This content has been automatically generated from the original PDF and some formatting may have been lost, therefore it should not be relied upon to extract citations or propose amendments. Please see the PDF for the official version of the document.
STATES OF JERSEY OFFICIAL REPORT
MONDAY, 8th SEPTEMBER 2025
COMMUNICATIONS BY THE PRESIDING OFFICER ........................................ 7
1.1 No communications ......................................................................... 7 QUESTIONS ......................................................................................... 7
- Deputy L.K.F. Stephenson of St. Mary , St. Ouen and St. Peter of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding In-Vitro Fertilisation funding (WQ.308/2025): ........... 7
- Deputy K.L. Moore of St. Mary , St. Ouen and St. Peter of the Minister for the Environment regarding property inspections since the introduction of the Rented Dwelling Licensing Scheme in May 2024 (WQ.309/2025): .................................................... 8
- Deputy H.L. Jeune of St. John , St. Lawrence and Trinity of the Minister for Infrastructure regarding effective waste management at public events (WQ.310/2025): ................ 8
- Deputy M.B. Andrews of St. Helier North of the Minister for Education and Lifelong Learning regarding suicide risk in children (WQ.311/2025): .............................. 9
Deputy T.J.A. Binet of St. Saviour (The Minister for Health and Social Services): ............ 9
- Deputy G.P. Southern : .................................................................... 10
- Deputy M. Tadier of St. Brelade :......................................................... 10
Deputy S.M. Ahier of St. Helier North (Chair, Privileges and Procedures Committee): ...... 10
- Deputy R.S. Kovacs : ...................................................................... 10
- Deputy S.Y. Mézec of St. Helier South : .................................................. 11
- Deputy S.Y. Mézec : ...................................................................... 11
- Deputy M.R. Scott of St. Brelade : ........................................................ 11
- Deputy M.R. Scott : ....................................................................... 12
- Deputy K.F. Morel of St. John , St. Lawrence and Trinity :............................... 12
- Deputy R.S. Kovacs : ...................................................................... 12
Deputy L.J. Farnham of St. Mary , St. Ouen and St. Peter (The Chief Minister): .............. 13
- Deputy M.B. Andrews : ................................................................... 13
- Deputy K.M. Wilson of St. Clement : .................................................... 13
- Deputy I. Gardiner of St. Helier North : .................................................. 13
- Deputy I. Gardiner : ....................................................................... 13
- Deputy M.B. Andrews : ................................................................... 14
Deputy K.F. Morel (The Minister for Sustainable Economic Development): .................. 14
- Deputy D.J. Warr : ........................................................................ 14
- Deputy K.M. Wilson : ..................................................................... 15
- Deputy K.M. Wilson : ..................................................................... 15
- Deputy M. Tadier : ........................................................................ 15
- Deputy M. Tadier : ........................................................................ 15
- Deputy D.J. Warr : ........................................................................ 15
Deputy K.F. Morel (The Minister for Sustainable Economic Development): .................. 16
- Deputy K.M. Wilson : ..................................................................... 16
- Deputy M. Tadier : ........................................................................ 16
- Deputy M. Tadier : ........................................................................ 16
- Deputy P.F.C. Ozouf of St. Saviour : ..................................................... 17
- Deputy P.F.C. Ozouf :..................................................................... 17
- Deputy K.M. Wilson : ..................................................................... 17
Deputy T.J.A. Binet (The Minister for Health and Social Services:) .......................... 18
- Deputy J. Renouf : ........................................................................ 18
- Deputy L.M.C. Doublet of St. Saviour : .................................................. 19
- Deputy L.M.C. Doublet : .................................................................. 19
- Deputy H.L. Jeune of St. John , St. Lawrence and Trinity : ............................... 19
- Deputy H.L. Jeune : ....................................................................... 19
- Deputy I. Gardiner : ....................................................................... 19
- Deputy I. Gardiner : ....................................................................... 20
- Deputy J. Renouf : ........................................................................ 20
Deputy M.E. Millar of St. John , St. Lawrence and Trinity (The Minister for Treasury and
Resources): ................................................................................ 21 3.7.1 Deputy A.F. Curtis : ....................................................................... 21
Deputy S.M. Ahier (Chair, Privileges and Procedures Committee): ........................... 21 3.8.1 Deputy M.R. Scott : ....................................................................... 22
Connétable A.N. Jehan of St. John (The Minister for Infrastructure):.......................... 22 3.9.1 Deputy P.F.C. Ozouf :..................................................................... 22
Deputy L.V. Feltham of St. Helier Central (The Minister for Social Security): ................ 23 3.10.1 Deputy I. Gardiner : .................................................................... 23
Deputy M.R. Le Hegarat of St. Helier North (The Minister for Justice and Home Affairs) ... 23
- Deputy L.M.C. Doublet : .............................................................. 24
- Deputy H.L. Jeune :.................................................................... 24
- Deputy H.L. Jeune :.................................................................... 25
- Deputy I. Gardiner : .................................................................... 25
- Deputy I. Gardiner : .................................................................... 25
- Deputy L.M.C. Doublet : .............................................................. 26
Deputy A. Howell of St. John , St. Lawrence and Trinity (Assistant Minister for Health and
Social Services - rapporteur):............................................................. 26
- Deputy L.K.F. Stephenson : ............................................................ 26
- Deputy J. Renouf : ...................................................................... 26
- Deputy J. Renouf : ...................................................................... 27
- Deputy L.M.C. Doublet : .............................................................. 27
- Deputy L.M.C. Doublet : .............................................................. 27
- Deputy L.K.F. Stephenson : ............................................................ 27
Deputy L.V. Feltham (The Minister for Social Security): ...................................... 27
- Deputy H.L. Jeune :.................................................................... 28
- Deputy J. Renouf : ...................................................................... 28
- Deputy J. Renouf : ...................................................................... 28
- Deputy L.M.C. Doublet : .............................................................. 29
- Deputy L.M.C. Doublet : .............................................................. 29
- Deputy H.L. Jeune :.................................................................... 29
Deputy M.R. Le Hegarat (The Minister for Justice and Home Affairs): ....................... 29
- Deputy C.D. Curtis : .................................................................... 29
- Deputy M. Tadier : ..................................................................... 30
- Deputy M. Tadier : ..................................................................... 30
- Deputy P.F.C. Ozouf : .................................................................. 31
- Deputy P.F.C. Ozouf : .................................................................. 31
- Connétable K.C. Lewis of St. Saviour : ................................................ 31
- Deputy C.D. Curtis : .................................................................... 31
Deputy S.G. Luce of Grouville and St. Martin (The Minister for the Environment): .......... 32
- The Connétable of St. Helier : .......................................................... 32
- Deputy J. Renouf : ...................................................................... 32
- Deputy P.F.C. Ozouf : .................................................................. 33
- The Connétable of St. Helier : .......................................................... 33
Deputy S.Y. Mézec (The Minister for Housing):............................................... 33
- Deputy I. Gardiner : .................................................................... 34
- Deputy P.F.C. Ozouf : .................................................................. 34
- Deputy P.F.C. Ozouf : .................................................................. 34
- Deputy H.L. Jeune :.................................................................... 35
- Deputy H.L. Jeune :.................................................................... 35
- Deputy M. Tadier of St. Brelade : ...................................................... 35
- Deputy M. Tadier : ..................................................................... 36
- Deputy L.M.C. Doublet of St. Saviour : ............................................... 36
- Deputy L.M.C. Doublet : .............................................................. 36
- Deputy I. Gardiner : .................................................................. 37
Deputy S.G. Luce of Grouville and St. Martin (The Minister for the Environment): .......... 37
- Deputy J. Renouf : ...................................................................... 37
- Deputy M. Tadier of St. Brelade : ...................................................... 38
- Deputy M. Tadier : ..................................................................... 38
- Deputy J. Renouf : ...................................................................... 38
Deputy L.V. Feltham of St. Helier Central (The Minister for Social Security): ................ 39 3.18.1 Deputy L.M.C. Doublet : .............................................................. 39
Deputy S.G. Luce of Grouville and St. Martin (The Minister for the Environment): .......... 40
- Deputy P.F.C. Ozouf : .................................................................. 40
- Deputy A.F. Curtis of St. Clement : .................................................... 40
- Deputy J. Renouf of St. Brelade :...................................................... 40
- Deputy J. Renouf : ...................................................................... 41
Deputy K.F. Morel of St. John , St. Lawrence and Trinity (The Minister for Sustainable
Economic Development): ................................................................ 42
- Deputy K.M. Wilson : .................................................................. 42
- Deputy I. Gardiner of St. Helier North : ............................................... 43
- Deputy I. Gardiner : .................................................................... 43
- Deputy M. Tadier of St. Brelade : ...................................................... 44
- Deputy K.M. Wilson : .................................................................. 44
Deputy S.G. Luce of Grouville and St. Martin (The Minister for the Environment): .......... 45
- Deputy H.L. Jeune of St. John , St. Lawrence and Trinity of the Minister for International Development regarding Jersey Oversees Aid's humanitarian support provided to Gaza (OQ.187/2025): ........................................................................... 45
- Deputy L.K.F. Stephenson of St. Mary , St. Ouen and St. Peter of the Minister for Education and Lifelong Learning regarding the demand for States secondary school places (OQ.191/2025): .................................................................... 46
- Connétable K. Shenton-Stone of St. Martin : ............................................. 47 Deputy T.J.A. Binet of St. Saviour (The Minister for Health and Social Services): ........... 47
- Deputy J. Renouf of St. Brelade : ......................................................... 48
4.2.1 Deputy J. Renouf : ........................................................................ 48
4.3.1 Deputy L.M.C. Doublet : .................................................................. 49
4.4.1 Deputy L.K.F. Stephenson : ............................................................... 49
4.5.1 Deputy H.L. Jeune : ....................................................................... 49
4.6.1 Deputy S.M. Ahier : ....................................................................... 50
4.7.1 Deputy J. Renouf : ........................................................................ 50
- Deputy H.L. Jeune : ....................................................................... 51
- Connétable M. O'D Troy of St. Clement :................................................ 51
- Deputy H.L. Jeune of St. John , St. Lawrence and Trinity : ............................... 51 Deputy S.Y. Mézec of St. Helier South (The Minister for Housing): .......................... 51
- Deputy M.B. Andrews of St. Helier North : .............................................. 52
5.2.1 Deputy M.B. Andrews : ................................................................... 53
5.3.1 Deputy R.S. Kovacs : ...................................................................... 53
5.4.1 Deputy J. Renouf : ........................................................................ 54
- Deputy A.F. Curtis of St. Clement :....................................................... 54
- Deputy S.M. Ahier : ....................................................................... 55
- Deputy D.J. Warr of St. Helier South : .................................................... 55 Deputy L.J. Farnham of St. Mary , St. Ouen and St. Peter (The Chief Minister): .............. 56
6.2.1 Deputy J. Renouf : ........................................................................ 56
6.3.1 Deputy K.M. Wilson : ..................................................................... 57
6.4.1 Deputy H.L. Jeune : ....................................................................... 58
6.5.1 Deputy M. Tadier : ........................................................................ 58
6.6.1 The Connétable of St. Brelade : ........................................................... 59
- Deputy J. Renouf : ........................................................................ 59
- Deputy S.M. Ahier : ....................................................................... 59
6.8.1 Deputy S.M. Ahier : ....................................................................... 59 Deputy M. Tadier : .............................................................................. 60 Deputy L.J. Farnham : ........................................................................... 60 Deputy P.M. Bailhache of St. Clement : ........................................................ 60 Deputy K.F. Morel : ............................................................................. 60 Deputy R.J. Ward of St. Helier Central :........................................................ 61 Deputy M.R. Scott of St. Brelade :.............................................................. 61 Deputy M. Tadier : .............................................................................. 61
PERSONAL STATEMENTS ...................................................................... 64
7.1 Deputy P.F.C. Ozouf :..................................................................... 64
ADJOURNMENT .................................................................................. 64
The Roll was called and the Greffier of the States led the Assembly in Prayer. COMMUNICATIONS BY THE PRESIDING OFFICER
The Bailiff :
There are no announcements from the Chair.
- Deputy L.K.F. Stephenson of St. Mary , St. Ouen and St. Peter of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding In-Vitro Fertilisation funding (WQ.308/2025):
Question
Further to the adoption of P.20/2024 (In Vitro Fertilisation (IVF) Funding), as amended, and the response to Written Question 5/2025, will the Minister provide an update on the provision of Government funded IVF since the new criteria and funding system were introduced earlier this year, including, but not limited to –
- the number of Islanders who have been provided IVF treatment;
- the number of rounds of IVF administered to each person, together with a breakdown of the clinics used;
- the number of positive pregnancy tests resulting from IVF treatment;
- the total expenditure on Government-funded IVF cycles to date this year; and
- the number of Islanders seen by the ARU (Assisted Reproduction Unit) for IVF treatment who did not qualify for funded treatment, with a breakdown of the reasons for their non- qualification?
Answer
- since the new criteria and funding system were introduced earlier this year, 17 Islanders have been provided IVF treatment
- all funded patients have had 1 fresh IVF / ICSI cycle each at BCRM only currently. In addition, there have been 7 Frozen Embryo Transfers (FETs)
- 9 positive pregnancy tests have resulted from funded IVF treatment
- the total expenditure on Government-funded IVF cycles to date this year is £62,000
- 43 Islanders were seen by the Assisted Reproduction Unit (ARU) for IVF treatment but did not qualify for funded treatment
- 28 because they or their partner already have a child
- 9 because they have previously had self-funded IVF, or have embryos stored
- 6 for other reasons that involve fewer than 5 patients e.g. age.
- Deputy K.L. Moore of St. Mary , St. Ouen and St. Peter of the Minister for the Environment regarding property inspections since the introduction of the Rented Dwelling Licensing Scheme in May 2024 (WQ.309/2025):
Question
Will the Minister advise how many properties have been inspected since the introduction of the Rented Dwelling Licensing Scheme in May 2024, how many landlords have received improvement notices and how many have had penalties imposed upon them?
Answer
The first annual report for the Public Health and Safety (Rented Dwellings) (Licencing) (Jersey) Regulations 2023 R.110/2025 was published on 8th July 2025.
Page 7 of this report highlights that 293 inspections had been completed since the commencement of the regulations on 1st May 2024.
Pages 8-12 of the report discusses the outcomes of these 293 inspections.
Page 14 of the report discusses enforcement and compliance. It highlights that no improvement notices have been issued following licencing inspections and no penalties have been imposed upon landlords.
- Deputy H.L. Jeune of St. John , St. Lawrence and Trinity of the Minister for Infrastructure regarding effective waste management at public events (WQ.310/2025):
Question
Will the Minister advise whether there are any requirements for ensuring effective waste management (particularly in terms of recycling and the management of environmental impacts) when permission is granted to hold a public event in Jersey and, if so, what those requirements are and how they are enforced and, if not, why not?
Answer
The Minister for Infrastructure's powers to licence events are limited to those that occur on Government of Jersey main roads. For these events, the Minister may set conditions that include the conduct of the event, the viewing of the event, preparations for the event, trials or practices for the event, and ensuring the safety or convenience of members of the public who may be at or near the event or at the location of the event.
The above said, the Bailiff 's Public Entertainment Panel (PEP) is the licensing authority for all public events in Jersey, including those on main roads, except for specific sports contests.
Event organisers will be required to complete an Event Management Plan as soon as the Bailiff 's Chambers are made aware of the event. This will help determine the level of input it will be necessary for the PEP to have. The panel is made up of representatives from the States of Jersey Police, Jersey Fire and Rescue Service, Ambulance Service, Health and Safety Inspectorate, Public Health Department, Infrastructure & Environment if event is held solely on a main road, and the relevant Parish Constable.
The event plan which the PEP reviews includes:
• the type of event
• how the event is organised
• a risk assessment, including the measures taken to make sure any potential and foreseeable risks are being addressed for those taking part or watching the event
• mitigation of any effects that the event may have on other people, such as noise or other nuisance
• a site map and event layout
The guidance requires that the plan should include mitigation of nuisance and consultation with the relevant parochial authority or land agent who may set conditions for waste management. It is clear that it is the responsibility of the event organiser to identify hazards and risks and to ensure that health and safety issues are properly managed for all aspects of the event, including:
• setting up the event
• the event itself
• clearing up after the event has taken place
The Minister for Infrastructure has no specific powers to require, approve, or place waste management plans upon event organisers.
The point raised in the question is a very valid one and I will raise this with the Bailiff 's Public Entertainment Panel to see if this can be included for future events.
- Deputy M.B. Andrews of St. Helier North of the Minister for Education and Lifelong Learning regarding suicide risk in children (WQ.311/2025):
Question
Will the Minister state, for each of the last five years, the number of reported cases in States schools where a child has been considered a suicide risk?
Answer
The Department does not hold this information in a reportable format. When staff in schools have that level of concern about a child or young person, they would refer to CAMHS or the Emergency Department.
- Deputy G.P. Southern of St. Helier Central of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding consideration given to the difference between unbearable suffering for terminal patients and unbearable suffering for patients with incurable illness (OQ. 201/2025):
Will the Minister advise whether, during the development of the Draft Assisted Dying (Jersey) Law 202-, further consideration was given to the difference between unbearable suffering for terminal patients and unbearable suffering for patients with incurable illness; and will he explain the extent to which incurable illnesses were considered within the drafting of the law?
Deputy T.J.A. Binet of St. Saviour (The Minister for Health and Social Services):
I am afraid the answer to both parts of the Deputy 's question is negative. No further thought has been given to either of the matters stated. As the Deputy will know, the draft law is based on the P.18/2024 proposals that were agreed by this Assembly in May of that year. In that debate, the Assembly agreed that assisted dying should be permitted for people whose physical medical condition is expected to cause death within 6 months or 12 months where neurodegenerative conditions are involved. However, the Assembly rejected proposals to permit assisted dying for people experiencing unbearable suffering. Whatever Deputy Southern 's view, or my view for that matter, might have been on the issue, I am afraid we both have to accept that the draft law can only reflect the detail of the collective decisions that were made during the earlier debate.
In the Minister's assessment could it be that, as stated in the Assisted Dying Law, it is open to challenge whether the difference between the 2 groups of candidates is discriminatory and open to challenge under H.R. (human resources) law.
Deputy T.J.A. Binet :
That is a question that I am afraid I cannot answer standing here. I am certainly happy to take further advice on that, but it is certainly something I have not got the knowledge to answer that question without making reference to somebody who knows about it more than I do.
During the course of drafting the current law that is being proposed, did the Minister take any advice on the future likelihood of any discrimination challenges for those Members of the public who may wish to avail themselves of assisted dying, but who do not currently meet the fairly tight description provided for in the proposals?
Deputy T.J.A. Binet :
No, I have not. I did not consider that to be particularly within my remit. My remit was for the team to go away and draft the laws in accordance with the decisions we have taken. I think I have got sympathy for the views of both Deputies here and I am hopeful that at some point in the future a proposition will be brought to the Assembly to have another vote on that area.
