PPC Minutes (Part A) - 26th January 2026

78

Privileges and Procedures Committee (16th Meeting)

26th January 2026

Part A (Non-Exempt)

All members were present with the exception of Deputies T.A. Coles of St. Helier South and K.L. Moore of St. Mary , St. Ouen and St. Peter , from whom apologies had been received.

Deputy S.M. Ahier of St. Helier North , Chair

Deputy C. S. Alves of St. Helier Central , Vice Chair

Deputy M. R. Ferey of St. Saviour

Deputy L. K. F. Stephenson of St. Mary , St. Ouen and St. Peter Deputy M. Tadier of St. Brelade

In attendance -

L-M. Hart , Greffier of the States

J. O'Brien, Head of Digital and Public Engagement

E. Patterson, Secretariat Officer, Specialist Secretariat

C. Tucker, Secretariat Officer, Specialist Secretariat

K.M. Larbalestier, Principal Secretariat Officer, Specialist Secretariat

Note:  The Minutes of this meeting comprise Part A only.

Minutes.  A1. The Minutes of the meetings held on 1st and 22nd December 2025, having

previously been circulated, were taken as read and were confirmed.

Privileges and  A2.  The Committee received an oral report from the Head of Digital and Public Procedures  Engagement in connexion with a request from Deputy T.A. Coles of St. Helier South Sub- for  consideration  to  be  given  to  the  publication  of  correspondence  from  the Committees:  Privileges and Procedures Committee's Sub-Committees on the States Assembly publication of  website.

correspond-

ence.  The Committee noted that, at present, only correspondence from Scrutiny Panels

was published on the website. The Head of Digital and Public Engagement advised that, if the Committee was minded to support Deputy Coles ' proposal, website related work to facilitate this had been costed at £1,200.

The Committee agreed to defer consideration of the above matter until the next scheduled meeting when Deputy Coles was present.

A discussion ensued with regard to whether a formal sign-off' process was required for correspondence being sent by Sub-Committees, but no firm conclusions were reached. Deputy L.K.F. Stephenson of St. Mary , St. Ouen and St. Peter stated that whilst the Diversity Forum Sub-Committee had been established under Standing Orders as a Sub-Committee of the Privileges and Procedures Committee, it was distinct from the other Sub-Committees in terms of its purpose and how it had been set up. She asked the Committee to take this into account in the context of this and other matters.

79 16th Meeting 26.01.2026

States  A3.  The Committee considered a report which had been prepared by the States Assembly: 3- Greffe in response to a request from Deputy M. Tadier of St. Brelade during a recent weekly  States meeting for a review of the decision to move to a 3-weekly meeting cycle (as meeting cycle.  set out in P.74/2021).

The Committee noted that Deputy Tadier had requested that the Committee consider the above matter in response to concerns expressed by some Members at being asked by the Chair to extend meeting days in order to accommodate the volume of business.

The Committee noted that, in adopting P.106/2020, the States Assembly had agreed to  a 6-month trial period of  3-weekly  meetings  during  2021.  Opinion  on  a permanent change had been split, with the States ultimately adopting a proposition which sought approval for a move to a 3-weekly meeting cycle, with a caveat that the frequency of meetings could be reviewed in future (P.74/2021 refers).

The Committee noted that changes had been made to the process for both oral and written questions when the aforementioned proposition had been adopted, together with related amendments to Standing Orders. If the Committee wished to return to a 2-weekly meeting cycle, consideration would have to be given as to whether the systems for both types of questions should revert to those in place prior to the introduction of the 3-weekly cycle.

The Committee considered statistics for the years 2020 – 2024, which illustrated trends in the volume of business considered by the Assembly over that period. The Committee concluded that the current arrangements appeared to work well with built-in flexibility for additional meetings as and when required. The 3-weekly meeting cycle also allowed sufficient time for Members to participate in other parliamentary work.

