Business case for move to Broad Street (FOI)

Request

In relation to the relocation to broad street office project could you:

A

Provide me with a copy of the business case

B

Confirm that the business case was signed before works commenced

C

Confirm that States rules on tendering for contracts were followed prior to awarding a contract for building works

D

Confirm the spend on broad street to the end of 2018 and confirm that a budget was in place before works commenced.

E

Confirm whether there have been any breaches in the public finances law in relation to broad street.

Response

A

Please find attached the summary business case relating to the acquisition, refurbishment and property occupation of 19-21 Broad Street (the Business Case).

Broad Street Business Case (Redacted)

The Business Case has been redacted in accordance with article 25 (Personal Information), article 33 (Commercial Interests) and article 35 (formulation and development of policy) of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011.

B

The lease transaction was entered into in July 2018 as notified to the States under R83/2018 presented on 3 July 2018:

Land transaction: 19-21 Broad Street

The ministerial decision included a report into the proposed case for the lease and the identification of Broad Street as the temporary space necessary to house staff from Cyril Le Marquand House, the necessity for such space having been identified by the Corporate Strategy Board in January 2018.

C and E

All works in relation to the Broad Street acquisition, refurbishment and property acquisition have been carried out in accordance with the processes detailed below and with due consideration made to the existing frameworks and agreements within the Government of Jersey at that time.

Tenders for Government of Jersey contracts are issued in accordance with the process set out in Financial Direction 5.1 for obtaining quotes and tenders. The Financial Direction 5.1 is available at the following link:

Financial Direction 5.1: Purchasing of goods and services

The following are exceptional circumstances which may be used to give exemption to the process:

• there is only one supplier, eg of a proprietary part where compatibility with an existing installation is required

• the goods, services or minor works to be provided are required so urgently that loss or damage may result from any delay

• the situation is a genuine emergency

• continuation of an existing contract, let in the first instance by means of competition

• where the contract is of a secret nature

Financial Directions should be complied with across the Government of Jersey, however, there may be exceptional circumstances when they cannot be complied with. In such cases an exemption should be sought in advance and an ‘Exemption from Tendering’ form completed and authorised by the Director General of the budget holding department.

If an exemption is not sought in advance, this is classed as a breach. If a breach has occurred then a Government of Jersey breach form must be completed and disclosed in the year end Government Statement.

The project team employed due diligence when engaging contractors and consultants by using existing tendered rates and/or benchmarking rates against the current market by using a quantity surveyor to ensure value for money was achieved as far as possible.

D

The amount spent on the Broad Street works as at 31 December 2018 was £1,055,731.17, excluding rental. A budget was identified for the project by the Treasury and Exchequer Department prior to the commencement of works, however formal transfer of the necessary sum to cover 2018 expenditure was not actually undertaken until the 2018 year end in order to ensure the budget was appropriate to cover the expenditure incurred to that date.

Further information in relation to the Broad Street works budget is available within the business case attached to response 'A' above.

Articles applied

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.

Personal information has been redacted in accordance with Article 25 – in this instance the details of individuals below a certain Government of Jersey grade who have a reasonable expectation of privacy.

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).

Article 33 (b) is a qualified exemption and a public interest test and prejudice test must therefore be applied. Article 33 (b) allows an authority to exempt information where its disclosure would, or would be likely to, prejudice the commercial interests of a person (including the scheduled public authority holding the information).

Whilst we accept that the public may have an interest in the contracts between the Government of Jersey and service providers, the Scheduled Public Authority (SPA) believes that the contract values are commercially sensitive as they are the outcome of negotiations between parties and that the release of this data could affect the negotiation of future contracts.

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.

The SPA is withholding the release of certain parts of the information as it relates to the formulation and development of policy and procedure by the public authority.

Article 35 is a qualified exemption, which means that a public interest test is required to be undertaken by the SPA. It is therefore necessary for the scheduled public authority to examine the circumstances of the case. Following assessment the SPA has to decide whether, on balance, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.

Although there is a need for transparency, accountability, financial and good decision making by public authorities this information relates to the ongoing office modernisation restructuring.

The following considerations were taken into account:

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 policy development and illustrates how the department accomplishes proposed reform

Public interest considerations favouring withholding the information

• release of the information at this stage might 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

Taking into account the various factors, the SPA has applied redactions where necessary to maintain this exemption.

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.