- Deputy R.S. Kovacs of St. Saviour of the Chair of the Privileges and Procedures Committee regarding the possible introduction of a recall election process for States Members whose conduct falls below expected standards or who breach the law (OQ.193/2025):
Will the chair advise what consideration, whether through any work undertaken or discussions in P.P.C. (Privilege and Procedures Committee) meetings, has been given to the possible introduction of a recall election process for States Members whose conduct falls below expected standards or who breach the law; and what conclusions, if any, have been reached?
Deputy S.M. Ahier of St. Helier North (Chair, Privileges and Procedures Committee):
When the former P.P.C. went out to consultation on the Code of Conduct last year, one of the questions posed was whether Members thought a recall mechanism should be introduced. Only 7 Members indicated some support for introducing a form of recall, with others expressing concerns about it becoming weaponised. The former P.P.C. took the decision not to progress this matter at that time. But I expect that as part of our consideration around the Code of Conduct, which we hope to lodge in a revised form for debate soon, we will discuss broader changes to Standing Orders and the States of Jersey Law, which we may wish to pursue.
[14:30]
Has P.P.C. examined how recall processes operate in other jurisdictions and what relevance or lessons such comparison may hold for Jersey, and has the public been consulted at all in this?
Deputy S.M. Ahier :
Yes, we have had comparisons with other jurisdictions but I do not believe that we have directly consulted with the public. That would be a possibility I suppose in the future, but at the moment we are discussing it within the confines of P.P.C. and we had debates about it on 2 occasions last year. On both of those occasions at the time it was not supported, but obviously times change.
In the absence of a recall mechanism there are ways that a States Member can be automatically expelled as a Member that do not require a mechanism, either a recall or anything else to initiate that, because it is automatic when they become disqualified. Has P.P.C. looked at that system and determined whether it is adequate or not or whether there is anything that ought to be changed in it, bearing in mind that there are obviously of course democratic ramifications of Members losing their seats automatically without any process that actually formally initiates that?
Deputy S.M. Ahier :
Obviously the Royal Court is permitted to remove a Constable from the Assembly, and that has obviously occurred quite recently, but that is not the case with Deputies. We have not discussed it yet, but I would imagine that it will be raised on our agenda moving forward because there are changes that I believe which we wish to make but will have to be discussed, and of course will have to be brought to the Assembly as well for confirmation.
One of the ways that Members can be automatically expelled from this Chamber is if they are declared bankrupt by the court. Has the committee given any consideration as to whether those kind of things are appropriate in the modern day in a democratic society, bearing in mind not all Parliaments have that as a mechanism to automatically expel Members? Would he and his committee undertake to look at that to see if the framework for continued membership in the Assembly, when the Members are going through things like that, is appropriate for the modern age?
Deputy S.M. Ahier :
Absolutely. A bankruptcy has not been raised as yet but certainly we will add that to the list of agenda items that we need to discuss. Of course the other way I am sure the questioner is aware of for removing a States Member is if the States Member withdraws themselves from the Assembly for 6 months, and again that has happened on a previous occasion.
The chair said that 9 Members supported a recall mechanism and I just wondered if he could give the exact number of Members who objected to one, and to explain how the P.P.C. are overcoming the possibility of the Code of Conduct itself being weaponised.
Deputy S.M. Ahier :
In response to the first part, we went out to consultation, obviously to Members, and there were 14 responses at that stage. The question regarding the recall system was the last question on the consultation, so that can have an effect on the amount of people who get down to the last question. But of the 14 responses received, there were 7 responses in favour. Some were firm yeses, some were depending on the gravity of offence, some were most extreme cases of poor behaviour, et cetera, and there were 2 definitive noes, so I think that covers that. On the weaponisation, that has not been discussed as yet.
I wonder how the P.P.C. can therefore justify, on the basis of what was a majority supporting recall mechanisms, having decided not to pursue that as a measure at this stage? The chair still has not responded to my question about how is he ensuring that the Code of Conduct is not weaponised, bearing in mind that surely it needs to be.
The Bailiff :
The answer to that was that it has not been considered by P.P.C. at this stage. Deputy M.R. Scott :
I see, sorry, I did not quite hear that.
The Bailiff :
He did answer that part of the question.
Deputy M.R. Scott :
Okay, stick with the first bit then. The first bit was that given that a majority of the Members supported a recall mechanism over a minority, why did the P.P.C. not continue to explore the subject at that stage, rather than indicate to Members they would not be doing so?
Deputy S.M. Ahier :
It was obviously discussed at the previous P.P.C. I was a part of that last conversation but obviously we have a newly formed P.P.C. now and I found the relevant comment on the minutes which said: "The committee did not support the introduction of a recall mechanism in the Jersey context and recognised the potential for misuse." That was the reason that was given at that time.
Continuing on from the theme of misuse of a recall mechanism, would the chair agree or disagree with the idea that a recall mechanism may not be a particularly edifying inclusion to political life in Jersey in terms of the way that it could be used not just within the Assembly but obviously within political discourse in the Island?
Deputy S.M. Ahier :
Yes, I agree with the Deputy 's question entirely but we have to accept that even if we bring amendments through the Code of Conduct or otherwise it will be up to the Assembly to determine whether a recall mechanism is wanted or actually needed. I am sure that it may well be popular within the constituencies but maybe not quite so popular among Members.
What other alternative permanent mechanism, if any, are currently under consideration by P.P.C. to ensure better accountability of States Members whose conduct falls below expected standards or breaches the law, where the public that elects us can have their say?
Deputy S.M. Ahier :
We are, at P.P.C., looking to change some of the Standing Orders in regard to the severity of punishments and sanctions and such like that can be brought. We hope to be able to bring those before the next election, certainly, and obviously it will be for the due consideration of this Assembly as to whether they support them or not.
- Deputy M.B. Andrews of St. Helier North of the Chief Minister regarding the Minister for the Environment's decision not to attend the Complaints Panel hearing held on 31st July 2025 (OQ. 181/2025):
Further to the Minister for the Environment's decision not to attend the Complaints Panel hearing held on 31st July 2025, will the Chief Minister state whether he had any discussions or correspondence with the Minister regarding the Minister's decision and, if so, whether he signalled his agreement with that decision?
Deputy L.J. Farnham of St. Mary , St. Ouen and St. Peter (The Chief Minister):
I can confirm that the Minister for the Environment and I did not have any discussions regarding his decision not to attend the panel hearing on 31st July.
I want to know whether the Chief Minister is in agreement with the Minister for the Environment's decision not to attend the Complaints Panel hearing on 31st July.
Deputy L.J. Farnham :
I believe that, in such circumstances, it is for the Minister to decide as to how such matters are approached. I know that all Ministers appreciate the importance of effective complaint mechanisms and consistently work with the Complaints Panel. As Members know, the Deputy will be giving a statement to the Assembly later today outlining his reasons for not being in attendance. I accept, in this decision, the Minister was acting in good faith and, to the best of his knowledge, in line with their obligations, including the obligations to their staff.
Does the Chief Minister agree that listening to Members of the public and their concerns is a key element of our role, and given that Minister's refusal to meet with the Complaints Panel, has he considered if the role of an ombudsman could have been helpful in this case? If so, can he state if it is his intention to establish this kind of oversight to retain confidence in the complaints process?
Deputy L.J. Farnham :
I think it is absolutely essential that Ministers and States Members engage fully with the complaints process, and it is up to Members and Ministers how they do that, depending on the context and the details of the case. I believe in this circumstance the Deputy did that, and he will be making an explanation of his rationale later. A piece of work is well underway, nearing completion, being carried out by Deputy Moz Scott , in line with my previous comments to the Assembly as to whether we proceed with the decision to establish an ombudsperson. I am beginning to think that that could be a better course of action because I think in this modern society now we need to, I think, nail down the complaints process a little bit and look for something that can take us forward. But, as I said, a decision will be made in due course.
I welcome the Chief Minister stating that it is important to engage with a complaints process. Will the Chief Minister commit to issue guidance to Ministers to their responsibility they must engage with the complaints process and Complaints Panel?
Deputy L.J. Farnham :
I think Ministers are fully clear on that, and Deputy Luce has engaged with the complaints process on a number of occasions. His decision not to attend a single meeting does not constitute a position where he is not going to engage. I think in his statement he says he is prepared to fully engage with the process. I am happy to remind Ministers of their obligation, although I know Ministers are already aware of that but I will reinforce the point.
Would the Chief Minister consider not attending the Complaints Panel, as public expecting? It is an option .. it looks like a break of trust that public has in the complaints process. My question: how will the Chief Minister restore public trust if Ministers decline to attend the Complaints Panel meeting?
Deputy L.J. Farnham :
I think that is exactly why we need to review the whole process. I think that we are likely to be leading towards an ombudsperson to tighten things up and have a broader and more consistent approach to dealing with public complaints.
Deputy J. Renouf of St. Brelade :
My question has already been answered, sir.
Does the Chief Minister agree with me that there is an expectation for Ministers, if they are to be called upon to attend the Complaints Panel, that they should be giving their side of events in order to have a fair hearing, but by not attending it does raise questions about political accountability of the Council of Ministers?
Deputy L.J. Farnham :
I completely agree, and believe it is a duty of all of us to engage with the public on such matters, and I believe Deputy Luce has engaged with the public and has engaged with the Complaints Panel. His decision not to attend a single hearing does not signal his intention not to engage with the case that is ongoing. I will leave it for the Deputy to make an explanation in his statement.
- Deputy D.J. Warr of St. Helier South of the Minister for Sustainable Economic Development regarding consideration of the economic and social impact should Jersey Zoo close (OQ.183/2025):
Further to recent media coverage regarding Jersey Zoo and Durrell Wildlife Conservation Trust, will the Minister advise what consideration, if any, has been given to the economic and social impact should Jersey Zoo close its doors or relocate off-Island?
Deputy K.F. Morel (The Minister for Sustainable Economic Development):
I am sure all Members would agree with me that it would be an enormous shame and disappointment to many Islanders if Durrell Jersey Zoo was to close. I must say that, other than media, I have no specific information to suggest that it is in that situation. I can say to the Assembly that no specific consideration has been given by my department to the economic and social impacts. My department does not hold any data on the number of visitors who come to Jersey specifically to visit the zoo, which would obviously be important in order to undertake such an investigation. I might add as well, that while I completely understand the genuine and positive nature that the Deputy is asking the question, I do get slightly concerned when something is brought to the political level publicly, because I would not want to encourage a process by which such an institution was to close just because it is being brought into that political discourse. I am very guarded because of that.
Can the Minister tell the Assembly what metrics are used by his department to measure the economic and social benefits that a visitor attraction brings to the wider economy?
[14:45]
Deputy K.F. Morel :
It is not and would not be appropriate in the main for any department of Government to measure the impacts of a specific organisation or business. We tend to look at sectors as a whole and so we would look at how attractions perhaps within the visitor sector add to the economy. I must say I do not believe we have done that piece of work but that is how we would look at it. I do not think we would ever look at a single business to see what impact that has.
Could the Minister confirm whether or not he has met with the board of Durrell to establish what is happening in the organisation?
Deputy K.F. Morel :
No, I have not. Again, I do not believe it is the place of any Minister or politician to necessarily involve itself in the affairs of what is ultimately a private organisation.
Durrell has been in receipt of a large amount of public money. What kind of support would the Minister consider now for Durrell, given its international local standing in the world of conservation?
Deputy K.F. Morel :
That is not a question that I have given consideration to at all before this moment, and so I could not answer it in any meaningful way.
Does the Minister welcome Durrell Wildlife Conservation Trust's decision to put an end to deer hunting on their Scotland estate that they announced over the summer, and does he think that will help boost their longevity and reputation for visitors in Jersey?
Deputy K.F. Morel :
I see what the Deputy is doing there. I meant just in making deer hunting relevant to this question. I genuinely do not know much about the situation with regard to hunting on the estate in Scotland. But I would welcome anything Durrell does that would enhance its longevity and sustainability.
Does he think it at least helps resolve some cognitive dissonance that members of the public might have with a wildlife preservation trust previously encouraging the killing of animals on its land?
Deputy K.F. Morel :
I can absolutely appreciate the cognitive dissonance that people may feel around that. Very superficially, having not thought deeply about it, I probably share that. But I also do understand how, particularly for instance, in wildlife parks across the world - particularly I know in Africa - they often do use hunting as a way to maintain wildlife levels. It is not a simple black and white answer. The management of wildlife is something that is far beyond my abilities, but it is a very complex issue.
A major factor for the losses incurred by the zoo is the withdrawal of donor funding. What support could the Minister offer the zoo to ensure it has a sustainable future should the decline in donor revenue be so significant that the zoo is no longer financially sustainable?
Deputy K.F. Morel :
I could not comment on what support may or may not be available. But what I would say, and this is partly in reference as well to Deputy Wilson 's earlier question, is that my door is open. I will not impose myself on the zoo, but they may well, and I am happy for them to impose themselves on me. So if they do wish to speak to me I would be more than happy to do so.
- Deputy K.M. Wilson of St. Clement of the Minister for Sustainable Economic Development regarding publishing a comparison of freight costs before and after the introduction of the new flat rate card (OQ.196/2025):
Will the Minister commit to publishing a comparison of freight costs before and after the introduction of the new flat rate card, so that the public may judge whether the contract with DFDS is working as intended; and if not, why not?
Deputy K.F. Morel (The Minister for Sustainable Economic Development):
Such a comparison, number one, would not shed any light on whether the contract is working as intended. But I must also add that direct comparisons cannot be made from today and previously due to the opaque nature of freight-pricing arrangements during the incumbent's previous tenure. The new flat rate card is entirely designed to create the transparency that was not there in the past. That promotion of transparency is expected to promote competition and, at the very least, an understanding long into the future of where freight prices will be set.
Earlier this year, the chief economist advised that the contract with DFDS would result in a maximum increase of 0.4 per cent in food prices. This projection was used to reassure the public and States Members that the new freight pricing structure would significantly increase the cost of living. If the Minister cannot produce any comparative data then will he explain what assumptions, exclusions and uncertainties were behind the 0.4 per cent figure and what corrective action Government will take if costs continue to increase above the 0.4 per cent figure?
Deputy K.F. Morel :
The person to ask about the 0.4 per cent figure in the main is the chief economic adviser, but I have no reason to doubt the chief economic adviser's assumptions and calculations. But it must also be said that that 0.4 per cent on a basket of shopping goods is not 4.4 per cent on R.P.I. (retail price index); it is much less than that. It is also very important to understand that following the J.C.R.A.'s (Jersey Competition Regulatory Authority) own investigations into the freight sector, that they determined that distribution of goods to the Island and into the Island came to just 7 per cent of the cost of goods on the shelves. So we are talking about a very, very small amount of the overall cost of goods in Jersey. That 7 per cent for distribution costs includes on-Island distribution costs, and so that 7 per cent is not made up solely of ferry and freight costs. It is made up of people distributing on-Island themselves. Deputy Wilson , particularly as a member of the Economic and International Affairs Scrutiny Panel, I am sure would easily happily engage with the chief economic adviser to understand that more.
A few days ago one of his own Assistant Ministers published publicly on a public website, unsurprisingly, a Facebook group, the following question that I expect to be asked is how the chief economic adviser estimated a 0.4 per cent increase on food prices without Government having sought key information from Ferryspeed. Is the Minister able to answer his Assistant Minister's question about whether it is correct that Government did not seek key information from Ferryspeed on that?
Deputy K.F. Morel :
I will not comment on what the Government did or did not engage with in the private company, but my understanding is that all calculations were done with regard to the previous incumbent's rate card. But what we are unsure of is whether that was actually what was being charged or not. As I understand it, calculations were done on the previous rate card.
Can the Minister advise whether or not an up-to-date projection is being done about taking into consideration the latest additional freight charges that we know DFDS have been imposing retrospectively for import and export of freights and the likely impact that is going to have on freight costs and possibly cost of living in Jersey?
Deputy K.F. Morel :
I thank the Deputy for that question. It is very important to understand that the previous incumbent was not running a sustainable ferry service. The previous incumbent had previously come to Government asking for £40 million to maintain its viability. It was not capable of investing in new vessels, and that is a situation that has entirely changed the contract that we have signed and indeed regardless .. let me change that. The tender process that we entered into was all about finding a sustainable ferry service that could stand on its own feet and could be invested long into the future. The one fact that we knew was that the previous incumbent was unable, with the previous situation, to engage in a sustainable ferry service and deliver that sustainable ferry service to this Island. When it came to Government asking for money we understood that when it went to our other Island with an emergency, that none of us know about still to this day, we understood that it did not have a sustainable ferry service. It is really important to note that the charges that the Deputy refers to are not DFDS charges, they are Ports of Jersey charges. So it would seem to me that if they were not being passed on in the past that was one of the many reasons why that was not a sustainable ferry service. The previous incumbent was not able to maintain that sustainability because it was swallowing costs that it was not able to swallow.
Would the Minister explain how he consulted and got advice as to the economic implications of the important and potentially momentous decision of a flat rate card, including whether or not he consulted the J.C.R.A.?
Deputy K.F. Morel :
We did engage with the J.C.R.A. and naturally the chief economic adviser was the main source of information in that respect.
I attended with 2 other Deputies the J.C.R.A. briefing, there were only 2 Members and myself there, and I specifically asked them about whether they were consulted on the flat rate card and they said no, they were not. Much to my concern they were not interested in it. It was a matter for Government. I wonder whether he could explain that disparity of statements.
Deputy K.F. Morel :
It was important to engage with the J.C.R.A. to understand whether a flat rate card would be viable in terms of its impact on competition and its impact from a regulatory perspective. There had to be, I believe, to the best of my knowledge, an engagement of some sort. But, as the Deputy has - he believes - found a disparity, I am of course very willing to go and find out exactly what was or was not said there. But it was my understanding that we had to at least find out whether the J.C.R.A. would have objections to such a thing.
It seems that increases in freight costs are now starting to affect every corner of our economy. Will the Minister commit to commissioning an independent review of the first 12 months of this contract? If not, will he please tell us how he is going to restore confidence in the arrangements that he has put in place for new ferry and freight services?
Deputy K.F. Morel :
Such hyperbole I feel does not do anyone in this Island a service. It is the case that we now have a situation where we know the freight rates going forward, how much the ferry company will charge freight providers such as Ferryspeed, such as Jersey Post and others, how much they will charge for their services. That is a situation that we never had before. We did not know when the previous incumbent suddenly put an 18 per cent or 19 per cent increase on the cost of freight. No one had any idea that that was about to take place, yet it happened. Previous to that there were many, many other times when freight prices were increased without anyone knowing that it was about to take place. That situation is not going to happen in the future, and I am disappointed that there have been communication errors by DFDS, which have created this distaste . I knew that there would always be some problems when we switch from one provider to another but I now know that we are working with a provider who will sit in the room and tell me what is actually going on rather than stringing me along with stories that I did not know that were coming from who knows where. I think it is really important that we understand that having the transparency going forward is vital to the freight situation in Jersey. I do not agree with the Deputy 's perspective that an item which makes up at the maximum 7 per cent of the cost of goods on our shelves ..
The Bailiff :
Minister, I do have to ask you to bring your answer to a halt. Deputy K.F. Morel :
.. is now having an impact on our corner of the economy.