Selection of an  A4.  The Committee, with reference to its Minute No. A13 of 10th November elected  2025, considered a report prepared by the Deputy Greffier of the States together with Member to  a draft report and proposition which established the convention of selecting an preside at  elected Member to preside at States Meetings in the absence of the Bailiff / Deputy meetings of the   Bailiff .

States.

The  Committee  recalled  that,  having expressed  support  for  the  above,  it  had requested that a draft proposition be prepared which was less prescriptive than P.86/2024, which had been lodged au Greffe' (and subsequently withdrawn) by Deputy I.J. Gorst of St. Mary , St. Ouen and St. Peter . The Bailiff had been consulted on the proposal and had suggested that 2 working days' notice be provided in respect of the requirement to preside. It had been suggested that the Chair/Vice Chair of the Privileges  and  Procedures  Committee  should  preside  in  the  absence  of  the Bailiff / Deputy Bailiff , with the Greffier and the Deputy Greffier presiding on an ad hoc basis to cover comfort breaks.

The Committee considered the draft proposition and noted that, if adopted, the arrangements would take effect when the States was reconstituted after the public election in June 2026. The draft proposition required the Committee to review the arrangement  after  one  year  and  report  back  to  the  Assembly  with  any recommendations. Whilst the adoption of the proposition would not require any legislative/Standing  Order  amendments,  changes could  be  made following  the review period if required.

The Committee considered the proposition and whilst the majority of Members were supportive of the proposition as drafted, Deputy M. Tadier of St. Brelade proposed inviting the Bailiff to attend the next scheduled meeting to discuss the matter in more detail. Deputy Tadier suggested that consideration should be given to a less formal approach which did not restrict who the Bailiff / Deputy Bailiff could select to Chair in their absence.

The Committee requested that the Greffier of the States invite the Bailiff to attend the next meeting.

Miscellaneous  A5.  The Committee considered a report prepared by the Deputy Greffier of the amendments to  States in connexion with draft amendments to Standing Orders which addressed the Standing  re-introduction of the office of Senator and the manner in which time not used during Orders.  oral questions without notice was allocated.

The Committee recalled that the Senators (Jersey) Amendment Law 2025 had received Royal Assent and had been registered in the Royal Court on 12th December 2025. In accordance with Article 65 of the Amendment Law, it would come into force automatically. The Committee noted that amendments to Standing Orders were required in respect of the Roll Call, modes of reference to elected Members during proceedings and to ensure that Senators could nominate candidates for the position of Chief Minister. Members considered a draft proposition which proposed that Senators would appear first on the Roll in accordance with previous practice.

Turning to Standing Order 66, it was recalled that it had previously been agreed that any time not used during the first 2 periods of oral questions without notice should no longer be carried over to the third period and would fall away (Minute No. A8 of 8th September 2025 refers).

The Committee approved the amendments and requested that the proposition be lodged au Greffe'.

Filming and  A6.  The Committee considered a report which had been prepared by the Deputy photography in  Greffier of the States in connexion with the development of a formal policy for the States  dealing with requests to film or take photographs in the States Chamber.

Chamber: draft

policy.  The Committee noted that whilst there was currently no formal policy in respect of

filming or photography in the States Chamber, it was generally accepted that filming or photography could not occur at any time without the explicit approval of the Bailiff  (as  the  presiding  officer)  in  consultation  with  relevant  Members.  This approach was consistent with that of other parliaments.

The Committee was advised that the accredited media had, in the past, been permitted to film or take photographs in the Chamber for the purposes of compiling a digital image library. Photographs of school visits were also permitted and the States Greffe used images taken in the States Chamber in conjunction with the work of the Assembly.

The Committee considered the draft policy, which sought to capture established practices and set out parameters to guide decisions in relation to future requests. It was noted that the States Greffe would refer all requests to the Bailiff , who might choose to engage with the Committee before arriving at a decision. In some situations, a standing consent' would be granted in order to avoid the need for repeated applications. Whilst not explicitly referenced in the draft policy document, the Bailiff had indicated that he might also grant consent directly on occasions when he accompanied official visitors on tours of the Chamber. The challenges associated

81 16th Meeting 26.01.2026

with policing the policy were recognised given the ease and speed with which individuals could capture images on mobile devices. It was suggested that policy breaches be dealt with by means of messaging, in accordance with current practice. A recent incident whereby a Member had made a video in the Chamber and posted this on social media without permission was noted.

