We are the Government Plan Review Panel. We were formed to coordinate the scrutiny of the Government Plan, and are responsible for the distribution of work to ensure that all projects in the Government Plan are reviewed by the most appropriate Panel in a consistent manner without any duplication.
THE ISSUE
The Government Plan replaces the previous Medium Term Financial Plan, and details income and expenditure forecasts for the subsequent four financial years following States Assembly approval. The Plan provides a definitive outline for the first succeeding financial year, and similar projections for the following three financial years.
THE REVIEW
The Government Plan Review Panel subsequently established this review to test the Government's approach to delivering this important policy, and gain a greater understanding of the views of the public and relevant stakeholders.
The workload was divided between the following Scrutiny and Review Panels:
- Corporate Services
- Economic & International Affairs
- Environment, Housing & Infrastructure
- Health & Social Security
- Education & Home Affairs
- Care of Children in Jersey Review Panel
Each Panel held public hearings with Ministers and stakeholders, received briefings from Officers, and reviewed both public and confidential information concerning the Government Plan.
Panels also scrutinised their assigned Actions, Business Case for Additional Revenue Expenditure, and Business Cases for Capital Expenditure in as much detail as possible, alongside confidential extended briefing cases, provided to us by relevant departments.
The work Scrutiny has undertaken has allowed States Members to gain a far clearer understanding of the content and planned effects of the Government Plan.
All Scrutiny Panels agreed to use a common system to report on the status of each project, as follows:
- Red - The Panel has reviewed this and is not satisfied or does not agree with the proposal. This may or may not lead to an amendment.
- Amber - The Panel has reviewed this and either has concerns or considers that it needs more work, or further detail should be provided. It might also mean that the Panel considers it too early to make an informed decision.
- Green - The Panel has reviewed the background information on the project and is satisfied with it.
AMENDMENTS
Following our review, several Scrutiny Panels have lodged amendments to the Government Plan (P.71/2019). These are as follows:
- Temporarily Remove the Efficiencies Programme from the Government Plan - Government Plan Review Panel
- Increase Stamp Duty Rate for Properties Above £1 Million - Corporate Services Scrutiny Panel
- Allocate £5 Million for a Loan Deposit Scheme for First Time Buyers - Corporate Services Scrutiny Panel
- Reduce the Proposed Increase to Long Term Care from 1% to 0.5% - Corporate Services Scrutiny Panel
- Increase Tax Allowances for Children -Corporate Services Scrutiny Panel
- Increase the Food Cost Bonus in Line with Inflation - Corporate Services Scrutiny Panel
- Increase Spending on the Maintenance of Sports Facilities by £125,000 to a total of £250,000 - Economic & International Affairs Scrutiny Panel
- Remove the Financial Stability Board Project Completely from the Government Plan - Economic & International Affairs Scrutiny Panel
- To Change the Source of the Transfer of £5 Million in Funds to the Climate Emergency Fund from the Consolidated Fund (as currently proposed) to the Strategic Reserve Fund - Environment, Housing & Infrastructure Scrutiny Panel
- Reduce the Proposed Increase in Fuel Duty from 6p to 4p - Environment, Housing & Infrastructure Scrutiny Panel
GOVERNMENT PLAN REVIEW PANEL
The Government Plan Review Panel was responsible for the overall coordination of the review. The Panel held public hearings with the Children's Commissioner and Chief Minister, and have collated a series of findings and recommendations concerning the Plan as a whole.
The Panel have concluded that an inadequate amount of information was provided at the start of the review, and that the Government did not provide additional information in a timely manner, or place enough in the public domain. Business cases were found to lack the necessary financial detail, and the Plan did not explicitly address how the sustainable well-being of Islanders has been taken into account.
The Panel have recommended that information on the structure and presentation of the Plan should be provided at an earlier stage, with full business cases and other relevant background material to be provided in full at the time the Government Plan is lodged. More detail should be made available to the public, and a greater emphasis placed on the Plan as a budget document, as opposed to a policy document.
The Panel have also expressed a number of concerns regarding the clarity surrounding the Efficiencies Programme. This includes concerns that details of the Programme (published as R.130/2019 in late October 2019) were released too late for adequate scrutiny, and that increased fees or charges should not be classified as an Efficiency.
The Panel have subsequently lodged an amendment to temporarily remove the Efficiencies Programme from the Government Plan, in order for further scrutiny to be conducted.
Panel Membership: Senator Kristina Moore (Chair), Senator Sarah Ferguson, Deputy Kirsten Morel, Deputy Mary Le Hegarat, Deputy Rob Ward, Connétable Mike Jackson
CORPORATE SERVICES SCRUTINY PANEL
Alongside a series of Actions, Additional Revenue Expenditure and Capital Projects, the Corporate Services Scrutiny Panel was tasked with analysing the financial forecast and economic outlook of the Government Plan, alongside the planned tax rises and the planned Efficiencies Programme.
The Panel commissioned 4insight to conduct a series of focus groups to gather the views of members of the public on the Government Plan, and recruited an advisor from the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy to produce a report on the financial soundness of the Government Plan.
The Panel noted that the Government Plan will lead to an increase in revenue from a base budget of £735 million in 2019 to £824 million in 2020, a rise of 12%. Combined capital and revenue spending will exceed £1 billion by 2023.
The Panel considered the economic impact of the Government Plan, taking into account the advice of the Fiscal Policy Panel. For example, the FPP welcomed the £90 million capital investment in the Government Plan (spending on roads, buildings etc) but said that the size of the investment means there is a "significant risk" in delivering it.
The Panel scrutinised the planned improvements to the Government's IT infrastructure, and recommended that the Government publishes an IT Strategy covering all IT spending in the Government Plan.
