H O U S E O F K E Y S O F F I C I A L R E P O R T
R E C O R T Y S O I K O I L Y C H I A R E A S F E E D
P R O C E E D I N G S
D A A L T Y N
HANSARD
Douglas, Tuesday, 25th June 2013
All published Official Reports can be found on the Tynwald website www.tynwald.org.im/Official Papers/Hansards/Please select a year:
Reports, maps and other documents referred to in the course of debates may be consulted on application to the Tynwald Library or the Clerk of Tynwald’s Office. Supplementary material subsequently made available following Questions for Oral Answer is published separately on the Tynwald website, www.tynwald.org.im/Official Papers/Hansards/Hansard Appendix
Volume 130, No. 23
ISSN 1742-2264
Published by the Office of the Clerk of Tynwald, Legislative Buildings, Finch Road, Douglas, Isle of Man, IM1 3PW. © Court of Tynwald, 2013 HOUSE OF KEYS, TUESDAY, 25th JUNE 2013
Present:
The Speaker (Hon. S C Rodan) (Garff); The Chief Minister (Hon. A R Bell) (Ramsey); Hon. D M Anderson (Glenfaba); Mr L I Singer (Ramsey); Hon. W E Teare (Ayre); Mr A L Cannan (Michael); Hon. T M Crookall (Peel); Mr P Karran, Mr Z Hall and Mr D J Quirk (Onchan); Mr J R Houghton and Mr R W Henderson (Douglas North); Hon. D C Cretney and Mrs K J Beecroft (Douglas South); Hon. C R Robertshaw and Mrs B J Cannell (Douglas East); Hon. J P Shimmin (Douglas West); Mr R A Ronan (Castletown); Mr G D Cregeen (Malew and Santon); Hon. J P Watterson, Mr L D Skelly and Hon. P A Gawne (Rushen); with Mr R I S Phillips, Secretary of the House.
______736 K130 HOUSE OF KEYS, TUESDAY, 25th JUNE 2013
Business Transacted Page Leave of absence granted ...... 738 Tribute to Dr Edgar Mann, former Tynwald Member ...... 738 Personal Statement by the Minister for Health, Mr Anderson ...... 740 Parish Walk, Congratulations to participants ...... 741
Questions for Oral Answer 1.1. Lois Group – FSC instructions in 2009 ...... 741 1.2. Government Actuary’s Department Report 2013 – Availability to Members ...... 742 1.3. Work Permit applicants with Manx Qualified partners – Policy ...... 743 1.4. Companies Registry – Retention of company records ...... 746 1.5. Sudden or unexpected deaths – Reported figures ...... 747 1.6. Landlord and Tenancy Bill – Landlords operating as a company ...... 749 1.7. Eastern Civic Amenity Site – Vehicle number plate recognition system ...... 750 1.8. Louis Group products – OFT action regarding alleged mis-selling ...... 752
Questions for Written Answer 2.1. Unexpected deaths – Causes, reviews and Coroner referrals ...... 754 2.2. Area Plan for the South – Legal procedure during preparation ...... 754 2.3. Regeneration Area blocks – Suitability and contractor ...... 756 2.4. Government pension scheme retirees – Lump sum payments 2007-13...... 756 2.5. Government pension schemes – Highest and lowest lump sum payments 2007-13 ...... 757 2.6. Government pension schemes – Total level of contributions 2007-13...... 759 2.7. Government pension schemes – Estimated cost of lump sum payments 2013-19 ...... 760 2.8. Meary Veg Sewage treatment works – Effluent discharged 2007-12 ...... 760 2.9. Meary Veg Sewage treatment works – Design load without contingency allowance ...... 760 2.10. Meary Veg Sewage treatment works – Population equivalent number 2007-12 ...... 761
Orders of the Day 3.1. Bill for First Reading – Post Office (Amendment) Bill 2013 ...... 762 4.1. Criminal Justice, Police Powers and Other Amendments Bill 2013 – Second Reading approved ...... 762 5.1. Public Health (Amendment) Bill 2013– Clauses stage deferred ...... 768
The House adjourned at 11.38 a.m.
______737 K130 HOUSE OF KEYS, TUESDAY, 25th JUNE 2013
House of Keys
The House met at 10.00 a.m.
[MR SPEAKER in the Chair]
The Speaker: Moghrey mie, good morning, Hon. Members.
Members: Good morning, Mr Speaker.
5 The Speaker: The Chaplain will lead us in prayer.
PRAYERS The Chaplain of the House of Keys
Leave of absence granted 10 The Speaker: Hon. Members, I have given leave of absence to the Hon. Mr Quayle and Mr Thomas who are off-Island on official business.
15 Tribute to Dr Edgar Mann, former Tynwald Member
The Speaker: Hon. Members, with the passing of Dr Edgar Mann last Friday, we mourn the 20 loss of a great political figure, public servant, former Tynwald colleague and friend. Edgar John Mann was born on 24th June 1926 in London. He was educated at Reigate Grammar School and King’s College, London, graduating from King’s College Hospital Medical School and qualifying as a doctor in 1949. National Service took him to Hamburg and the Royal Army Medical Corps, where he met and 25 married Joan, a ward sister, in 1951. Back in England, he went on to become a GP in a medical practice with Dr Clague, a Manxman who sowed the idea of one day moving to the Isle of Man. Dr Mann later took a diploma in Public Health, was elected fellow of the Royal Institute of Public Health and Hygiene in 1962 and worked as Administrative Medical Officer of the South East Metropolitan Regional Hospital Board. 30 Taking over a GP practice in Essex in 1963, he also went on to become Lieutenant-Colonel in the RAMC, in command of Field Ambulances in the Territorial Army. Dr Mann became one of the first medical practitioners to obtain a diploma in Medical Jurisprudence in 1971, and served as a police surgeon with the Metropolitan Police. He moved with his family to the Isle of Man in 1973, to take up medical practice as Laxey’s 35 GP. Dr Mann was a family doctor of the old-fashioned sort, your own medical history – indeed those of your family – being held firmly in his head. You would enter the waiting room – no appointment system existed in those early days – knowing you would be seen, even long into the evening. Only then would the good doctor end his surgery and go home. 40 Dr Mann was a popular GP, much loved by his patients to whom he devoted his medical skill, and whom he continued to serve for some years after he entered politics, loved even by the malingerers – those who hoping to be signed off work would be genially dismissed when they foolishly tried it on with the words ‘no note, no vote’. (Laughter) Edgar Mann became a Laxey Commissioner in 1974, and the following year served as 45 Chairman, before entering the House of Keys for the then two-seat constituency of Garff,
______738 K130 HOUSE OF KEYS, TUESDAY, 25th JUNE 2013
succeeding Jean Thornton-Duesbery, and joining Speaker Charles Kerruish, who had by then already held the seat for 30 years. He was quickly appointed to several Boards of Tynwald – forerunners of today’s Departments – notably as Chairman of the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries, in 1980. To this day, there are 50 older farmers who famously still talk of him as one of the most effective political leaders the Manx agricultural industry has ever seen. In 1981, he became Chairman of the Finance Board, in effect Treasury Minister. This was a critical time for the Isle of Man. Government had virtually nothing in reserves, the ability to pay its bills resting on the prompt payment of income tax by a few individuals, and it was also the time 55 of the collapse of the Savings and Investment Bank. Edgar Mann was instrumental in bringing about the Financial Supervision Commission and first real banking regulation framework, restoring confidence and laying the foundations which would pave the way for the Island later being a reputable and respected financial centre. It was in this period of strenuous work as family doctor, diligent MHK and a leader in 60 Government that Dr Mann sustained an attack on his health in the form of a debilitating stroke. After it, by single-minded determination and perseverance, he overcame many of its effects, learning to write again by using his left hand. In 1985, he was elected to the Legislative Council, and also became a head of Government, as Chairman of Executive Council. In this role, he pioneered an enlightened new Residence Policy, 65 aimed at attracting younger, economically active people, and professionals, rather than just wealthy retired people, as hitherto, in order to diversify and grow the struggling Manx economy. In 1986, a new ministerial system was due to be brought in following the General Election. A decision of Tynwald following Select Committee recommendations in which Dr Mann played a leading role. On the eve of the General Election, as a matter of principle, Dr Mann decided to 70 resign from Legislative Council, and to contest it, even though this is not technically necessary, on the grounds that the new Ministers should be democratically accountable to the public. There was one problem. The two-Member seat of Garff had just been reduced by the Boundary Commission to a single seat, and it was already held by Sir Charles Kerruish. There then followed what can only be described as a political battle of the Titans – one that is remembered still in the 75 folk memory of Garff – following which Dr Mann was unsuccessful. He no longer had a seat in Tynwald and did not become, as had been widely predicted, the Island’s first new Chief Minister. Absolved of national political service, Edgar Mann now had time to indulge his passion for model trains and miniature railways and, for a while, he even ran a model railway shop, first at Tynwald Mills and then in Laxey, known as Mann Trains. Inevitably perhaps, he rejoined Laxey 80 Commissioners. On the elevation of Sir Charles Kerruish as first President of Tynwald in 1990, the resulting by-election in Garff saw Dr Mann return to the Keys and hold onto the seat the following year. In 1992, following his strong conviction that stronger checks and balances to executive power under the ministerial system were needed, he headed up an unofficial opposition group of MHKs known 85 as the Alternative Policy Group (APG), which held influence in this House and in Tynwald for a number of years. In fact, I see that in this House there are two former participants in that particular political experiment still with us. During this period, Dr Mann also served as a member of the Department of Industry under Eddie Lowey and as Deputy Speaker of the House of Keys, until his election for a second time to 90 Legislative Council in 1995. After the General Election in 1996, he was appointed by Chief Minister, Donald Gelling as Minister for Education, serving for three years, and earning great respect from the teaching profession. It was during his office that delegated financial management of schools was introduced for head teachers, as were the first external school inspections, a programme of extending pre- 95 school education and overseeing the computer revolution of learning and teaching in the classroom. He continued to serve in the Department of Education until his retirement from politics in 2002. He was a past Chairman of the Manx Foundation for the Physically Disabled, of Laxey 100 Heritage Trust and a past President ofLonan and Laxey Royal British Legion. Edgar Mann was a gentleman. He was softly spoken, but exuded a quiet authority, underpinned by sharp intellect and learning, which was always worn likely and modestly. Right to the end of his political career, he was one of the few Members of Tynwald who, on rising to his feet, would be able to command absolute respect from Members of the Court, when, in the hushed silence as 105 all that accumulated wisdom and knowledge unfolded in logical argument, we listened and learned. ______739 K130 HOUSE OF KEYS, TUESDAY, 25th JUNE 2013
‘A wise old bird’ was what one now retired Member affectionately called him; also a man of great humanity, kindliness and concern for the underdog in society, as countless patients and constituents will tell. 110 Those of us who knew him and worked with him, especially as a new Member of Tynwald or as a Minister – as I can personally testify – also benefited hugely from his example, experience, and quietly spoken advice. A gentle exterior, always with a twinkle in his eye, but he was no fool. We knew also that there was toughness and iron inside that velvet glove – something which stood the Isle of Man in good 115 stead when Edgar Mann was at the height of his powers. How fortunate for the Island nation of Mann to have for its leader a namesake, who would protect its interests in London, Brussels or Washington. In retirement Edgar took great joy in his family, especially the large gatherings for family celebrations, and in his model trains. In his last years, he fought illness stoically. 120 One of our great political figures has now gone, as has the husband, father and grandfather of a close family to whom he was so devoted. To his wife Joan, sons Timothy, John, Simon, Paul and Mark, to his daughters, Mary and Elizabeth, their families and his 16 grandchildren, we as a house offer our deep condolences. (Members: Hear, hear.) May they take comfort that many in our Island community will keenly share their sense of loss of a good man, whose life was devoted to 125 public service and to the well-being of the people of the Isle of Man, his home for 40 years and one he loved so well. Edgar John Mann, may he rest in peace. Please rise, Hon. Members, for a few moments of silence tribute.
