States Assembly’s climate emergency declaration

​​​​​​​​Request 819813731

Information held in relation to the States Assembly’s climate emergency declaration on 2 May 2019 (Proposition P27/2019). Recorded Impact Assessments Provide Information held:

• Cost-benefit analyses
• Economic impact assessments
• Business cases
• Ministerial briefings
• Evaluation or performance reports that quantify the direct, measurable economic or financial impact on Jersey residents arising from the emergency-related taxation and expenditure.

Response

Proposition P.27/2019 was brought by Deputy Robert Ward, who at the time was not in a Ministerial role. The Cabinet Office therefore does not hold any background documents that went into the preparation of that proposition.

In response to the States Assembly’s approval of P.27/2019 the Climate Emergency Fund and the Carbon Neutral Roadmap workstream were established. We have interpreted this request to include information relating to these workstreams.

Cost-benefit analyses and economic impact assessments

The suite of documents that form the evidence base of the Carbon Neutral Roadmap can be accessed via the following link: Evidence for the Carbon Neutral Roadmap.

As this information is accessible by other means, Article 23 of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011 has been applied.

Replicated in this response are sections of the evidence base covering the costs and benefits of being carbon neutral and impact assessments:

Business cases

The business case ‘CNR Programme SOC FINAL REDACTED FOR FOI 819813731' is provided. This covers Climate Emergency Fund expenditure for the Carbon Neutral Roadmap programme in delivery period 1 from 2022 to 2025.

It has been redacted to ensure personal information is not shared, Article 25 of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law has been applied in this regard. It has also been reviewed and redactions made to ensure that Commercial Interests have been protected where necessary, in accordance with Article 33 of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011. Article 33 is a qualified exemption; therefore, a Public Interest Test has been conducted by the Scheduled Public Authority and can be found at the end of the response.

Further business cases that cover the individual projects that make up the programme have been developed. The provision of these business cases is exempt under Article 16 of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011 as to provide the requested data would take in excess of 12.5 hours stipulated with the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011.

Ministerial briefings

This information is exempt under Article 16 of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011 as to provide the requested data would take in excess of 12.5 hours stipulated with the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011.

Evaluation or performance reports that quantify the direct, measurable economic or financial impact on Jersey residents arising from the emergency-related taxation and expenditure.

The Cabinet Office does not hold the requested information; Article 3 of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law applies.

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 23 - Information accessible to applicant by other means

(1) Information is absolutely exempt information if it is reasonably available to the applicant, otherwise than under this Law, whether or not free of charge.

(2) A scheduled public authority that refuses an application for information on this ground must make reasonable efforts to inform the applicant where the applicant may obtain 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.

Article 33 - Commercial interests

Information is qualified exempt 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 taken into account.

Public interest considerations favouring disclosure:

• Disclosure of the information would ensure the general public are informed about the response to the Climate Emergency.

• 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 the information could potentially disadvantage the contractor’s and the SPA’s ability to retain commercial advantage in any future tender process.

• 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.

• Contract documents can contain proprietary methodologies, pricing structures, and operational strategies developed by the contractor. Making these public would unfairly advantage competitors and potentially reduce market participation in future tenders.

• The disclosure of redacted details 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 redacted details 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.

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.​