks support for the delivery of a new St. Helier campus "in the heart of St. Helier ", without providing an associated business case or financial and staffing implications. This amendment removes the commitment to this unknown' cost to the Government and taxpayers until further information is available.

Children's Rights Impact Assessment

I consider that this amendment has no direct or indirect impact on children and that the duty to have due regard to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child does not arise. Accordingly, a Children's Rights Impact Assessment is not required under the Children (Convention Rights) (Jersey) Law 2022.

[1] Jersey-CEHA-Education-and- Li felong-Learning-15-10-2026.pdf Page 49

P.75/2026 Amd.(15)