130 Members stood in silence.
The Speaker: Thank you, Hon. Members.
135 Personal Statement by the Minister for Health, Mr Anderson
The Speaker: Hon. Members, I have given Minister David Anderson permission to make a 140 personal statement. Mr Anderson, Minister for Health.
Mr Anderson: Thank you, Mr Speaker, for allowing me to make this Personal Statement. Following an accusation raised publicly by a clinician at Noble’s Hospital that I misled the 145 House in my answer to Question 19 during our sitting of 11th June which was then referred to in Tynwald Court last week, I wish to make a Personal Statement. I have never stated that any of the 10 consultants who signed the letter to the Medical Director of Noble’s Hospital in October last year have retracted their concerns about patient safety. I have stated that some of the original signatories of the letter withdrew their support for the letter, by 150 which I meant that they had later acknowledged that signing this letter was not the most appropriate way of raising their concerns at that time. There are established mechanisms in the Hospital for reporting incidents that could have or did lead to harm, and which all members of staff have a contractual and professional duty to use. There are a number of forums and committees in the Hospital, where matters regarding patient 155 safety are regularly discussed and actions agreed. Patient safety concerns are raised every day in hospital in the developed world. This is an integral part of patient safety improvement. I believe I have made it clear in my response to the question from the Hon. Member for South Douglas on 11th June that examining and, where necessary, addressing these concerns is a continuous process at Noble’s Hospital. I stand by my previous remarks in the House, which are 160 true. I did not mislead the House. The most important thing is that concerns raised by the 10 consultants are being addressed and this is where the focus of the Department’s attention lies.
The Speaker: Thank you, Minister. 165
______740 K130 HOUSE OF KEYS, TUESDAY, 25th JUNE 2013
Parish Walk Congratulations to participants 170 The Speaker: We move on to the Order Paper. Before doing so, can I take this opportunity to congratulate all those who took part in the Parish Walk – not least, our own Members, Mr Cretney and Mr Crookall, and our Council colleague, Mr Butt.
175
Questions for Oral Answer
180 TREASURY
Louis Group FSC instructions in 2009
185 1.1. The Hon. Member for Michael (Mr Cannan) to ask the Minister for the Treasury:
On what date in 2009 the Financial Services Commission instructed the Louis Group not to accept extra funds and not to roll over deposits; and why such instructions were given?
190 The Speaker: We turn to Questions for Oral Answer, Question 1. I call the Hon. Member for Michael, Mr Cannan.
Mr Cannan: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I ask the Question standing in my name. 195 The Speaker: I call the Treasury Minister, Mr Teare.
The Minister for the Treasury (Mr Teare): Thank you, Mr Speaker. It is important to clarify that the Louis Group was never permitted to accept deposits in the Isle 200 of Man. Louis Group SLN Ltd, an Isle of Man company, which was not conducting regulated activities, did issue secured loan notes – an unregulated product. Louis Group International Holdings Ltd, subsequently renamed LGSP Investments Ltd, a British Virgin Islands company, which was not regulated, did issue Louis Group Property 205 Investment and Cessation of Securities Agreements, known as PICS, which was again an unregulated product. Both of these companies are now in liquidation. On 12th November 2009, the Financial Supervision Commission used its powers under section 14(2) of the Financial Services Act 2008, to direct Louis Group (IOM) Ltd not to accept any new 210 investors into the PICS or structured loan note products and that maturing investments in these products must be repaid upon maturity and not roll over for a further period. Louis Group (IOM) Ltd was directed, as it was the only Isle of Man regulated entity in the Louis Group and was involved in the marketing promotion of sale of the secured loan notes and PICS. The direction was issued because current financial accounts were not available in respect of 215 the products or underlying vehicles. Additionally, the secured loan notes had effectively given investors who would ordinarily be precluded access to the Louis Group Structured Fund plc, an experienced investor fund, exposure to the same. The products were not regulated products but, with the above knowledge, the Commission believed it appropriate to seek to ensure that no new money went into these products, 220 and that existing investors were repaid as their investments matured. Thank you, Mr Speaker.
The Speaker: Mr Cannan, supplementary question.
225 Mr Cannan: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Treasury Minster for his Answer.
______741 K130 HOUSE OF KEYS, TUESDAY, 25th JUNE 2013
Can I ask him whether the FSC is satisfied that in fact their instructions were undertaken in respect of secured loan notes, PICS and investments into these products? Also, can I ask him what meetings and updates is he asking from the FSC in respect of the 230 Louis Group and how often he is receiving such updates?
The Speaker: Mr Teare.
The Minister: Dealing with the second part of the question first, from the Hon. Member for 235 Michael, I am regularly updated on all matters appertaining to the FSC, including the Louis Group. I have regular meetings with the Chief Executive of the FSC, and I am satisfied that the FSC acted appropriately and that its instructions were implemented. What I would repeat again, Mr Speaker, is, as I mentioned in this place on 12th February, in answer to an earlier Question, this liquidation is under the direction of the court, and I feel that 240 there will be issues which will be referred back to the court in the fullness of time.
The Speaker: Mr Karran, Hon. Member.
Mr Karran:Vainstyr Loayreyder, would the Shirveishagh Tashtee not agree that if there was 245 information promoted by the Louis Group that somehow they had cover by the FSC, as far as their product is concerned, has that been discovered or not, as far as the Louis Group is concerned, and could he also answer, if there were promoted products that were not on the facade of being deposits, what did the FSC do, as soon as they were aware of such products being offered?
250 The Speaker: Mr Teare.
The Minister: It came to the attention of the FSC, as part of a routine investigation and also combined with the analysis of the company’s accounts. At that juncture, the FSC reissued the direction, as it is quite entitled to do, under the financial 255 regulations legislation 2008. This matter has been investigated by court appointed investigators who were appointed in May last year. They reported back to the court in September this last year, and there were proceedings which were initiated in December. Then in January this year, the liquidators were formally appointed by the courts. 260
Government Actuary’s Department Report 2013 Availability to Members 265 1.2. The Hon. Member for Castletown (Mr Ronan) to ask the Minister for the Treasury:
When the GAD annual financial report for IOM Public Sector Schemes for year ended March 2013 will be available to Tynwald Members? 270 The Speaker: We turn to Question 2. Hon. Member for Castletown, Mr Ronan.
Mr Ronan: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name. 275 The Speaker: I call on the Minister for the Treasury, Mr Teare.
The Minister for the Treasury (Mr Teare): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I can confirm that the 2013 Government Actuary’s Department (GAD) Report will be made 280 available to Members at the October sitting of Tynwald, alongside the Government accounts. They are used as supporting information, Mr Speaker, to actually give more clarity to the Government’s financial information which will be published in October, sir.
The Speaker: Mr Ronan, supplementary. 285 Mr Ronan: I would just like to thank the Minister for his Answer and for clarifying when the Report will be available to the public. ______742 K130 HOUSE OF KEYS, TUESDAY, 25th JUNE 2013
I thank him for that.
290 The Speaker: Mr Karran.
Mr Karran: Vainstyr Loayreyder, could the Shirveishagh Tashtee give us any indication of how much growth in the deficit, as far as the public sector pension is before… Has he got that information now, and if he has, would he tell us what the deficit has grown to from last year’s £65 295 million shortfall?
The Minister: I thank the Hon. Member for his question. What I would say is that I would repeat what I said earlier, that this forms part of the Government’s financial information which we will be publishing to support the Blue Book in 300 October. How much growth in the public debt? The Government Actuary will supply the figures and, as I said, it will be made available to Hon. Members in October. The actual figures will be dependent upon various assumptions used, for example the rate of inflation, the growth in salaries and, of course, the discount factor with the return on the 305 investment funds.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 310 Work Permit applicants with Manx qualified partners Policy
1.3. The Hon. Member for Michael (Mr Cannan) to ask the Minister for Economic Development: 315 What policy is in place for Work Permit applicants who are either engaged to or living, as a partner, with a Manx qualified worker?
The Speaker: Question 3. Hon. Member for Michael. 320 Mr Cannan: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I ask the Question standing in my name.
The Speaker: I call on the Minister for Economic Development, Mr Shimmin. 325 The Minister for Economic Development (Mr Shimmin): Thank you, Mr Shimmin. The Control of Employment Act 1975 is the primary legislation which provides for the Work Permit system currently in operation on the Island. Other than for certain exempted or temporary employments, persons who are not classed as Isle of Man Workers require a Permit issued by my 330 Department in order to work. Individuals may qualify as an Isle of Man Worker in a number of ways: usually by birth; continuous periods of residence; completing periods of full-time education; or, as directly relevant to the Hon. Member’s Question today, by marriage to or civil partnership with an Isle of Man Worker. 335 Isle of Man Worker status does not extend to persons who are either engaged or co-habiting with an Isle of Man Worker. Therefore, such persons need to obtain a Work Permit, should they wish to enter into employment in the Island – unless this employment is itself exempt. Under section 3A of the Control of Employment Act, Work Permits are automatically granted to spouses or civil partners of Work Permit holders or spouses or civil partners of workers whose 340 role is exempted from requiring a Work Permit under that Act. However, there is no formal obligation under the Control of Employment Act 1975 or the Control of Employment Regulations 1993 to consider unmarried partners or co-habiting couples in respect of Work Permit applications.
345 The Speaker: Mr Cannan, supplementary.
Mr Cannan: Thank you, Mr Speaker.
______743 K130 HOUSE OF KEYS, TUESDAY, 25th JUNE 2013
Can I ask the Minister, does he not consider, in the modern age, where international and national travel is commonplace and where young men and women from this Island go off to attend 350 university and often go off to explore international and national job opportunities, that when they come back to the Island, there is a strong chance that they may have engaged themselves in a relationship of some sort, and that actually the legislation in this respect is slightly out of date, given that it is very hard for us to expect our young men and women just simply to engage in a relationship, as they do these days, with somebody similar living just down the road? 355 The Speaker: Minister to reply.
The Minister: Thank you, Mr Speaker. A little confused: the issue is one of principle of protecting Isle of Man Workers. 360 If we are looking at a principle, I think the majority of this House are in support of attempting to keep people who are eligible as Isle of Man Workers to be employed. If we are looking at an individual case, then all Hon. Members will have examples where you could make a case on behalf of a constituent; but that would not actually undermine the whole principle of the Work Permit situation. 365 Hon. Members would find it very difficult, were they in my position, to be able to determine on individual cases, where the length or relative seriousness of a relationship would need to be assessed. I am not sure how I or anybody would be able to evidence that what was being put forward to the Committee or my Department was actually factually true. Therefore, unfortunately, there are many people who would argue that they are in a serious 370 relationship and therefore should be exempt, and then it would be up to my Department to try and evidence and prove that. However, all Hon. Members will have the opportunity, probably in October, to discuss the future control of employment legislation, where if that is the wishes of the House then obviously, we have the opportunity of amending that, and putting it into the situation. 375 The Speaker: Further supplementary, Mr Cannan.
Mr Cannan: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Does the Minister see any potential problems with this, in respect of the forthcoming Equality 380 Act and its implications for Work Permits?
The Speaker: Reply, sir.
