Jersey's politicians have backed a move to bring the long-standing issue of the States being exempt from Parish rates back to the Assembly in 2018.
It follows a previous debate in December 2016, where the States voted against Article 17 of the Draft Budget, which would have allowed for the States’ payment of rates to proceed in 2017. The new proposition, brought by St Helier Constable Simon Crowcroft, requires the Treasury Minister to consult on a fresh proposal and bring it to the States next year.
Constable Crowcroft said the States had been, "...pondering the issue of paying rates on their properties for 20 years. " He explained that during the previous debate on 14 December, the Assembly had "...failed to agree the payments to the parishes, although bizarrely we agreed on the far more difficult aspect of the money would be raised."
Mr Crowcroft received support from various members of the Assembly including the Treasury Minister, Senator Alan Maclean, who indicated he had already started to consult with Constables. "There is much much more to do. Whilst I can’t guarantee all practical issues will be resolved in time for the States to pay rates in 2018, that is the timetable I have asked my officers to work towards. There are issues to resolve with colleagues, including the constables, however there are barriers to overcome rather than reasons for not proceeding."
St. Clement Constable, Len Norman, said he looked forward to the consultation: "It is not so much the States having to pay rates, it is the taxpayer having to pay rates. it's a game of money going round. We need to be very careful in getting it right and getting it simple.
Some members were more sceptical towards the proposition. St. John Constable, Christopher Taylor, explained that while he wasn't against the States paying rates, he was "...vehemently against anything that might increase the rates to my parish."
After what the St. Helier Constable described as the "shortest debate" on the subject of States parish rates, 38 members of the Assembly voted in favour of the proposition, with only two voting against it.
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.