Having considered the draft policy, the Committee approved the same and requested that the Bailiff be advised of its decision prior to the policy being circulated. In doing so, the Committee noted that arrangements had been made for an official end of term' photograph for Members. Deputy L.K.F. Stephenson of St. Mary , St. Ouen and St. Peter suggested that this might also present an opportunity for any Members who wished to do so to take photographs in their allocated seats for posterity. Whilst no  issues  were  envisaged  with  this  request,  the  point  was  made  that  such photographs could not be used by Members in their election campaign.

Standing  A7.  The Committee, with reference to its Minute No. A8 of 10th November 2025, Orders 16/67  considered a report prepared by the Deputy Greffier of the States, together with a and 103 –  draft amendment to Standing Order 16 – leave to make a personal statement. personal

statements:  The Committee recalled that the Bailiff had granted Deputy P.F.C. Ozouf of St. review.  Saviour leave to make a personal Statement at the States meeting on 8th September

2025, in accordance with Standing Orders 16 and 67. The statement directly related to  the  Committee's  proposition which  sought Deputy Ozouf 's suspension for breaching the Code of Conduct. Given the existing procedural context, as set out in Standing Order 103 (2)(e), the Committee had considered the following options -

amending Standing Orders to preclude personal statements which directly related to suspension/confidence/censure propositions, given that the Member who was the subject of the proposition could speak twice in accordance with Standing Order 103(2)(e); and,

making broader provision within Standing Orders for the Bailiff to refuse leave to make a personal statement if it was considered that granting leave would constitute a breach of other Standing Orders (such as Standing Order 103). Guidance along the lines of that produced in 2013 could be developed and circulated to support the application of any revisions to Standing Orders.

The Committee had requested that draft amendments to Standing Orders which encompassed the options set out above be prepared for its consideration. The Bailiff had been consulted on the proposals and had expressed support for amendments to Standing Orders to ensure that Members were unable to make personal statements in relation to suspension propositions.

The Committee  discussed the  proposed amendment  to Standing Order 16 and considered the likelihood of the existing procedural context being used as a means of  circumventing  other  Standing  Orders  in  the  future.  Members  agreed  that amending Standing Orders as proposed was appropriate and would bring greater procedural clarity. It was noted that the amendment would preclude Members from making  a  statement  on  a  proposition  which  related  to  a  vote  of censure/confidence/suspension unless the  statement was made at least 14 days before the debate on the proposition and the purpose of the statement was to advise the States of the Member's decision to resign either as an elected Member or from the office or body to which the proposition related. It was also proposed that updated guidance be presented to accompany the proposed amendment.

The Committee deferred consideration of the above matter pending a discussion with the Bailiff at the next scheduled meeting.

Hansard/  A8.  The Committee, with reference to Minute No. A5 of 1st December 2025, transcripts of  received an oral report from Ms. J. O'Brien, Head of Digital and Public Engagement, Scrutiny  in connexion with options for improving the search functionality associated with Hearings:  Hansard and transcripts of Scrutiny Hearings on the States Assembly website. improved

search  The Committee recalled that it had considered the results of a survey designed to functionality  gauge the opinion of Members in relation to Hansard in its current format and had on States  noted a general dissatisfaction with the existing search functionality and a desire for Assembly  improvements.  Some  Members  preferred  to  use  a  new  website  known  as website.  digitalStates.je, which had been developed by Deputy A.F. Curtis of St. Clement . It

was understood that digitalStates.je aimed to improve accessibility and included transcripts of States meetings with enhanced search functionality and breakdowns of Members' contributions. The Committee had also noted requests for a more user- friendly format for mobile devices; breaking up speeches for easier reading and linking speeches and subjects to individual Members.