The Minister: Once again, the Chairman of the Civil Service Commission – the largest 385 employer in the Isle of Man – will understand how complex and delicate all forms of employment legislation can be, in order to be fair to all parties concerned. The Equality Act is a matter that, again, will be coming forward, we hope within this calendar year, and therefore an opportunity to amend any aspect of either legislation to incorporate the idea that somebody coming to the Island with any form of relationship with an Isle of Man Worker, 390 should be able to supplant those people who are born and bred on the Isle of Man will be an interesting amendment. I do not believe that our equality legislation, as proposed, will cause a problem with regard to this. What will be required, if we are to change the legislation and allow partners of people within a relationship, would be the way in which you would evidence the seriousness or otherwise of that 395 relationship. I think that is quite a complex area, and as much as I have sympathy with the Hon. Member for Michael, in the past, whenever looking at this, it is always erred on the side of that which we can prove, rather than that which can be argued on individual cases, otherwise the legislation would cease to have real teeth. 400 The Speaker: Hon. Member for Douglas East, Mrs Cannell.
Mrs Cannell: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Could I ask the Minister please to clarify what he means when he says ‘common law couple’ 405 and ‘unmarried’? Surely he is aware that an unmarried couple is an unmarried couple but a common law couple is also an unmarried couple, although they may have their relationship registered.
______744 K130 HOUSE OF KEYS, TUESDAY, 25th JUNE 2013
Is he aware that the matrimonial proceedings legislation acknowledges and recognises couples who are in a common-law relationship, in terms of property rights, etc. So if they are excluded 410 from being acknowledged as would a married couple, then could he expand upon the reasons why?
The Speaker: Mr Shimmin.
415 The Minister: As often, Mr Speaker, we are dealing with legislation designed in one period and we live in a different one. As pointed out at the start, this is a 1975 piece of legislation, which is due to be updated this year. All Hon. Members can realise, the changes in the last nearly 40 years, both to our community and the way people live their lives, are considerable. 420 With regard to this piece of legislation under which my Department is operating, there is the issue of marriage or civil partnership as the determining element. Those not in either of those would then have to try and make a case with regard to why they could potentially be exempt. Under our legislation amended in 1993, we must consider whether suitable Isle of Man Workers are available. However, we can consider whether couples have been working, living on 425 the Island for an extended period. Therefore, there is a caveat that we can look at the length of that relationship, but it is as yet unclear how one would evidence that that relationship was a long-term, meaningful relationship, rather than just, as is often the case in the Isle of Man, people cohabiting because of the cost of living on the Island.
430 The Speaker: Hon. Member for Onchan, Mr Karran.
Mr Karran: Would the Shirveishagh not agree that any proposals down this line would actually weaken the Work Permit legislation? The fact is that most people outside this Hon. House are concerned that the Work Permit legislation is not strong enough to protect the locals, as far as 435 employment is concerned? Would he feel that maybe more of a priority would be, instead of extending an exemption to people living or in partnerships, that the fact is that maybe we need to have more transparency, so that people know when they can object to people getting Work Permits for jobs that can be done by people who have Isle of Man Worker status? 440 The Speaker: Reply, sir.
The Minister: Mr Speaker, I think any Hon. Members who have been involved in the discussion, either internally within the Department or within this House, will realise that it is a 445 very emotive and complex area. We all want the Isle of Man to thrive: for that we need good people to run businesses and to create opportunities. However, we have a growing level of longer-term unemployed and we have a target to keep our unemployment below 3%, which is admirable where we are, but we need to continue to work to do that. 450 Many of those people within the unemployment figures are relatively low skilled persons, and therefore there is a reason why they have a primacy with regard to employment on the Island, rather than somebody coming from off the Island. We are attempting to halve that long-term unemployment in the next 18 months. In order to do that, we need to make sure the jobs that are able to be done by Isle of Man Workers are indeed 455 taken by Isle of Man Workers. The Hon. Member for Onchan, again with the Member for Michael and everybody else, will have the opportunity and I look forward to the debate discussing the Control of Employment Bill, because we all want that which will protect Isle of Man people. However, we are an increasingly diverse community, and the idea of being able to encourage people to come and live on our Island 460 and then refuse them the ability to work is actually very detrimental and indeed, some of our own young people are discouraged from coming back for that very reason. So I am not making light of the Hon. Member for Michael’s situation. However, it is very hard to evidence and be fair to all concerned.
465 The Speaker: Thank you.
______745 K130 HOUSE OF KEYS, TUESDAY, 25th JUNE 2013
Companies Registry 470 Retention of company records
1.4. The Hon. Member for Douglas South (Mrs Beecroft) to ask the Minister for Economic Development:
475 How long a company’s records are retained by the Companies Registry after it has been struck off, dissolved or liquidated?
The Speaker: Question 4, Hon. Member for Douglas South, Mrs Beecroft.
480 Mrs Beecroft: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I ask the Question standing in my name.
The Speaker: Again, Minister for Economic Development, Mr Shimmin.
485 The Minister for Economic Development (Mr Shimmin): Mr Speaker, the period for which documents are retained is enshrined in legislation. In respect of companies incorporated under the Companies Act 1931, section 2 of the Companies Act 1961 allows documents to be destroyed 12 years after the company has been struck off, dissolved or liquidated. 490 The Limited Liability Companies Act 1996, section 52A, allows documents to be destroyed 12 years after the company has been struck off, dissolved or liquidated. Documents submitted under the Companies Act 2006 are currently retained indefinitely, as no regulation has been made enabling them to be destroyed.
495 The Speaker: Mrs Beecroft, supplementary.
Mrs Beecroft: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Minister for his response but is he prepared to actually look at changing the legislation, so that they can be held indefinitely, in fact? With the age of technology that we have 500 now, it seems rather strange that a company’s record, its history, is destroyed after 12 years, when sometimes people want to do research or for what ever reason, going back longer than that. Is there any intention by his Department to try and change that, because data can be stored very simply, these days, without taking a huge amount of space?
505 The Speaker: Minister to reply.
The Minister: Thank you, Mr Speaker. We have usually been in a position of destroying about 2,000 files a year or the equivalent of 150 metres of shelf space. However, as the Hon. Member has pointed out, as now all documents 510 are electronically stored, in future we will retain an electronic copy of every document indefinitely. Therefore, we may destroy the originals after 12 years, but for those captured electronically, the current position is that they would be stored indefinitely.
The Speaker: Mrs Beecroft. 515 Mrs Beecroft: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Just out of curiosity, really, if the Minister could give an indication of how many companies are not held electronically at the moment and how much of a job it would be to put those documents into electronic format, so that nothing else would have to be stuck permanently 520 destroyed?
The Speaker: Minister.
The Minister: Companies Registry now has an electronic copy of the document submitted 525 since April 2002. Therefore, if we roll 12 years forward, by the time that we would come for removing those after 12 years, it will be next calendar year. Therefore, we have a copy of that document on file since live April 2002, and as much as we are keen to do the opportunities as outlined, I would point out that in recent years, there have only been two occasions. Therefore, the
______746 K130 HOUSE OF KEYS, TUESDAY, 25th JUNE 2013
job of trawling back, to have done this for the possibility of people wishing to research was not 530 deemed an appropriate, when we are so close to now having all records electronically stored.
The Speaker: Mr Karran.
Mr Karran: Vainstyr Loayreyder, would the Shirveishagh not agree that there would maybe a 535 policy decision that there will be, from now on, a situation where the ones that, if they are in existence, they will be scanned, as far as if there are any documents there? Would the Shirveishagh not also agree that when you have a situation which arises not very often, where you end up with people… where company assets end up bona vacantia and you then had to send constituents back to try and re-introduce the company back on to the Company 540 Register in order to claim the property, that it will make it impossible for that situation to arise in future, where they could lose their property totally?
The Speaker: Mr Shimmin.
545 The Minister: One of the attempts we are making is to reduce bureaucracy and the idea of scanning in what have been 150 metres of shelf space per year would be an enormous task. I would point out that before documents are destroyed, my Department consults with the Chief Registrar and the Financial Supervision Commission to determine if any of them are deemed to be of sufficient public interest. We do retain a sample, approximately 7%, which are transferred to the 550 Public Record Office. Indeed, for anybody who has let the matter run beyond the 12 years, the bona vacantia means that the assets are held by Treasury and therefore there is a legal process to go through. I think we have to be proportionate in this. The mechanism is one which on occasions has been able to be resolved by the court. The actual work involved in doing and achieving what the two Hon. 555 Members are requesting is already 11 years down that journey and should effectively become redundant very, very shortly./ Therefore, as much as I can understand the Hon. Members, I do not believe it is the best utilisation of a limited resource that we have, to try and grow the economy of the Island, when there are other safeguards available. 560
HEALTH
565 Sudden or unexpected deaths Reported figures
1.5. The Hon. Member for Douglas South (Mrs Beecroft) to ask the Minister for Health:
570 Pursuant to his response to Written Question 30. on 11th June 2013 whether the change in criteria for reporting sudden or unexpected deaths indicates that the figures given for previous years could be understated?
The Speaker: Question 5, Hon. Member, Mrs Beecroft. 575 Mrs Beecroft: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I ask the Question standing in my name.
The Speaker: I call on the Minister for Health, Mr Anderson to reply. 580 The Minister for Health (Mr Anderson): Mr Speaker, I can confirm that the change in criteria for reporting sudden and expected death does not indicate that figure given for previous years was understated. They were based on the criteria of reporting at that time. Once the changes were made to the 585 Prison computer system and the threshold for reporting was reduced, then obviously the numbers of patient deaths reporting into the system was increased. It is not correct to seek to respectively apply the new criteria to suggest there was a previous understatement, any more than, if the criteria had reduced the threshold, it would be correct to say that the figure was previously overstated. ______747 K130 HOUSE OF KEYS, TUESDAY, 25th JUNE 2013
590 I think is important to note here that the number of overall deaths at Noble’s Hospital has not increased, and I can confirm that the overall deaths for the last five years are as follows: 2008-09, 279; 2009-10, 258; 2010-11, 254; 2011-12, 244; 2012-13, 251. The average mortality rate at Noble’s Hospital has been less for the last five years than the UK average. The average here on the Isle of Man for the last three years is 1.27%, with the average for 595 a UK trust over the same period being 1.55%. As the Hon. Member may recall from my answer to her in February this year, we are planning to provide more detailed and robust mortality figures in line with the UK, and my officers are currently discussing the issues, discussing the information requirements with relevant Departments. 600 The Speaker: Mrs Beecroft.
Mrs Beecroft: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Minister for his response. Would he not agree with me that in his previous response 605 on 11th June, he stated:
‘However, it should be noted that this increase is due to a change in the criteria for reporting sudden or unexpected deaths on the Incident Reporting System and also coincides with the upgrade and development of the Incident Reporting System in 2012.’
If that is the case – and I have no doubt that that is the case, I have no need to question that – it is actually logic that, had the same criteria been used in previous years, there would have been an 610 increase in reporting in those years, because that is basically what the system is… what you are saying in your previous Answer. If I could also ask, you say you are going to have more robust… I cannot remember the correct wording that you said – robust reporting or robust mechanisms, more in line with the UK. Could I ask what these more robust systems are, what benchmarking is going to be carried out and what 615 data validation and audit of the data that there will be in the future, so that we can have confidence in the figures and be able to compare them?
The Speaker: Reply, sir.
620 The Minister: In relation to the last point, yes, I believe we can have confidence in the figures we have. What we will be doing in the future is getting reports from other Departments. At the moment we do not have that information to look into mortality detail, if you like. That will involve two other Government Departments, which at the moment are not providing that information to us, but we have asked them to do that. 625 I am confident that our statistics… and I have already given the Hon. Member the figure, that over the three-year average, our figure is 1.27% compared with the English hospitals, where the mean figure is 1.55%. In relation to the point the Hon. Member made to start her supplementary, I think that is false logic, because those that were reported under the old definition were not ‘sudden and unexpected’. 630 Equally, if the criteria were relaxed, then you could not argue the numbers were previously over- reported. You cannot respectively apply criteria to historic data and draw conclusions from them, because you have not got the information that was required to do that.