The Panel has suggested a number of amendments to the Government Plan to help reduce the impact of some of the revenue raising measures in the Plan and tackle the high cost of living in Jersey. This includes increases to the Food Costs Bonus and Child Tax Allowances.
Panel Membership: Senator Kristina Moore (Chair), Deputy Steve Ahier (Vice-Chair), Connétable Karen Shenton-Stone, Connétable Richard Vibert, Deputy Jess Perchard
ECONOMIC & INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS SCRUTINY PANEL
A large number of the projects scrutinised by the Economic and International Affairs Scrutiny Panel were rated “green” which indicates that the Panel was satisfied with the level of background information and the funding allocated for each one.
The Panel rated a number of the projects as “amber” because they either flagged a number of concerns or simply did not provide enough detail. The Panel rated three projects as “red”, the first two were related to refurbishing sports equipment in States funded sports centres and the third called for the establishment of a Jersey Financial Stability Board.
This led the Panel to lodge two amendments. One is to increase funding in Jersey’s sports facilities and the other removes the establishment of the Financial Stability Board and its funding.
The Panel also raised concerns over plans to remove Economic Development from the Growth, Housing and Environment Department, given the lack of clarity about the impact this may have on the projects listed under the Department, and the efficiencies identified around the re-organisation of staff through the Target Operating Model.
Panel Membership: Deputy Kirsten Morel (Chair), Deputy David Johnson (Vice-Chair), Senator Kristina Moore, Deputy Jess Perchard
ENVIRONMENT, HOUSING & INFRASTRUCTURE SCRUTINY PANEL
The Environment, Housing & Infrastructure Panel have expressed concern over the level of funding directed towards environmental matters, particularly in light of net carbon neutrality strategies, which will likely require long-term financial input.
The Panel were disappointed that there were no indications of realistic incentivisation, but expect this to form part of the process in 2020, during the update to the 10-year-old Sustainable Transport Policy.
The Panel have also expressed concern over the lack of detail on the long-term housing policy and the £10 million spend attached to it, and have concluded that the strategy and funding level to enhance the St. Helier Urban Environment appears to be insufficient.
The Panel does not agree that revenue raising measures, in the guise of broadening the hours of car parking charges, should be considered an 'efficiency'. The Panel believes these proposals are likely to be unpopular and questions whether any work has been carried out on the consequential effects. As such, the Panel recommends that this be removed from the Efficiencies Plan.
The Panel are further sceptical of the proposed increase to Fuel Duty, arguing that there is little in the report to justify the claims of predicted behavioural change. They have subsequently lodged an amendment to lower this increase.
Panel Membership: Connétable Mike Jackson (Chair), Connétable John Le Maistre (Vice-Chair), Connétable Sadie Le Sueur-Rennard, Deputy Kirsten Morel, Deputy Inna Gardiner
HEALTH & SOCIAL SECURITY SCRUTINY PANEL
The Health & Social Security Panel are encouraged by the Government's adoption of all core recommendations set out in their "Assessment of Mental Health Services" report, which are being taken forward in the Government Plan.
However, the Panel has concerns about the ambiguity of several projects, including the Disability Strategy and Community Support, the capital project to deliver Health Service Improvements, and the Digital Health and Care Strategy, alongside the funding of the planned digital patients' records system.
The Panel supports the request for additional funds in 2020 to undertake research on financial Independence in old age but until the outcome of the research is known and proposals are brought to the States Assembly, it is unable to confirm whether its content with the funding requested for 2021-2023.
Panel Membership: Deputy Mary Le Hegerat (Chair), Deputy Kevin Pamplin (Vice-Chair), Deputy Carina Alves, Deputy Trevor Pointon
EDUCATION & HOME AFFAIRS SCRUTINY PANEL
The Education & Home Affairs Panel have broadly welcomed the projects reviewed within their remit, and are supportive of the investment in education, which is crucial if the Government intends to fulfill its priority of Putting Children First.
The Panel are also welcoming of the investment being made in the skills of the Island and the wider workforce requirements, both now and in the future, and the investment in the services that keep the Island safe.
However, the Panel have made a number of recommendations where further information is required in respect of certain projects. The Panel were concerned about the reliance on both efficiencies to maintain funding for investment, and the parallel changes from target operating models and reviews into education, which will need to be monitored and revisited by the Panel to hold Ministers to account on their deliverance of this Plan.
The Panel recommends that clear funding streams will need to be identified, rather than simply alluded to.
Panel Members: Deputy Rob Ward (Chair), Deputy Rowland Huelin (Vice-Chair), Deputy Trevor Pointon, Connétable Simon Crowcroft (resigned from Panel in October 2019).
CARE OF CHILDREN IN JERSEY REVIEW PANEL
The Care of Children in Jersey Review Panel have noted that there is a considerable emphasis being placed within the Government Plan on achieving the strategic priority of 'Putting Children First', and are generally supportive of what is being proposed.
The Panel is also pleased to see that the work undertaken in response to the Independent Jersey Care Inquiry is continuing in earnest.
However, the Panel wish to stress that the investments being made must have productive outcomes that show tangible improvements to services for Children, and that the positive outcomes stretch beyond the four years of the Government Plan.
One particular area that the Review Panel would comment on is that clarity must be provided over the role the Government, States Assembly, and all public services play as Corporate Parents. The Panel has recommended that the legislation to define the role of corporate parent is progressed swiftly to grant this clarity.
Panel Members: Deputy Rob Ward (Chair), Deputy Kevin Pamplin (Vice-Chair), Deputy Mike Higgins, Deputy Trevor Pointon, Deputy Louise Doublet (joined Panel in October 2019), Senator Kristina Moore (resigned from Panel in October 2019).