Government of Jersey

Information about the publication of Ministerial Decisions

A formal published “Ministerial Decision” is required as a record of the decision of a Minister (or an Assistant Minister where they have delegated authority) as they exercise their responsibilities and powers.

Ministers are elected by the States Assembly and have legal responsibilities and powers as “corporation sole” under the States of Jersey Law 2005 by virtue of their office and in their areas of responsibility, including entering into agreements, and under any legislation conferring on them powers.

An accurate record of “Ministerial Decisions” is vital to effective governance, including:

demonstrating that good governance, and clear lines of accountability and authority, are in place around decisions-making – including the reasons and basis on which a decision is made, and the action required to implement a decision
providing a record of decisions and actions that will be available for examination by States Members, and Panels and Committees of the States Assembly; the public, organisations, and the media; and as a historical record and point of reference for the conduct of public affairs

Ministers are individually accountable to the States Assembly, including for the actions of the departments and agencies which discharge their responsibilities.

The Freedom of Information Law (Jersey) Law 2011 is used as a guide when determining what information is be published. While there is a presumption toward publication to support of transparency and accountability, detailed information may not be published if, for example, it would constitute a breach of data protection, or disclosure would prejudice commercial interest.

A decision made (21.09.2009) to lodge an amendment to the 4th amendment to the Annual Business Plan 2010.

Decision Reference: MD-C-2009-0073
Decision Summary Title :	Annual Business Plan 2010 (P.117/2009): Amendment to 4th Amendment		Date of Decision Summary:	18/0909
Decision Summary Author:	Policy and Research Officer		Decision Summary: Public or Exempt? (State clauses from Code of Practice booklet)	Public
Type of Report: Oral or Written?	Written		Person Giving Oral Report:	N/A
Written Report Title :	Annual Business Plan 2010 (P.117/2009): Amendment to 4th Amendment		Date of Written Report:	17/09/09
Written Report Author:	Strategic Planning Manager		Written Report : Public or Exempt? (State clauses from Code of Practice booklet)	Public
Subject: Chief Minister’s Amendment to the 4th Amendment to the Annual Business Plan 2010 (P.117/2009)
Decision(s): Further to the meeting of the Council of Ministers held on the 17th September 2009, the Chief Minister agreed to lodge the following amendment to the 4th amendment to the Annual Business Plan 2010 (P.117/2009): (i) In paragraph 2 (i) after the words “total income of the organisation” add the words “except where to do so would breach confidentiality agreements, Codes of Practice or legislation such as Data Protection legislation”. (ii) In paragraph 2 (ii) after the words “with no de minimis level for this listing” add the words “except where to do so would breach confidentiality agreements, Codes of Practice or legislation such as Data Protection legislation”.
Reason(s) for Decision: This Amendment has been lodged by the Chief Minister less than 14 days before the start of the debate in accordance with the provisions of Article 11 (5) of the Public Finances (Jersey) Law 2005. Paragraphs (4) and (5) of Article 11 are in the following terms – (4) A draft annual business plan is not capable of being amended during a debate in the States on the draft except in accordance with an amendment lodged at least 14 days before the start of the debate. (5) Paragraph (4) does not apply to an amendment moved by the Chief Minister if the States agree that the amendment may be debated forthwith or at a time approved by the States. In accordance with the provisions of paragraph (5) the Chief Minister will seek the agreement of the States to debate this Amendment during the debate on the Annual Business Plan 2010. The rationale for lodging this Amendment is laid out in the attached report.
Resource Implications: Nil
Action required: Amendment to the fourth Amendment to the Annual Business Plan 2010 to be lodged au Greffe for debate by the States Assembly.
Signature:		Position: Senator Terry Le Sueur Chief Minister
Date Signed:		Date of Decision (If different from Date Signed):

Annual Business Plan 2010 - Amendment to 4th Amendment

draft Annual Business Plan 2010 (P.117/2009): 4th amendment (P.117/2009 Amd. 4) –

AMENDMENT

(i) In paragraph 2 (i) after the words “total income of the organisation” add the words “except where to do so would breach confidentiality agreements, Codes of Practice or legislation such as Data Protection legislation”.

(ii) In paragraph 2 (ii) after the words with no de minimis level for this listing” add the words “except where to do so would breach confidentiality agreements, Codes of Practice or legislation such as Data Protection legislation”.

CHIEF MINISTER

Report

The Council of Ministers fully supports the intent of this part of Senator Ferguson’s amendment. Having discussed the detail with Senator Ferguson, it has been agreed to further refine the proposals to bring them in line with GAAP principles and also ensure that they are deliverable with limited additional resource.

i) Publishing accounts of grant receiving organisations

At present most departments making grants require a copy of the accounts as a condition of giving the grant. In a number of instances however disclosure of these accounts to the public may contravene the Code of Practice on Access to Information held by the States or breach confidentiality agreements with grant receiving organisations or Data Protection Legislation. At the very least, an amendment is required to ensure that these bodies would not be affected.

This amendment can in principle be delivered, within certain parameters as outlined above. However it will have the following implications:

i) Some grant receiving bodies may not apply for grants in future as a result of this requirement to publish their accounts. This is likely to prevent departments delivering on Strategic objectives.

ii) The costs are likely to be considerably higher than anticipated in the amendment. There are more than 60 bodies receiving grants from Education, Sport and Culture alone, and overall in excess of 100. Printing copies of these accounts for all States members is likely to cost at least £5,000 a year.

iii) The number of organisations involved means that the administration of this is likely to be considerable. At a time when the department is already resource constrained and facing the challenge of delivering a radical improvement to financial management, this amendment is likely to divert resources from focus on key objectives.

ii) Full list of grants in the accounts

As part of the move to GAAP it is already planned that this list is included in the States of Jersey accounts for 2009, providing detailed disclosure of grants, although with a de minimis of £100,000. Removing the de minimis will result in a lengthy disclosure in the accounts of several hundred lines, but is deliverable.

It is not considered appropriate that small grants made to individuals are included in the accounts with no de minimis, and there may be data protection issues with publishing such information.

Some grants made by the States of Jersey are to private companies or sole traders and disclosure of grant recipients by name would be commercially sensitive and is likely to preclude them from applying for and receiving these grants. Further disclosure of these by name to the public would contravene the Code of Practice on Access to Information held by the States.

Where such grants are made it is proposed that the sums paid are listed out individually in the accounts but that sensitive information is removed from the disclosure.