The Speaker: Supplementary, Mrs Beecroft. 635 Mrs Beecroft: Thank you, Mr Speaker. If I may ask the Minister to clarify, is this going to be the last change in the criteria? It makes it very difficult to compare how anybody is performing, if criteria are going to be changed again. You are not comparing like with like. 640 Also, could I ask him again about the data validation and the audit of the data? I think he missed that out in his previous response to me – if he could just clarify that point, please.
The Speaker: Minister to reply.
645 The Minister: Mr Speaker, my understanding is that we are upgrading to a UK system, so every time the UK upgrades its system. I believe, in order to benchmark, we should move our systems in line with that. So that is what is being done. ______748 K130 HOUSE OF KEYS, TUESDAY, 25th JUNE 2013
As far as audit validation, I will have to get back to the hon. Member with that point. I have not got that information here today. 650
SOCIAL CARE
655 Landlord and Tenancy Bill Landlords operating as a company
1.6. The Hon. Member for Douglas North (Mr Houghton) to ask the Minister for Social Care:
660 If he will include within the Landlord and Tenancy Bill a provision for landlords who operate as a company to be permitted to petition the court for information in the same way as any other landlord?
The Speaker: We turn to Question 6. Hon. Member for Douglas North, Mr Houghton. 665 Mr Houghton: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name, sir.
The Speaker: I call on the Minster for Social Care, Mr Robertshaw. 670 The Minister for Social Care (Mr Robertshaw): Thank you, Mr Speaker, and I thank the Minster for his Question. I believe it relates to a company’s ability to file proceedings and right of audience in proceedings in any court. These provisions are contained within section 36 of the Administration 675 of Justice Act 1981, section 16A of the High Court Act 1991 and indirectly through the exclusion established by section 9 of the Advocates Act 1976. It would not be reasonable or appropriate to use the Landlord and Tenant Private Housing Bill, which is a self-contained piece of legislation, to seek an amendment to these Acts. Any change would have wide implications and should therefore be considered in isolation. 680 The Speaker: Mr Houghton.
Mr Houghton: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I think the Minister actually is deluded in the Answer that he has given. In many Bills, there 685 are amending clauses them at any other and many other acts. In this case, his emphasis is on landlord and tenancy operations, and in one of those operations, in the case of a company, and through a company, only a company can employ the use of an advocate, when that company can be a very small group who can do the work themselves and wish to apply to the court as an individual. 690 This is strictly relative. May I ask the Minister if he could take this back once again and review it, or I will consider, when he brings the Bill forward, bringing amendments before this House for Hon. Members to decide. I am asking the Minister to take the initiative in this: will he do so?
The Speaker: Minister to reply. 695 The Minister: Thank you, Mr Speaker. The Landlord and Tenant Private Housing Bill is not an amending piece of legislation – i.e. unlike other Bills, it does include provisions to amend or repeal any other Acts. It has been drafted in this way because it does not replicate other legislation. It is simply required to provide the legal 700 framework for the mandatory introduction of a landlord registration scheme. Moving it slightly broader for a second, there are ramifications in engaging in the broader aspects of how companies and their personality relate with the courts. I would suggest to the Hon. Member that if he feels really strongly about this, he perhaps considers it in isolation in perhaps a Private Member’s Bill. 705 The Speaker: Mr Quirk, Hon. Member.
Mr Quirk: Thank you, Mr Speaker. ______749 K130 HOUSE OF KEYS, TUESDAY, 25th JUNE 2013
I wonder whether the Minister regarding… he indicated in his last Answer with reference to 710 registration. Could I ask the Minister if he is considering that the Health Service, which has a large, substantial portfolio in rented property, will be registering as well.
The Speaker: Mr Robertshaw.
715 The Minister: Mr Speaker, no.
INFRASTRUCTURE 720 Eastern Civic Amenity Site Vehicle number plate recognition system
1.7. The Hon. Member for Onchan (Mr Quirk) to ask the Minister for Infrastructure: 725 Whether the use of a vehicle number plate recognition system at the Eastern Civic Amenity Site is within the powers of the local authority; and what the cost of this system is to his Department?
730 The Speaker: We turn to Question 7. Hon. Member for Onchan, Mr Quirk.
Mr Quirk: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I beg to ask the Question standing in my name.
735 The Speaker: I call on the Minister for Infrastructure, Mr Cretney.
The Minister for Infrastructure (Mr Cretney): Thank you. Waste charges for the appropriate disposal of waste have grown steadily over many years, as appreciation of the environmental impact of inappropriate waste disposal has increased. The Island 740 has seen a dramatic move away from landfill disposal to more environmentally sustainable re-use, recycling and recovery. This does, however, come at a cost. Nothing was cheaper than throwing waste into a hole in the ground. As the cost of waste disposal has increased, so has the incentive to try and avoid paying these costs, particularly for some business users that generate commercial waste. One way in which 745 some commercial waste producers try to avoid paying for waste disposal is by taking it to a civic amenity site for free disposal as household waste. This has four impacts. The local authorities pay for the disposal at the household disposal rates. Local companies that operate commercial waste transfer stations lose business. Legitimate businesses that pay for the disposal of their waste are put at a disadvantaged. The DoI, through its 750 subsidies to household waste, pays for the disposal. This could therefore be seen as fraudulent activity at the expense of the tax- and ratepayers and puts legitimate businesses at a disadvantage. All four civic amenity sites have procedures in place to try and stop this abuse. It is, however, difficult for the site staff to monitor this effectively. The Department receives comments and letters suggesting that the practice of commercial waste going into civic amenity sites continues. 755 In order to reduce the amount of commercial waste getting into the civic amenity sites, the Department intends to extend the use of the automatic number plate recognition system across all four sites. This will help protect the interests of tax- and ratepayers and legitimate businesses. The automatic number plate recognition system at the Northern Civic Amenity Site has been very effective in helping to identify and challenge abuse of the site. An added advantage is that the 760 system could also be used to formulate resource planning, as the system is able to quickly identify peaks and troughs in user levels. Resources can then be matched accordingly. The use of automatic number plate recognition system at civic amenity sites is fairly common in other British jurisdictions. The cost of installing the system at each site, with the appropriate analysis software is approximately £9,000. I say ‘approximately’, as no on-site survey has yet been 765 undertaken for the installations. We believe that the use of automatic number plate recognition systems by local authorities for this purpose is lawful and we are in the process of reaffirming this belief with legal advice. The installation will not take place in the Eastern Civic Amenity Site until we have confirmed the legality of the system’s operation. 770 ______750 K130 HOUSE OF KEYS, TUESDAY, 25th JUNE 2013
The Speaker: Mr Quirk.
Mr Quirk: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Minister for the comprehensive reply. 775 Can I ask the Minister, is your Department now in conflict with Government policy, where the policy is of Government at the minute that local authorities have to structure their own financing? As a consequence of providing not one, but now three extra to other civic amenity sites, this system, at £9,000 apiece, is taxpayers’ money, which should not be spent on local authority business. 780 The Speaker: Mr Cretney.
The Minister: I think only recently in Tynwald, when I was talking about the Western Civic Amenity Site and seeking approval for changes to the structure of that organisation, I did say that I 785 do believe, in my opinion, a more consistent approach Island-wide would be beneficial. This system is in place at the Northern Site and has proved successful, and I see no problem with extending it to the other sites in order to provide such consistency.
The Speaker: Mr Karran. 790 Mr Karran: Vainstyr Loayreyder, would the Shirveishagh not agree that with the bad history we have had with some of these sites, we need to do anything we can to make that we do not end up with a situation where fraud was able to flourish on issues, as far as these civic amenity sites? Does he not agree that if it does mean that the taxpayer has to put some money in, in order to 795 help the ratepayer, in order to get good management there, allowing for its lamentable past, then we should be helping them?
The Speaker: Mr Cretney.
800 The Minister: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Yes, I do agree with the Hon. Member on that point; and also one of the points I did make in my initial remarks was that there was actually a cost to the Department by the fraudulent activity taking place, so by trying to use measures to protect that, at a cost of £9,000 per facility, we are going to save money in the long run, anyway. 805 The Speaker: Mr Quirk.
Mr Quirk: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Is it true or not, Minister, the Northern Civic Amenity Site is actually run by your Department 810 wholly? So there is a difference of opinion there. Could I ask the Minister regarding the data which is collected from these recognition systems: who will have control of that data on each of the sites – specifically the two sites, or one potentially, which is the Eastern one, but the Northern one itself – I presume the Northern one is under your control, but the Eastern one is run by the authorities themselves. Who will be 815 controlling that data and will it be shared?
The Speaker: Minister.
The Minister: I will have to come back to the Hon. Member in relation to that point. 820
______751 K130 HOUSE OF KEYS, TUESDAY, 25th JUNE 2013
OFFICE OF FAIR TRADING
Louis Group products OFT action regarding alleged mis-selling 825 1.8. The Hon. Member for Onchan (Mr Karran) to ask the Chairman of the Office of Fair Trading:
What actions his office is taking in respect of any alleged mis-selling of Louis Group products?
830 The Speaker: We turn to Question 8. Hon. Member for Onchan, Mr Karran.
Mr Karran: Vainstyr Loayreyder, I ask the Question standing in my name.
The Speaker: I call on the Chairman of the Office of Fair Trading, Mr Quirk. 835 The Chairman of the Office of Fair Trading (Mr Quirk): Thank you, Mr Speaker. The involvement of the Office of Fair Trading in the resolution of the alleged mis-selling of the Louis Group products is in pursuance of the Financial Ombudsman Scheme created by schedule 4 of the Financial Services Act 2008. As such, the procedures followed are in accordance with the 840 legislation. To date, the Ombudsman Scheme has received 28 complaints alleging mis-selling of the Louis Group products. These complaints fall into three broad categories. First, we have received nine complaints regarding products sold directly to customers by the Louis Group (IOM) Ltd. One complaint was progressed through the system and was determined 845 by adjudication in favour of the complaint prior to the decision of the High Court for the company to be wound up. One of the companies was rejected as being outside the scope of the Ombudsman Scheme. The seven other complaints were at various stages when the decision was taken to wind up the company. 850 When the company is wound up by the court, the Office of Fair Trading cannot proceed with existing complaint or indeed accept a new complaint against that company. At this stage, the interests of all the creditors are properly dealt with by the courts and the appointed liquidator. The second group of complaints relate to the mis-selling of the Louis Group products by an Isle of Man based independent financial adviser. The total of 18 complaints of that nature have 855 been received to date. Five of those complaints have been dealt with through the system to completion. Four of these have been determined in favour of the complainant at adjudication, and the fifth was partly upheld against at adjudication. Five of the complaints were determined to be outside the scope of the Ombudsman Scheme. The remaining eight complaints are currently being processed through the 860 system. Finally, there was one complaint that relates to the sale of the Louis Group product by an independent financial adviser in another jurisdiction. This is not covered by the Ombudsman Scheme and should be dealt with by the ombudsman or similar authority in the jurisdiction where advice was given. 865 I would emphasise that the information which I have provided today is a snapshot and is an evolving situation and the data can and will change.
The Speaker: Bearing in mind some of the complaints referred to are before the courts, I am sure Members will frame any supplementary questions accordingly. 870 Mr Karran.