- Deputy J. Renouf of St. Brelade of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding the review of elective surgery (OQ.188/2025):
Further to the statement he circulated on 7th August 2025, and his comments in the media reported on 26th August 2025, will the Minister provide further details about the review of elective surgery that is currently underway and how it interacts with his ambitions to increase spending for health?
Deputy T.J.A. Binet (The Minister for Health and Social Services:)
As the Deputy will recall, in my statement on 7th August I referred to a review of procedures and treatments. The statement was reasonably basic in order to present a straightforward and easily understandable message for all concerned. However, having been asked for further details, I am happy to explain that the review forms an essential part of work being undertaken to develop an all- new treatments and interventions prioritisation policy. At present, we are reliant upon a narrow and outdated policy, which does little more than set criteria for access to publicly-funded surgeries only. The new policy will cover access to surgery, wider treatments and medicines. All that is happening at this stage is that the professional team at H.C.J. (Health and Care Jersey) are getting on with the work prescribed. What is important to make clear is that nothing has been predetermined. Insofar as this review interacts with my ambitions to increase funding for Health, I would say that it occurs mainly in one specific area; value for money. I believe this was made very clear in my statement of 7th August.
[15:00]
In July 2024, the orthopaedic and theatre review was delivered and it said that elective surgery could be delivered more efficiently by, for example, identifying procedures that could be performed in outpatient rooms rather than in in-patient theatre facilities. Have the recommendations of that review been taken up?
Deputy T.J.A. Binet :
I have no idea. Health has 3,000-odd employees. That sort of detail I certainly would not carry with me. I am very happy to make the inquiry and let the Deputy know as soon as I found out.
When the Minister is assessing whether this policy change delivers value for money and any savings, will he be sure to look at whether there is a reduction in spend across all departments and whether any delays in elective procedures will not result in actual higher costs in other departments or over time?
Deputy T.J.A. Binet :
That is quite a complicated question insofar as it relates to waiting times. There is a specific problem in their own right. All of the recommendations will be made to me by clinical experts. The whole thing will be referred to the Health Advisory Board, and the decisions will be made as a result of that process.
To simplify my question, will the Minister be looking across other departments with other Ministers and not just looking at the savings to his own department? He also mentioned the tips policy. Will he ensure that this new policy takes into account factors around health inequalities?
Deputy T.J.A. Binet :
I am not aware that this is particularly focused on health inequalities. This is basically a review of the way that services are delivered in all areas. It is an across-the-piece evaluation.
In the Minister's comments on 26th August, the Minister said that we are trying to be as open as we can about everything that we are looking at. Will the Minister therefore publish the terms of reference for this specific review?
Deputy T.J.A. Binet :
I am happy to publish any information that we have that relates to this review.
Will the Minister confirm whether this review will be finalised before Christmas or part of a wider discussion that the Assembly can see within the discussions around health financing and the health strategy?
Deputy T.J.A. Binet :
I think if everything goes according to plan, the idea is for the report to be submitted to the advisory board at its next meeting. Everything will be revealed at that stage.
Would the Minister explain why the value-for-money recommendations from orthopaedic review that was a year ago were not taken forward and how this review ensured that the recommendations from another review will deliver value for money and the service required?
Deputy T.J.A. Binet :
Sorry, could the Deputy repeat the name of the review that she initially referred to? The Bailiff :
Can you do that?
Deputy I. Gardiner :
I am answering to the Deputy Renouf supplementary questions the Minister was not able to answer what happened with the recommendations of the Orthopaedic Department review in 2024 that was published.
The Bailiff :
Could you state the name of the review again? Because I am afraid I did not hear that either, Deputy . Deputy J. Renouf :
Sir, if I may, it is the orthopaedic and theatre review.
The Bailiff :
Orthopaedic and theatre review. We appear to be having entertainment with the lights. Let us assume that they will not actually damage the speaker system. I beg your pardon, Deputy . I am sorry, I was distracted by work.
Deputy T.J.A. Binet :
No problem, Sir. The orthopaedic review, I can only assume that that has been carried out in a way that one would expect it to be. I think that the people that do these things take into account and into context all of the reviews that have been done in the past. As I say, I do not carry intimate points of detail of such things around with me, but I am certainly happy to make the inquiry and inform the Deputy of the extent to which that has been taken up.
The waiting list for the elected surgery has been rising every month for over a year. When does the Minister anticipate that the waiting list will start to come down?
Deputy T.J.A. Binet :
I think the Deputy referred specifically to orthopaedic waiting lists. We are having a lot of problems with an awful lot of waiting lists.
The Bailiff :
I think the Deputy was about to interject and say she was not limiting it to orthopaedic. Deputy I. Gardiner :
To elected surgery.
The Bailiff :
Elective surgery.
Deputy T.J.A. Binet :
It is a complicated one; no simple answer. People will see when the Budget comes through that I am looking for a considerable increase in funding for lots of different areas in Health, which we will go through when the time comes. It is going to take some considerable time to put these issues right. It is not something that we can solve in the next 3 months, and I would be lying if I said that we had a clear plan to do that.
What reassurance can the Minister give that, following the review of elective surgery that is underway, we will not end up with a 2-tier service where some procedures will only be available to those who can afford to pay?
Deputy T.J.A. Binet :
What the review intends to do is to provide guidance on how we should prioritise in terms of importance. As I think everybody knows, healthcare becomes more and more complicated every year and more and more procedures and treatments are introduced. Every now and again you have to have a review. I think it is some considerable time since that has been done and we are relying on a lot of information that was put together many years ago. I think it is high time that we did this review, and I am sure that when it comes out that everybody in the Assembly will find that it is a considerable improvement on what we are working with at the moment.
- Deputy A.F. Curtis of St. Clement of the Minister for Treasury and Resources regarding the Aviemore site (OQ.195/2025):
Further to the rejection by the Assembly of P.9/2025, will the Minister (as shareholder representative) outline what progress, if any, has been made by the States of Jersey Development Company on the purchase and development of the Aviemore site, including any notable activities undertaken since February; and if no progress has been made, why not?"
Deputy M.E. Millar of St. John , St. Lawrence and Trinity (The Minister for Treasury and
Resources):
Following the decision of the States Assembly to reject P.9/2025, the Minister for the Environment has been requested to prepare supplementary planning guidance to help guide the development of the Aviemore site. S.o.J.D.C. (States of Jersey Development Company) have therefore not progressed work on the site as it would be imprudent to begin advancing plans and incurring costs without the benefit of the planning guidance, which is still awaited. This guidance will identify the key planning issues that are specific to the site and will seek to provide guidance in order that those issues might be appropriately addressed when the site is brought forward for development.
Would the Minister identify where the request for supplementary planning guidance comes from in this case? Given a site of that size and nature, it would be highly unusual to see site-level supplementary planning guidance for sites like this?
Deputy M.E. Millar :
I believe that pursuant to P.73/2010, which is a proposition that formed S.o.J.D.C., such guidance is required before S.o.J.D.C. can proceed with any development. Given the increased planning risk highlighted during the debate on the Deputy 's proposition, the need for clear planning guidance is critical before any work can begin. My understanding is that S.o.J.D.C. cannot begin the work without the planning guidance.
- Deputy M.R. Scott of St. Brelade of the Chair of the Privileges and Procedures Committee regarding the anticipated enactment date of the Draft Elections (Senators) (Jersey) Amendment Law 202- (P.56/2025) (OQ.182/2025):
Will the chair state the anticipated enactment date of the Draft Elections (Senators) (Jersey) Amendment Law 202- (P.56/2025) and provide his estimates of any potential delays to that enactment should the Assembly approve any amendments to the law?
Deputy S.M. Ahier (Chair, Privileges and Procedures Committee):
Subject to the approval of the legislation at this sitting, P.P.C. expects the draft law to be sent to Privy Council with a view to the matter being considered before Christmas, and the various Articles will come into force on the dates listed under Article 65 of the law. It is worth noting that P.P.C. has no influence over the schedule for Privy Council's timing or agenda. Although P.P.C. has expressed some concern about the impact of Deputy Tadier 's fourth amendments on the course and administration of future elections, it does not consider that this should have any impact on the enactment or commencements of the law if adopted. P.P.C. was mindful that the decision of this
Assembly to reinstate Senators was made close to the start of the election year and it therefore built contingency into the timetable when it settled on the earliest commencement date as February 2026. There is a reasonable gap between 1st February and the proposed start of the nomination process in relation to Deputy Tadier 's amendment.
In his speech on accepting his chairmanship, the chair indicated a concern that amendments could delay the amendment law, so I just wondered if he could explain how he formed this view.
Deputy S.M. Ahier :
As I have just explained, the only delays that we can see that could possibly have affected it was Deputy Tadier 's fourth amendment. There are no other concerns that we can voice.
- Deputy P.F.C. Ozouf of the Minister for Infrastructure regarding the Island's fuel supply (OQ.202/2025):
Further to Oral Question 118/2025, will the Minister for Infrastructure provide an update on what engagement, if any, has taken place with the incumbent operator, as well as any alternative operators, regarding the future of the Island's fuel supply?
Connétable A.N. Jehan of St. John (The Minister for Infrastructure):
I thank the Deputy for his question. I can confirm that officers are currently in the process of agreeing a new heads of terms with the current operator, which will ensure stability and resilience in the island's fuel supply.
Over the summer period I had 3 meetings scheduled with the Minister for Infrastructure and Chief Minister, but 2 of them were cancelled with the promise of another. This has been the subject of a number of oral questions, and I wonder whether the Minister is prepared at any point to engage with a Member and the panel who have advanced concerns about a continuation of an existing lease. In answering, maybe he would explain the tenure and length of that proposed new lease, which will be subject to a Standing Order challenge no doubt.
The Connétable of St. John :
The Deputy is absolutely right that any lease would be subject to a 168 where any Member can challenge. The lease is for a shorter period than the original lease and will include break clauses. In terms of meetings, I am not sure which meetings were cancelled and by whom, but I am back on the Island and available.
The Bailiff :
We come now to Question 10 where Deputy Gardiner will ask of the Minister for Health and Social Services.
- Deputy I. Gardiner of St. Helier North of the Minister for Social Security regarding enabling Nurse Independent Prescribers to issue medical certificates (OQ. 199/2025):
Will the Minister explain what consideration, if any, has been given to enabling Nurse Independent Prescribers to issue medical certificates and, from any such consideration, will he state what steps would be required to allow this and explain what barriers (if any) there are to achieving it?"
Deputy T.J.A. Binet (The Minister for Health and Social Services):
I am sorry I have been taken completely unawares. [Aside] Oh, sorry, that is a relief, Sir. The Bailiff :
Sorry, did I read the wrong Minister out? I am sorry. I think it could be that the original one was coached differently, but it does not matter. Sorry about that, Minister.
Deputy L.V. Feltham of St. Helier Central (The Minister for Social Security):
I thank the Deputy for raising this. It is an interesting question and is also well-timed. The Deputy may recall that in July I signed a Ministerial Order expanding the range of independent prescribers to include not just nurses but also pharmacists and paramedics who hold the relevant qualifications. This was an important step in modernising our primary care workforce and making the best use of all of our health professionals who work in Jersey. At this stage, my team has not yet started to consider the expansion of medical certification to a wider group of health professionals. However, this type of expansion is well-aligned with the ongoing expansion of primary healthcare health roles and will be considered at an appropriate time. Work would be needed to create the process for authorising a range of healthcare professionals to issue certificates, including identifying appropriate qualifications, governance, and clinical oversight, record-keeping, et cetera. I will continue to work with the Minister for Health and Social Services, G.P.s (general practitioners), and other healthcare professionals to support the effective delivery of modern primary care services.
[15:15]
Given that the United Kingdom extended fit note certification 2022 to include advanced nurses and, as Ministers agreed, it will reduce pressure on G.P.s, improving continued care and reduce waiting time for patients, would the Minister indicate what are the timeline, if she would be working with the Minister for Health and Social Services to ensure that a small change can actually bring better service and proper monetary savings too?
Deputy L.V. Feltham :
I am not able to commit to a date at present because, as I said, no work has been planned. However there is ongoing work around the expansion of primary care services and I am quite willing to follow up with the Deputy as that work progresses. I am as keen as she is to ensure that our primary care services are efficient and effective as possible and providing the very best care to our Islanders.
- Deputy L.M.C. Doublet of St. Saviour of the Minister for Justice and Home Affairs regarding hate crime legislation that has not been prioritised (OQ.179/2025):
Will the Minister advise why hate crime legislation has not been prioritised by the Government, and explain how she intends to mitigate the impact on vulnerable groups of the consequent delay to this legislation?
Deputy M.R. Le Hegarat of St. Helier North (The Minister for Justice and Home Affairs)
I thank the Deputy for the question. It is unfortunate that the Police Complaints Law is now in its 30th draft, and that has pushed back all legislation in relation to this term of office. The hate crime law was due to follow that particular piece of legislation as the officer has already been allocated it. We are now hoping that this legislation will be lodged in the coming weeks. I have recently met with 2 members of the community in order to explain where we are in relation to the hate crime law. In terms of mitigation, there is clearly no way to address hate crime as effectively as a hate crime law. However, this Government has taken considerable steps towards equity in the areas of wages and childcare, as well as the development of the International Cultural Centre into a dedicated resource to support vulnerable groups. I would also remind Members that while there is not a proper law. There are laws that actually will address hate crime as both important and required. Most harms which will be addressed in this law can and should be addressed in other pieces of legislation and, therefore, I would encourage any member of our community who is a victim of this type of offence to go to the police and report it because there is legislation that can be used even though we do not at this stage have a specific hate crime law.
Deputy L.M.C. Doublet :
Could I ask the Minister just to repeat part of the answer because I was not clear. She mentioned that the law would be lodged before the end of the term. Did she mean the Police Complaints Law that has delayed this one or does she mean this law?
Deputy M.R. Le Hegarat :
Yes, my apologies. It is the Police Complaints Law which will be lodged in the coming weeks. In relation to the Hate Crime Law, I had previously said that I was hoping that it would be before the end of 2025. Unfortunately, due to the complexity of the Police Complaints Law, that is not going to be possible. However, once the Police Complaints Law is lodged in the coming weeks, that individual will straight away start working on the hate crime law, although that officer has already got some knowledge and understanding.
The Bailiff :
Yes, I will allow a supplementary now that you have had the answer.
Thank you. That does help. Could the Minister clarify, is there a chance then that the hate crime legislation could be lodged before the end of this term?
Deputy M.R. Le Hegarat :
It is unlikely that it will be lodged before the end of this term. Basically, we hope that we will make significant progress before the end of this term of office and that a new Government will be able to seek the drafting time. Because even though we will obviously have done significant work on it, the drafting time will be a challenge. Also, the fact that we will be going into purdah in April will make it even more of a challenge. So it is unlikely that it will be lodged before the end of this term of office because of the challenges in relation to drafting time.
Unfortunately, I was contacted by constituents this summer who had experienced some racial abuse while they were on the beach with their family and they expressed disappointment that when they went to the police they had found out the hate crime law was not in place, and they felt that could have maybe strengthened their dealings with the police. But, of course, the main point is that we do not want to see this kind of situation in Jersey ..
The Bailiff :
It does have to be a question, this is a speech at the moment, Deputy , could it be a question please? Deputy H.L. Jeune :
Yep. Could the Minister give examples of how herself and her officers are trying to prevent this type of racial abuse from happening in the first place?
The Bailiff :
Before you answer that, Minister, can I just say that "yep" is not the parliamentary term for "Yes, Sir." All right, please answer the question.
Deputy M.R. Le Hegarat :
Thank you. What I would say in relation to officers and myself, I am quite clear that I feel that we need a hate crime law. We just have not been in a position for this law to be progressed further than it has been. In relation to individuals if they receive abuse or if they are assaulted, if there is anything in relation to telecoms legislation, then I would suggest that they report it to the police. In relation to protection, it is always valuable for people, if they have got witnesses to those offences, that those witnesses go with them also. But these types of offences need to be reported to the police and they need to be reported in fast time in order that those matters can be dealt with.
Could the Minister maybe explain a little about what the Government is doing to try to reduce hate crime in general in Jersey, not from the point of view of trying to just prevent it? We have seen in the U.K. an increase and we would not want to see it here. What is she specifically doing for the wider community to see that we do not have this type of behaviour?
Deputy M.R. Le Hegarat :
I think quite often there are many campaigns in relation to many things and I think if you looked at some of the campaigns that have been running over recent weeks and talking about people's behaviour in whatever circumstances, I think a lot of the media in relation to that, that can actually fall in line with a number of different offences. When we talk about behaviour in relation to violence against women and girls, we are also talking about behaviour in relation to other individuals as well. I think we need to be aligned to the fact that there are not always specifics about what offences we are talking about.
I am sure that the Minister remembers Hate Doesn't Belong Here, a campaign that was run in 2019, 6 years past, and since then we have been waiting for the hate crime law. Does the Minister accept that the delay undermines confidence in protecting minority groups in Jersey?
Deputy M.R. Le Hegarat :
I do remember the campaign and I think that it is important that we remember that. Of course we have, in the last 18 months, reintroduced Building a Safer Community framework. From the perspective of that and managing that, and communities working together, I think that will highlight those facts. I do generally believe that if members of the community feel unsafe, or they feel that they are at risk, that it is important for them to go into somewhere like the International Cultural Centre, or to go into the States of Jersey Police, or speak to people within their own community, so that they can get help and assistance to be able to deal with matters. It is about all of us as a community. It is not only about legislation, it is about us as a community working together in order to be able to stop these things from happening.
I 100 per cent agree with the Minister that we need to work as a community together. Saying that, unfortunately, in our Telecommunications Law for online racial abuse the threshold is really high. Other States Members tried to test this law, which was unsuccessful. Going into the elections, would the Minister consider, to ensure that Members and candidates will feel protected, to look again if anything can be done to introduce the hate crime law before the coming elections?
Deputy M.R. Le Hegarat :
I cannot promise that the hate crime law will be in before the elections, simply because there is insufficient drafting time before we come into purdah. However, there will be the consultation that will come while this legislation is being worked on, so that will be going out into the community. There is some work that has obviously already been done on this but it is about the offences and the drafting of those, so there has been some work and this will be going out to consultation one would hope prior to the election, so therefore the public will know that this law is coming down the track.
I thank the Minister for her answers and she is clearly keen to progress this law. I want to echo Deputy Gardiner 's question. Could the Minister give an update on a response that she gave to a previous question I asked in this area, encouraging the Minister to speak with the police around recording crimes motivated by hatred, even before we have the legislation? Could she let us know what the progress of those discussions are, and is she ensuring that the police have the resources to do this and are given any assistance that they might need?
Deputy M.R. Le Hegarat :
I think what the Deputy asks is a point .. and I am aware of the question that she asked me previously. From my recollection, I apologise to the Deputy , I cannot actually recall whether I have had this conversation or not. However, what I will say is that where other places have recorded what we would say is a non-crime, it has caused some difficulties in relation to resourcing, but I will go back to the States of Jersey Police and ask in relation to this matter because, as I said, I cannot recall whether I had an answer or not.
