The Scrutiny system needs a bite to add to its bark

Some have suggested scrapping it altogether; others have said it needs urgently reforming; some have refused to be a part of it; and some just no longer seem to take much notice of it.

Yet there are also those who still passionately believe that the system can work extremely well in keeping an eye on what goes on in the departments that run our Island.

They include Deputy Tracey Vallois, the president of the Chairmen’s Committee which oversees the Scrutiny system and which just a few months ago announced a new code of conduct for panels aimed at reinvigorating Scrutiny and restoring people’s faith in it.

But, while it is all well and good making positive statements about working together, sticking to a common framework and keeping petty personality politics out of it, the proof, as they say, is in the pudding.

It was with this in mind that I opened a copy of a report into Jersey’s respite care services for children and young people with special needs on Thursday. Published by the Health, Social Services and Housing Scrutiny panel, it ran to more than 60 pages and was a bit of a daunting prospect first thing in the morning.

But the more I read, the more impressed I was, and I quickly got to the final pages without the need for extra tea and biscuits and experiencing a sudden urged to tidy my desk that usually accompanies a task of this kind. And it wasn’t just the subject – the need for the services for parents and carers of children with special needs to have a break – that kept me interested.

It was also the report. It was well written, it was free from jargon and pointless long words, it was to the point, and each statement was supported by compelling evidence from the people who use the services.

Yes, there were a large number of key findings, and with them a lot of recommendations, but each one was important in its own right and fully deserved to be there.

In fact, I found it all very difficult to sum up in a 400-word news article because so much of it was spot-on.

The recommendations were also straightforward, achievable and will be hard for Health Minister Anne Pryke to reject.

All in all, the report – the result of many months of hard work interviewing people, visiting facilities and research – was a big success. Scrutiny, in this instance, worked very well, and panel members Deputies Kristina Moore (chairman), James Reed and Jackie Hilton must be praised.

They are also a good example of how three socially minded and intelligent politicians with experience in various areas can work together to achieve something. Also worthy of recognition are the Scrutiny officers who worked with them.

The question now is, what next? Well, the Health Minister has six weeks in which to look in detail at the report and decide if she will accept or reject the recommendations, which include things like employing more social workers, developing a facility for emergency respite care in Jersey, and coming up with a system to monitor how many families could benefit from respite.

And this is what worries me now.

An outstanding piece of work that could make a real difference to hundreds of Islanders and generations to come could ultimately prove useless unless the Health department fulfils its end of the bargain.

Of course it should and it will say that it will, but we have to remember that this is a department that is for ever commissioning reviews and reports and, it seems, for ever ignoring what they then say.

OK, maybe ‘ignoring’ them is a bit harsh, but I have lost count of the number of articles for this paper I have written about a new Health report that has come out and recommends implementing recommendations from previous reports.

It is time that changed and the department – which I agree is one of the most under-pressure, technical and wide-ranging departments in the States – not only listened to what is being said, but also acted on it.

In addition, the rest of the States must realise that they need to spend some money at Health.

The Scrutiny panel has now pledged to keep pushing the department on these recommendations, and all three members are confident that words will translate into action.

It is also up to us, the media, and us, the public, to keep the pressure on to ensure that a system designed to help some of the most vulnerable people in our society actually does just that.

Scrutiny can work, and it isn’t a waste of time when it is done properly. But its lack of power to force ministers and departments to act on its recommendations means that it works only when those at the top want it to.

However, that can change if enough people get behind it and use the power of public pressure to give it some much-needed bite to its bark.