The Committee had been advised that the cost of providing an automated transcript of  States  Meetings  with  enhanced  search  functionality  was  estimated  at approximately £30,000. This involved using artificial intelligence to transcribe parliamentary sessions from audio to text. However, 100 per cent accuracy could not  be  guaranteed  and  a  disclaimer  would  be  required  (as  was  the  case  on digitalStates.je).  The  Committee  had  agreed  that  the  option  of  uploading  a searchable version of the original (and official) Hansard report, which was quality assured by the States Greffe, be explored, as opposed to creating an automated version at additional cost.

Members were advised that a response was awaited from the external transcription company in relation to a request for the transcript to be provided in an alternative format to facilitate enhanced search functionality on the States Assembly website. The Greffier of the States highlighted the need to ensure that any such changes did not compromise the format and style of the official record.

Management  A9. The Committee, with reference to Minute No. A6 of 1st December 2025, of electronic  received a report from Ms. J. O'Brien, Head of Digital and Public Engagement in mail messages  connexion with the organisation of Members' contact details on the States Assembly to all States  website  to  ensure  a  targeted  approach  to  the  management  of  correspondence Members.  addressed to all States Members.

The Committee recalled that it had agreed that a form of words be devised for inclusion on the website which encouraged members of the public to contact constituency representatives in the first instance. Other suggestions had included groupings such as, all Ministers/all Connétable s/all Senators (after the 2026 public election). Whilst some changes had already been made to the States Assembly website with Members' individual contact details now being listed ahead of the option to contact all States Members, the Committee had requested that further consideration be given to the manner in which Members' contact details were presented on the States Assembly website. This would include consideration of groupings, as detailed above, and more compelling messaging which focussed attention on the importance of targeted communication.

The Committee noted the changes proposed in response to its comments, to include text designed to facilitate a more targeted approach and the creation of distribution lists. Members were also requested to consider whether to remove the ability to email

83 16th Meeting 26.01.2026

all States Members to avoid duplication of effort. It was noted that topic pages were under development which would include contact details for Members with official responsibilities in specific areas.

The Committee discussed the above matter and, with the exception of Deputy M. Tadier of St. Brelade , supported retaining the ability to contact all States Members. Deputy Tadier believed that contacting all States Members was counterproductive and constituted poor practice. However, the importance of making it as easy as possible to contact elected Members was recognised and there were occasions when the public wished to do so on matters which affected the Island as a whole. Deputy Tadier suggested that members of the public should be encouraged to include the parish they lived in on any communications. The Committee also approved the inclusion of text designed to target communications, as set out in the report, and agreed that the proposed Comité des Connétable s grouping should be replaced with an all Connétable s' grouping.

On a related matter, Deputy C.S. Alves , Vice Chair asked whether members of the public who contacted elected representatives via the website received out of office responses when Members were away. The Head of Digital and Public Engagement undertook to clarify the position and to provide data on the number of electronic messages sent to Members via the website.

Role profiles  A10. The Committee, with reference to its Minute No. A7 of 1st December 2025, for elected  noted that the Role Profiles for States Members' document, which had recently been Members:  approved by the Machinery of Government Sub-Committee, had been circulated to Machinery of  the members of the Diversity Forum and the Political Awareness and Education Sub- Government  Committees as requested and that no comments had been received.

Sub-

Committee.  The Committee was advised that due to the cancellation of Sub-Committee meetings

in December, the document had been uploaded to the Teams channels which had been set up for those bodies. A recent re-post' by officers at the request of Deputy L.K.F. Stephenson of St. Mary , St. Ouen and St. Peter had failed to elicit any responses.

The Committee discussed the document and noted suggested amendments from the Chair and Deputy Stephenson .

The Committee requested that the document be included on agendas for comment at the next Sub-Committee meetings.

Forthcoming  A11.The  Committee noted  propositions  which  had  been  lodged  au  Greffe'  for business.  forthcoming meetings of the States Assembly.