Mr Karran: Vainstyr Loayreyder, could the Caairliagh, the Chairman, inform this Hon. House which company was outside the scheme? Does the Chairman feel that when you saw the promotional literature, which talked about the 875 fact that it was low risk, that it was…? I think in some of the literature, it said that it was covered by the FSC. Does he feel that there has been any deception as far as that is concerned? Does he feel that the Ombudsman Scheme, allowing for the fact that it seems like it is, once again, the lack of protection to consumers… there is a total need for a review of the present Ombudsman Scheme so that it can actually have the teeth to do the job? 880 The Speaker: Mr Quirk. ______752 K130 HOUSE OF KEYS, TUESDAY, 25th JUNE 2013
The Chairman: Thank you, Mr Speaker. In preparing the above response, I have to say that the Office of Fair Trading sought to provide information to the House without discussing individual cases. These are matters which are subject 885 to and being determined by other jurisdictions or our own courts. I would say to Hon. Members here, the Office of Fair Trading is trying to be helpful, but I would say to Members, if you have any information, any advice, it should be before the courts, because that is who is dealing with the case.
890 The Speaker: Mr Karran.
Mr Karran: Vainstyr Loayreyder, could the Caairliagh tell this Hon. House, which was the company that was outside the scheme and why was there a specific company that was outside the scheme as far as the different, numerous products that the Louis Group were producing, as far as 895 investment was concerned? Can he inform this House, and if not, can he give that information later on?
The Speaker: Mr Quirk.
900 The Chairman: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Obviously, the client confidential basis which Members or members of the public have in connections with the OFT are private and I am not privy to that information, sir.
The Speaker: Mr Karran. 905 Mr Karran: Vainstyr Loayreyder, would the Caairliagh not agree that none of us want the individuals but it is interesting to see why one particular company scheme from the Louis Group products was outside the scheme; or is he saying that it was an individual company that was not a Louis Group scheme? 910 I am interested to know what the criteria were to allow certain products to be outside the Financial Ombudsman, so that the Chairman might want to look at extending the legislation of the Financial Ombudsman Scheme so it actually has teeth.
The Speaker: Mr Quirk. 915 The Chairman: Sorry, Mr Speaker, I did indicate to the Member, I do not have any information on that at all, but I am sure that if the Member was so concerned, he would actually attend the Office, and maybe our officers would like to discuss the parameters generally.
920 The Speaker: Thank you, Hon. Members. That brings us to the end of the Questions for Oral Answer. The Answers to the Questions on the Order Paper for Written Answer will be circulated.
______753 K130 HOUSE OF KEYS, TUESDAY, 25th JUNE 2013
Questions for Written Answer 925
HEALTH
Unexpected deaths 930 Causes, reviews and Coroner referrals
2.1. The Hon. Member for Douglas South (Mrs Beecroft) to ask the Minister for Health:
Pursuant to his response to Written Question 30 on 11th June 2013, how many of the sudden or unexpected deaths referred to were ascribed to natural causes; how many required a 935 Serious Patient Safety Review; and how many were referred to the Coroner in each year?
Answer: Of the total of 67 reportable deaths, a total of 65 deaths were attributed to natural causes. The list of causes of these deaths include:
940 • Cancer • Stillbirths • Road Traffic Accidents • Cardiac Arrests • Gastro Intestinal bleeds 945 Of the 67 reportable deaths, seven resulted in Serious Patient Safety Reviews. These reviews were carried out to provide reassurances to clinical teams and families that all appropriate care had been given and, where necessary, learn lessons for future care provision. Serious Patient Safety Reviews do not, in themselves, necessarily indicate service failures. 950 For the period 1st April 2008 to 31st March 2009 there were a total of four sudden or unexpected deaths reported to the coroner. (One inquest held – verdict - natural causes) For the period 1st April 2009 to 31st March 2010 there were a total of four sudden or unexpected deaths reported to the coroner. (One Inquest held – verdict - accidental death) For the period 1st April 2010 to 31st March 2011 there were a total of three sudden or 955 unexpected deaths reported to the coroner. (No Inquests held) For the period 1st April 2011 to 31st March 2012 there was a total of one sudden or unexpected death reported to coroner. (No Inquests held) For the period 1st April 2012 to 31st March 2013 there were a total of eight sudden or unexpected deaths reported to the coroner. (One Inquest held – accidental death) 960 The circumstances in which a death will be referred to a coroner include:
• an accident or injury • an industrial disease • during a surgical operation 965 • before recovery from an anaesthetic • if the cause of death is unknown • the death was sudden and unexplained, for instance, a sudden infant death (cot death).
970 INFRASTRUCTURE
Area Plan for the South Legal procedure during preparation 975 2.2. The Hon. Member for Douglas South (Mrs Beecroft) to ask the Minister for Infrastructure:
If he will make a statement on the legal procedure followed by his Department when it prepared the Area Plan for the South?
______754 K130 HOUSE OF KEYS, TUESDAY, 25th JUNE 2013
Answer: The Area Plan for the South was prepared in accordance with the procedures set out 980 in Schedule 1 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1999, details of which are attached and which can also be found on the Tynwald Legislation website (link below). http://www.legislation.gov.im/cms/images/LEGISLATION/PRINCIPAL/1999/1999- 0009/TownandCountryPlanningAct1999_2.pdf
985 Schedule 1 DEVELOPMENT PLAN PROCEDURE Section 2
990 Interpretation 1. In this Schedule ‘plan’ means a strategic plan or an area plan.
Preliminary publicity 2. When preparing a plan and before finally determining its content, the Department shall take 995 such steps as will in its opinion secure — (a) that adequate publicity is given to the matters with which it intends that the proposals in the plan should deal; (b) that persons who may be expected to desire an opportunity of making representations to the Department with respect to those matters are made aware that they may do so; and 1000 (c) that such persons are given an adequate opportunity of making such representations.
Publication of draft plan 3. (1) After complying with the requirements of paragraph 2 and considering any representations made with respect to the matters there referred to, the Department shall publish a draft of any plan. 1005 (2) A draft plan may not be published more than 12 months after the steps referred to in paragraph 2 with respect to the plan have been completed. (3)Where a draft of a plan is published, the notice under section 45(2)(a) shall state — (a) that copies of the plan may be inspected and obtained as mentioned in section 45(2)(b) and (c); and 1010 (b) that within such period as may be specified in the notice (not being less than 42 days beginning with the date on which it is first published), any person may make objections or representations in writing with respect to any proposal in the draft plan.
Inquiry 1015 4. (1) After the expiry of the period specified under paragraph 3(3)(b), the Department shall cause an inquiry to be held. (2) The inquiry shall be conducted by a person or persons appointed by the Governor for the purpose; and—(a) the Inquiries (Evidence) Act 2003 applies to such an inquiry with the omission, in section 1(1), of the words from ‘where Tynwald’ onwards, and of section 3; and (b) any person 1020 shall be entitled to be heard (in person or by a representative) at the inquiry.13
Publicity for report of appointed person 5. As soon as may be after it receives the report of the person or persons by whom the inquiry was conducted, the Department shall publish the report. 1025 Adoption of draft plan 6. (1) After considering the report of the person or persons by whom the inquiry is held, the Department may by order adopt the plan in the terms of the draft, with or without modifications; and the plan as adopted shall be annexed to the order. 1030 (2)Where the Department proposes to adopt the plan with modifications — (a) it shall publish a notice stating— (i) the general effect of the proposed modifications, and (ii) that within such period as may be specified in the notice (not being less than 21 days beginning with the date on which it is first published), any person may make objections or representations in 1035 writing with respect to any of the modifications; (b) it shall not adopt the plan before the expiration of the period so specified; and (c) before doing so it shall consider any objections and representations duly made with respect to the modifications and not withdrawn.
______755 K130 HOUSE OF KEYS, TUESDAY, 25th JUNE 2013
1040 Publication of plan after approval 7. As7. As soon as practicable after a plan has been approved by Tynwald, the Department shall publish it.
1045 Regeneration Area blocks Suitability and contractor
2.3. The Hon. Member for Onchan (Mr Quirk) to ask the Minister for Infrastructure: 1050 Whether the blocks used for the regeneration areas around the Island are suitable; and which contractor is being used in Douglas to put these in place?
Answer: The highway construction and natural stone block materials used for the regeneration 1055 works are compliant with the requirements of British Standard 7533. This document prescribes the standards for both a carriageway or a footway pavement constructed with clay, natural stone or concrete pavers and is the code of practice for laying natural stone, precast concrete and clay paving units. The use of granite block materials in accordance with British Standards will ensure their technical suitability for use within the regeneration areas. 1060 The initial public consultation and community engagement works undertaken by the Douglas Development Partnership for regeneration projects in Douglas identified a requirement for high quality natural stone aesthetic finishes and the colour of the blocks to be used. The outcome of this early public and community engagement was endorsed by the local Douglas Regeneration Committee. 1065 The use of hard stone natural granite materials results in them being resistant to the ingress of liquid spills and permits them to be cleaned mechanically without damage or reduction in the skid resistance of the individual blocks. The use of hard wearing high quality grout between the granite blocks also prevents the ingress of water and allows high pressure and mechanical cleaning. The use of lower quality clay or concrete materials would not exhibit these characteristics. 1070 A review of the feedback on the pilot regeneration projects was undertaken by the local Regeneration Committee in June 2012. This Committee has representatives from Douglas Borough Council, local members of the House of Keys, Douglas Development Partnership, Government Departments and the Douglas business community. This Committee endorsed both the use of the natural stone material pavers and the colour of these blocks. 1075 The use of granite blocks allows the blocks to be lifted, cleaned and relayed if statutory undertakers need to undertake unforeseen emergency repairs at any time in the future. The granite blocks meet the technical requirements and their use is in accordance with the objectives of the Town and Village Regeneration Scheme and the requirements of the local regeneration committees. The blocks provide a serviceable high quality paving solution for many decades to 1080 come. The main contractor for the Douglas regeneration works is the Department of Infrastructure, with two local firms providing some additional labour working under DoI control. The Department’s site teams are working a twin shift system construction programme from 6am – 10pm every day except Saturday. 1085
PUBLIC SECTOR PENSION AUTHORITY
1090 Government pension scheme retirees Lump sum payments 2007-13
2.4. The Hon. Member for Castletown (Mr Ronan) to ask the Vice-Chairman of the Public Sector Pension Authority: 1095 How many people retiring under all pension schemes operated by the Isle of Man Government drew lump sum payments in each of the financial years 2007-08 to 2012-13; and what the total value of lump sums paid out in each of those years was?
