Scrutiny can fulfil its function

From John Henwood.

DEPUTY Michael Higgins, chairman of the States’ Economic Affairs Scrutiny Panel, has criticised certain parties – he named the Jersey Bankers’ Association – for not co-operating with his panel’s review of the proposed Depositor Compensation Scheme.

One might wonder why any organisation or individual would decline an appearance before a Scrutiny Panel. Perhaps it has something to do with the currency of the scrutiny process being devalued by some (though not all) practitioners.

My own experience of the previous Economic Affairs Panel is of a body which could easily be perceived as one that set out to achieve a pre-determined outcome. Deputy Geoff Southern, the chairman of the Panel that reviewed the Treasury Minister’s proposed sale of Jersey Telecom and, later, also reviewed the funding of Jersey Finance, was given to describing his approach as one of collecting evidence and basing judgments upon it.

His panel certainly collected evidence, but in those two investigations it seemed the inconvenient evidence, that which did not fit the conclusion the panel or its chairman wished to achieve, was given little regard or in some instances discarded completely whereas the evidence that tended to support his views was given prominence.

In both these cases, upon receipt of a draft of the panel’s report, representations were made in an attempt to ensure a more balanced final position, but again such changes that were accepted were minor and apparently grudgingly made.

As one who had a role in devising the scrutiny process I found this to be worrying; it seemed to get the whole idea off on the wrong foot and to devalue a procedure that was designed to provide an open and independent check on the new ministerial process.

In short, it appeared that Scrutiny was being used as a tool of opposition, a device to undermine policies that were unpalatable to certain scrutineers. All new machinery needs time to run in and in my more optimistic moments I still believe that, with goodwill and integrity of purpose, Scrutiny can fulfil the function it was designed to provide.

However, Deputy Higgins should not be surprised when those bitten in previous encounters prove twice shy. It is up to him and his colleagues who comprise the second generation of Scrutiny Panel chairmen to build confidence in the system.