The Committee was reminded that a briefing was due to be held later in the day in relation to amendments to Standing Orders in respect of the Code of Conduct for Elected Members (P.102/25 refers).

Action list:  A12. The Committee noted the actions and outcomes arising from previous meetings. Privileges and

Procedures

Committee.

Common- A13.  The Committee, with reference to its Minute No. A13 of 1st December 2025, wealth  received an oral report from the Greffier of the States in connexion with the Parliamentary  recommendations  arising  from  the  Commonwealth  Parliamentary  Association

Association  (CPA) Gender Sensitive Parliament Self-Assessment Jersey report (the CPA report). Gender

Sensitive  The Committee recalled that Recommendation No. 9 of the aforementioned report Parliament  related to the establishment of a designated family room for Members and their Self- dependants which was equipped to meet caregiving needs.

Assessment

Jersey report:  The Committee recalled that it had been agreed that the Mary Newcombe room provision of  would be re-purposed for use as an informal meeting room/family room. It had family room  originally been envisaged that Members could leave children unattended in the within the  family room, whilst being solely responsible for their care, safety and welfare. States  However, a risk assessment had concluded that children, irrespective of their age, Building.  should not be left unattended in the room for safeguarding, safety and security

reasons.  The  Greffier  reminded  the  Committee  that  the  CPA  report  also recommended a review of security provisions within the States Building. It was acknowledged  that  current  security  levels  and  access  controls  within  the parliamentary estate were unlikely to meet accepted standards and that airport-style security access arrangements could be recommended. There was a strong likelihood that unaccompanied strangers would not be permitted within the parliamentary estate.

The Committee discussed the above matter and noted a suggestion that Members' children  could  wait  in  the  Information  Centre  in  Morier  House  for  their parent/guardian or the public library/public gallery of the States Chamber. The Greffier of the States stated that it was not appropriate for staff within the States Greffe to supervise Members' children; nor were unaccompanied children permitted to access the public gallery. It was also pointed out that the Information Centre was open to the general public so the suggestion gave rise to a whole host of issues, not least safeguarding. It was further noted that the main entrance doors to Morier House were closed and locked at 5.30 pm. Deputy L.K.F. Stephenson believed that most workplaces now provided an area for children to wait for their parents – it was noted the States Greffe did not provide such a facility for all the reasons set out above.

The Committee noted the position.

Jersey  A14. The  Committee noted a comment which  it recalled  had been circulated Electoral  electronically and which had been prepared by the Jersey Electoral Authority (JEA) Authority:  in relation to P.115/2025 – Registration of political groups, which had been lodged comment in  au Greffe' by Deputy R.J. Ward of St. Helier Central .

response to

P115/2025.  P.115/2025 requested the Committee, in consultation with the JEA, to produce a

voluntary code of practice for all political groups that had candidates standing in the 2026 public election. The code would require, among other things, the publication of a political agenda, information about funding sources and details of any donations above the threshold set out in the Public Elections (Expenditure and Donations (Jersey) Law 2014. As the Committee was unlikely to reach a consensus on the matter to the manner in which it was constituted, the JEA had been asked to provide a comment on the proposition.

In its comment the JEA acknowledged the need for transparency but had noted that long before the formation of political parties, informal groupings had existed with Members gravitating towards those with shared political views. More recently, this practice had been extended through the creation of named groups or movements and some disquiet had been expressed during the 2022 elections regarding the fact that such bodies did not need to meet the same level of transparency as their party counterparts,  despite  the  fact  that  they were campaigning  as  a  collective  and appeared to be sharing resources. The JEA accepted that discussions with PPC to

85 16th Meeting 26.01.2026

address any gaps, perceived or otherwise, in the existing Election legislation were necessary but did not consider the suggestion that a voluntary Code should be implemented in the interim to be practical or enforceable. It was noted that the JEA would be issuing a  general Code of Conduct for all candidates which would make reference to declarations  under  the  Law.  As  the JEA also  had  statutory powers under Article 17D of the Elections (Jersey) Law 2002, with regard to the content of the nomination form it would consider whether a declaration relating to an affiliation to a group or movement should be included on the form.