- Deputy L.K.F. Stephenson of St. Mary , St. Ouen and St. Peter of the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding IVF treatment (OQ.190/2025):
Further to the response to Written Question 308/2025, which showed that by the beginning of July only 10 per cent of the budget allocated for I.V.F. (in-vitro fertilisation) treatment this year had been spent, will the Minister set out what plans he has to review the criteria to allow more people to access treatment, particularly those currently not eligible for funded treatment for non-clinical reasons; and if he has no such plans, why not?
Deputy T.J.A. Binet (The Minister for Health and Social Services):
Could I ask if the Deputy would be minded to allow Deputy Howell , Assistant Minister for Health and Social Services, with responsibility for this to answer?
Deputy A. Howell of St. John, St. Lawrence and Trinity (Assistant Minister for Health and
Social Services - rapporteur):
I thank the Deputy for her question. We are currently underspent on budget. This was anticipated given that we knew it would take some time for eligible couples to start the I.V.F. process. This includes couples who were waiting for treatment at the Lister Clinic, with which Healthcare Jersey has only recently signed a contract. We have taken a cautious approach as it is not possible to accurately predict demand, and we have to remain within the budget this year and in future years. That said, we recognise that the existing I.V.F. criteria may be too restrictive and, as the Deputy is aware, we have committed to review them once we have more financial data on which to base our decisions, which we are currently doing. We will discuss any recommendations with stakeholders and I will update the Deputy and the Assembly on any changes that may be brought forward, but this will not be until after the end of October.
I appreciate the Assistant Minister's response to the question. If possible, could she explain why it is taking so long for that process to happen, recognising that for some fertility patients every month really does matter for them?
Deputy A. Howell :
I acknowledge that every month does matter, Deputy . The officers are working on it and we absolutely have to know the financial situation before we open up the criteria, and if indeed we are able to do that. We have to have 9 months' financial data to be able to work on.
Will the Minister commit that, if there is an underspend, it will not be clawed back and used to fund other services but will be used to expand the criteria as outlined by Deputy Stephenson ?
[15:30]
Deputy A. Howell :
I can make no commitment until we have the data, but I will do my very best to make sure that this is ring-fenced for the I.V.F. service.
I am merely asking that the money should be kept for the purposes for which it is already allocated. Will she not confirm that that will indeed be the case?
Deputy A. Howell :
We will do our very best.
The Children and Civil Status Law, which will be in force hopefully by the end of this year, means that same-sex couples need to use assisted reproduction to access their parental rights. The Minister has previously agreed to address this, to erase that inequality. Could she advise of the progress on this please?
Deputy A. Howell :
This is certainly one of the criteria that we are looking at. We are exploring all avenues and it is to be fair to everyone.
Would the Minister commit to addressing this by the time the Children and Civil Status Law comes into force, please?
Deputy A. Howell :
The team are working very hard, but I cannot commit to what we are able to do until we have done the review.
Will the Assistant Minister set out the policy priorities that she and her team will be working to, should it be possible to widen the criteria following that review? What is the team aiming to achieve with the funding that is available? If possible, is it also possible to commit that there will not be a reduction in the budget for next year on the argument that this year has been underspent?
Deputy A. Howell :
The team are working on this and they are reviewing all aspects. When they have an answer, I will report back to the Deputy .
- Deputy H.L. Jeune of St. John , St. Lawrence and Trinity of the Minister for Social Security regarding the trainee minimum wage (OQ. 186/2025):
Will the Minister explain the reasons for reintroducing the trainee minimum wage and detail the process undertaken to move away from the States Assembly's decision to adopt P.5/2023, which saw the integration in 2024 of the trainee minimum wage into a single minimum wage?
Deputy L.V. Feltham (The Minister for Social Security):
In taking the decision, I think it is important that I contextualise what a different place we were in from when the Assembly decided to harmonise the trainee rate with the minimum wage. I am really
proud that we now have a significantly higher minimum wage. Following the raising of the minimum wage in April to £13 an hour, I received feedback from both employer and employee representatives as to difficulties taking on apprentices, as well as similar feedback from the chair of the Children, Education and Home Affairs Scrutiny Panel and other colleagues within the States Assembly. Following this, I asked for detailed economic advice from the chief economic adviser. It was important for me to listen to the range of views and information that I have received. I have always been clear that any decision on this would be taken in collaboration with the Minister for Education and Lifelong Learning to ensure that there are sufficient opportunities available and real viable alternatives to post-16 in-school education. I am grateful to the Minister for Education and Lifelong Learning and Skills Jersey for the close co-operation over the last few months. I had to make the announcement and decision during the summer recess so that I could make the announcement in August ahead of new apprentices taken on in the 2025 academic year. I am also pleased to have issued new guidelines so that we avoid any exploitation of the trainee wage. Additionally, in consideration of the rates and how to set, that I ensured that we did not go to a lower rate than the £10.50 an hour that was agreed by the Assembly when they agreed to harmonise the rates. Of course, I would remind employers that this is a minimum rate and they can choose to pay more if they wish to.
Does the Minister accept that uncertainty around the minimum wage and trainee wage has created this instability for young workers and employers, with many choosing not to take on apprenticeships? How is she addressing these uncertainties to make up for this lost year for trainees?
Deputy L.V. Feltham :
I have not seen any evidence to suggest that what the Deputy is saying is correct. If she has any evidence to suggest that, then please could she pass that on to me. I acted as swiftly as I could, given the information that I had to hand and the advice I was given.
The Minister says that the landscape has changed since the original proposition from Deputy Andrews , but it has not changed since June. At a Scrutiny hearing in June, I asked the Minister whether she supported different training rates and she replied: "I think I would see that as being quite discriminatory. If somebody is doing the same job it does not matter what age they are." Can she explain what has changed since then?
Deputy L.V. Feltham :
Yes, I can explain what has changed since then. I worked with officers to construct a really specific set of guidelines to ensure that only employees that are on very specific traineeships and apprenticeships are eligible to receive that rate. That is different to what had been done in the past whereby the rate could have been applied to any employee in their first 2 years of service and I understand was abused by some employers in that respect.
I wonder also why the Minister has not brought a rescindment to the proposition that established the unification of those rates?
Deputy L.V. Feltham :
When the trainee rate was harmonised, the proposition at the time was amended to retain the part of the legislation that enabled the Minister to make a trainee rate by order, and that is why I did not bring a rescindment. Also the timing for me to have brought a rescindment would have meant that I would not have been able to make the change in time for the beginning of the academic year. I thought that that may then lead to the consequences as described by Deputy Jeune in her previous question.
How will the Minister track whether this change in policy is resulting in more trainee positions? Deputy L.V. Feltham :
I will be working very closely and continue to work very closely with the Minister for Education and Lifelong Learning and his team at Skills Jersey to ensure that we are receiving the results that we need and, indeed, developing the skills that we need on-Island.
If it does not result in an increase, what is the Minister's plan then? Deputy L.V. Feltham :
I think then we would need to look at the reasons for it not resulting in an increase, and it may well not be me that would need to take action, but other Ministers, such as the Minister for Education and Lifelong Learning. But we would need to see that evidence base first.
Many of the questions have been asked, but the Minister was clear that she had to make the decision very quickly to help the academic term 2025. Will the Minister be able to publish as soon as possible, or with the co-operation of the Minister for Education and Lifelong Learning and Skills, whether those traineeships have been filled at Highlands so that they could be fulfilled during 2025, because it seems that it is very late in the day to get trainees to apply for Highlands skills training? Could the Minister publish whether those courses have been filled or not as soon as possible?
Deputy L.V. Feltham :
Of course that data is not my data, that is the data of the Minister for Education and Lifelong Learning and I am sure that he will answer any questions that other Members or indeed Scrutiny may have.
- Deputy C.D. Curtis of St. Helier Central of the Minister for Justice and Home Affairs regarding the illegal and organised operation of receiving payment for offering lifts by unregulated, non-DBS checked drivers without adequate insurance coverage (OQ.192/2025):
Will the Minister advise what procedures, if any, are in place to police the illegal and organised operation of receiving payment for offering lifts by unregulated, non-D.B.S. (Disclosure and Barring Service) checked drivers without adequate insurance coverage; and if none, will she commit to addressing this issue?
Deputy M.R. Le Hegarat (The Minister for Justice and Home Affairs):
I thank the Deputy for her question. The ongoing use of illegal taxi operations remains a significant concern, requiring continued attention from the Department for Infrastructure, with the support of the States of Jersey Police. S.o.J.P. (States of Jersey Police) routinely stop, engage with and, where offences are identified, investigate individuals operating outside the bounds of regulation. However, it should be noted that recent prosecutions have not resulted in successful convictions. It is recognised that a substantial proportion of Islanders utilise informal lift services, commonly known as Jersey Lifts. S.o.J.P. have maintained a proactive approach in delivering safeguarding messages and advice regarding the risks associated with improper use of such services. Where individuals are identified as posing a risk to public safety, S.o.J.P. will take proportionate action in accordance with their powers.
Is the Minister concerned that at some point there could be an accident which is not covered by insurance, or an assault on a member of the public by one of these drivers while their customers may be especially vulnerable following a night out?
Deputy M.R. Le Hegarat :
I would reiterate what the States of Jersey Police would say. It is not advisable for any member of the public to take a lift with somebody who is not regulated and has no D.B.S. check. The police will continue to monitor and do what they can in relation to this matter, and I appreciate what the Deputy is saying in relation to the risks. We can only continue to highlight those risks but, at the current position that we are in, we can advise people not to take those risks. But we can only do what we can do.
This seems a very grey area, which I know many a Minister for Home Affairs and Minister for Infrastructure have struggled to resolve over the years. Could the Minister explain why she thinks there has been such a low conviction rate where prosecutions have taken place and could she clarify how many decisions have been made to prosecute and have any of them ever resulted in a successful prosecution?
Deputy M.R. Le Hegarat :
As far as I am aware, there has been no successful prosecution. I am aware of one that went through the courts. There was one that was a driver, the same driver on 2 separate occasions, was reported in 2023 and a prosecution was brought but that was unsuccessful. In relation to the further details that the Deputy requires, I can certainly make inquiries to find out whether and how many others have actually got to the stage of prosecution. It is very difficult to prosecute it, it is very difficult to be able to establish that the people are not known to each other and they are not just having a lift home, and whether they are just giving some money for petrol. It is a very difficult situation and we can only continue to reiterate the fact that it is not advisable to utilise this type of service because the insurance is not likely to be valid should an accident occur.
It seems strange for the Minister and the police to be giving advice not to use something which is not an illegal taxi service. If somebody wants to hitch a lift presumably it is okay to hitch a lift so long as it is mutually consensual. Could the Minister maybe advise whether energy will be better spent making sure that D.V.S. (Driver and Vehicle Standards) enforced their own permits so that those who are not taxi drivers, who do not have a taxi licence, should not be carrying out taxi-type activities? Could that indeed maybe involve something such as a mystery shopper programme where such services which are being offered illegally could be fished out?
Deputy M.R. Le Hegarat :
I see the idea of the mystery shopper, however the difficulty with this is that this legislation does not sit with the Minister for Justice and Home Affairs, it sits with the Minister for Infrastructure so I do not regulate how people do or do not get cab registrations, if you like.
[15:45]
I suppose you could say that you could use the shopping-type thing, but I think the thing is that this has grown and it is very difficult to be able to establish what is somebody actually giving a lift to a friend, as most of us may do on a regular basis, and whether somebody else may not be able to drive and have paid them for that purpose. However, as I said, it is a very difficult offence to actually prosecute and I will find out the data. But, as I said, it is very difficult to prosecute and to establish the full facts.
Does the Minister have any idea - and I appreciate her difficulties - wearing her Home Affairs hat or do the police have any idea of the scale of the use of so-called Facebook Lifts in comparison to the amount of regulated taxi rides, say, on a Saturday night?
Deputy M.R. Le Hegarat :
Quite frankly, no, I do not, because every night you will have a certain amount of taxis that will be on the ranks and those will take people home. There will be a certain amount of people who will go on and book one through illicit lifts. I do not think that that data is available. I can certainly ask the question, but I doubt that it is going to be available. So I can ask the question but I doubt very much whether that data will be available.
Just very briefly, I am not currently on Facebook and so I do not know, but when I was I understand it is a closed group on Facebook which you have to agree to join. Once inside, you can see all the posts offering and requesting lifts. May I build on the suggestion of the previous questioner when saying that you can be a mystery shopper on there, because my understanding is there is a very significant amount of users on it. Would the authorities within the police think that it would be a good idea, and does she think it is a good idea, to ask that question just so we can get a handle on how much of this is in this Facebook group?
Deputy M.R. Le Hegarat :
I could certainly ask the questions, and I will ask the State of Jersey Police whether there is any way that they can get access to the Facebook page but, as I said, this is one of a number of issues in relation to roads policing and the police have to take priorities. At this stage, this may not be as high a priority as the other 5 that are mentioned in the fatal 5.
I know this is something that the present and previous Ministers for Infrastructure have wrestled with. A little unfair to have a go at D.V.S., because they can only regulate what is legal, not what is illegal. Deputy Ozouf has pipped me to the post regarding the Facebook sites, which do advertise this extensively. But it is definitely something we need to have ..
The Bailiff :
I am sorry, is this a question? The Connétable of St. Saviour : It is coming up.
The Bailiff :
That would be quite nice.
The Connétable of St. Saviour :
Obviously, insurances will be null and void, so will the Minister agree to work with other fellow Ministers to nip this in the bud finally?
Deputy M.R. Le Hegarat :
I am always happy to work with the other Minister.
Jersey Lift started as a way to help people who could not wait for a taxi and of course were reimbursed by the passenger. Is the Minister aware that things have moved on, so with Facebook groups now with 14,000 members and another with 28,000 members, and there are people doing this as a job and not paying any tax or social security, an almost unregulated and potentially dangerous industry and this is not fair to the legal taxi service?
Deputy M.R. Le Hegarat :
I will ask the question of the States of Jersey Police to see whether they can get access to these sites. I am not sure that they can but, as I said, there has been work on that. They continue to monitor what is going on in the evenings and some prosecutions have been forthcoming but have been unsuccessful. So, as I said, I will ask them again about what access they do or do not have to these sites. I think clearly the message we need to be saying is that this is not necessarily a safe mode of transport home because if there is an accident then you may not be insured.
- Connétable A.S. Crowcroft of St. Helier of the Minister for the Environment regarding the Northern Quarter development (OQ.184/2025):
Will the Minister advise whether more units of accommodation than were originally approved were permitted in the Northern Quarter development in St. Helier on the basis of the intention of Andium Homes to seek to extend the Millennium Town Park?
Deputy S.G. Luce of Grouville and St. Martin (The Minister for the Environment):
The planning history for the site, the Northern Quarter, formerly the BOA warehouse in Rue Le Masurier, is considerable. Subsequent to outline planning permission being granted on appeal in September 2016 for 169 dwellings, the scheme has been amended a number of times through the planning process to a final total of 195 units. Building records confirm this is the number constructed, but I have no indication of a specific justification for that increase, although we did find a housing mix commentary from 2020 that seems to indicate there was a demand for one bedroom units at that time. It may be that the unit mix was changed for this reason and that resulted in the additional units count.
The Minister will be aware that several large developments have been completed or are under development in the area of the Millennium Town Park. Is he concerned that there is simply not enough green space in the Millennium Town Park to cater for all the new residents who are coming into the northern part of St. Helier ?
Deputy S.G. Luce :
The Constable will understand that I am not going to pass comment in the Assembly on any potential expansion of the Town Park or otherwise due to the potential for planning applications coming in the future. The only thing I would say is that I have visited not only the Northern Quarter but I have looked at the other sites which are under development currently, and they all conform to the standards which we have asked of them, and Northern Quarter in particular got some outdoor space. It is the subjective thing about the amount of park space that may be needed near these developments, but they do all have recreational areas already.
The Minister answered the question as asked, which was to do with the number of units in the development and referred to the planning history. Can he confirm that the planning history did not involve expansion of the site, as opposed to increasing the number of units?
Deputy S.G. Luce :
I can confirm that I believe that to be the case, if only inasmuch as that the Northern Quarter is a very specific site. It has always been my understanding that the development may include more units now, but the actual size of the site itself could not enlarge because it is surrounded by boundaries and roads.
Would the Minister agree with a constituent of mine - actually not sure if it is a constituent but a member of the Honorary Police - that pointed out to me that Andium do have a no-ball policy in relation to their developments, and such that while the Minister for Infrastructure's laudable plans to get people active, that has a cost of parking, et cetera? Would he take the point that you cannot have any balls and kids want to play with balls in the Town Park actually, or something similar in terms of green spaces, what is going to be required? When the facts change, I change my mind. Does he?
Deputy S.G. Luce :
I did say that every unit has a minimum amount of open space that has to be provided with each unit, and that is the case. I cannot comment on ball playing in these areas. I cannot say I know anything about this but, if true, the Deputy does make a point; young children like to play with any manner of things, but quite often that involves balls.
I appreciate the Minister is somewhat prevented from commenting on the issues around the extension of the Millennium Town Park, but I would hope that he has seen how well used the existing park is. Would he agree with me that we really need to look very seriously to see whether we can increase the space in order to cater for the residents of St. Helier ?
Deputy S.G. Luce :
I can confirm to the Constable that I have witnessed myself the use that particular park gets and other parks in St. Helier . I have witnessed for myself off-Island the benefits to communities of open green space in the built-up area and I would encourage as many as possible to be built. I am not going to go further than that. I will not be taking part in the debate in our next sitting as to whether we extend the park or not. What we build, as I have said before, it could well be subject to a planning application which I may need to determine.
- Deputy I. Gardiner of St. Helier North of the Minister for Housing regarding emergency accommodation in Jersey (OQ.198/2025):
Will the Minister confirm whether emergency accommodation in Jersey is currently only provided by charitable organisations such as the Shelter Trust and the Women's Refuge and will he also advise whether it is his assessment that the current provision meets the existing and future needs of vulnerable Islanders?
Deputy S.Y. Mézec (The Minister for Housing):
Andium Homes and the Housing Advice Service do not themselves directly manage emergency accommodation, all that is provided for in Jersey is provided and managed by charitable organisations. There are around 200 bed spaces provided there but a very significant proportion of that is in facilities which are indirectly owned by the Government through Andium Homes, who provide them to those charities in order to provide that service from them. The question on meeting existing and future needs is an interesting question because, of course, the ideal scenario is that future need is mitigated as much as possible. I am confident that the work of the Housing Advice Service and Andium in engaging with those charities is, right now, probably at the best level that it has ever been before and their communication is much better than it had been in the past, and their ability to be present with those organisations to help build pathways for residents there to go into permanent accommodation is the best that it has ever been. I am also assured that when you get the odd incident where the provision that is available either is not suitable or accessible to a particular person or household because their needs are particularly unique, because of the directions provided by myself
and the Minister for Social Security, our teams are instructed to do whatever they can in that moment as an emergency, if necessary, to make sure that those people are not left on the street and will be left with a roof above their head, one way or another, through that service.
