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While there is a presumption toward publication to support of transparency and accountability, detailed information may not be published if, for example, it would constitute a breach of data protection, or disclosure would prejudice commercial interest.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 (06/02/2007) regarding: Jurats' Fees - Proposed Increases.

Subject:	Jurats’ Fees: Proposed Increases
Decision Reference:	MD-C-2007-0008		Exempt clause(s):	n/a
Type of Report: (oral or written)	Written		Person Giving Report (if oral):	n/a
Telephone or e-mail Meeting?	n/a		Report File ref:	-
Written report – Title	Jurats’ fees: Proposed Increases
Written report – Author (name and job title)	Jeremy Harris, Policy Adviser
Decision(s): To approve draft Regulations, entitled the draft Règlements (2000-) sur le Tarif des Honoraires des Jures-Justiciers, the effect of which would be to make changes to the tariff of fees payable to Jurats; and To agree that the draft Regulations should be lodged ‘au Greffe’ for consideration by the States.
Reason(s) for decision: There are 14 fees for different categories of work that are undertaken by Jurats. Of these 14 fees, 2 were last increased in 1980, 9 were last increased in 1989 and 3 were last increased in 1996. Consequently it is considered appropriate that increases should be made to the tariff of fees to reflect the general increase in the cost of living since the last changes.
Action required: Mr. Harris will contact the States Greffe to arrange for the draft Regulations to be lodged ‘au Greffe’ on or before 13th February 2007 for consideration by the States on 27th March 2007.
Signature: Chief Minister		Date of Decision: 6 February 2007

Jurats' Fees - Proposed Increases.

REPORT TO CHIEF MINISTER

Jurats’ fees: Proposed Increases

1. The Chief Minister is asked to approve draft Regulations, entitled the draft Règlements (2000-) sur le Tarif des Honoraires des Jures-Justiciers, the effect of which would be to make changes to the tariff of fees payable to jurats.

2. There are 14 fees payable by the public for different categories of work that are undertaken by jurats. Of these 14 fees, 2 were last increased in 1980, 9 were last increased in 1989 and 3 were last increased in 1996. It is considered appropriate that increases should be made to the tariff of fees to reflect the general increase in the cost of living since the last changes. The fee increases are different in each category and range from 100% to 150%. .

3. Resource Implications: The tariff changes relate to fees payable in respect of the transactions listed in the draft Regulations. The financial implications for the States are considered to be minimal. There are no manpower implications.

4. This proposal does not have any other resource implications, as confirmed below –

Manpower: Nil

Property: Nil

ICT: Nil

Law Drafting: Nil (the draft legislation has already been drafted and is attached to this report).

5. The draft Regulations have been considered by the Legislation Advisory Panel and they have the Panel’s support. The Panel’s recommendation to the Chief Minister is that it should be approved and lodged ‘au Greffe’ for consideration by the States.

6. Subject to your approval, the draft Regulations will be lodged ‘au Greffe’ on or before 13th February 2007 for consideration by the States on 27th March 2007.

Jeremy Harris,

Policy Adviser

2nd February 2007