It was noted that the comment had been presented in the name of the Committee as the JEA could not present comments to the Assembly in its own right. However, it had been made clear that the comment had been provided by the JEA.

The following members had approved the presentation of the comment –

Deputy S.M Ahier of St. Helier North

Deputy L.K.F. Stephenson of St. Mary , St. Ouen and St. Peter Deputy M.R. Ferey of St. Saviour

Deputy T.A. Coles of St. Helier Central

Deputy K.L. Moore of St. Mary , St. Ouen and St. Peter .

P.104/2025 –  A15. The Committee, with reference to its Minute No. A11 of 1st December 2025, Draft Elections  noted  draft  correspondence addressed  to  all  States  Members  which  had  been (Jersey)  circulated electronically on behalf of the Chair in relation to an amendment to Amendment  P.101/2025 - Draft Elections (Jersey) Amendment No. 2 Law, which had been No. 2 Law  lodged au Greffe' by the Comité des Connétable s.

202-:

amendment -  The  Committee  noted  that  the  Comité  did  not  support  the  move  to  transfer Comité des  responsibility for the production of ballot papers from Electoral Administrators to Connétable s.  the Judicial Greffier. The Comité's amendment also proposed that responsibility for

the  arrangements  for  the  count  should  remain  the  responsibility  of  electoral administrators.

In an attempt to avoid impeding the smooth running of the election, the Chair had proposed withdrawing P.104/2025, with a view to the newly constituted Privileges and Procedures Committee progressing the changes. Responses from Committee Members  indicated  concerns  in  relation  to  the  Comité's  amendment  and  an unwillingness  to  support  the  withdrawal  of  the  proposition.  The  majority  of Members believed that the States should be given the opportunity to debate the proposition. Consequently, a Members' briefing on P.104/2025 had been held on 12th January 2025, as planned.

It was recalled that the proposition had been adopted as amended on 20th January 2026.

Remote  A16.  The Committee, with reference to Minute No. A4 of 8th September 2025, participation in  considered draft amendments to Standing Orders, together with an accompanying States  report which had been prepared by the Deputy Greffier of the States in connexion Meetings:  with remote participation in States Meetings (Standing Order 55A refers). proposed

amendments to  The Committee recalled that 2 propositions had been lodged au Greffe' by the Standing  previous Committee, both of which sought to amend Standing Order 55A. The Orders.   propositions had been subject to a reference back' to the Committee with a call for further consultation  with  Members  on  the  subject.  Consequently,  a  survey  of

Members had been conducted. Draft amendments to Standing Orders had been

prepared for consideration by the Committee based on the responses received and a draft proposition had been circulated to Members with a briefing following on 11th November 2025. 9 Members had attended the briefing and differing views on the proposals had been noted. The most contentious issues appeared to be the ability to move from in person to remote participation during the course of a meeting and the recording  of  the  reasons  for  remote  participation  in  the  States  Minutes. Consequently, the draft proposition had been structured to allow Members to vote separately on the proposals and amendments to the accompanying report were also noted. The Bailiff had been consulted on the basis that guidance would be required on the application of Standing Order 55A, a copy of which had been provided for consideration by the Committee.

The Committee considered the proposed amendments and noted that whilst some form of remote participation continued to be permitted in several parliaments, many had transitioned to more targeted and limited arrangements. It was recognised that opinions were divided among States Members in relation to remote participation. Whilst the Committee acknowledged the benefits of resolving the matter by means of debate ahead before the States was reconstituted, it was aware of the volume of outstanding business and agreed that the matter should be considered by the newly constituted Committee after the election.

Draft Treaties  A17. The Committee, with reference to its Minute No. A14 of 10th November (Jersey) Law  2025, considered a report which had been prepared by the Deputy Greffier of the 202-.  States and a draft comment in response to the draft Treaties (Jersey) Law 202-,

(P.122/2025), the purpose of which was to provide for the States Assembly to approve treaties.

