GoJ's expenditure on JT Group Limited and its subsidiaries (FOI)

​Request 688701119

​I would like to request information under the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011 regarding the Government of Jersey’s expenditure on JT Group Limited (also trading as JT) and its subsidiaries. Specifically, I am requesting the following details for each of the last five financial years (2019 – 2023):

1. Procurement Process & Tendering

○ A breakdown of the total expenditure that was awarded through a competitive tender process vs. that which was directly awarded (i.e., without an open tender).

○ A list of contracts awarded to JT Group Limited and its subsidiaries, including:

The name of the contract

The contract duration

The total contract value

Whether the contract was awarded via tender or directly awarded

If directly awarded, the justification for doing so (e.g., exemptions used under procurement rules).

2.  Professional Services & Unstructured Fees

○ What professional services have been purchased from JT Group Limited and its subsidiaries (e.g., consultancy, technical support, project management) in the past five years?

○ Were these services procured under pre-negotiated rates, or were they billed on an ad-hoc basis?

○ If professional services were billed outside a tendered contract, what governance or procurement controls exist to ensure that fees are fair and competitive?

3. Service-Specific Arrangements (e.g., PBX Systems, Support Contracts)

○ Where services such as telephony PBX systems or managed telecoms infrastructure are supported by JT Group Limited, does the Government have a structured contract that includes professional services and ongoing support?

○ If professional services (such as system upgrades, configuration, or maintenance) are required, is there a requirement that they must be procured from JT?

○ Has the Government ever negotiated these fees in advance, or are they charged at the supplier’s discretion?

4. Contract Renewals & Market Testing

○ When was the last time the Government tested the market for telecoms and associated services to ensure competitive pricing?

○ Have there been any recent procurement reviews or audits regarding the Government’s telecoms spending?

I would appreciate if the information could be provided in electronic format (Excel or PDF where applicable). If any part of the request exceeds cost limits, please prioritize questions 1-3 and advise on what information can be provided within FOI constraints.

Thank you for your time and assistance.

Response

1. As the information requested is not held in a central register, to provide an answer to the request would require extraction and manipulation of data to produce new information.  A Scheduled Public Authority (SPA) is not required to manipulate and create new data sets in response to a Freedom of Information request, Article 3 of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011 has been applied.  

2a. As information related to the purchase of professional services with JT in the last five years is not recorded in a way that allows data to be produced other than by manually reviewing all information, the cost would be in excess of that allowed under the  Freedom of Information (Costs) (Jersey) Regulations 2014​. Article 16 of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011 therefore applies

2b. As information related to the rates applied and billing of professional services with JT in the last five years is not recorded in a way that allows data to be produced other than by manually reviewing all information, the cost would be in excess of that allowed under the  Freedom of Information (Costs) (Jersey) Regulations 2014. Article 16 of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011 therefore applies

2c. As information related to the procurement approach for the purchase of professional services with JT in the last five years is not recorded in a way that allows data to be produced other than by manually reviewing all information, the cost would be in excess of that allowed under the  Freedom of Information (Costs) (Jersey) Regulations 2014​. Article 16 of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011 therefore applies

3. The information requested is exempt under Article 33(b) (Commercial Interests) of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011. Article 33 is a qualified exemption; therefore, a public interest test has been applied and is shown at the end of this response. 

4. As the information requested is not held in a central register, to provide an answer to the request would require extraction and manipulation of data to produce new information.  A Scheduled Public Authority (SPA) is not required to manipulate and create new data sets in response to a Freedom of Information request, Article 3 of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011 has been applied.  

Articles applied

Article 3 - Meaning of “information held by a public authority”

For the purposes of this Law, information is held by a public authority if –

(a)     it is held by the authority, otherwise than on behalf of another person; or

(b)     it is held by another person on behalf of the authority.

Article 16 - A scheduled public authority may refuse to supply information if cost excessive

(1) A scheduled public authority that has been requested to supply information may refuse to supply the information if it estimates that the cost of doing so would exceed an amount determined in the manner prescribed by Regulations. 

Article 33 – Commercial interests 

Information is qualified exempt information if –  

(a) it constitutes a trade secret; or 

(b) its disclosure would, or would be likely to, prejudice the commercial interests of a person (including the scheduled public authority holding the information).  

Public interest test 

Question 3:

The release of the details of support contracts, professional services and ongoing support could potentially disadvantage the current supplier and the Government of Jersey’s ability to retain commercial advantage in any future tender process.  

It is in the public interest to be made aware of any public service infrastructure costs in relation to Service-Specific Arrangements (e.g., PBX Systems, Support Contracts), however, it is considered that the likely prejudices to the developer, the Government and the taxpayer should this information be released outweigh the argument that the release is in the public interest.​