Thank you, Minister, for creating the map of co-ordinated approach. I am sure that the Minister is aware that last week after leaving second emergency accommodation, charity accommodation for a government-provided hotel, a single mother with her daughter was refused check-in and ended up sitting on the bench in the Millennium Park at 9 o'clock at night. Even though a solution was found for them, does the Minister believe this demonstrates a safe and co-ordinated system of emergency housing provision? What immediate steps will he take following this incident so that no family in crisis is ever again left on the bench in Millennium Park.
Deputy S.Y. Mézec :
I am obviously not going to go into the private details of a case like that, as no Minister should on the floor of this Assembly, other than to say that there is substantially more to it than that. I am grateful to the Deputy for acknowledging in the framing of her question that a solution was provided in this case.
I wonder whether the Minister would be kind enough to explain the scale of emergency accommodation required, while never wanting to deal with any public or constituency matters. I have been dealing with one case in which the individual concerned was not able to get any accommodation at all and was going to be homeless for 6 weeks unless an intervention was made, which was not available.
[16:00]
Deputy S.Y. Mézec :
Again, for that specific example, I would want to know more about the facts to be able to offer a more concrete answer to that. But generally speaking there is capacity within the bed spaces that are provided by the charities in Jersey, and my department is constantly in dialogue with those people to try to assist them into permanent housing because obviously the best solution is to bypass emergency housing altogether and go straight into a permanent home in which to be safe and secure. But the instruction from myself and the Minister for Social Security is that when an emergency case arises and there is a risk of street homelessness, that they are instructed to engage immediately to prevent that from happening. That can involve various things, including paying for a hotel, and that will simply be signed off so that will not be an immediate barrier there through bureaucracy or anything like that. Obviously that is not the ideal scenario but they are instructed to do that to make sure that that does not happen. But that does require good communication so that we know who these people are, know where they are and can contact them to enable that kind of solution, and often that can be quite difficult.
I welcome the Minister's issues about personal details and I will take up the case with him, but I wonder whether or not he would be prepared to explain to the Assembly at some point the scale of individuals who are unable to find accommodation because of the current state of the private sector rental market. I was horrified with this particular incident, and it is not an isolated one. I understand the challenges that he has but I wonder if Members could be alerted to the scale of issues that we are having with individuals that are simply unable to be housed, Andium doing their best and we obviously celebrate the fact the O.B.E. (Order of the British Empire) was given to the former chief executive, but there is more to do.
Deputy S.Y. Mézec :
Indeed. On that final point, very well deserved because of the transformation that has enabled us to do so much better work that happened under his leadership. Of course, I would give Deputy Ozouf the undertaking to do that and perhaps we can talk offline about the detail that he would want included in that. The 2 points I would make is that we are now working with those charities to collect data in a way that we were not previously, and that does help give some useful insights and some evidence to some of the things we probably suspected already. He talks about accessing private accommodation, obviously the issue of housing qualifications is a huge part of that and that is a big part of the feedback that I get that finding pathways to permanent housing can often be very difficult because of that. That is an important angle in the conversation.
Does the Minister agree that Islanders who are homeless or at risk of homelessness should have a clear statutory right to accommodation, as per the U.K.?
Deputy S.Y. Mézec :
Yes, I do believe that and I would like us to get to that position. That will be a piece of legislation that will need to be drawn up at some point in order to do that. But I do not think that that is something that in terms of a law could be commenced immediately because we would have to first make sure that we have the infrastructure in place within our public services and other service providers to make sure that when we provide a statutory right to be housed that we know how we will deliver that. I think as soon as we get to a point where we are confident that we can enact such a right, then I would want us to legislate and go in that direction most definitely.
I welcome the Minister's answer to that question. Maybe the Minister could give a bit more detail on what kind of infrastructure he would see needs to be put in place ahead of any statutory rights to accommodation and what kind of timeline that would look like.
Deputy S.Y. Mézec :
It is a difficult question to answer. We know that there are places .. I think in the U.K. there is some kind of statutory right along the lines that the Deputy is referring to. But in reality, it is often not provided for by local authorities because of the difficulties they have. Even though it exists, in reality it is not too much benefit to those who would need it. The things that we would have to think about would be what duties there are on public services for what they do when they encounter somebody who meets a statutory definition of homelessness? That would not exclusively be the housing part of the Employment, Social Security and Housing Department. It would be all departments. It could be the health service that someone's first interaction is with when they are facing homelessness. We would have to work out how that duty is followed by all public services and what they have to initiate as a result of it and who they contact. Those pathways would have to be clear so that everybody knows what their duty is and how they fulfil it when such a thing is made law.
Is a family's status either for 5 years' residency for income support purposes and benefits or 10 years for housing residency a consideration when it comes to emergency accommodation? Does that pose any problems in what the Minister is aspiring to do for this area?
Deputy S.Y. Mézec :
I do not think it is necessarily an issue for accessing emergency accommodation in that if somebody presents themselves who does not have those rights, then some allowances will be made for it. Much of the bed spaces in the charitable sector will not exclusively be for people with entitled status. I know the Minister for Social Security would make funding available, if necessary, to help somebody, even if they did not have their years in Jersey otherwise. The difficulty that it can lead to if somebody does not have their housing qualifications is that their options for a pathway into permanent housing then become more limited. Because as it currently stands, they would not be entitled to social housing and their access to private rental housing would be limited as well. That does often pose difficulties for people in those situations and it makes it harder for my team to map out a pathway for them.
I suppose the question might arise reasonably from a member of the public is: how long would one expect emergency accommodation to be paid for somebody who does not have 5 years' status in the Island? Would consideration, for example, of whether that person has children with them or not also play into that decision?
Deputy S.Y. Mézec :
The Deputy phrased that as a question a member of the public might ask. What was the question Deputy Tadier was asking, just to have an informed answer?
Deputy M. Tadier :
It is the same question essentially. In the provision of emergency accommodation, i.e. whether it is paid for by this Minister or signed off by the Minister for Social Security as a discretionary payment, what consideration is given to somebody's residential status in that and, ultimately, in how much support they will be given for seeking either emergency or proper housing in the longer term?
Deputy S.Y. Mézec :
It is a very difficult question to answer, and I think I would want to give more thought to it before giving an answer off the top of my head. I would want to look at what we have done in circumstances where that might have been relevant previously. But, as I said, the instruction is that we are to do everything we can to ensure that nobody ends up sleeping on the street because of an emergency housing situation. That would be based on who they are and what help we can offer them. We would not just leave someone out in the dark because they did not have particular status.
The Minister published at the end of last year I believe a policy response report in relation to recommendation 59 of the V.A.W.G. (Violence Against Women and Girls) report, which relates to this issue. Could the Minister please update the Assembly as to the progress of the completion of the recommendations within that report?
Deputy S.Y. Mézec :
Is she referring to the follow-on accommodation recommendations? Indeed, I met very recently with the C.E.O. (chief executive officer) of Freeda (Free from Domestic Abuse) to talk about this. It is one of those things where if something is follow-on accommodation, but it is a decent and nice home, you would want that to be permanent accommodation and so you are not putting a family through upheaval. When I met with the C.E.O. we discussed some potential options that could be available through Andium Homes because of Andium's building programme, which some of this is contingent on and building up capacity in that, that gives us the freedom to provide some kinds of access that we have not done previously that might not be a very standard social housing application. Then I also met last week with the C.E.O. of Andium to talk about some of that capacity and what we might do with that. But there are some options there and we want to think a bit more about how we initiate those. I look forward to being able to do so when we are in a position to do so, but the conversations are definitely happening.
I thank the Minister for his answer. At the end of the report that we are talking about he states that: "A funding stream will need to be identified to fulfil the recommendations of that report." Was a business case submitted as part of the Government Plan? Will there be funding in the Government Plan to see this through, so that follow-on accommodation can be made available?
Deputy S.Y. Mézec :
No, there has not been a business case for this Government Budget coming up. There are elements of this that do not necessarily need to have business cases for funding through this mechanism to deliver. Because much of Andium's finances are independent of the Government Budget. There are things within their capacity that if they are able to deliver they would not feature in a Government Budget in that way. If that ends up being a preferred option it would not go through that formal process.
The Minister indicated in his answer there are several steps that need to be taken if you go towards the statutory. There are several steps needed to be taken to address Deputy Doublet . A question, would the Minister commit to one, 2 or 3 steps that he will take until the end of this term to progress on the homelessness matters?
Deputy S.Y. Mézec :
I think I have already outlined many of those. A big part of that is developing more capacity within our social housing sector; that is ongoing. Something we are doing literally every day. We are, through the Housing Advice Service, constantly improving the communication and services that they are able to provide. It was not that long ago that such a service did not exist but now we have a team of specialists who are now physically going to the homelessness charities, meeting with people directly and trying to find bespoke pathways for them that did not exist previously. We have been working on expanding that ever since. There are steps that are underway that we can witness already.
- Deputy J. Renouf of St. Brelade of the Minister for the Environment regarding the former Nude Dunes restaurant at La Pulente (OQ. 200/2025):
Following the issuing on 7th August 2025 of two compliance notices by his department to the former Nude Dunes restaurant at La Pulente, will the Minister explain the rationale for why 2 months was allowed for compliance to be achieved; and will he also state whether it is his assessment that the current legislation for ensuring compliance is fit for purpose?
Deputy S.G. Luce of Grouville and St. Martin (The Minister for the Environment):
The authority to issue enforcement notices rests with the chief officer and not with myself as Minister. I am, therefore, not able to explain the chief officer's rationale for allowing the 2-month compliance period. Additionally, as I may be called upon to objectively determine an appeal proceedings that may result from this enforcement action, I am unable to comment on the appropriateness of the compliance period set by the chief officer. However, I can say that the Planning and Building (Jersey) Law 2002 provides for a wide range of powers to secure compliance with enforcement notices, including prosecution, injunction and works in defaults. I consider these powers fit for purpose in instances of non-compliance with notices.
Does the Minister accept that his answer and indeed the 2 months' compliance period risk the credibility of his department, at a time when people who do comply with planning rules would expect to see other people who do not have justice imposed on them pretty swiftly?
Deputy S.G. Luce :
Times that are used in enforcement notices and compliance are always difficult. I think it is always incumbent to make sure that a time period that is set for a period of time which is achievable, practically achievable, physically achievable. If it would be, for example, a future decision that I might take considering water standards, it may be that I have to set a time period which would allow the water company enough time to practically put in place the steps required. I could go on with any number of examples but I cannot talk about this specific case. But I would say that in any case one has to be fair to both sides. A time period has to be set in which it would be practical for the person to change whatever is being asked to be changed. I am sorry I cannot be a bit more specific.
[16:15]
Speaking as an elected politician maybe rather than an enforcer, could the Minister confirm whether he understands the level of public dissatisfaction, not only in St. Brelade but throughout the whole Island, that a planning application which is being refused for change of us now, as many Islanders have said, the owner seems to be putting 2 fingers up to the planning system? I am not sure if that is parliamentary but that is what they have said in a public group. In fact there is an allegation that this is being used for Airbnb or some kind of residential use, even though it does not have that permission. That allowing 2 months for this to go on while there is still a long period of summer left is seen by many Islanders to be Government being weak when somebody simply decides to bypass the legitimacy of the planning process. Is that something the Minister, as a fellow politician, has sympathy with?
Deputy S.G. Luce :
It may well be the case but I am in a difficult situation when I stand here as Minister for the Environment and asked to have an opinion as a Back-Bencher. All breaches will be investigated by my Department, but I cannot control people's behaviour. If they wish to go off and do things, it is then incumbent upon my officers to go and investigate. If they find that things are not as they should be, the enforcement notices are issued and the person who has the enforcement notice issued has a period of time to rectify the thing they are being asked to change. I cannot really say more than that.
Because this relates to, I think, a level playing field, would it be correct for Deputy Renouf and myself to go back to our St. Brelade constituents and say to the many who are homeowners that it would be okay for them to put illegal structures on their premises and that they can expect a 2 months' grace period for those structures to stay before they will have to remove them from the Minister's department, or will there be different rules applied to those constituents who also wish to break the planning rules in future?
Deputy S.G. Luce :
As I have just said, the officers in my department will investigate all breaches and, if necessary, enforcement notices will be issued. If those enforcement notices are not complied with, that will then be taken to a step further, where evidence will be produced to show that the compliance has not taken place. Legal advice will be taken and a prosecution will hopefully follow. We will always pursue non-compliance, and I would like to think the department is always fair and treats everybody in an equal equitable way. But every case is different and unique, but in every case I would like to think that we are fair to the person that we are issuing the notice to, to make sure that where we do issue the notice with a time period, that that time period allows the person sufficient time to be able to put the situation correct.
I am not sure how members of the public are going to react when I have to explain that the Minister has not asked the chief officer why they have allowed 2 months. But perhaps he could explain whether he has asked what potential enforcement measures are available if the 2-month deadline is not met.
Deputy S.G. Luce :
The reason I have not asked my chief officer is that he went on leave before this question was received, and he is a rather long way away and I have not been able to contact him. But he does have, as I said before, various powers, including prosecution, injunction and works in default. When it comes to works in default, I can say to the Deputy - and I am sure he is aware - those powers are vested in myself as Minister and such an option would be subject to a Ministerial Decision. I would need to get the work priced and works in default, for Members' information, is where I undertake to do the work myself and then seek to reclaim that money from the person. It is not quite as straightforward as it may sound. One needs to be very careful and diligent about what work you are having done and you do not want to get yourself in trouble. But those are the options. In this particular case, as I have said before - I know this is the final question - but it is a live compliance matter and I really cannot comment any further.
- Deputy L.M.C. Doublet of St. Saviour of the Minister for Social Security regarding the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) (OQ. 180/2025):
Will the Minister advise whether the Government intends to seek the extension or ratification of the U.N.C.R.P.D. (United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities) to Jersey and if not, why not?
Deputy L.V. Feltham of St. Helier Central (The Minister for Social Security):
I thank the Deputy for her question. Earlier this year I raised the possibility of extending the ratification of the U.N.C.R.P.D. with a range of stakeholders and put it on the agenda for discussion with the Disability and Inclusion Advisory Group. The group's discussion was focused on making sure that any decision to ratify must enhance and not distract from the Government's aim of improving inclusivity and accessibility across the Island. They said that it was a case of ensuring that the resources that we have are targeted at the areas that will have the greatest impact. Following on from that discussion, I have ensured that the Disability and Inclusion team will be undertaking a process to assess our current policy and practice against the relevant Articles of the Convention. This will help them to determine the value of extending ratification and explore how best this can be achieved, including identifying a realistic and meaningful timeframe. It is important to note that the Jersey Disability Strategy is already grounded in the principles of the U.N.C.R.P.D. As such, the Convention is already guiding the Government's actions and we are absolutely aligned with its principles.
3.18.1 Deputy L.M.C. Doublet :
I thank the Minister for her response, and I look forward to hearing the outcome of that. Could she give an idea of a timeframe for when we might be able to hear an update on that? Also, is there going to be an update to the Disability and Inclusion Strategy anytime soon?
Deputy L.V. Feltham :
As I said, the Disability and Inclusion team are currently undertaking that process. I do have a Disability and Inclusion Advisory Group next week, which I would hope to receive a further update. I will continue to update the Deputy and her Scrutiny Panel as this work progresses.
- Deputy P.F.C. Ozouf of St. Saviour of the Minister for the Environment regarding amendments to the Bridging Island Plan (OQ. 203/2025):
Will the Minister advise whether he intends to seek amendments to the Bridging Island Plan, particularly in relation to the demand for homes available for rent to families, or does he intend to leave any planning framework changes until the next Island Plan is brought to the Assembly?
Deputy S.G. Luce of Grouville and St. Martin (The Minister for the Environment):
The established legal framework which governs any review of the Island Plan would preclude any review of the Island Plan before the end of this political term. The Bridging Island Plan is, however, already delivering family homes for rent on the sites zoned for the provision of affordable homes, along with the provision of family homes on other sites being developed by Andium Homes. As I just said, there is insufficient time to undertake and complete the requisite stages required for any review of the current plan before the end of this political term. Currently the existing legal framework does not enable the review of part of an Island Plan. But I am proposing that the law is changed to enable this to happen. This proposal is currently the subject of consultation and is part of the Planning Services review.
The last part of that question was very welcome indeed because does the Minister agree that the Minister for Housing's comments over the summer break that there is a need for more family homes, the background to the Bridging Island Plan disproportionately delivering flats with 75 per cent of supply being apartments, Fiscal Policy Panel warnings that there is undersupply of appropriate homes, will he then give any indication of when the legal changes will be made so that we can say to our constituents that there is going to be a prioritisation of putting back what should have been done in the Bridging Island Plan?
Deputy S.G. Luce :
As I said just a few minutes ago, it is my intention to change the law so that a section of the Island Plan can be debated in isolation from the rest of the plan. I thought for some time that this was necessary. We live in an ever-changing world where circumstances can change very, very quickly and we have seen that. Before the last Island Plan was debated there was huge demand, the population was soaring and here we are in what seems like just a few minutes later and circumstances have certainly changed. It may not be just on population housing, it may be things like trying to find sites for light industry to be put or energy, for example. We know that political scenarios around the globe change so, so quickly. I think it is vital that a small part of the Island Plan should be able to be debated in isolation from the rest of it. Those proposals are out to consultation. It is my intention that the changes will be made, I hope, before Christmas but certainly before the next election.
The Minister has said he cannot amend the plan, which is correct, but he can issue guidance. The provision of family homes is something the Government he is in is highlighting in investing in Jersey. Is he considering in the interim issuing guidance on the correct or the appropriate housing mix, so he can achieve the Government he is part of ambitions sooner?
Deputy S.G. Luce :
I have a number of pieces of guidance which I am in the middle of trying to get out of the door, so to speak, along with a huge amount of other work. I cannot say to the Deputy that changing guidance on this particular issue is something which I had thought about. I will certainly go away and take these views on board. As he will know only too well, I cannot change policy and guidance has to adhere to policy. I cannot change policy but I will certainly go away and have a look at that and see whether something can be done in short order.
Will there be a new Objective Assessment of Housing Need as part of that process, given that the Minister for Housing described the current assessment of housing need as a work of fiction?
Deputy S.G. Luce :
I do not intend to comment on the quote from the Minister for Housing. But what I may say is that it does appear that, as I have said, things are changing very, very quickly. Anybody who owns a one- bedroom flat, for example, who is looking to dispose of it, will find that their property is being put on the market with a very, very large number of other properties. There are issues around people in first-time buyer properties looking to move on who cannot because the cost of their house has increased. There are a number of issues around housing. Housing is not my remit but I think there is definitely a case for looking as ever. One of the reasons for changing the plan is to allow us to look and make decisions and make some changes. That is the reason I think it is important that the law is changed.
Deputy J. Renouf :
Sir, could I under Standing Order just query? I did ask: will there be a new Objective Assessment of Housing Need? I do not believe that question was addressed.
The Bailiff :
If it was I am afraid it passed me by, Minister, so .. Deputy S.G. Luce :
I may not have answered that question, Sir. But I would think that if an assessment is done of housing needs it may well be that there is some new direction of travel setting some new targets.
