Ports of Jersey restructure
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.
2025.06.24
3.22 Deputy J. Renouf of St. Brelade of the Minister for Treasury and Resources regarding the recent restructure of Ports of Jersey and related discussions (OQ.153/2025):
Further to the response to Written Question 272/2025, will the Minister advise what discussions, if any, she has had with Ports of Jersey regarding the recent restructure and state whether it is her assessment that the restructure has been successful?
Deputy I.J. Gorst of St. Mary , St. Ouen and St. Peter (Assistant Minister for Treasury
and Resources - rapporteur):
The Minister was briefed on the planned restructure and, as part of the cycle of quarterly shareholder meetings with Ports of Jersey, is briefed on their ongoing progress. It is evident from the response to Written Question 272 of this year that an organisational restructure of this nature takes a significant amount of time to plan, implement and then finally evaluate. Accordingly, the Minister regards it as being too early in the process to provide a full assessment of the success of the restructure.
- Deputy J. Renouf :
I wonder if you will allow extra supplementaries if we have caught up a little bit with the timings.
The Deputy Bailiff : We will see. Deputy J. Renouf :
Last year the C.E.O. (chief executive officer) of Ports of Jersey received a bonus of £120,000, more than 40 per cent of his annual salary. Does the Minister think this was appropriate, given that the year ended with a botched management reorganisation which led directly to the airport being put into special attention on 10th December?
Deputy I.J. Gorst :
That really is difficult for me to answer on behalf of the Minister. The questioner will know when I was Minister I was perturbed by the structuring of bonuses and the size of bonuses in arm's length organisations. I know that the Minister herself is exorcised by those bonuses and their structuring thereof. I do not think I am in a position to add anything further than that.
The Deputy Bailiff :
We have in fact completed all the questions. There are 4 minutes left and, Deputy Ozouf , do you want to ask a supplemental question? Your light is on.
- Deputy P.F.C. Ozouf of St. Saviour :
Yes, please, thank you, Sir. Much appreciated and well done on your timing today, Sir, brilliant, if I may say. [Laughter] The Minister is conflicted because obviously he is External Relations. He has basically said that there is need for concern, as Deputy Renouf has raised. Is it not the case that Ports of Jersey seem to be more of a property company than an airport and doing safety issues and that there is concern among Members? There is more than anecdotal evidence to suggest that there is a botched management reorganisation, and that is the cause of the recent problems at the airport. Does the Minister not need to exert some grip on this issue, as difficult as that is because the Minister is involved?
Deputy I.J Gorst :
The Deputy is quite right, it is difficult for me to answer questions directly on the opinion that the Minister for Treasury and Resources might have because I have what might be seen by some as a conflicting hat around civil aviation. I have answered questions in that regard. I am sure if the Minister were here in person she would talk about the improved service getting Islanders through security in a shorter period of time than previously, bags on to carousels. Of course, as Minister for External Relations, I am fundamentally concerned about security and safety of the airport. In hindsight, would the restructuring have taken place in the way that it did without the perhaps necessary time? Then I think, in hindsight, we would say no. When it comes to whether the Ports of Jersey is a property development company, as Members know, I think we called it the red line at the time; it was drafted around certain parcels of land to seek to ensure that Ports of Jersey did not need to keep coming back to the Assembly and the taxpayers to fund the investment in necessary facilities. Is that working as well as we in this Assembly might have anticipated at the time? I fear that that, at best, is an open question.