Custody Visitor Scheme (P122/2009)- Amendment

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While there is a presumption toward publication to support of transparency and accountability, detailed information may not be published if, for example, it would constitute a breach of data protection, or disclosure would prejudice commercial interest.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 (21.08.2009) to approve the presentation to the States of an amendment to the proposition: Custody Visitor Scheme (P122/2009)

Decision Reference: MD-HA-2009-0083

Decision Summary Title :

Custody Visitor Scheme – P122/2009 – Amendment

Date of Decision Summary:

14 August 2009

Decision Summary Author:

Executive Officer

Home Affairs

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 :

Custody Visitor Scheme – P122/2009 Amendment

Date of Written Report:

17 August 2009

Written Report Author:

Minister for Home Affairs

Written Report :

Public or Exempt?

(State clauses from Code of Practice booklet)

Public

Subject: Custody Visitor Scheme P122/2009 – Amendment.

Decision(s): The Minister approved the presentation to the States of his amendment to the Deputy of St. Martin’s Proposition – Custody Visitor Scheme – P122/2009.

Reason(s) for Decision: The Deputy of St. Martin’s Proposition has been discussed with the Minister, and has received his support, subject to the proposed amendment.

Resource Implications: There are no resource implications arising from this decision. However, there would be resource implications linked to the implementation of the Scheme, as detailed in the Deputy of St. Martin’s Proposition.

Action required: The Executive Officer, Home Affairs, to request the Greffier of the States to lodge the Minister’s amendment ‘au Greffe’.

Signature:

Position:

Assistant Minister for Home Affairs

Date Signed:

Date of Decision (If different from Date Signed):

Custody Visitor Scheme (P122/2009)- Amendment

CUSTODY VISITOR SCHEME

(P.122/2009) – Amendment

Custody Visitor Scheme (P.122/2009) – Amendment

Page 2 – for the words “1st February 2010” substitute the words “1st May 2010”.

REPORT

I welcome this Proposition which has the beneficial effects of –

(a) assisting the police by helping to ensure that they are providing the service that is expected of them;

(b) helping to ensure people in custody are getting the right standard of care; and

(c) increasing the public’s confidence in the police, as it demonstrates that they are open to independent outside scrutiny.

For the Scheme to work properly it will need to be seen to be independent of the States of Jersey Police. The Proposition suggests that the Custody Visitors would initially be appointed by the Minister for Home Affairs. I am content with this provided that the Members of the States are satisfied that this provides sufficient independence. The alternative would be for the Custody Visitors to be appointed by the States on the recommendation of the Minister for Home Affairs.

Issues arise as to the way in which the secretariat to support the Scheme should be provided. It will take some time to investigate whether this is best provided directly by the Home Affairs Department or through the Police Complaints Authority or otherwise. In the medium term, once a Police Authority is established, the secretariat supporting that body could also support the Custody Visitors.

It will take some time for the Scheme to be properly set up and this at a time when the Home Affairs Department are already under considerable pressure of work.

For this reason, I have lodged the Amendment in order to give both my Department and myself an additional three months in which to ensure that the Scheme is properly set up and to ensure that the other important priorities of the Home Affairs Department can be satisfactorily completed.

MANPOWER AND FINANCIAL IMPLICATION

There are none arising from this Amendment. The estimation of additional resources set out in the Proposition is accurate but the Home Affairs Department can find this within the existing budget.