Can the Minister just clarify for Members, will it be only the Minister who can open up the Island Plan to amendment after his law change or will it be ordinary Members? Is there any particular area that he is prepared to say he will be opening up for amendment?
Deputy S.G. Luce :
The first thing I want to say is there is no particular area that I have in mind immediately to open up for Island Plan review. But this is out to consultation and it is a very interesting question that the Deputy poses, one that I have certainly considered myself. As much as it might seem like a good idea for someone sitting on the Back Benches to think they could bring a proposition to review a section of the Island Plan, as Minister I would be slightly terrified by the prospect of waking up every morning with another Back-Bencher proposing review in another section of the Island Plan. I think in reality we would have to be very selective of it as to who would have the ability to bring that proposition forward, whether it would be only the Minister for Planning, whether it would be only the Chief Minister or a recommendation from Council of Ministers. There would have to be a mechanism put in place which would ensure that this Assembly is not asked to sit in judgment on sections of the Island Plan every other sitting.
In the previous question I asked about a housing needs assessment and the Minister said that he was not the Minister for Housing but certainly in other post-holder's time, as the Minister for the Environment or Planning President, most of the time it was housing that dominated all issues.
[16:30]
Would the Minister also agree that he and the Council of Ministers need an economic impact assessment of what is going on in the housing crisis that is not the crisis that we thought it was but now a crisis of over-supply and people not buying, with developers not building and the rest of it? It seems that he agrees with the underlying sentiment that one is picking up that there is absolute carnage in the market generally, inexplicable decisions. Will he get an economic assessment of why this is and what the Government in advance of maybe the Budget could do about it?
Deputy S.G. Luce :
I think it is incumbent on any Government to try to keep an eye and a handle on what is happening in the housing market and in Jersey particularly. We hear a lot about family homes but family homes are being delivered on rezoned sites. Maybe the Deputy may say that there may not be enough but the Minister for Housing will have an idea of how many we need. He can look and see what is available in the rezoned sites and what is still to come forward. He can look at some of the applications which have been approved and still have not to start being built. But I can agree with Deputy Ozouf , I think it is incumbent upon us to keep an eye on what is happening, to look at the demand, the type of demand and particularly the type of house that is in demand and to try to adjust accordingly. Because while one, like myself, can be very much wedded to the supply and demand theory, it is all very well having a huge amount of supply in one sector and nothing in another, when it is the other sector that really needs those units. I take the Deputy 's views on board.
- Deputy K.M. Wilson of St. Clement of the Minister for Sustainable Economic Development regarding the economy in the Summer season (OQ. 197/2025):
Further to reports of the difficulties encountered by the visitor economy earlier in the year, will the Minister explain whether that economy recovered and performed as expected over the summer season and will he also state whether it is his assessment that the measures in place to attract visitors during the autumn shoulder months will sustain the visitor economy into next year?
Deputy K.F. Morel of St. John, St. Lawrence and Trinity (The Minister for Sustainable
Economic Development):
I thank the Deputy for her question. The visitor economy has faced many headwinds over the last 4 or 5 years. That started at Brexit, it moved most clearly into COVID, and now is having to cope with price rises in its structure as well, such as obviously increasing wages and such like. On top of that we are seeing consumer demand fall in jurisdictions that would normally feed business to Jersey in terms of visitor accommodation. In a sense, has it been where I would like it to be? The answer is a quite simple no. I would like to see more tourists come to Jersey than we have had. But I am pleased to see that there are signs of recovery and that there are signs that the work we are doing, and I work incredibly closely with both the Chamber of Commerce and the Jersey Hospitality Association and Visit Jersey, I am constantly in contact with them to try to find ways to create that stronger base for the future. We are seeing that increasing visitor numbers from the U.K. have come by sea; 4 per cent higher than last year in 2024. Yes, we have seen a fall-off in French, particularly day-trippers coming to Jersey, but that obviously does not affect the hotel industry. We are seeing across the U.K. market a U.K. market that is weak. Ireland, their first quarter fell by 23 per cent in terms of visitors from the U.K. What we are seeing is many headwinds. But what I am committed to is continuing to work very, very closely with all the concerned associations and parties. I know it is difficult. It is something that vexes me and that I work with on a daily basis to try to make sure that we are doing everything we can to sustain Jersey's visitor economy, not just for this year, not just this autumn but long into the future.
I thank the Minister for his response. He provided some valuable insights into some of the challenges there. But I just wondered, could he provide us with some more content as to what specifically is the Government doing to address the downturn in the economy at this time, in the visitor economy at this time?
Deputy K.F. Morel :
Naturally when Government responds to what it is doing it tends to look to the money that it is spending. I have said these things in previous Assemblies but I will do so again. We have provided over the 2 years - that is this year and next year - £4 million in extra funding for Visit Jersey; that is on top of their base budget. We have seen £2 million over those 2 years also sent to Ports of Jersey to secure new air routes. We have obviously through Visit Jersey .. they choose where to put their funding and they choose the types of engagement they wish to engage with. They have obviously chosen "Bergerac" and that is with the support of the Council of Ministers. On top of that later this month I hope to be lodging the new Alcohol Licensing Law, which is aimed very much at reducing barriers to business. We have reduced the de minimis threshold which lies in the G.S.T. (goods and services tax) refund scheme. That is an attempt to show Jersey as a lower-priced destination because price is a big problem in Jersey; price is probably the main problem that we have. We have also reopened the Visitor Information Centre and we have had trialling of free entry at Jersey Heritage sites, such as the Jersey Museum, which drives footfall there. As I said at the last Assembly, I have very much spoken with the J.H.A. (Jersey Hospitality Association) and created a working group that meets monthly. Also working with the Chamber of Commerce and we are looking particularly at data on that side of things. They are just a few of the things we are doing. That is not even talking about heritage investments which run to the many millions, which are also designed to increase Jersey's attractiveness as a destination.
Minister, I am sure that you are aware about Critical Infrastructure Resilience - Transport Links report that was published by C. and A.G. (Comptroller and Auditor General). When I looked through the report I found that in 2024 expectations for sea passengers by the Ports of Jersey in their strategic plan was just under 500,000 arrivals. But within the report C. and A.G. confirmed that during 2024 we had only 272,000 passengers arriving through Jersey's sea routes and more than half the visitors coming from France. Would the Minister consider to review strategic plans compared to the reality and what steps can be taken when we have this disparity between planned and arrivals?
Deputy K.F. Morel :
I think it is really important that we understand that the customer is changing. We have seen a big shift, a very large shift from sea arrivals to air arrivals; that is something which is changing almost on a daily basis. That is one of the reasons why you are seeing those changes. I do worry obviously because I know that the ferry decision that I made is something which so many people want to maintain as an issue. I do worry that people try to look for that one thing which is the cause of all the problems. As I have just listed, there are many, many reasons why we have had a more difficult season this season. But I think it is very important that we understand that there is change in our customer base, there is change in Jersey's cost base, and there is change in literally the money available to people. One of the things we are seeing is a much, much later booking situation and that is one reason why Visit Jersey's autumn campaign has been working.
Minister, it is 2024, it is before any ferry situation. My worry that we are thinking about development, for example, the redevelopment of the ports which is thinking will bring new clients, when we are not getting into almost half of the arrivals without any ferry situation. What is the assessment we need to do for our future Jersey product?
Deputy K.F. Morel :
It is very interesting because I spent a lot of time thinking about the port redevelopments and I do wonder .. not so much just on a tourism front because I do not think a new terminal will ever bring more passengers. It is, what is the port there for? I think our port could do a lot more and probably does need to do a lot more into the future, rather than just passengers and freight. It should be looking at marine engineering and the such like service, and it already is servicing offshore windfarms in other places. I always am prepared and continue to keep strategic plans under review. As I said, in my case I am working constantly and consistently with the trade associations in regards to hospitality so that they can see we are working together co-operatively to try to ensure that tourism remains a key industry for Jersey, because it is a key industry for Jersey that maintains not just itself but maintains Jersey's connectivity as a whole.
Would the Minister also seek to speak to the wider commercial business and retail community in St. Helier ? I am sure the Minister, like me, will have been to places like Dinard, all sorts of small towns in Brittany, where shops stay open - surprise, surprise - well even after 6.00 p.m. and that you can buy ice creams even after 8.00 p.m. at night and there are crowds of people. Even on Sundays you cannot differentiate which day of the week it is when you are in Saint-Malo in the summer and even into the shoulder months. Is there a wider conversation that the Minister would be willing to have about how we make sure that not just St. Helier but that Jersey is open for business for locals, for business visitors and for tourists alike, certainly in the summer but all year round?
Deputy K.F. Morel :
I think that is an absolutely fascinating and very valid set of perspectives by the Deputy . We have - and it was under my predecessor, now Chief Minister - effectively, got rid of most of the opening hours restrictions, the vast majority of them. It is not legal barriers that are stopping that taking place, it is commercial barriers that are stopping that taking place. I will more than happily engage with any retailers to see what else can we do. This is the one of the things an events programme in St. Helier is so important for because that brings people to town out of hours. None of this is easy but I could not agree more, that when you visit Saint-Malo, when you visit Dinard and Dineault particularly you see these small towns but they are open, not all year round but they are open certainly throughout the summer to a great extent. But there are vast discrepancies in the numbers; 3 million visitors visited Saint-Malo, I believe, roughly last year or the year before, Jersey I think has come to 700,000 visitors.
Deputy P.F.C. Ozouf of St. Saviour : I think given time, Sir, I will not.
I accept that the Minister has previously stated some of the interventions to turn the visitor economy around. But given what he has just said about the change to the customer and cost base, what is it that he and his team believe they need to do differently to improve matters?
Deputy K.F. Morel :
I do not believe it is something that Government needs to do differently. I think it is something that Government working with the industry needs to just consistently be very honest and open with each other. I think we need to understand that Government cannot run a business, and Government cannot run an industry. What Government can only do is enable those businesses to have the best platform upon which to thrive commercially; that is what I will continue to do. I mentioned the Licensing Law; that is part of it. The events legislation that we are working through at the moment is exactly designed to do the same sort of thing. It is about enabling businesses to thrive. It is not about Government doing it because Government cannot run and should not run businesses.
The Bailiff :
There is a possibility of maybe one question and one answer.
- Deputy D.J. Warr of St. Helier South of the Minister for the Environment regarding pesticides containing PFAS (OQ. 189/2025):
Further to reports in February 2025 that 4 pesticides used in Jersey contain P.F.A.S. (perfluoroalkyl substances), will the Minister advise what steps, if any, have been taken to remove these pesticides from use and if such steps have been taken, when it can be expected that the use of these pesticides will cease?
Deputy S.G. Luce of Grouville and St. Martin (The Minister for the Environment):
Extensive international research is underway to better understand the risks associated with the hundreds of P.F.A.S.-containing products used in daily life and pesticides containing P.F.A.S. are just one example. Pesticide use on the Island adheres to E.U. (European Union) and U.K. approvals. These jurisdictions possess the necessary expertise and analytical capacity to assess how specific P.F.A.S. compounds used in pesticides break down into metabolites, how they interact with plants and soil, how the crops absorb them and, ultimately, how they might affect human health. I will continue to follow the guidance from the E.U. and the U.K. If they decide to ban specific pesticides I will support implementing an equivalent ban in Jersey.
[16:45]
In practice, this occurs automatically; that is before any pesticide can be used, sold or supplied it must be authorised for use. In the U.K. these authorisations are granted by the Chemical Regulations Directorate.
The Bailiff :
You went over the time by 8 seconds, Minister, but I think we can forgive you for that. Deputy S.G. Luce :
My apologies, Sir.
THE STATES noted that in accordance with Standing Order 63 (9), a written response would be provided to the following oral questions that had not been asked during the time allowed at the meeting –
- Deputy H.L. Jeune of St. John , St. Lawrence and Trinity of the Minister for International Development regarding Jersey Oversees Aid's humanitarian support provided to Gaza (OQ.187/2025):
Question
Will the Minister state whether Jersey Overseas Aid, through its partners, has been able to reach civilians in Gaza with humanitarian assistance in the last few months, and whether the Commission has assessed the effect on communities when any such assistance is blocked, delayed or weaponised?
Answer
A recent briefing from the World Food Programme's Country Director in Jerusalem confirmed that the latest allocation is successfully reaching civilians in Gaza. This support is providing essential nutrition to malnourished children under five, as well as to pregnant and breastfeeding women.
Further confirmation has been received from the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, indicating that Jersey's funding is contributing to the delivery of protection, shelter, sanitation, and health services through its pooled fund.
Additionally, International Health Partners has delivered medicines for over 55,000 people in the West Bank and is actively collaborating with in-country partners to move critical medical supplies into Gaza, despite ongoing access restrictions.
The Commission receives regular briefings and remains acutely aware of the devastating consequences when humanitarian assistance is blocked, delayed, or weaponisedexacerbating hunger, disease, and protection risks. For this reason, continued support is directed toward trusted humanitarian partners to ensure aid is delivered impartially, even under severe constraints
- Deputy L.K.F. Stephenson of St. Mary, St. Ouen and St. Peter of the Minister for Education and Lifelong Learning regarding the demand for States secondary school places (OQ.191/2025):
Question
Will the Minister explain what modelling is undertaken to predict the demand for States secondary school places; and will he also advise at which point in the process any potential challenges in demand are identified and what procedures are in place to address such challenges?
Answer
The department has been routinely forecasting pupil numbers for many years to support strategic planning across the education system. Our current model draws on a range of robust data sources, including:
• Birth numbers
• Termly pupil census data
• Residential addresses of pupils
• Migration patterns within the pupil population
This modelling includes estimating how pupils are likely to be distributed across different education sectorssuch as Government of Jersey fee-paying, non-fee-paying, and private schools. We use these data inputs to project future cohort sizes and forecast year group demand at individual schools over a twenty-year period.
Recognising that all projections carry a degree of uncertainty, and that population dynamics can change, we apply a prudent planning assumption by incorporating an additional 5–10% capacity within the system to ensure resilience and flexibility in meeting future demand. For example, the forecasts for Year 7 taken during Year 5 enable schools and the department to plan forms of entry and any staffing changes that may be required.
So, there are continual points at which challenges around demand are identified. Including projections for the next 20 years. For the deputy, we have briefed the scrutiny panel and all head teachers on the future demographic trends. There is no simple summary of the future projections.
The Bailiff :
We come now to questions without notice. The first Minister is the Minister for Health and Social Services.
Deputy S.G. Luce :
Sir, before we start, could I just ask a question of the Chair? The Bailiff :
Yes, of course. Deputy S.G. Luce :
The intention is that this questions without notice will take us to 5.30 p.m., is it our intention to continue with the 2 statements after that?
The Bailiff :
It is entirely a matter for the Assembly of course. I have given permission for a personal statement to be made by Deputy Ozouf as the next item of business after questions. Then there is a statement from you, as Minister, which will of course attach to it the possibility of some questions to follow on from that. If we do get through that today, then that will enable the Assembly to have a flying start tomorrow with Public Business but that is a matter for the Assembly ultimately. We will probably need to decide that when we finish the question periods.
In recent weeks the Minister has spoken very openly about the need for a substantial increase in health funding. Could the Minister please explain to Members why he thinks such large increases are required and where he thinks this funding should come from?
Deputy T.J.A. Binet of St. Saviour (The Minister for Health and Social Services):
It is quite correct, I think it is commonly known that I have made it plain that the health service requires a lot more money and that takes some explanation. Just by way of background, in the forthcoming Budget we were looking for about £8 million a year going forward on digital and £4 million on preventative health and an increase in the base budget for Health. I think what nobody has taken into account or certainly not made a public statement about is the fact that Health is quite an unusual area insofar as it has to deliver what it delivered last year. In the following year it has to deliver whatever medical science throws at it in addition. If we look back over the past 60-plus years, life expectancy has increased from about 71 to 83 years, something roughly in that order; 12 years of extra life. It is in those 12 extra years that peoples' money gets spent. We are still paying 20 per cent tax and criticising the health service for overspending when we should be referring to it in terms of underspending. When we come to our digital efficiency, we have been rated on an international scale of 1 to 7 and we have scored at zero. When I see appointments being missed, appointments not going out in the right way, patients falling in between the gaps between the services, it does not entirely surprise me. We have not got an operating system that is collective that allows the human element to come together, and that is going to be addressed in the next sitting when we look at the Partnership Board. There is a great deal of work to be done and a lot more money is going to be required. In terms of where that comes from, we need the money immediately. I will be looking for that money to come from existing funds. But then I think we have to have a serious conversation with the public about the situation that we confront. I think we are going to have to ask the public to pay and contribute more money because you simply cannot do that from where we are at the present. I think if people want to carry on
The Bailiff :
I think you have to bring that answer to a close, Minister. Deputy T.J.A. Binet :
Sorry, I was just trying to provide a comprehensive response, Sir. The Bailiff :
Understood but that is 30 seconds over the usual one minute 30 seconds that we allow. Deputy T.J.A. Binet :
Thank you, Sir.
The Bailiff :
Supplemental question, Connétable ?
The Connétable of St. Martin :
No, that is quite a lot to process. No, thank you, Sir.
Taking on board that the Minister is asking for more money, could he clarify whether that money will, essentially, go to fund the same system that we have now? In other words, a system where it is free for people going to the hospital and elective surgery and so on or has he at any point considered other models, such as insurance models or so on? In other words, are we simply spending more on the same system or are we considering new systems?
Deputy T.J.A. Binet :
We will be spending more with the system that we have got and the system that we have got will expand and improve. In terms of the funding, I think we have got to be prepared to look at anything and everything. That might be a range of charges for certain items, it might be an insurance system. We are certainly trying to encourage more use of private insurance. But I think we have got to look everywhere. We will put in charges to drive behavioural change in some areas to improve efficiency and certain areas might include raising funds. It is a complicated area and it certainly will not be sorted out between now and Christmas. It is an ongoing effort which is going to be very comprehensive.
Will there be a health strategy to explain where the money is being spent, what the ambitions are and how we might judge whether if those ambitions are being successfully met?
Deputy T.J.A. Binet :
I am always very interested when people talk about health strategy. I believe we have got a very active health strategy taking place at the moment. At some point in time, when time allows, I am going to articulate that properly and make that plain publicly. There is a lot of reorganisational stuff going on. In terms of the finer points of health strategy, I think that will come when we have got our house in order. It is a bit like going on a journey and planning the journey before; a journey by car and not making sure that your car is in order before you start the process. That is the approach that we are going to be taking.
When the Minister is looking at reforming the health service, will he take an approach that bears in mind health inequalities which are already quite entrenched in Jersey and to ensure that any reform of the system does not further worsen those health inequalities?
Deputy T.J.A. Binet :
We certainly will not be looking to worsen health inequalities. I am very happy to say that we will be doing all that we can to improve those inequalities. It is all part and parcel of the mix.
The Bailiff :
Any other questions for this Minister?
Could the Minister give an example of concrete actions that he is going to take to do that? Deputy T.J.A. Binet :
I am afraid I cannot give any concrete examples but you can rest assured that that is one of the many things that is on the agenda.
Would the Minister set out what he believes are the 3 achievements that he is most proud of during his term of office so far as Minister?
