In his first update to States members about his committee’s work, he said that while some would inevitably be retrospective, he believed that Scrutiny could add value while policy was being developed.
It wrote to all principal committees but the response came via Policy & Resources, he said, which he described as a missed opportunity.
Had Scrutiny been involved earlier on the Fiscal Policy Framework, it might have avoided the ‘surreal situation’ where its president was seconding amendments to its own report, he said.
‘A scenario that earlier scrutiny, including assessment of impacts on economic growth and competitiveness, might reasonably have helped to avoid,’ he said.
The topic was brought up in a subsequent question from Deputy John Gollop, who asked if Deputy Sloan would welcome other States committee members joining the SMC panel from time to time.
‘I think so,’ said Deputy Sloan, adding that this was the modus operandi of the Scrutiny function.
Deputy Sloan said that its new Public Accounts sub-committee should have its mandate and constitutional role strengthened, and possibly include the role of an auditor-general, which he believed was under consideration as the subject of a possible requete.
One of its hearings so far focused on the work of the States Property Unit where it was found that it operated without key performance indicators and thus without what Deputy Sloan said was a ‘meaningful performance framework’.
Afterwards he said the SMC was struck by the way in which there had been a political reflex action to defend the unit, rather than allowing scrutiny to perform its function.
‘That instinct to close ranks, rather than to welcome challenge, is a cultural issue, not a personal one,’ he said, adding that this was illustrated in its initial assessment of the handling of the Leale’s Yard development too.
Its review of the unit was ongoing, he said. The committee had asked several supplemental questions of P&R and had been told to expect a reply by 20 February. He said this pace made progress ‘challenging’, while recognising that P&R had a lot to command its time.
SMC would shortly be bringing a report on compelling States bodies to comply with the Freedom of Information Appeals Panel since, after its inception, it was found that it lacked the power to enforce its findings.
This had led to a small but significant number of cases in which there was a failure to comply with its decision that information should be released.
Future hearings planned by the committee would include one on the Finance and Investment Plan and its next one would focus on the corporate tax review that is currently taking place.
SMC also believed that the underlying thinking behind the formation of the new Housing Committee required closer examination and intended to hold a hearing on this, too.
Deputy Sloan criticised the fact that it had been given the terms of reference for the Leale’s Yard Political Oversight Group after several requests, but these had been labelled as confidential.
‘This is difficult to justify given their largely procedural nature, and reflects a default tendency to restrict information rather than publish it,’ he said.
‘Scrutiny is not opposition by another name.
‘It is an essential component of good governance.’
You need to be logged in to comment. If you had an account on our previous site, you can migrate your old account and comment profile to this site by visiting this page and entering the email address for your old account. We'll then send you an email with a link to follow to complete the process.