______756 K130 HOUSE OF KEYS, TUESDAY, 25th JUNE 2013
1100 Answer: Mr Speaker, in the time allowed, the PSPA has analysed the figures available as best they can. Historically, the PSPA’s pensions administration system would not have recorded the information requested in a format that is easily extracted (without having to go into the individual records of approaching 2000 retiring members to determine whether a lump sum was taken and the amount). The new administration system introduced over the last 12 months will be able to record 1105 and extract this type of information for future retirements. Therefore, the Government’s Axapta payment system has been used to extract the information, which it is believed is broadly correct. However, there are some limitations to the figures provided by Axapta as follows: 1. Axapta does not distinguish between lump sum payments on retirement of members and 1110 lump sums paid on the death in service of a member. However, the PSPA estimates that around £4m of the total lump sums paid over the period 2007-08 to 2012-13 were in respect of members who died in service. Therefore, the figures provided below will be predominantly lump sums taken on retirement; 2. Neither Axapta nor the PSPA’s administration system can confirm how many retiring 1115 members took a lump sum compared with those not taking a lump sum. Prior to the introduction of the Unified Scheme in April 2012, under some sections of previous schemes, the lump sum was an option rather than provided automatically to members. Therefore, some members can and will have chosen not to take the lump sum. However, based on the PSPA’s experience, the PSPA estimates that around 90% of retiring members generally take the lump sum where this is an 1120 option. The figures extracted from Axapta are provided below. These relate only to the schemes managed by the PSPA and therefore exclude schemes for Local Government, the Post Office and Tynwald members and show the total number of retirements and total lump sums taken in each year. 1125 Year Number of Total Lump Sums retirements
2007-2008 290 £10,136,881
2008-2009 267 £10,412,965
2009-2010 331 £12,978,214
2010-2011 327 £14,923,556
2011-2012 376 £16,976,596
2012-2013 356 £21,330,679
Total 1947 £86,758,891
The PSPA would also comment that an individual’s lump sum on retirement is calculated in accordance with the rules of each pension scheme and is based on the person’s length of service and final pensionable pay. Therefore, individuals’ with longer service and/or higher pay would 1130 receive a higher lump sum in accordance with the calculation under the schemes rules. This methodology of calculating lump sums is also used in similar private sector schemes. Additionally, it is worth noting that members taking a lump sum would serve to act in the best interests of schemes as this will reduce the on-going pension liability, which given current mortality projections, will act to contain future costs. 1135
Government pension schemes Highest and lowest lump sum payments 2007-13 1140 2.5. The Hon. Member for Castletown (Mr Ronan) to ask the Vice-Chairman of the Public Sector Pension Authority:
What the highest and lowest lump sums drawn were in each of the years 2007-08 to 2012-13 ______757 K130 HOUSE OF KEYS, TUESDAY, 25th JUNE 2013
1145 for each of the pensions schemes operated across the Isle of Man Government?
Answer: Mr Speaker, as mentioned in the response to the previous question posed by the Hon. Member, historically some sections of public service schemes gave members the choice of whether or not to take a lump sum on retirement. Therefore, potentially, the lowest lump sum 1150 drawn could be zero if a member chose not to draw the lump sum. However, as also advised in the response to the previous question, the PSPA estimates that around 90% of retiring members generally take the lump sum where this is an option. Additionally, the Axapta payments system does not distinguish between lump sums paid on retirement or arrears of payments, many of which will be small amounts. Therefore, without again 1155 investigating each individual record and small payment on Axapta, and given the time allowed, it would be difficult for the PSPA to highlight the lowest lump sum drawn in each year. However, it is possible to say from a broad review of Axapta payments and from investigating a few specimen records that the lowest lump sum payment each year is likely to be in the ‘£100s’ which would cover members who left schemes in the past with short service and low salaries who are now 1160 retiring. The Table 2.5A below therefore shows the highest lump sums drawn from each of the public service schemes currently managed by the PSPA in the years requested, excluding therefore schemes for Local Government, the Post Office and Tynwald members:
Table 2.5A Public Sector Highest lump Highest lump Highest lump Highest lump Highest lump Highest lump Scheme sum sum sum sum sum sum 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 £ £ £ £ £ £
Airport Fire 0 0 23,297 0 198,424 n/a
Firemen’s 172,564 125,787 145,915 166,720 130,588 n/a
Unified n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 514,479 Scheme Judicial 1992 94,478 9,700 0 0 114,533 0
Judicial 2004 0 0 0 0 98,242 0
Manual 41,988 48,476 63,449 78,853 66,949 n/a Workers 1977 Radio Manx 7,942 0 3,781 3,592 54,154 n/a
MEA 95,302 130,203 81,572 235,046 71,323 n/a
Manual 31,698 38,717 39,527 38,888 50,295 31,905 Workers No. 1 National 46,521 27,153 63,134 69,573 82,910 n/a Transport NHS 2007 176,918 149,463 279,708 197,012 202,148 n/a
NHS 2008 0 0 0 0 44,934 n/a
Civil Service 126,172 160,635 165,689 377,730 187,620 n/a & analogous Police 118,372 114,171 190,317 160,958 209,885 193,995
Teachers 118,017 149,290 232,078 158,708 120,843 169,623
1165 Notes 1. The Unified Scheme commenced from April 2012. Therefore, those schemes which have a ‘n/a’ in final column would have formed part of the Unified Scheme from 2012-13; 2. Where there is a ‘zero’ in a particular year, this means that no lump sums were paid out in that year; ______758 K130 HOUSE OF KEYS, TUESDAY, 25th JUNE 2013
1170 3. Figures have been rounded to the nearest whole pound; 4. The row headed ‘Civil Service and analogous’ includes all sections of the Principle Civil Service Pensions Scheme as well as related analogous schemes for Officers of Boards, Harbour Police, Insurance and Pensions Authority and the Financial Supervision Commission. 1175 5. An individual’s lump sum on retirement is calculated in accordance with the rules of each pension scheme and is based on the person’s length of service and final pensionable pay. Therefore, individuals with longer service and/or higher pay would receive a higher lump sum in accordance with the calculation under the schemes rules. This methodology of calculating lump sums is also used in similar private sector schemes. 1180
Government pension schemes Total level of contributions 2007-13 1185 2.6. The Hon. Member for Castletown (Mr Ronan) to ask the Vice-Chairman of the Public Sector Pension Authority:
For the highest and lowest lump sums drawn from pension schemes operated by the Isle of 1190 Man Government in each of the years 2007–08 to 2012-13 what the total level of contributions made to the scheme were by both the employee concerned (without identifying them) and employer in each case?
Answer: Mr Speaker, the PSPA does not record the total contribution per employee made to 1195 each of its schemes. However, Table 2.6A below shows the percentage rates of employee and employer contribution when applied to each employee’s pensionable earnings for each scheme managed by the PSPA. Schemes managed out with the PSPA for Local Government, Post Office and Tynwald Members are excluded.
Table 2.6A Public Service Scheme Employee Contribution Employer Contribution % of Pensionable Pay % of Pensionable Pay 1. Airport Firemen 1989 11% 0 2. Fireman’s Scheme 1990 11% 0 3. Unified Scheme Between 5% and 11% Between 0% and 18.6% depending on section of depending on employer scheme 4. Judicial Scheme 1992 4% 0 5. Judicial Scheme 2004 4% 0 6. Manual Workers 1977 5% 7% [Water Authority 18.6%] 7. Radio Manx Scheme 6.5% 16.8% 8. MEA Superannuation 6% 17.3% 1985 9. Manual Workers No. 1 1.5% 7% 10. National Transport 5% 7% Scheme 11. NHS Superannuation 2007 Tiered up to 8.5% 14% [7% for dentists] 12. NHS Superannuation 2008 Tiered up to 6.5% 14% [7% for dentists] 13. Civil Service & related Between 1.5% and 3.5% 0 Schemes depending on section of Excluding MER 9.5% and scheme Water Authority 22.1%
14. Police Pension Scheme 11% 0 15. Teachers Pension Scheme Tiered between 6.4% and 14.1% 11.2% depending upon salary 1200
______759 K130 HOUSE OF KEYS, TUESDAY, 25th JUNE 2013
Notes 1. The contribution rates for schemes 1, 2, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12 and 13 were incorporated into the Unified Scheme from April 2012; 2. Schemes 1, 2, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12 and 13 no longer exist in their own right as they have 1205 formed part of the Unified Scheme from April 2012. Therefore, employee contribution percentages are as highlighted above. Employer contribution percentages have remained unchanged from the previous schemes.
1210 Government pension schemes Estimated cost of lump sum payments 2013-19
2.7. The Hon. Member for Castletown (Mr Ronan) to ask the Vice-Chairman of the Public 1215 Sector Pension Authority:
What the estimated cost by year is of lump sums being drawn out of the Isle of Man Government pension schemes for the years 2013-14 to 2018-19?
1220 Answer: Mr Speaker, the PSPA does not predict what future lump sums and pensions might be payable from the schemes that it manages. One reason for this is that members can choose the age at which they wish to retire and therefore, other than members who reach their normal pension age in any year, the PSPA will not generally know which members might choose, or be contemplating, taking early retirement benefits and therefore it would not be able to predict with any accuracy 1225 what future lump sums might be payable from schemes. An analysis of future cash flows in terms of benefit payments is generally undertaken as part of a scheme’s regular actuarial valuation, but the analysis tends to focus on future predicted pension outgoings rather than specifically on lump sums.
1230
WATER AND SEWERAGE AUTHORITY
Meary Veg Sewage treatment works 1235 Effluent discharged 2007-12
2.8. The Hon. Member for Onchan (Mr Karran) to ask the Chairman of the Water and Sewerage Authority: 1240 What the average suspended solids content was, in milligrams per litre, of effluent discharged from Meary Veg sewage treatment works in each year between 2007 and 2012?
Answer: The average suspended solids content of the treated effluent discharged from Meary 1245 Veg was:
2007 21.0mg/l 2008 17.9mg/ 2009 16.0mg/l 1250 2010 14.5mg/l 2011 16.0mg/l 2012 11.2mg/l
1255 Meary Veg Sewage treatment works Design load without contingency allowance
2.9. The Hon. Member for Onchan (Mr Karran) to ask the Chairman of the Water and 1260 Sewerage Authority:
______760 K130 HOUSE OF KEYS, TUESDAY, 25th JUNE 2013
What the design load was, in cubic meters per year, for sewage expected to be treated annually at Meary Veg for a Population Equivalent of 64,000 without the 30% contingency allowance?
1265 Answer: The question mixes flow (cubic meters per year) and biological load (kilograms biochemical oxygen demand per year). The flow arriving at Meary Veg for treatment is dependent on the contributing population, trade effluent flow, infiltration into the system and, most significantly, rainfall. The design average daily flow for Phase 1 of Meary Veg is 20,214 m3 per day or 7,378,110 m3 per year. The design peak flow is 37,910 m3 per day. Phase 1 of Meary Veg 1270 was designed for a biological load of 3,840 kilograms biochemical oxygen demand per day or 1,401,600 kilograms biochemical oxygen demand per year.
1275 Meary Veg sewage treatment works Population equivalent number 2007-12
2.10. The Hon. Member for Onchan (Mr Karran) to ask the Chairman of the Water and Sewerage Authority: 1280 What Population Equivalent number was being treated at Meary Veg in each year between 2007 and 2012?
Answer: Based on 60 grammes biochemical oxygen demand per person per day, the average 1285 population equivalent load treated each year at Meary Veg is:
2007 Insufficient data 2008 57,733 2009 60,833 1290 2010 65,917 2011 61,667 2012 55,033
______761 K130 HOUSE OF KEYS, TUESDAY, 25th JUNE 2013
Orders of the Day 1295
BILL FOR FIRST READING
Post Office (Amendment) Bill 2013 1300 The Speaker: We turn to Item 3, Bill for First Reading: the Post Office (Amendment) Bill. I call the Secretary of the House.
The Secretary: Bill for First Reading: the Post Office (Amendment) Bill 2013, Member in 1305 charge, Mr Ronan.
The Speaker: Thank you.
1310 BILL FOR SECOND READING
Criminal Justice, Police Powers and Other Amendments Bill 2013 Second Reading approved 1315 4.1. Mr Watterson to move:
That the Criminal Justice, Police Powers and Other Amendments Bill 2013 be read a second time. 1320 The Speaker: Bill for Second Reading: Criminal Justice, Police Powers and Other Amendments Bill 2013. I call on the mover Hon. Member for Rushen, Mr Watterson.