The Committee recalled that the aforementioned legislation had been developed in response to the adoption of P.6/2023,- the Bilateral Investment Treaty with the United Arab Emirates, as amended. Paragraph (b) of the proposition requested the Legislation Advisory Panel, in consultation with the Privileges and Procedures Committee, to bring forward legislation by which all Treaties and International Agreements signed by a Minister under entrustment from the United Kingdom Government or which were to be extended to Jersey under the United Kingdom Government's  ratification  process,  were  subject  to  ratification  by  the  States Assembly before they came into force. The Committee had recently been briefed on P.122/2025 by Deputy Sir P.M. Bailhache of St. Clement in his capacity as the Chair of  the  Legislation  Advisory  Panel  in  accordance  with  the  requirement  for consultation. The Committee had subsequently requested that a comment be drafted confirming its satisfaction with the draft legislation.

Having considered the draft comment, the Committee approved the same and requested that it be presented to the States.

Bailiff 's  A18. The Committee considered a draft proposition which sought to amend the term Consultative  of office of Members of the Bailiff 's Consultative Panel, together with a report Panel: election  which had been prepared by the Deputy Greffier of the States in this regard.

of Members.

The Committee noted that  the Bailiff 's Consultative Panel  had originally been constituted by an Act of the States dated 7th July 1992, in which the Assembly had agreed to establish a Panel of elected Members with whom the Bailiff could consult on appropriate cases on a confidential basis. The constitution of the Panel had been amended by Acts of the States on 4th February 2003 and 16th May 2006 and, as a consequence, the Panel comprised the following members:

• the Chief Minister;

87 16th Meeting 26.01.2026

• the Minister for Treasury and Resources;

• the Chair of the Privileges and Procedures Committee;

• the Chair of the Comité des Connétable s; and

• 5 other members elected by ballot by the States for a period of 3 years

It was noted that the term of office of the Members elected by ballot had been linked to  the  election  cycle. However,  constitutional  arrangements  for  the Bailiff 's Consultative Panel had not been updated when the political term had been extended to 4 years. Consequently, the draft proposition sought to align the term of office of Panel Members with the election cycle to ensure a quorum.

The Committee approved the proposition and requested that it be lodged au Greffe'.

On a related matter, Deputy L.K.F. Stephenson of St. Mary , St. Ouen and St. Peter advised that  she had contacted the Greffier of the States to express concerns regarding the absence of any information on the Order Paper for the meeting of the States on 20th January 2026, in relation to the remit of the Panel. The Greffier apologised for this oversight and agreed that Members should have been provided with this information. The Chair undertook to touch on the remit of the Panel in his speech during the debate on the proposition.

Computer- A19. The Committee received a report which had been prepared by the Legislative readable  Drafting Office in connexion with a computer-readable legislation project, which legislation  aimed to drive improvements in legislative drafting.

project:

Legislative  The project considered improvements to the quality of drafting and the readability Drafting  of legislation. Outcomes had been shared with other legislative drafting offices Office.  across the Commonwealth and with the technology community.

The Committee was interested to note the content of the report and congratulated the Legislative Drafting Office on the completion of the project work.

States Greffe  A20. The Committee considered the States Greffe Business Plan for 2026. Business Plan:

2026.  The Committee noted that the Business Plan was an operational document which set

out 10 specific aims for 2026, with the core business being supporting the work of the Assembly, its Committee and Panels and individual Members.

