Select a region
JPH, RSG, CAMB, SoJDC, ALBOB or Al and Bob – who exactly is in charge of managing the Government’s estimated £1billion property estate?
The answer, it appears, is everyone and no-one, as Express explains in this deep-dive into the matter...
In a recently-published report, the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) - the panel of politicians responsible for keeping an eye on how public money is spent - did little to hide its exasperation at the state of managing taxpayer-owned bricks and mortar, despite the Government releasing a ‘Public Estate Strategy 2021-35’ last March.
That inaugural document set “the framework for the development of a fit-for-purpose, modern estate; consolidating the management of all our property assets as part of a single Corporate Landlord Model to governance and decision-making.”
But PAC hasn’t been able to clearly identify who should implement that strategy. Is it Jersey Property Holdings (JPH), the Regeneration Steering Group (RSG), the Corporate Asset Management Board (CAMB), the States of Jersey Development Company (SoJDC) or the Arms-Length Bodies Oversight Board (ALBOB)?
Or should it be left to Al and Bob?
And what about Target Operating Models (TOM)? Can clear instructions from Tom help Al and Bob work out who is in charge?
Confused? PAC certainly appear to be, and are calling for answers.
The Government say they will publish an implementation plan in March next year, a year after the strategy itself. PAC say it is “dismayed” at this delay.
CLICK TO ENLARGE: The left-hand pie chart shows that, of the 874 property assets, most of which are ‘controlled’ by other bodies such as Andium and Ports of Jersey, the Public Estate Strategy applies to just 275 assets with a value of over £773m. This means that the Estate Strategy only covers just under a third (31%) of the whole taxpayer-owned estate.
PAC is clearly frustrated over the lack of clarity on who makes the decisions.
It writes in its second review into the matter: “Part of the difficulty in progressing this review has been in receiving often incomplete and conflicting advice about who is actually in charge of Estate Management, for example, who decides the strategic direction or directs the management of the portfolio, and drives the necessary changes, and who is in charge of operational activities such as maintenance.”
This is despite the establishment of Jersey Property Holdings in 2005, which was designed to “to bring coherence in all Government property activities”.
Indeed, PAC points out, an organisational chart included in Estate Strategy doesn’t even include JPH.
The Regeneration Steering Group was set up in 2010 to oversee the activities of SoJDC and give it direction. Chaired by the Chief Minister, its remit appears to have expanded beyond the waterfront and SoJDC.
PAC recommends that RSG should, without delay, review its membership and update its terms of reference. Mechanisms should be also put in place to monitor and track its overall effectiveness.
If the RSG is the political lead on estate management, then the Corporate Asset Management Board is the senior officer-led body charged with managing public estate and is chaired by the Director General of Infrastructure, Housing and Environment.
Pictured: The structure of the Government's estate management, which the PAC have taken from the former's Public Estate Strategy 2021-2035, published in March. The PAC point out that it fails to mention Jersey Property Holdings, which is supposed to be the central 'corporate landlord'.
The CAMB feeds into the RSG but PAC notes that “little information is publicly available on CAMB, its remit and its composition, and it therefore considers that its function will not be widely known or understood".
It added that it was “surprised to hear that neither Jersey Property Holdings or CAMB were considered to be the ‘drivers’ of co-ordinating, prioritising allocating and developing the property needs of the various elements of the Government’.
Pictured: Piquet House in the Royal Square, which the PAC use to illustrate its report. The use of the old military police station, built in 1803, has been uncertain for a number of years.
PAC said it was “troubled by the current ‘reactive’ and ad-hoc approach of CAMB.
It recommends that CAMB, or any replacement senior officer-led body, should define and establish its relationship with departments (including non-Ministerial), States-owned entities, arms-length organisations, and the Regeneration Steering Group in respect of its core function to ‘co-ordinate, prioritise allocate and develop the property needs of the various elements of the Government’.
Ministers have long-said that one way to alleviate the current 'housing crisis' is to turn unwanted States-owned property into housing. The old planning offices at South Hill are a prime example and more sites will be freed up when the Government moves into the redeveloped Cyril Le Marquand House.
However, PAC say they are “dismayed” at the lack of progress. They conclude that the development of any ‘Corporate Asset Management Plan’ – the operational-level implementation of the Estate Strategy - is a matter of “utmost urgency”, given that the latter has been in draft form since the beginning of 2020 and published since March.
“A coherent and objective rationale for the acquisition, disposal of and management of the property in the public estate must be established,” the committee say.
Pictured: The Public Accounts Committee say that SoJDC should not be allowed to define its own relationship with its owner, the States.
PAC also expressed its "disappointment" at the lack of community and stakeholder engagement, particular with bodies that might be interested in purchasing a publicly owned building or two.