Mr Watterson: Mr Speaker, in moving the Second Reading of the Criminal Justice, Police 1325 Powers and Other Amendments Bill 2013, I do not intend to go into much detail about the individual provision because these will be covered during the clauses stage. Instead, I intend to explain in broad summary form what the Bill does, along with why and how this Bill is different from the previous Bill that included these matters. Mr Speaker, in principle, this Bill has two key objectives: firstly, to secure the efficiency, 1330 effectiveness and good conduct of officers in the Isle of Man Constabulary, in the exercise of their duties in the 21st century; secondly, to empower the Constabulary to effectively investigate serious organised crime, both locally and where that crime crosses our borders. The second objective is important for our international reputation as, if we are unable, for legal reasons, to assist other jurisdictions effectively to investigate crime that crosses jurisdictions, we 1335 may be accused of being a secretive or unco-operative jurisdiction. I hope you will forgive the brief history lesson relating to this Bill, but it is important when debating the principles within it, to understand the process whereby this Bill got before the House today. The previous Bill, which I and many here opposed, was moved by my predecessor Mr 1340 Earnshaw. There are two principal concerns. The previous Bill covered a lot of areas, cutting across 25 Acts, making tracking the provisions very difficult. That is why this Bill deals with fewer concepts and deals with eight Acts. The second concern was that the new powers to be given to the Police were not proportionate to the responsibilities. A lot of work has been done to ensure that powers given to the Police are both necessary and proportionate. 1345 In preparing this Bill, we have cut out the following provisions regarding amendments to the Criminal Code 1872, obscene publications, forgery, offensive weapons, road traffic, consumer protection, custody, the moving on of groups of 10 or more persons suspected of causing harassment, and fireworks. We have also cut the following provisions as they raise significant issues of public policy, 1350 which need greater and separate consideration, such as test purchases by under-aged persons, sexual offences, licensing and public order. This Bill is therefore smaller, more focused and relates directly to Police operational powers.
______762 K130 HOUSE OF KEYS, TUESDAY, 25th JUNE 2013
After red-penning those matters just mentioned, I decided that we needed a fresh consultation on the provisions. This was undertaken over a period of 10 weeks, not six. The Police Consultative 1355 Forum held four local meetings around the Island and fed back to the Department. I personally gave a presentation to the Positive Action Group and have personally responded in writing to each letter or email submitted in response to the consultation, and considered every issue raised. The main elements of this Bill deal with bail, search warrants, search and sift powers, powers of arrest, the treatment of persons under the age of 18 and the powers to make regulations 1360 governing police activity. Other matters covered by the Bill include powers relating to drug offenders, the audio and visual recording of interviews, and the taking of photographs, samples and fingerprints. In response to consultation, we have either significantly amended provisions, introduced safeguards or fully reconsidered the following areas: bail, search warrants, serious offences 1365 committed by children, and the return of missing children. It was previously proposed to make breach of a conditional bail a criminal offence. Having listened to consultees, the proposal has been removed from the Bill, and the power to order forfeiture of bail money has been extended from the current securing surrender to custody, to additionally securing adherence to any condition of bail. 1370 Search warrants have to be applied for to a judicial authority and where the warrant authorises multiple entry the subsequent entries must be in accordance with the terms of the warrant and additionally authorised by a person of at least the rank of Inspector. In relation to serious offences committed by children, I decided that instead of determining offences for which children will be required to assist the Police by order, the legislation should be 1375 set out in the Bill and follow the existing law as set out in the Children and Young Person’s Act 2001. In relation to missing children, the term ‘arrest’ has been removed and the Police are now simply in power to lawfully return a child, who has been reported missing, to the adult responsible for their welfare. Also reflecting public concerns, the provision makes it clear that if there is any 1380 concern about a child’s welfare, the existing power to take a child under Police protection may be exercised. It may be asked why a Bill that is concerned with Police powers and the efficiency, effectiveness and… of the Police, deals with issues relating to bail and children. This is because a considerable amount of Police time is consumed in dealing with bail and locating and returning 1385 children reported missing. In relation to bail, it has been the case that up to one in 12 arrests made by the Police have been in relation to those who have breached one or more of their conditions of bail. The time taken in handling cases of breach of bail conditions is disproportionate and a waste of Police time and resources. The changes in this Bill relating to the forfeiture of bail money are designed to reduce 1390 the number of breaches of bail and hence the number of arrests. The other provisions relating to bail are concerned with efficiencies and will be expanded upon when the relevant clauses are moved. In relation to children, a considerable amount of Police time is also taken up locating and returning children reported missing. What the Police seek here is the legal authority to return a 1395 child once that child has been located. Mr Speaker, the purpose of this legislation is to take forward measures which improve the conduct, efficiency and effectiveness of the work undertaken by the Police. In preparing the Bill, we have restricted its scope to the most serious and pressing needs, and as a result of taking on board the views of the previous House, the Committee on the Bill and the concerns I myself have 1400 about this Bill, I feel that the product you see today is now fit for purpose in balancing powers with responsibilities. In addition, this Bill serves to bring forward measures, which seek to maintain and develop the Island’s reputation as a responsible, well-regulated and fully open and co-operative jurisdiction in international arena, a jurisdiction that is open for business. Mr Speaker, I beg to move that the Second Reading of the Criminal Justice, Police Powers and 1405 other Amendments Bill 2013 be approved.
The Speaker: Mr Quirk.
Mr Quirk: I beg to second, sir. 1410 The Speaker: Hon. Member for Douglas North, Mr Houghton.
Mr Houghton: Thank you, Mr Speaker. ______763 K130 HOUSE OF KEYS, TUESDAY, 25th JUNE 2013
Mr Speaker, just a few points that I see are fair and reasonable that are in this particular Bill. 1415 First, those issues that the Minister has mentioned in relation to children – changing the issues of bail and the competency towards that – and restricting the scope of the last Bill is all very much welcomed. There is a lot of good information and changes, and welcome changes in the Bill, but I do have some concerns in some other areas that I would just like to put on Hansard, although I have made 1420 these clear to the Minister at the presentation that he gave last week. For instance, and I was actually hoping for the Minister to make clear in the issue of his arrangement for bail, taking cognisance of what was said at the presentation, I would have thought the Minister would have put a little bit more detail in his opening speech, in order to reassure Members in relation to the issue of arresting people on the street and then bailing them on the 1425 street because that point was not made clear at the presentation. So if I make it clear, what I am saying is there is this street bailing that the Bill brings forward, but the way the Bill is written, and I have been through it again, I cannot understand – and I am not stupid – but I cannot understand for a moment where and why and what is the point of bailing someone on the street is, and it is not clear whether that person who has been bailed, has actually 1430 been arrested in the first place. This is very, very serious, Mr Speaker, and if I may just point out how the procedure currently works in respect of bail. For somebody to be bailed, first they have to be arrested, taken to Police Headquarters and processed, and there is a number of issues to do with processing. At Police Headquarters, they have to establish the identity of that person, they have to take DNA swabs and tests etc. There are 1435 a number of issues that they have to go through there. Then, dealing with whatever the issue is, if they are satisfied that that person can leave the police station, they then bail him and it is known as police station bail. Police station bail cannot really have any conditions attached to it; only court bail has conditions attached to it. So they have got to be satisfied that that person can be released from 1440 Police custody and re-attend the police station at a later time. There are other means for people who they do not need to hold in custody but they can release, those are sureties and recognaissance for bail. So that is the position as far as that is concerned. There are, just for clarity, two other issues to do with bail where the Police can charge you, then bail you to a court, and then when you are at court, the court can release you on bail and you 1445 see this an awful lot, where the court releases a defendant on bail and puts conditions on that defendant, and if the defendant does not stick with the conditions then they are placed in custody, that is the usual routine. So, bail follows an arrest. What I am not clear about in this Bill is, are you looking at a new form of bail – of bailing someone who you are not going to arrest? That is a very, very important question that has not been 1450 answered in my mind at this particular point in time. Bail is a fundamental way of controlling people who are brought to the Police Station as prisoners and when they return back to answer their bail at that Police Station they are then automatically back under arrest and that is how it goes. Further to that, I have concerns, I have had long-held concerns that I have consulted with 1455 senior officers at the Isle of Man Constabulary, in relation to the abuse, in my opinion, on many occasions on police station bail. What happens is Joe Soap gets arrested for something, whatever it is, is taken to the station, processed, police station bailed and issued a piece of paper to return in two weeks’ time or whatever. It is not as vague as that – it is ‘you will return to the police station at 4pm on 21st July. 1460 If you fail to show up we will come out to you and you will be arrested’… okay, which is fair and reasonable. So Joe Soap turns up on 21st July, only to be release bailed again. ‘We are making more enquiries’, when it is well known that there are no enquiries being made, nobody has got around to doing anything. That is my big concern about Police work, as far as people are bailed… So they are re-Station bailed for another two to three weeks, a month. They come back a month 1465 later. They are bailed again. And again and again and again. The best one I have known of someone who was police station bailed – quite a serious offence, but still police station bailed – was for somewhere in the region of 14-15 months, which was wholly inappropriate, because if it was a very serious offence you would be in custody. So it could not have been as serious as one where you would automatically hold somebody in custody rather than give them bail, on a police 1470 station bail. I know full well investigations in this particular case had not been made, the work had not been done because the officer is under pressure running from here to there and everywhere, and the file had not been completed, or consideration as to whether to release that particular person or move them on and charge them and have them put before the court. ______764 K130 HOUSE OF KEYS, TUESDAY, 25th JUNE 2013
1475 What I am asking, also, is if the Minster would give due cognisance to the case of police station bail, that a limit be put on and that would need an amendment to this Bill, which I would be quite pleased to move but I want to work with the Minister, rather than against him and gain his support on this. As I say, I have at the presentation said to him that I will meet with him during the summer, before this goes to clauses stage, in order to hammer out one or two of these points. 1480 These are points of serious principle but I feel, I strongly, strongly feel, in the public interest that there should be a limitation on the length of bail, so, for instance, as soon as you have been arrested the clock starts. You are either, within four months or six months, and I cannot decide at this particular point, and I want to further consult, but let’s just assume the law says if this amendment is put into this Bill and then active later, that you had four months to police station bail 1485 a suspect or you released him, or charged him, within that period of time. Now I see that as only fair because if you have done a wrong, you should be dealt with and processed. If you have not – and I have to say that many people who are on police station bail have not committed an offence – they are entirely innocent, and later, many months later, they have been released from their bail when they have answered it. They have been released, or they have got a note posted through their 1490 letterbox to say ‘you no longer have to answer this police station bail, you are released from that requirement’. If there is a time limit set on the period of police station bail, that will concentrate minds and I think that will be in accordance with natural justice. So that is my point on bail. Mr Speaker, in respect of arrestable offences, and I have major concerns about this, the word ‘arrestable’ in this case, when we are talking about arrestable offences, is quite confusing because 1495 there are arrestable offences and there are offences where there is a power of arrest. An arrestable offence is an offence – usually the serious offences, top-end serious offences – which would attract a minimum of five years’ custody. Those offences are one where there is no time limit on the time required to arrest an individual – it could be 20 years later, as we know with many offences going before the courts these days. Those are very serious offences and those 1500 offences have not been interfered with in the Bill. But can I say, the way that those arrestable offences are being treated as ‘capturing’, for want of a better word – an arrestable offence or one with the power of arrest – seems to be being downgraded by this Bill. I understand, though I am not quite sure… whether there is a view to this in the United Kingdom also. I see that as a retrograde step. 1505 The word is a bit confusing because, like I say, there are the arrestable offences which are known as those serious ones, with a minimum of five years’ custody, or there are offences where there is a power of arrest, which are not known as arrestable offences. So that is a confusion and perhaps a better word, or terminology, needs to be put in place. But the Bill is appearing to downgrade what an arrestable offence is. I feel that is a retrograde 1510 step and I would ask the Minister to review it because it does not have any meaning to the offences themselves because the Bill does not interfere with the offences, just the status of what an offence is. So I just do not understand that and I do not understand why we are attacking that in that particular area. Moving on, Mr Speaker, to… finally moving on, to those of search warrants. There is an awful 1515 lot of information in this Bill, lots of changes where we are dealing with search warrants, and I would welcome those because of course in some cases they do have to be updated and modernised as to how a police officer must go with another professional type person to search a property etc. That needs to be enshrined in law. I do have quite serious concerns as to the issuing of warrants for the more serious offences. 1520 Warrants, Mr Speaker, can be obtained for searching properties from the judiciary and of course the judiciary begins with magistrates, who are lay people. Fairly often a magistrate can be called upon to obtain a search warrant anytime – during 24 hours a day. This is an addition under the Police Powers and Procedures Act where search warrants can be issued on usually the arrest of an individual straight away, to search a property to save somebody 1525 moving any goods or valuables, stolen items, etc on to another address. That operates under the Police Powers and Procedures in respect of the Police ability to issue search warrants. These search warrants are usually for offences where the Police require to go and search one or a number of premises, and not necessarily when they have actually got them in Police Headquarters under arrest. 1530 Going back to the issue of search warrants, the Bill does not cover or it does not differentiate, if I may say, the difference between the magnitude of the judiciary obtaining those search warrants and it is a very, very serious matter. So if, for instance, and I could tell you a number of stories of the judiciary but my knowledge in the past, and it has not altered, the situation has not altered, but the senior judiciary – and I mean 1535 the likes of the High Bailiff and above – they are obviously seasoned law men and they ask the ______765 K130 HOUSE OF KEYS, TUESDAY, 25th JUNE 2013
Police, who come to them for search warrants, some very searching questions. And they have to be satisfied in their own mind that that warrant is worthy of being issued for the reasons that they have obtained from the police officer before they sign the actual warrant. Whereas a magistrate, I do not feel, should be put under that sort of pressure – it could be a late time of the evening or 1540 whatever – for the more serious offences. If that magistrate is contacted for less serious matters where they require a search warrant, then I have no problem at all. But the more serious ones, as against the less serious ones, I would like to see a differentiation in between the two of those. I am willing to speak to the Minister on that and an amendment just to deal with that. 1545 Because everything now, Mr Speaker, as you know and as we all know, has to be fair, equitable and transparent, and for search warrants to search banking premises, insurance premises and finance sector areas and things like that, and I am sure are most usually done, because someone has used their discretion and said ‘now that is a serious matter, let’s get that from the High Bailiff or the Deemster… to issue that particular warrant’. But I would like to actually see it 1550 in transparency, actually in a point of law. And I do not think any Hon. Member in this House here would deny that particular point of view. I feel, Mr Speaker, those are the main issues that I see with the Bill. I am going to give the Bill its Second Reading because I do have a very high regard for the integrity of the Minister who has worked jolly hard about these matters. 1555 I am sure that we can come to some answers, because that is what politics is – the art of the impossible, as we know, Mr Speaker – and I am willing… because this is legislation, I am willing to give it my time during the summer period, to work with the Department to see if we can come up with an appropriate amendment in order to make this legislation better, a higher standard and higher in integrity. I am sure the Minister will support me on those. 1560 I thank you, Mr Speaker.