Deputy T.J.A. Binet :
I do not like to talk about issues of pride. I have been given a job to do. I think in successive statements that I have made it is very clear the things that I am doing. I think critically improving the funding, being clear about what that funding is going to be used for. I think the plans for the Partnership Board, hopefully, are going to make sense to Members of the Assembly. I am just happy to talk about the work that I am doing and I am certainly not interested in using the word "pride" in any way.
4.4.1 Deputy L.K.F. Stephenson :
What are the 3 main things that are still on the Minister's to-do list as his top priorities for the rest of his term?
Deputy T.J.A. Binet :
I think I have probably just mentioned them: improve the funding, get the Partnership Board through and just carry on with the number of numerous things we have been doing. When we talk about the Partnership Board, I will be giving a full explanation of the other elements that we brought into play to make sure that we have got a more consolidated and cohesive health service.
Could the Minister give an update on the new hospital? Where is it at in the process and when will we start to see it being put up?
Deputy T.J.A. Binet :
Yes, negotiations are taking place between the final companies that are vying for the project. I am hoping that a contract will be signed before Christmas. It may just be that it might be just after Christmas; that is a little bit later than we had anticipated. That is simply because the construction industry is a tricky one at the moment and we are having to be very, very careful about what we do and how we do it in terms of making sure we have got the right partner going forward. But I am very close to the process. I am very happy with the way it is going. I think we have got some very good people on the team running that project.
I thank the Minister for providing that information and maybe a follow up would be, would we see before the next elections some movement up at Overdale and some spades in the ground?
Deputy T.J.A. Binet :
I think it is fairly certain that the main contractors will be at work before the next election. But I think it is also important to make it clear that work continues on that site all the time. The Jersey new waterworks premises are being refurbished now ready for the team to take up residence there while the project is going on, and that is going to be used as an F.M. (facilities management) hub thereafter. Mains electricity, drainage and site hoardings are all being put in place with local contractors. In the past scheme that would have been given to the overall contractor and they would have taken a margin on it. Our team have very cleverly made sure that they put out to local business everything that they possibly can to keep that spend in the Island. Work will continue between now and the main contractor arriving on site.
The Minister just mentioned that he was looking for a £12 million increase in his budget in the forthcoming Island Budget. Does he believe that there will be similar reductions from other departments to cover that?
Deputy T.J.A. Binet :
No, I do not. I have made it plain that I think this money should be in addition to anything else. I do not think other budgets need to suffer on account of this. As I have said, the money is required immediately. If we start waiting until we have done any sort of tax-raising or charge-raising exercises, we risk and it simply will be too late. The rate at which health costs are increasing, I think it could cause our overall budget serious damage if we do not start addressing the many problems that have been ongoing for a considerable amount of time. No, I would not be looking to other areas to make cuts to make this money available.
Does the Minister envisage that there may have to be tax rises to cover the extra costs moving into the future?
Deputy T.J.A. Binet :
As I have said, nothing is predetermined. I do not know whether we talk in terms of tax rises or certain charges for certain procedures; that is the work that is just being started at the moment.
Listening to the Minister's answer to my earlier question, it seemed to me that he was talking about a health strategy being developed in his head. I wonder whether he would commit to whether or not there is going to be a health strategy published. To develop his analogy, as well as he is getting the car ready for the journey, it is also good to know the destination and the route and a health strategy might clarify that.
Deputy T.J.A. Binet :
Perhaps I can make it a little bit clearer. I am bringing a proposal for the establishment of a Partnership Board. If the Assembly are minded to pass that, we will move very quickly to establish that. It will be the job of that Partnership Board then to do the more detailed work of putting a health strategy together. I am very happy about the overall structural strategy that we are working on at the moment. I am happy to elaborate when I describe the Partnership Board and why we need that. I am certainly happy in the introduction to give more background of the overall picture, which, as I say, it might be in my head but I have made all of my thoughts very public, certainly over the last 6 months.
Just to clarify that the Minister is subcontracting the health strategy to the Partnership Board should it be established?
Deputy T.J.A. Binet :
I do not think it is necessarily a case of subcontracting. There will be a Partnership Board that brings all the threads together. It will give G.P.s, the private businesses that are in care, the charities and H.C.J. an equal voice. I think that is the forum in which these things are better discussed. It is a proper operating forum that brings all the threads together. I think it is a more coherent approach to putting strategies together.
I just wonder if the Minister could update on the delivery of the dementia strategy and if he will be putting further funding towards that in the next budget?
Deputy T.J.A. Binet :
I have not got an up-to-the-minute report on where we are with that but the £4 million that I will be asking for preventative work, I am fairly certain that some of that money might be available to dementia. Because there are a number of areas that we need to tackle. I am not sure but I think it is an 8 per cent year-on-year increase in people reaching retirement age, and that is going to place a very heavy burden on the service. Dementia will be taken extremely seriously ongoing.
It seems to me that we are following a chicken and egg strategy. I would implore on the Minister for Health and Social Services to follow the principle that you cannot build a hospital without a health strategy; that comes first.
[17:00]
You would not know how big your hospital should be, what services the hospital should provide, what staffing ratios they supply and what medical backup you need and staffing. Without that you should not be building a hospital.
The Bailiff :
I am sorry, what was the question? The Connétable of St. Clement : Do you agree?
Deputy T.J.A. Binet :
I do not agree with that at all for lots of reasons, not least of which is timing. The new hospital's strategy started 3 years ago nearly. We are well under way. There has been an enormous amount of collaboration between the team and everybody that works in the health services. They have got a very clear view of what is required to meet their needs going forward. That has involved virtually everybody, there have been hundreds of consultations. I do not accept that contention at all and I do not think it does justice to the considerable amount of work that has taken place.
The Bailiff :
That brings the time available for questions to this Minister to an end. The next Minister is the Minister for Housing.
What actions will the Minister take before the end of his term to help under-25 year-olds access affordable housing and to tackle the bean drain, an issue this Government has already recognised as a serious concern and one driven by the lack of affordable housing for young people?
Deputy S.Y. Mézec of St. Helier South (The Minister for Housing):
I thank the Deputy for her question. I have been clear that it is my ambition that at some point I would like us to get to a point where we can lower the age for social housing eligibility below 25. But I have been clear that that will be done in an evidence-based way, making sure that we are
matching capacity with interest. I am not setting an arbitrary deadline for that because if we got to that deadline and turns out that capacity was not going to match interest there, then that would not be to anyone's benefit. It is something that I am keeping a watchful eye over and something which I am in regular conversations with Andium Homes about, testing with them what interest they get when a new development comes online and what types of applicants come forward - if there is less or more demands than they anticipated from it - and it will be through that that I decide when is the moment to lower the age. It is my desire for it to go beneath the 25. I am probably running out of time, but she had also mentioned about the bean drain. I do not think that social housing eligibility is the only element to that. First-time buyer support is obviously a huge part of that as well and that is why I am wholesale behind the ambitions in the Investing in Jersey plan which I think will go some way to making that something that more young people feel is an aspiration that they can meet in Jersey.
5.1.1 Deputy H.L. Jeune :
I thank the Minister for his answer and he mentioned the first-time buyer scheme but, of course, maybe under 25 year-olds do not necessarily want to make that commitment yet so what other schemes or actions could the Minister do to support affordable housing for under 25 year-olds if it is not through Andium and if they are not wanting to take that commitment to get a mortgage and build debt just yet?
Deputy S.Y. Mézec :
I do think that it is important that we encourage people into home ownership as young as they can manage because that means that they are spending more of their younger working years paying into an asset for themselves, paying their own mortgage and, if we are able to encourage that younger, then that is a good thing. It also means those young people will have a clear commitment to Jersey and are less likely to be actively thinking about moving when they are tied to the Island with that asset. But, of course, for those for whom that is not an interest to them or something they want to pursue right away, I think that it would be very helpful to encourage young people to be able to live independently in their early 20s, not having to stay with their parents beyond their years, which is something that for many reasons will not be desirable to people at that age. But if they know that their option is going to be to move into a private rental sector where there is insecurity of tenure and no protection against excessive rent increases then I would not blame any young person for not finding that particularly appealing, especially when they would compare that to other jurisdictions that in the near future .. England, for example, making huge progress on that now and other jurisdictions being much further along than we are, which is why I have proposed a residential tenancy law that I think will, in particular, help young people looking to rent in the private sector.
- Deputy M.B. Andrews of St. Helier North : Is the Minister supportive of P.61 and, if not, why? Deputy S.Y. Mézec :
This is embarrassing. Can the Deputy remind me which one P.61 is? I am not good with P. numbers usually.
Deputy M.B. Andrews : Pre-sale agreements. Deputy S.Y. Mézec :
Pre-sale agreements. Deputy Andrews and I spoke about this recently. The proposition, in its current form, will not go as far as I think the Deputy 's ambition is to have a better framework for how people buy their homes to give them protection from gazumping, so I am keen to engage with Deputy Andrews about what we might be able to do perhaps to tweak that in some ways to make it stand a better chance of providing protection to those people. Deputy Andrews , when I met to speak to him, had indicated that he was happy to have that conversation so I am looking forward to getting a date in the diary and sitting down over a coffee with him and seeing if we can work something that gives us all confidence, can be a good way forward on that.
What elements of concern does the Minister have at the moment and how would he go about correcting those?
Deputy S.Y. Mézec :
Even with pre-sale agreements in the form that Deputy Andrews is proposing, there would still potentially be circumstances where people could end up in a situation where they think they are about to go ahead with transacting on a house and then have their heart broken because something has come up that is not necessarily anyone's fault or is not out of malicious attempt to extort more money from that person. There are things that can come up at the last minute that would not be covered by that and, of course, there is the strange part of our rules which is physically having to go to a court and buy your home through that way, which is not a system that lots of other jurisdictions do. I think that if we sit down together and think about this, perhaps there is something a bit more all-encompassing we could look at that might be able to close-off some of those loopholes and meet the ambition that Deputy Andrews is raising, which is a genuine and sincere one to stop people from going through that horrible moment that we have had testimony has happened under our system under the current rules in recent years.
As my second oral question did not make it due to time and it is for housing, I will ask it now. Wider to the presentation of the Scrutiny Report on the Draft Residential Tenancy Amendment Law in which it is stated that there are significant misinformation and confusion around the law and the proposed amendments, will the Minister detail what steps, if any, he is taking to address and counter this information?
Deputy S.Y. Mézec :
I would be lying if I said I did not feel a great sense of vindication when I read that line in the Scrutiny Report because it most definitely is the case that in much of the dialogue about the proposed Residential Tenancy Law that there is a large proliferation of misinformation as to what the law will require of people in our society. The soft approach to that is to do some of the things that I have already done, which is provide a Q. and A. document that I hope is reassuring to both landlords and tenants and, if the law is adopted, obviously I will have more to do on that. I am producing more firm guidance that I want to be as easily accessible and understandable as possible but the hard approach on that is to be unapologetic in countering misinformation when it is spread by some. When people want to disparage the proposed law and say things like: "Oh, this just increases red tape", I will look that Member in the eye and say: "Go on, tell me what red tape", and I will enjoy the flustering that they do afterwards because there is no extra red tape proposed in that law. When a Member stands up and talks about state oversight being introduced by the law, we will be unapologetic in saying that is untrue; there is no extra state oversight proposed in that law. We stand firm against misinformation because it is something that when it is proliferated in politics denigrates us all.
Building on that, will the Minister set out the measures proposed in the draft Residential Tenancy Amendment Law to mitigate any potential unintended consequences, particularly in the view of the misinformation identified?
Deputy S.Y. Mézec :
Indeed, and we will begin that debate possibly tomorrow, and there will be a degree of my proposal proposition speech in that where I will tackle some of that misinformation and aim to do that. We also have our government communication channels, which we intend to use as well to make sure that as many as the myths around this can be countered. I am confident that if we are given permission to go ahead with that, then people will eventually come to realise that the law that is proposed is balanced and proportionate, does not lead to any extra impositions on anyone who is currently doing the right thing in that part of our market but will exclusively negatively impact those who are undertaking behaviours that nobody would want to defend.
Speaking about the supply of family homes and the Island Plan rezoned sites specifically for that purpose, affordable family homes, does the Minister believe that if the sites that were rezoned in the Bridging Island Plan are not brought forward for development, they should be compulsory to purchase as allowed for in the Bridging Island Plan that they can be?
Deputy S.Y. Mézec :
Given that I voted in favour of the Bridging Island Plan, it would be hypocritical for me to say that that should not be an option. Obviously, it should be a last option and would not be something that you would want to go through the process of doing if it was at all avoidable but there is a reason why that backstop is in the Bridging Island Plan. I supported it being there and as a very, very last resort, I would not have any kind of in-principle opposition to it, but hopefully it is not something we need to consider.
Is the Minister engaging at all with landowners, developers or any other stakeholders to ensure that that measure is not required and encourage those sites to be brought forward without that backstop?
Deputy S.Y. Mézec :
I have had a lot of engagement in the last year and a half with various developers and those seeking to bring these sites online and build what was also intended to be built on them. I have worked with them to make sure that what they propose fits in with that vision and that they stand the best chances of success in being able to deliver on it. Because the Deputy has asked me that question though, I should probably go back and double check all of those sites to see if there are any that have not come up in any of that dialogue so far and if there are not any, then I should probably look at that.
The Minister for the Environment earlier touched on a growing challenge that is facing owners of properties with first-time buyer restrictions from previous approvals when they were built as demand has been exceeding supply. Will the Minister advise whether he and his department have reviewed the stock of housing - the accumulative stock created of housing - which has these purchase restrictions and whether we need to review how occupancy restrictions work to best serve the homeowning market?
Deputy S.Y. Mézec :
I do not know if that review of the stock in the way the Deputy is asking has taken place, but it is the case though that the broader policies on who can access those kinds of homes with restrictions on is something that we are actively considering. There is a line in the Investing in Jersey plan that highlights that especially as something that we are going to need to look at reviewing those policies. I did last year change some of that to make it easier for people who had already bought a home to regain their first-time buyer status for the purposes of upsizing, and that enables them to access some
of the schemes, like Andium Homebuy, for example, or other restricted homes that they had not beforehand been able to access as easily. But the testimonies that I am receiving now from people who are struggling with upsizing suggest to me that there is probably more we ought to be looking at doing in that but that is on our agenda, and it is referenced in the Investing in Jersey plan.
Does the Minister intend to extend the First Step Scheme and, if it is extended, where will he get the funding from?
Deputy S.Y. Mézec :
There will not be an extension of it for this upcoming Budget. Initially, we had £10 million earmarked for it and we were able to extend that to another £2 million at the last one. I am very pleased with how it has gone so far. I think it has been a great success, but my intention now is to take a little bit of time to reflect on it, see if there is any tweaking that could be done. There were people who appealed through it because they were not eligible so I want to think about did any of those people have a point and could a future tranche or iteration of it accommodate those kinds of people more easily. We will need to take some time to do that and obviously it will not be in the gift of this Assembly and this Government because of the election next year, but if I have anything to say about it, I will want to push for more funding for the Budget afterwards when we will have done that piece of work to be able to see if any tweaks to First Step need to be made. But I think that it has already demonstrated that it is a very good system, it works, and it would be relatively easy to restart it again at some point in future if we needed to.
[17:15]
Will the Minister provide the current number of Islanders who are in band one on the Affordable Housing Gateway? Band one, as a reminder, most of them are emergency accommodation like homelessness, staying in hostel shelter, tied in accommodation linked to the employment, et cetera. What are the numbers and when does the Minister expect that they will receive accommodation?
Deputy S.Y. Mézec :
This is where I am going to fumble through my paperwork, but I do have that figure somewhere and I am trying to buy time to find it and obviously I am going to fail to do so, but I will endeavour to get that figure to the Deputy as soon as possible.
The Bailiff :
If you delay it a little bit more, we will be out of time anyway, Minister. The Minister has undertaken to answer; I will give you a supplemental.
Deputy I. Gardiner :
There will not be time. I understand. Thank you. The Bailiff :
That does bring to an end the time available for questions to this Minister. We therefore come on for questions to the Chief Minister and we have Deputy Warr .
That was very quick. In his answer to my P.F.A.S. question, the Minister for the Environment said that he would be following international guidance. I would like to bring to the attention of the Chief Minister a recent court case in Italy where a company was found guilty of contaminating water in the Veneto region. Eleven executives were jailed. The judge commented the executives were not simply negligent; they deliberately prioritised profits over health. What reassurance can the Minister give to Jersey residents the application of any chemicals currently used by the farming community are P.F.A.S. free?
Deputy L.J. Farnham of St. Mary , St. Ouen and St. Peter (The Chief Minister):
I do not have the expertise to answer that question without referring to the officials. I would refer to the work that is being led by Deputy Luce and Deputy Binet on the P.F.A.S. and remind the Deputy and the Assembly the Government have published their response to the third report from the independent P.F.A.S. scientific panel to reassure Islanders and have agreed the recommendations and provided intervention and feedback. We are making good progress with that, having accepted the challenges that lie ahead in now dealing with the best way to deal with it. The technical aspects of assuring which farming chemicals do not contain P.F.A.S., I would have to seek expert advice; I am happy to do that. Perhaps the Deputy could put that in a written question, and we can provide a public answer.
Does the Chief Minister not believe that rather than waiting for slow-moving E.U. regulatory processes, an island the size of Jersey should in fact be on the front foot and implementing our own precautionary restrictions on P.F.A.S. use ahead of external regulatory frameworks?
Deputy L.J. Farnham :
I would argue that we are on the front foot and remind Members we are leading the way in almost every other jurisdiction with the work that is being done. Yes, I do believe that we should stay on the front foot and rather than fast followers, we have the opportunity to be leaders in our small Island, and I have full confidence in the work that is being carried out. I am agreeing with the Deputy and also reminding Members while this work is challenging and concerning for Islanders, we are moving forward with it.
On 21st August, after it was announced that the fast ferry service to the U.K. would be suspended for the winter, the Chief Minister said: "The level of service delivered to date, particularly the decision to withdraw the U.K. fast ferry over winter, falls short of what was promised." The day after the Minister for Sustainable Economic Development confirmed that that was not something that was in the contract, so can he say in what way DFDS service fell short of what was promised?
Deputy L.J. Farnham :
First of all, I want to take the opportunity to say that I have been working closely with the Minister for Sustainable Economic Development in meeting with DFDS and holding them to account. In fact, we have a meeting with them in Jersey after the Assembly this evening. In relation to the fast ferry and the contract to which it applies, there are 2 aspects to that contract which involve comments I made. The first one is that the contract says that they are obliged to provide fast ferry services during the summer months, but in the contract DFDS also proposed - and the tables are in there - that they would continue to provide a fast ferry service throughout the winter months, and they provided some schedules to that. Of course, there is a commitment by DFDS to invest £300 million in a new fleet in forthcoming years, over the next .. I am not sure, I think it is 6 years, might be 8, so that is a far greater investment than we have ever seen in the ferry so there has to be a certain amount of commercial latitude in the contract. But we had a positive meeting with DFDS and we are meeting with them again today to work closely with them to ensure Islanders get the best service possible within the realms of commercial reality.
