The senior committee has also confirmed that it awarded the work to Dorey Financial Modelling without inviting tenders because the cost was below the threshold at which a competitive procurement exercise was required under States rules.
The information was published as P&R replied to a series of written questions submitted by Robert Curgenven.
It claimed that the firm appointed was uniquely well-positioned to carry out the work in the short timescale required in order to inform the landmark States debate on tax and spending which resumes on 30 September.
‘Dorey Financial Modelling proposed an approach which would enable it to progress at speed without exposing raw data to external AI,’ said P&R president Lindsay de Sausmarez.
‘It has previously processed census data on behalf of the States and so is aware of, and has the facilities to manage, the strict requirements around the transferring, storing and processing of census data.
‘It has an up-to-date working knowledge of Guernsey census data – how it is sourced, data and definitions.’
Deputy Curgenven asked P&R to publish the terms of reference of its contract with the firm, which the senior committee did.
The terms set out that the sole task was to provide external validation of the original modelling exercise carried out by P&R civil service advisors.
They required Dorey Financial Modelling to review the in-house exercise and establish the following: whether the models make appropriate calculations of income tax, social security contributions and GST revenues on an individual and household basis; whether the explicit and implicit assumptions applied in the modelling are fair and reasonable; and whether the final revenue estimates generated from the modelling, including any post modelling adjustments made, represent an appropriate estimation of potential revenues.
Deputy Curgenven’s questions probed the impartiality and objectivity of the firm carrying out the work.
‘The managing director has been publicly described as a long-standing supporter of broadening the tax base and, ahead of the debate, publicly stated that most people would be better off under the GST package and that rejecting it would hamper growth,’ he said.
He asked whether P&R took any steps to make sure that the review was carried out to the standard expected under the civil service code. He also asked whether the senior committee imposed any conditions on public comments about the tax package made by those paid to review it.
In its reply, P&R expressed confidence that the firm was strictly bound to follow professional standards.
‘As an actuary, the managing director of Dorey Financial Modelling is bound by professional and ethical obligations under the actuaries’ code, which includes principles on integrity and impartiality,’ said Deputy de Sausmarez.
‘Specifically, the actuaries’ code states that “members must ensure that their professional judgement is not compromised, and cannot reasonably be seen to be compromised, by bias, conflict of interest or the undue influence of others”.’
P&R undertook to publish the firm’s modelling report in full on Wednesday next week. That is the day after the deadline for submitting amendments ahead of the resumption of the tax debate the following week. It said that was the earliest date by which it could be done.
You need to be logged in to comment.