The Speaker: The Hon. Member for Onchan, Mr Hall.
Mr Hall: Thank you, Mr Speaker. 1565 Just to add to the comments from the Hon. Member for North Douglas, Mr Houghton. As, Mr Houghton has said, I think there is a lot of good work gone into this but I would just like to add some comments on the Second Reading. I will give it my support. When we are talking about arrest, we are talking about removing somebody’s complete freedom of movement, which is a serious matter. Looking through the explanatory memorandum, 1570 one of the issues I would like to just put on record here, and just to have some comment from the Minister, is that when we are talking about changing the law in anyway, usually it is for a very good reason that it is either defective in some way or it is not working. What I would like to know is, I have not seen the evidence that the law needs to be clarified or the current law is not working. In the explanatory memorandum, in number 37, it talks about the powers of arrest, saying that 1575 the changes reflect the fact that there is no criminal offence for which somehow a person may think they cannot be arrested. But I am not sure whether this is really a valid reason if we look at the words ‘may think’ that could be rather speculative. Where is the evidence that anyone does think that he or she cannot be arrested? So in any event, does the law have to be altered simply because somebody may have a misconception of it? I 1580 would be interested to know what Minister has to say about that. It seems to be somewhat a little bit fragile on that issue. The other matter when we are talking about obviously the powers of arrest and what is being proposed, is the necessity test and the changes that surround that. One of the things that is in the Bill, we were talking about the provision of an address being satisfactory for service. Under the 1585 current law, there is a definition of what ‘satisfactory’ could include. It would not necessarily have to be the address of the accused. It could belong to a third party, a family member or otherwise. But my understanding is that will no longer apply and then that could then result in an arrest, removing somebody’s total freedom of movement. It would make an arrest more likely, I would have thought. So, that could be potentially quite a serious implication and I would be interested to 1590 know what the Minister has to say about that. Then in the Bill, another area which does concern me somewhat, in the new provisions, is that when we are talking about the, again, arrests without warrants, we are looking at… it seems somewhat vague, and it would be easy to establish in clause 27, because an arrest can be made without a warrant, to allow the prompt and effective investigation of the offence or of the conduct 1595 of the person in question.
______766 K130 HOUSE OF KEYS, TUESDAY, 25th JUNE 2013
Looking at that particular statement there in itself, I think there would be perhaps few circumstances where you could say that the wording would not satisfy the necessity test. Especially, when we are looking at the prompt and effective investigation that could really apply to more or less everything… and again, could be leading to, again, increasing the likelihood of an 1600 arrest. So that is another area I think that probably just needs to be looked at once again, and I am quite happy to – again, echoing what Mr Houghton said – work with the Minister on this over the coming months to iron out these issues. I am pleased and I made representations to the Minister about the bail issue, which he has addressed and I do thank him for that. I have raised some additional points, which I have asked to 1605 be reviewed, with the review by senior officers of the bail conditions under what actually in terms of a custody officer… in the UK, it is specifically defined as being a police officer not below the rank of sergeant. Obviously, it does mention custody officer throughout the Bill. What actually is the definition in the law here of the custody officer? Is it the same as the UK, that it is a police officer not below the rank of a sergeant? Because it seems to be implied to me through some 1610 discussions I have had with the Department that a custody officer can also mean that of the rank of a constable, as well as a sergeant. That being the case makes one of the clauses read somewhat a bit odd, in my view. So it would be interesting to see what that clarification is. So there are just a few additional points. But I do look forward to working with the Minister over the coming months on this particular Bill. 1615 Thank you, Mr Speaker.
The Speaker: I call on the mover to reply, Mr Watterson.
Mr Watterson: Thank you very much, Mr Speaker, and thank you to both of the Members 1620 who have spoken on this and thank you also to them for their consideration in raising these matters with me in advance as well as here on the floor of the House today. Obviously, it would make life easier for Ministers if Members engaged at an early stage of the consultation process, but I accept that the way that things work and that people’s time tables do not always allow that to happen. 1625 Taking the points in turn, Mr Houghton about bail and street bail, the purpose is to allow the Police to require a person to attend a police station on a future occasion. The thought behind this is that we may have capacity issues at Police Headquarters, we do not want to be keeping people in cells unnecessarily if we do not have the happy ability to question them straight away. So the idea is that they are required to come back on a future occasion. That is the thinking behind it. Mr 1630 Houghton has raised some technical points within that, that we will work with him on over the summer. The abuse of police station bail, or the potential abuse of police station bail, in terms of the length of time that people are on police station bail, this was a new issue when the Hon. Member raised this with me a week or so ago. It is something that I have given an undertaking to look into, 1635 it was not the purpose of this Bill to deal with any issues there but now that the Hon. Member has identified them, if we have the time and the ability to solve that over the summer and look to see if there are any further safeguards required, again, I am happy to do that with him. I would perhaps take a little issue with the Hon. Member that there seems to be this downgrading of arrestable offences. The change in terminology, there certainly is, but I do not see 1640 this as a downgrading and in fact the change to what happens at the coalface on the street is not going to be significant. The changes, as indeed were raised by Mr Hall, arise out of the fourth report on the Joint Committee on Human Rights, and I am happy to go through the logic that has led from that report through to the legislative change with the Hon. Members over the summer. In terms of warrants and the seniority of the judge issuing a warrant, especially a multi- 1645 premises warrant, I am happy to look at this because the reason for multi-premises is for more complicated or serious offences. So the requirement of having either a Deemster, or the High Bailiff or Deputy High Bailiff, issuing a warrant of that nature, I think is a valid point to make, as opposed to a lay magistrate and we will look at that again with the Hon. Members over the summer. 1650 Mr Hall's points about the evidence of the law not working, that refers back to the necessity test and the points that I made around the fourth report on human rights. When this was first written, I cannot remember how far back this law goes in the UK, but it was a case of ‘here is an arrestable offence and now I have the power to arrest you’, but there was not really the requirement to justify that arrest rather than report for summons. This changes the wording to 1655 reflect the actual practice now that there has to be in order to safeguard a person’s human rights – a compelling case to say why the person needs to be detained. ______767 K130 HOUSE OF KEYS, TUESDAY, 25th JUNE 2013
Mr Hall also raised the concerns because a person might not have a permanent address. They may, by virtue of that, feel that there is then a power to arrest. I do not think that would be sufficient cause in itself to say that ‘yes, I have to arrest you just because you are living between 1660 two or three addresses’. I do not think that would be sufficient to pass the necessity test. But again I am happy to make sure that we have got our wording right on all of these points over the summer. The prompt and effective investigation point that the Hon. Member made, this is the same wording that is in the Police Powers and Procedures Act 1998. It is just a straight translation of 1665 that so there no actual change there in the powers that are required. Finally, in terms of the point that the Hon. Member for Onchan made about appeal of bail, the conditions of bail made at the Police Station, the wording around the use of a more senior officer, the intention is of course that if you go in and you are given Police bail conditions that you are not happy with, you can appeal to a more senior officer. When we talk about more senior officers, of 1670 course if the person booking you in is a Constable, then that would be a Sergeant. But the intention is that the appeal would be to a senior Police Officer so, again, I am happy to work with you to ensure that we have got the wording right, to make sure that it is an officer of the level of Inspector or above, and make sure we get that clarified. I have to apologise that given that these were raised about a week or so ago at the presentation 1675 to Members… I have not had the opportunity because of other time commitments, to get into these and really dig down and provide detailed answers today. But I hope that with the commitments that I have provided to the Hon. Members to work with them over the coming weeks, to provide answers to their questions and remaining, as I have been throughout this Bill, open-minded to change if it is not right and it needs changing, that I will work with them to achieve that. 1680 With that, Mr Speaker, I am thanking Hon. Members for their patience with the length of my response. I beg to move.
The Speaker: Hon. Members I put the motion that the Criminal Justice, Police Powers and 1685 Other Amendments Bill 2013 be read for the second time. Those in favour, please say aye; against, no. The ayes have it. The ayes have it.
1690 BILL FOR CONSIDERATION OF CLAUSES
Public Health (Amendment) Bill 2013 Clauses stage deferred 1695 The Speaker: Hon. Members, the Public Health (Amendment) Bill clauses stage will be held over. That concludes the business of the House today. I look forward to seeing Hon. Members at the Speaker’s Lunch at 1.15 p.m. – those who are able to come. The House will now stand adjourned until next sitting, which will take place on 1700 Friday, 5th July in St John’s.
The House adjourned at 11.38 a.m.
______768 K130