I am confused by that because the Minister for Sustainable Economic Development said on 22nd August that there were no guarantees within the contract about use of fast ferry services in the winter. I wonder if we could have some clarity from the Government about this, please.
Deputy L.J. Farnham :
As I have just said, I think there is an interpretation to be had in the contract from what I have just explained. DFDS did propose that they would operate some fast ferry services in the winter. At the moment, they are planning to take one fast ferry out and keep one fast ferry in, and I am optimistic that we can find some schedules using one fast ferry between Saint-Malo and the northern routes and those are the discussions we are having now.
Can the Chief Minister advise what oversight he has of the economic conditions affecting the Island at the moment and what is he doing to improve the cost-of-living position that is affecting so many Islanders at this time?
Deputy L.J. Farnham :
As I have said on numerous occasions in the Assembly, as many Members will know, we have limited levers we can pull to impact upon our own cost of living because the majority of it is dictated by circumstances outside of the Island but this Government we refer to the C.S.P. (Common Strategic Policy) in relation to the reduction of G.P. fees, provided extended nursey care. There are some more financial support measures coming up in the existing Budget promoting competition. Deputy Morel chairs the Cost of Living Support Group and I refer Members to the report of that that was published in, I think, 2022 in relation to keeping States charges as low as possible, and we have limited those to 2.5 per cent increases. We are doing whatever we can to bear down on the cost of living, but it is difficult because we have limited options. I know it is a topic that is high on the agenda of the Minister for Sustainable Economic Development, but it is extremely challenging given most of the challenges are coming from outside of the Island.
Can we be confident that there will be some consideration given to fiscal stimulus within the forthcoming Budget and on that, can the Chief Minister explain why the Budget is delayed and we have not seen it yet?
Deputy L.J. Farnham :
Yes, I can reassure Members we are bringing forward as part of the Budget some measures that will help Islanders with costs. From memory, I am talking about extended nursery care as an example. The Budget is not delayed as such. When I wrote to Scrutiny back in May, we were aiming for lodging it 2nd September. I think when we looked at States business and the timing of the assisted dying debate and the challenges we have .. I say challenges we have had with the Budget. It has been a long, lengthy, detailed discussion about how we reprioritise spending in the Budget. It was agreed that the most sensible solution was to lodge on 15th September for debate in December, so I hope that is acceptable to all Members and I promise them not a dull and boring pre-election Budget but an interesting Budget that I think is in the best interest of the Island.
The Chief Minister alluded to this in a previous answer, but could the Chief Minister update the Assembly on the current status and timeline for the proposed public ombudsman?
Deputy L.J. Farnham :
Not at the moment because Deputy Moz Scott is in the process of completing her work. I am looking at her now, but I am sure she will update me afterwards. I can let the Deputy know but I know work has progressed and I hope that is something we can take to the Council of Ministers in fairly short order.
In the absence of an ombudsman, how are Islanders currently meant to have confidence that their complaints against public bodies are handled fairly and independently?
Deputy L.J. Farnham :
I think that is probably at the heart of why this Assembly agreed to establish an ombudsperson some time ago. We have run our various complaints system. The one we are running with now, I think it is fair to say, needs a review for more modern society and community and I think that is why we are likely to be recommending to Council of Ministers we move ahead with the previous States decision. That, of course, is subject to debate on the detail but then I think we will be in a position to have a consistent long-term approach to handling complaints both inside and within government organisations and to government-owned organisations as well.
The Chief Minister has mentioned the DFDS, that he is meeting with them this evening. Can the Chief Minister confirm that he is aware that our Scrutiny Panel has asked for the contract, the concession agreement, to be put in the public domain? Is that something that the Chief Minister from a governmental point of view can commit to doing and, if not, why not?
Deputy L.J. Farnham :
It is something that both the Minister for Sustainable Economic Development and I agree with the principle of. Of course, it is different to the operating agreement. It is now 150 pages with, I think, 9 schedules of detailed contractual terms that relate to a business arrangement with a multinational company so there are a lot more commercially sensitive aspects of the contract. The contract has been provided to Scrutiny in its entirety, and the Minister for Sustainable Economic Development is considering how best to publish the detail without compromising the confidentiality, but I would like to say we are committed to better transparency on this and the Deputy will keep the chair of Scrutiny informed.
I wonder whether the Chief Minister might ask DFDS .. we have written to them as a Scrutiny Panel asking them to meet with us in public, which they have declined. I wonder in his meeting tonight, in the spirit of transparency along with the concession agreement which we are asking to be published, whether they would also agree to come and meet with us publicly willingly.
Deputy L.J. Farnham :
I shall certainly ask the question.
Once again referring to the northbound ferry route, would the Chief Minister agree that given the public ultimately would like a cheap, reliable ferry service running in calm seas all the time, would he agree that a compromise would be a slower vessel but reliable running north?
Deputy L.J. Farnham :
That is what is proposed by DFDS, that they would increase and improve the service provided by the traditional ferry during the winter period. I would like to see some rotation of the fast ferry on the southern and northern route, and that is part of the discussions we are having with them. But we can be assured of an improved and stable traditional ferry service throughout the winter service providing additional sailings.
6.6.1 The Connétable of St. Brelade :
Will the Chief Minister guarantee to provide calm seas throughout the winter? Deputy L.J. Farnham :
Yes, and sunny weather as well.
Deputy Scott 's amendment to the Residential Tenancy Law, amendment 6, is premised on the claim that she is "simplifying the Minister for Housing's proposition". Does he think that it shows respect within the Ministerial team that one Minister rewrites a proposition for another Minister and would he recommend that Ministers adopt this practice more widely, perhaps with a variety of Ministers rewriting the Budget to their taste?
[17:30]
Deputy L.J. Farnham :
How long have I got, Sir? I think all Ministers and Assistant Ministers have acted with courtesy, respect and professionalism when dealing with this. We have had some challenging discussions around the Council of Ministers table, and it is quite within the rights of an Assistant Minister to amend a proposition. Would I like a smoother Government? Not necessarily, because I think when we disagree, when we have these disagreements, we have deeper and more thorough debates, and I know it is not always comfortable. But in the case of the Residential Tenancy Law that is coming to debate tomorrow, I look forward to that debate and when the Government cannot agree, we are mature enough to say we agree to differ, and we turn to this Assembly to make the right democratic decision.
The Bailiff :
Supplemental question, Deputy Renouf ? Forty-five seconds. Any other questions? Deputy Ahier , you will have to be quick.
I did press my light earlier; not to worry. Does the Chief Minister accept that all States Members should abide by the Code of Conduct?
Deputy L.J. Farnham :
There are a number of different codes of conduct but in general, yes, I do agree with that.
Are there any aspects of the Code of Conduct that the Chief Minister believes may need amending and will he bring forward any amendments to the code?
Deputy L.J. Farnham :
I simply would need time to consider that. I do not think anything is perfect and we could probably make improvements, and I am sure this topic will come up for conversation at some stage in the debate tomorrow.
The Bailiff :
Very well. That brings to an end the question times for the Chief Minister. Can I just make an observation from the Chair? I called to account Deputy Jeune because she said: "Yep", but on various other occasions, we have had "yeahs" or no acknowledgement of a question from the Chair at all and that is not very parliamentary, so perhaps if Members could avoid slang if it is in response to a question from the Chair, that would be much appreciated before anger ensues.
Deputy M. Tadier :
Sir, it is 5.30 p.m., may I propose the adjournment? The Bailiff :
You can. May I, before you propose the adjournment, simply say we move on to 2 matters before Public Business. The first matter is a statement that can be made by Deputy Ozouf . That is a personal statement and therefore there are no questions that flow from that. Having looked at the length of it, it is 7 or 8 paragraphs, 3 of them are about 5 lines and the rest are 2 lines and no more. Then there is the possibility of a statement from the Minister for the Environment which, of course, will attract the potential for 15 minutes of questions. If the Assembly continues then we are likely to be finished by well before 6.00, but that is a matter for Members. I simply give that as information so that Members can decide if they want to deal with these matters as a first item of business tomorrow, or whether or not they wish to deal with them this evening. In that context, do you propose the adjournment?
I do. I think that tomorrow's business, the first item is of course the one that deals with the matter of P.P.C., which involves Deputy Ozouf , and I imagine that his statement relates to that very topic. So, it would seem to be logical to have that done on the same day rather than have a statement now, which there are no questions about. It seems sensible to have that tomorrow and in fact do the other statement also tomorrow. We are at 5.30. We have sat a day early, and it is a continuation of States business after question time.
The Bailiff :
Then you are proposing the adjournment, Deputy . I can see that there may be room for discussion on this. Is that seconded, before we have a debate on it? [Seconded]
I am not sure of the Standing Order. If I may amend the proposition, and I do not want to spend more than 5 minutes. I understand Deputy Ozouf 's statement will only take about 5 minutes, and I propose it might give us something to reflect upon overnight before tomorrow's debate, and I propose we allow him to make it. [Approbation]
Deputy P.M. Bailhache of St. Clement :
I am afraid I did not quite hear what the Chief Minister said, but I was going to ask you for a ruling in essence on a point of order, because it does seem to me that where a Member wishes to make a personal statement, he really ought to be given the opportunity to make that statement at the earliest opportunity [Approbation], and it is a very short statement, and I hope you will be able to rule that it should take place this evening.
The Bailiff :
Thank you. I do not feel able to make that ruling. The points you make are entirely well made and the Assembly may agree with that. Standing Orders, I believe, provide that the Bailiff has to approve the content and has to indicate that it can be made. But when it is made, is normally when it falls conveniently within the business of the Assembly. We have reached the end of the ordinary business for the day. It may be entirely sensible to deal with a short matter at this point, but I do not think I can pre-empt the rights of the Assembly by giving an order to that extent.
I am encouraged by the foot stamping following Deputy Bailhache 's intervention. In my opinion, and it is only my opinion, I would like to put the Assembly in the hands of Deputy Ozouf on this matter, and if he should like to make the statement tonight then I feel that that is for him to decide, rather than the rest of us.
The Bailiff :
We have a proposition. Are you prepared to withdraw that in favour of the possibility of dealing with Deputy Ozouf alone at this point?
Deputy M. Tadier :
No. I would like to sum up when everyone has spoken and maintain the proposition. The Bailiff :
All right. Very well.
Deputy L.J. Farnham :
I did try to amend it. Is that possible?
The Bailiff :
I do not think we can amend on the hoof in that way. I think the correct thing is if Members do not want to adjourn immediately and want to deal with some other matter, either one or both of them, then we vote on Deputy Tadier 's proposition and then someone else makes another proposition. It may or may not pass.
Deputy R.J. Ward of St. Helier Central :
I just want to say to the Assembly, on a number of occasions people with families have said that they do have children and last minute extensions to the day are not a positive thing to do and we have adjourned. But we seem to be not doing that today. I think if this is going to happen it should have been dealt with earlier in the day so those with families, who have to look after them, could have made arrangements. But we are not doing that.
Deputy M.R. Scott of St. Brelade :
Notwithstanding that, I find this whole thing very kind of uncomfortable. I agree with Deputy Morel . I know that Deputy Ozouf cannot speak but a little thumbs up or thumbs down would be really useful.
The Bailiff :
Does any other Member wish to speak on this? The issue is whether or not we adjourn immediately. If we vote in favour of that - and Deputy Tadier will have a chance to respond - if we vote in favour of that, then the Assembly will stand adjourned, and the rest of the business will continue tomorrow. If we vote against, then it will be for the Assembly to determine whether we deal with one or both matters of outstanding business. No other Members?
I do not know if I am missing something. We made a decision to meet early on a Monday. We would normally be here on a Tuesday at 9.30. We would normally have question time, then we would move on to a period of statements, if there are any, and then we would move on to the rest of Public Business. We made a decision to sit today exceptionally to do question time. We did not say we were coming back here to question time and any other statements. Members knew that. There were Members who were not in the Assembly today, who have been excused because today was not a scheduled sitting day. Deputy Ozouf 's statement, I suspect that he will make a personal statement, is directly related to the no doubt long debate that we will have tomorrow on the issue in hand, which is to do with the suspension of a Member, which is very serious and which needs detailed consideration. I would suggest we do not start that this evening, especially when we were not anticipating starting it, especially when we do not have the full number of Members who might be
here to hear that statement. I also notice I do not have a copy of that statement that is being made. I do not have my laptop with me today either, and I do not have access to my emails. So I will not be able to read along with what Deputy Ozouf might wish to say. But I do note that he made a personal statement at the recent sitting, and that he will also have 2 opportunities to speak tomorrow during the debate at the beginning and at the end of the debate. We are essentially talking about a third speech here, and I think it would be entirely appropriate for that speech to be made in the wider context of the debate, which we will then virtually immediately start after the speech. That is the reason I am proposing the adjournment, as the Standing Order says the adjournment should be posed at 5.30. I might be missing something. I do not know what the wider politics are here, but I do not see why we would not adjourn and come back tomorrow and do this in the right order and also hear the statement that is to be made from the Minister for the Environment, which will include questions. I maintain the proposition that we adjourn now.
The Bailiff :
All those in favour of adjourning .. the appel is called for. I invite any Members who are out from the Chamber to return to their seats. The vote is on do we adjourn now or continue to deal with other business yet to be determined. If Members return to their seat, I ask the Greffier to open the voting. A vote pour is to adjourn immediately. If Members have had the opportunity of casting their vote, then I ask the Greffier to close the voting. The proposition is defeated:
POUR: 12 |
| CONTRE: 32 |
| ABSTAIN: 3 |
Connétable of Grouville |
| Connétable of St. Helier |
| Deputy S.Y. Mézec |
Connétable of St. Ouen |
| Connétable of St. Brelade |
| Deputy P.F.C. Ozouf |
Deputy G.P. Southern |
| Connétable of Trinity |
| Deputy R.S. Kovacs |
Deputy M. Tadier |
| Connétable of St. Peter |
|
|
Deputy M.R. Le Hegarat |
| Connétable of St. Martin |
|
|
Deputy S.M. Ahier |
| Connétable of St. John |
|
|
Deputy R.J. Ward |
| Connétable of St. Clement |
|
|
Deputy C.S. Alves |
| Connétable of St. Mary |
|
|
Deputy T.A. Coles |
| Connétable of St. Saviour |
|
|
Deputy B.B. de S.V.M. Porée |
| Deputy C.F. Labey |
|
|
Deputy J. Renouf |
| Deputy S.G. Luce |
|
|
|
| Deputy K.F. Morel |
|
|
|
| Deputy I. Gardiner |
|
|
|
| Deputy I.J. Gorst |
|
|
|
| Deputy L.J. Farnham |
|
|
|
| Deputy Sir P.M. Bailhache |
|
|
|
| Deputy D.J. Warr |
|
|
|
| Deputy H.M. Miles |
|
|
|
| Deputy M.R. Scott |
|
|
|
| Deputy C.D. Curtis |
|
|
|
| Deputy L.V. Feltham |
|
|
|
| Deputy R.E. Binet |
|
|
|
| Deputy H.L. Jeune |
|
|
|
| Deputy M.E. Millar |
|
|
|
| Deputy A. Howell |
|
|
|
| Deputy T.J.A. Binet |
|
|
|
| Deputy M.R. Ferey |
|
|
|
| Deputy A.F. Curtis |
|
|
|
| Deputy B. Ward |
|
|
|
| Deputy K.M. Wilson |
|
|
|
| Deputy L.K.F. Stephenson |
|
|
|
| Deputy M.B. Andrews |
|
|
The Greffier of the States:
Those voting pour: the Connétable s of Grouville and St. Ouen , Deputies Southern , Tadier , Le Hegarat , Ahier , Ward , Alves , Porée , Renouf and Deputy Coles online.
The Bailiff :
The next logical thing is to permit Deputy Ozouf to make his statement, because that is the next order of business, and if we are not adjourning we must be doing something. But then it falls to be decided as whether the Minister makes his statement at the end of that.
Deputy M. Tadier :
Could I ask for a point of process? Could we have a copy of the statement, please? The Bailiff :
Yes. The Greffier was waiting before circulating until the Greffier knew that the Deputy was to make his statement. Now, that is known, that will be circulated forthwith.
Deputy S.G. Luce :
If I could be of assistance, and in order to circulate my statement at the correct time, could we agree now that I would not make my statement until tomorrow morning? Would Members agree with that?
The Bailiff :
Can I just take a general mood of .. Yes. I think if someone proposes the adjournment after Deputy Ozouf has spoken, then there is going to be no comment.
Deputy S.G. Luce : I am grateful. Deputy M. Tadier :
Just to say I do not have the statement. I do not have access to emails, and I am waiting for a paper statement.
The Bailiff :
It has been circulated to Members electronically in the usual way, Deputy . But if it assists, you can have my paper copy. You will have to pass it around. I have mine electronically. But we do not have an usher.
Deputy K.F. Morel :
I believe the usher may have gone to print out some copies.
The Bailiff :
There we are. Could you hand that to the Deputy Tadier , please?
Deputy M. Tadier :
Thank you. It is kind.
The Bailiff :
That is fine.
I am sorry for taking the Assembly's time, but I am grateful. Last November, I drove at 31 miles an hour in a 15-mile-an-hour green lane. Although I was insured, I had not displayed the valid insurance certificate in my car. Following interactions with the States police this was corrected, and I wrongly assumed that this matter was closed. Highly respectful of the Parish system, of course I would have wished that the non-attendance at the Parish Hall Inquiries would not have occurred. However, because of the speeding issue, I was referred to the Magistrate's Court where I admitted the offence, gave a fulsome apology and paid the fine immediately. Following media reports of my attendance at the Magistrate's Court, the Commission of Standards received 4 complaints from members of the public. The Commissioner decided to commence an investigation and concluded my conduct fell short of the Code. I accepted that finding and I apologised before P.P.C. I wish to offer a full and unreserved apology today to this Assembly, to my constituents, to the Honorary Police of St. Helier , whose service I said I deeply respect. This experience has been profoundly humbling and distressing. I have felt genuine embarrassment and regret for letting down those I serve and for falling short of the standards expected of me. In the last 2 years, I have faced a number of personal traumas, including, most importantly, the death of my husband. The effect has been to turn my life upside down and to a great extent affected my ability to single handedly address the volume of issues that arise in such circumstances in the ways that I would wish. Members of this Assembly are aware that during this period I was also advised to seek expert professional advice for my health. As a result, it was established and then later confirmed that I was living with A.D.H.D. (Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder). This diagnosis would never have been made otherwise, but this clarity has given me the tools to make the necessary adjustments. It has helped me to gain a deeper understanding and insight into both the challenges and strengths, but that is not an excuse.
[17:45]
However, it offers an explanation as to why I have found certain issues so challenging, including my interaction with the Commissioner of Standards whose office I have the utmost respect for. I am adjusting to the way of life as it is now for me. I continue to put in place structures and arrangements that will assist me for a better future, and I thank Members for their continued understanding and support. Thank you.
Deputy L.J. Farnham of St. Mary , St. Ouen and St. Peter :
I propose the adjournment, please.
The Bailiff :
The adjournment is proposed. The Assembly stands adjourned until 9.30 a.m. tomorrow morning. ADJOURNMENT