Field H1219, St Helier

​​Request 821551422

Emails/minutes/notes from 1 August 2025 - 28 February 2026 held by Housing Department, Infrastructure & Environment, Planning & Building and States Planning Committee in relation to Field H1219, St Helier.

Response

Emails, minutes and notes held by the Scheduled Public Authority (SPA) between 1 August 2025 and 28 February 2026 are attached.

Freedom of Information response 821551422 Attachment.pdf​

Personal information within the documents has been redacted in accordance with Article 25 (Personal Information) of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011.

Information has also been withheld under Article 35 (Formulation and development of policies) of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011.

Article 35 is a qualified exemption; therefore, a prejudice and public interest test has been applied and is shown at the end of this response.

Additionally, information has been withheld under Article 33(b) (Commercial Interests) of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011.

Article 33 is a qualified exemption; therefore, a prejudice and public interest test has also been applied and is shown at the end of this response.

Articles applied

Prejudice and Public Interest tests

Application of Article 35 – Formulation and Development of Policies

The requested information relates to ongoing policy development and internal deliberations concerning planning processing agreements. Article 35 is engaged where disclosure would, or would be likely to, prejudice the formulation or development of policy.

Disclosure of this information at this stage would be likely to inhibit the free and frank exchange of views between officials and decision-makers. The material reflects evolving positions, options under consideration, and internal advice that has not yet been finalised. Premature disclosure would undermine the “safe space” required for effective policy

formulation, as stakeholders may become less willing to express candid opinions if such views are subject to public scrutiny before decisions are reached.

There is a real and significant risk that disclosure would distort public understanding by presenting incomplete or provisional information, potentially leading to misinformed debate and external pressure that could adversely affect the integrity and effectiveness of the policy development process.

Accordingly, it is considered that disclosure would be likely to prejudice the formulation and development of policy within the meaning of Article 35.

Application of Article 33(b) – Commercial Interests

The information also contains commercially sensitive material relating to organisation(s) and negotiations. Article 33(b) applies where disclosure would, or would be likely to, prejudice the commercial interests of any person, including the public authority.

Disclosure would be likely to harm the commercial position of the parties involved by revealing sensitive details such as contractual terms and or negotiation strategies. This could place those parties at a competitive disadvantage in the marketplace and undermine their ability to negotiate effectively in current or future commercial engagements.

In addition, release of this information could prejudice the public authority’s own commercial interests by weakening its negotiating position and reducing its ability to secure best value in procurement or contractual arrangements.

The identified harm is both real and substantial, and there is a clear causal link between disclosure and the likely prejudice to commercial interests.

Conclusion of Prejudice Test

For the reasons outlined above, it is considered that:

Disclosure would be likely to prejudice the formulation and development of policy (Article 35); and

Disclosure would be likely to prejudice commercial interests (Article 33(b)).

Both exemptions are therefore engaged.

While there is a public interest in transparency and accountability, particularly in relation to policymaking and the use of public funds, this is outweighed in this case by the strong public interest in:

Maintaining the integrity of the policy development process; and

Protecting commercially sensitive information to ensure fair competition and effective use of public resources.

Article 35 - Formulation and development of policies

Information is qualified exempt information if it relates to the formulation or development of any proposed policy by a public authority.

Public Interest test

In applying this article, the following considerations were considered.

Public interest considerations favouring disclosure

• Disclosure of the information would support transparency and promote accountability to the general public, providing confirmation that the necessary discussions have taken place.

• Disclosure to the public fulfils an educative role about the early stages in policy development and illustrates how the department engages with parties for this purpose.

Public interest considerations favouring withholding the information

• In order to best develop policy and provide advice to Ministers, officials need a safe space in which free and frank discussion can take place – discussion of how documentation is presented and provided is considered as integral to policy development as iterations of documents are demonstrative of the policy development process.

• The need for this safe space is considered at its greatest during the live stages of a policy.

• The release of the information without comprehensive interpretation alongside other data could impact the general public with misinterpretation and generate misinformed debate. This would affect the ability of officials to consider and develop policy away from external pressures, and to advise Ministers appropriately.

• Premature disclosure of this information may limit the willingness of parties to provide their honest views and feedback. This would hamper and harm the policy–making process not only in relation to this subject area but in respect of future policy development across wider departmental business.

Considering all considerations above, while transparency is important, the public interest in disclosure must be weighed against potential harm caused by distress or misinformation.

It should also be noted that once a policy is formulated and published, the public interest in withholding information relating to its formulation is diminished, however, the use of the

exemption can be supported if it preserves sufficient freedom during the policy formulation phase to explore options without that process being hampered by some expectation of future publication.

The SPA has concluded that, on balance, the risk of causing significant concerns or spreading misinformation, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the benefits disclosing the information.

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

In applying this article, the following considerations were considered.

Public interest considerations favouring disclosure

• Disclosure of the information would support transparency and promote accountability to the general public, preventing misuse of public contracts and favouritism.

• Disclosure would also promote trust in the Scheduled Public Authority (SPA) by showing openness

Public interest considerations favouring withholding the information

• The disclosure of and work plans could potentially disadvantage the contractor’s and the SPA’s ability to retain commercial advantage in any future processes.

• This could also result in the SPA’s inability to secure best value for the taxpayer and this will likely prejudice the SPA as its bargaining power decreases.

• The disclosure of the work plans may result in misinformed public debate regarding any mutually agreed changes to the original work plan. Therefore, this could jeopardise the business relationship between the SPA and the contractor.

• The disclosure of the work plans can invite undue interference from third parties who may misinterpret timelines or attempt to influence operational decisions, disrupting service delivery. For example, public stakeholders may react to methodologies used or

maintenance schedules without understanding the technical or regulatory rationale, causing unnecessary delays or conflicts.

• Technical terms, seasonal adjustments, or contingency protocols within work plans can be misunderstood by non-specialists. This may lead to misinformation and mischaracterisation of the contractor’s performance. For example, seasonal reductions in mowing frequency for environmental reasons might be wrongly interpreted as neglect or cost-cutting.

Considering all considerations above, while transparency and accountability is important, the public interest in disclosure must be weighed against potential harm caused by prejudice of the commercial interests and the risks of misinformation.

The SPA has concluded that, on balance, the risk of causing harm caused by prejudice of the commercial interests and or concerns or spreading misinformation, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the benefits disclosing the information

Article 25 - Personal information

(1) Information is absolutely exempt information if it constitutes personal data of which the applicant is the data subject as defined in the Data Protection (Jersey) Law 2018.

(2) Information is absolutely exempt information if –

(a) it constitutes personal data of which the applicant is not the data subject as defined in the Data Protection (Jersey) Law 2018; and

(b) its supply to a member of the public would contravene any of the data protection principles, as defined in that Law.