It recommends that the Director General of IHE, who is the top civil servant overseeing the property portfolio, should “without delay, engage in comprehensive, consistent and regular stakeholder engagement, in order to determine their needs, as well as to ensure that any future acquisition, disposals or improvement to properties take into account their requirements”.
Former Chief Executive Charlie Parker promised a review of the Government’s relationship with its own property developer, which started life developing the Waterfront and has expanded its remit to develop other areas of town.
However, its primary focus remains on land reclaimed ‘west of Albert’ and properties around the Harbour, including the former Planning offices on South Hill.
PAC says it “fundamentally disagrees” with the review process, namely that a report commissioned by SoJDC itself should take precedence over any strategic review of its role by the Government.
“PAC considers it to be frankly, odd, that a States-owned entity [SoJDC] has undertaken its own review which apparently looks at cementing its role and its relationship with JPH, and that the Government officers do not see that as a blatant disregard of the Comptroller and Auditor-General’s accepted recommendations, with a huge potential for bias and self-interest on the part of the company.”
PAC puts its weight firmly behind the C&AG’s principal recommendation: that there should be a fresh strategic review of SoJDC.
Through States-owned or grant-funded bodies set up by the States – including Andium Homes, Ports of Jersey, Jersey Electricity, JT, Jersey Water, Jersey Post, Visit Jersey and Jersey Heritage – the Government owns or part-owns castles, reservoirs, runways, exchanges and power stations.
To keep a watching brief on these assets, the Government has set up the Arms-Length Bodies Oversight Board (ALBOB). But PAC can see little evidence of its progress.
It reports: “The continued piecemeal approach to engaging with States-Owned Entities and Arms-Length Organisations, in terms of developing and implementing a cohesive and comprehensive estate strategy linked to the overall corporate objectives, is not working.”
It adds: “Lack of clarity in the roles, responsibilities and working relationships between ALBOB, RSG and CAMB is apparent. This can negatively impact optimum decision making about surplus properties or acquiring new ones, and it has a detrimental effect on cost and efficiency of scale opportunities for operations and maintenance.”
And PAC recommends: “A Strategic Review of the responsibilities and working relationships between ALBOB, RSG and CAMB should be undertaken as soon as possible.”
Since Mr Parker became CEO in 2018, the phrase ‘Target Operating Model’ has entered the public-service vernacular.
Pictured: The PAC is critical of the lack of references to disability access in the Government's estate management strategy.
It refers to restructuring of departments and responsibilities and PAC wanted to understand the ‘TOM’ process had resulted in a more joined up approach to estate management.
‘Not really,’ was its conclusion, particularly in IHE, which incorporates JPH.
“The Committee is not satisfied that the Infrastructure, Housing and Environment Department and Jersey Property Holdings are working to create a clear and organised set of priorities within the TOM that align with the aims and values set out in the estate management strategy,” PAC found, pointing out that it didn’t help that JPH and IHE are currently running at a vacancy rate of 30% and 25% respectively.
How can you be effective if you're so short-staffed? it argues.
PAC recommends that the role and responsibilities of JPH should be revised as soon as possible, with particular regard to clarifying its expected role in the implementation of the estate strategy.
If the picture couldn’t get any murkier for the committee, it also concludes that there is “inaction” and “a lack of a joined-up approach” when it comes to property maintenance, which limits potential cost-savings and increases the States’ liability.
And the Government hasn’t paid enough attention to its own disability strategy when reviewing the public estate.
In all, PAC – in its 118-page report, which is its second on the estate management strategy – does not give the Government a glowing mark, although it says it welcomes the executive’s commitment to set a clear timetable of its implementation.
Pictured: PAC Chair Deputy Inna Gardiner says the Government should act "without further delay".
It concludes: “PAC found that the lack of clear leadership and strategic vision and an absence of any prioritisation process or rationale for property decisions, led to poor decision making.
“Moreover, without clear guidance, it is difficult for individual departments to assess their own property requirements unprompted and relay them in an optimal manner to the correct team in a timely manner.
“Property decisions are formed on a ‘first come, first served’ basis, and not supported by an objective rationale, overall needs and benefit for the Island.
“PAC found that estate management remains an ad hoc reactive process. Neither IHE or CAMB proactively approach departments to assess their need; instead, Government departments with differing resources and understanding of the property management process must submit their property requirements without adequate guidance.”
In short, it is calling on the Government to – quite literally – get its own house in order.
“The members of PAC are unanimous in their conclusion that the Government must act without further delay to maximise the value and use of States properties and restore and maintain public trust and confidence in its ability to manage the Public Estate,” it says.
“Accepting and fully implementing the recommendations from this report in a timely fashion will go a long way towards that aim.”
Click HERE to read the report in full.
FOCUS: The £1bn property dilemma
Comments
Comments on this story express the views of the commentator only, not Bailiwick Publishing. We are unable to guarantee the accuracy of any of those comments.