The Committee's attention was drawn to the operational objectives for 2026, which included the following –

delivering an inclusive 2026 election campaign

the provision of an induction and training programme for new Members

reviewing and enhancing key performance indicators

supporting the Privileges and Procedures Committee in a review of Standing Orders (to include the Code of Conduct for Elected Members)

a review of the delivery of political education in primary schools

the development of a political engagement programme for year 10 students hosting an inter-parliamentary communications network event

exploring technological advances to improve efficiency

a review of records management and data storage policies

a review of the resourcing of independent bodies and inter-parliamentary networks

The Committee discussed the Business Plan and considered an organogram which had been included within the document. In terms of the number of staff employed

within the States Greffe (and the number of vacant posts), the Greffier of the States advised that the former Greffier had instituted a departmental restructure in 2019, which had resulted in the provision of new services and the creation of additional posts. The Chair advised that he had been approached by some Members seeking information on the uptake of services provided by the Constituency Support team. The Greffier of the States advised that the Constituency Support team had been established in response to a request from the former Chief Minister, Deputy K.L. Moore of St. Mary , St. Ouen and St. Peter . A number of Members had accessed the service and  the  Greffier  suggested  that  demand  was likely  to  grow  with  the reinstatement of the office of Senator and the loss of Deputorial seats. Constituency Support officers were occasionally deployed to support the Scrutiny function during periods of reduced demand. Deputy L.K.F. Stephenson of St. Mary , St. Ouen and St. Peter advised that she appreciated the presence of Constituency Support officers at surgeries.

The Committee approved the Business Plan and requested that the Greffier of the States make the necessary arrangements for it to be presented to the States.

Machinery of  A21. The Committee noted that Deputy M.R. Scott of St. Brelade had recently Government  tendered her resignation from the Machinery of Government Sub-Committee. The Sub- Committee endorsed a recommendation to appointment Deputy M.R. Ferey of St. Committee:  Saviour to the Sub-Committee and thanked him for participating in the work of a resignation of  number of its Sub-Committees.

Deputy M.R.

Scott of St.

Brelade/

appointment of

Deputy M. R.

Ferey of St.

Saviour.

Legacy report.  A22. The Committee received an oral report from Deputy C.S. Alves of St. Helier

Central, Vice Chair and Chair of the Political Awareness and Education Sub- Committee in connexion with the production of legacy reports by the various Sub- Committees of the Privileges and Procedures Committee.

Deputy Alves highlighted the extensive work which had been carried out by the Sub-Committees and suggested that each one should produce a comprehensive legacy report, either as stand-alone documents or as an appendix to the main Committee's legacy report. She advised that this view was supported by Deputy T. A.   Coles  of  St.  Helier  South,  in  his  capacity  as  Chair  of  the  Machinery  of Government Sub-Committee.

Whilst accepting that the Diversity Forum was a Sub-Committee of the Privileges and Procedures Committee, Deputy L.K.F. Stephenson of St. Mary , St. Ouen and St. Peter advised that Members considered it to be somewhat distinct in terms of its purpose and how it had been set up. Members of the Sub-Committee were anxious to ensure that the work which had been undertaken was attributed to the Sub- Committee and not merely absorbed' within the legacy report produced by the Committee. It was recalled that the Diversity Forum had produced its own legacy report  ahead  of  the  2022  public  election.  The  Chair asked  whether  the Sub- Committee wished to break-away' from the main Committee and become an independent entity. Whilst Deputy Stephenson felt that there was a middle ground, she expressed considerable concern with regard to what had been perceived as attempts to curtail and control the Sub-Committee.

89 16th Meeting 26.01.2026

The Committee discussed the above matter and concluded that each of the Sub- Committees  should  produce  legacy  reports  for  inclusion  within  the  main Committee's  report.  The  Committee  endorsed   Deputy   Stephenson 's recommendation that the Sub-Committees should produce 2 pages of information in relation to their work. The Committee agreed to consider the draft legacy reports at its meeting on 13th April 2026.

Matters for  A23. The Committee noted the following matters for information – information.

that some of the security doors in both the States Building and in the Hill Street building were not closing properly. The Greffier of the States undertook to raise this with officials;

concerns regarding Members' conduct at the conclusion of meetings of the States and prior to the Bailiff leaving the Chamber; and,

that group photographs of recent iterations of the States Assembly had not yet been displayed in the States Building.

Date of next  A24. The Committee noted that the next scheduled meeting would be held on 9th meeting.  February 2026, at 9.15 am in the Blampied Room, States Building.