Under matters arising from last month’s meeting, it was reported that detailed work on drawing up outline legislation on food hygiene, liquor licensing, beach huts (within the context of the land and business policy) and a policy framework that could allow rental of property outside of employment contracts, requires expert legal input and so awaits the return of Crown Counsel to the island.

The first item on the agenda was the draft new Constitution for Ascension, St Helena and Tristan da Cunha. The Constitutional Review Team had visited Ascension from 17 to 18 November and had held two lengthy sessions with Councillors as well as a public meeting.

Councillors had clearly done their homework ahead of the visit and raised a number of issues. The Team agreed several amendments as a result of and will circulate a revised draft in December.

Concern was expressed about one of the two articles that does not appear in the draft Constitution for Ascension, and that is “deprivation of St Helenian status”. It was felt unfair that the descendants of Saints working and living on Ascension, where no status is available, could lose their St Helenian status. While noting that changes to the rules on St Helenian status would have to come from St Helena’s Exco, the Governor agreed to discuss this with Ian Hendry.

The second article that does not apply on Ascension, freedom of movement, prompted a suggestion that in light of the Foreign Affairs Committee’s recommendations on the UK government’s policy, space should be allowed in the new Constitution to allow for any future change that might arise on right of abode. The Attorney General said that we had to be realistic about what could be achieved now, but that Constitutions are not set in stone. Should the policy framework change, then would be the time to look again at the Constitution.

Council then focussed on AIG’s financial position. Government spending was currently lower than anticipated. All departments were conscious of the need for prudence and sought economy wherever possible. The main concern was government income, which is lower than forecast, with the overall result that a planned surplus of £242,000 was now likely to be around £88,000.

These figures are based on the assumption that the MOD will pay its share of the island’s property tax burden in full. Councillors were unhappy with this situation and wanted to know what was being done. It was noted that this is being discussed at a high level in the UK between the MOD and FCO and we await the outcome of those discussions. The Governor undertook to use his influence wherever possible to ensure that this issue is resolved satisfactorily.  It was also noted that the Finance Committee had held its first full meeting. The process of building next year’s budget was underway but will take some time and a great deal of work (and discussion) to finalise.

Next item on the agenda concerned arrangements for meeting the cost of having a dedicated Crown Counsel on Ascension. This post was created two years ago in recognition of the heavy work load in providing legal advice to government and drafting legislation. Ascension has its own laws in a number of areas but there can be gaps, and confusion about whether St Helenian law should then apply, or even in some cases, aspects of UK law. The current basis for funding this key post is that the FCO paid 100% of the costs in the first year, 50% in the second year (2008/9) and will pay 33% in the third year (2009/2010). AIG would pay from then on. The issue before Council was whether a case should be made to ask the FCO to continue part-funding of this post on the basis that good governance was crucial to both Ascension and HMG. The Governor agreed a proposal to put an OTPF bid forward for this.

Discussion on renting property outside of a work contract was brief as we awaited detailed legal input on the policy framework to make this possible.  A question was raised about the number of houses that might be made available for this. Councillors thought that it would be useful to start on the basis of short periods up to say three months, with perhaps two properties being made available. It was noted that currently there is very little spare housing stock, but that some employing organisations are expected to be giving up a small number of properties in coming months.

It was agreed that consideration be given to making two houses available when the situation permits, and that the detailed legal work on drafting the policy framework should be an early priority for Crown Counsel on her return.

The next item on the Council’s agenda was the island’s roads. Complaints had been received by Councillors about the condition of some parts of the road network where the surface breaks down and potholes regularly appear. Improving the roads to the same standard as those laid down by the US would be prohibitively expensive - and unnecessary - as those had been built to take heavy trucks. However a bid for EU funds had been made in May this year, and which should allow for better roads to be provided across the main parts of the road network. We hope to have news early next year.

Next up was a short list of tax related items that might be considered in the context of a review of the tax system. Councillors had received a number of representations. The first concerned tax on leave payments between contracts.  There was some surprise expressed here as it was felt that leave should be part of a contract, not something in between contracts, with the employee actually not being under a contract for that period. That aside, it was pointed out that income tax is a tax levied in the place it is earned, not where it is spent.

If that were not the case, an employee going holiday in St Helena and spending his earned income there, would then fall to be taxed by St Helena! The Attorney General said that Council could recommend this sort of change to the tax regime but that there was a risk of creating anomalies. It was also noted that taxation was not liked by anyone, but that, sadly, there was no escaping it. The question of taxing lump sum payments for people who don’t participate in the Gratuity Trust Fund scheme was more complicated and required a better understanding of how that scheme worked, and why some were outside it. Crown Counsel would be asked to advise on this on her return. There was then a proposal for a higher rate of tax on those with higher incomes in order to reduce the tax burden on the lower paid. The Governor emphasised that this was a political judgement for Council to make, but cautioned that such initiatives often fail in many parts of the world – in practice it often yields too little to make any real difference to the lower paid. The Director of Financial Services would work up figures to allow Council to consider further. A further question regarded making payments into the Bank of St Helena’s New Life account “pension scheme” without deduction of income tax. There was brief discussion of this noting that such payments are usually not taxed and that consideration could be given to allowing this.

Pedestrian access at the lower end of Two Boats village was then discussed.  The only entry point there had a cattle grid to stop sheep and donkeys from entering the village, but a number of people had asked if a pedestrian gate could be provided for so that those walking dogs etc, could pass more freely.  This was on the agenda because it was thought it might be expensive and therefore need to be considered as part of next year’s capital budget. However it was confirmed by the Director of Technical Services that it should be possible to arrange this at fairly modest cost this year.

The question of Financial Assistance for Councillors’ costs was then discussed. Councillors face costs in carrying out their duties, and it would be appropriate to help with internet costs, which are high on Ascension, as well as printer ink and paper. The Governor said that he supported this proposal which he felt was fully justified – Councillors worked very hard on behalf of the people and gave up a lot of their time, and should be reimbursed for this sort of expense incurred in doing so. There was no dissent and it was agreed that Councillors would discuss with AIG’s Finance Department an arrangement for reimbursing these costs.

Under Any Other Business the question of deportation orders was briefly raised and discussed – why had AIG been involved in paying for someone to be deported when it is the responsibility of the employing organisation? It was agreed that this would be looked into.

The question of rabies vaccination for dogs and cats coming into Ascension from St Helena and elsewhere was also raised. Crown Counsel could advise on her return whether this was already covered by existing ordinances. It was suggested that it would be useful also to consult with the island’s unofficial vet about this issue.

The recent letter to the Islander in response to an anonymous letter in the St Helena Independent and subsequently the Islander was also mentioned. Some Councillors felt that a joint letter to the electorate outlining what they have been doing on their behalf should come as a higher priority than a response to an anonymous letter.

Others had felt it important to address the misconceptions in that letter. Councillors are giving thought to how best to communicate with the electorate as they all agreed that everyone has the right to make known their views and opinions, especially without feeling the need to conceal their identity.

The date for the next meeting was discussed but not decided on because many people would be absent over December and January. This will be discussed separately and notified in due course. It was noted that the Governor will be visiting in early February and that we should take advantage of that to have a full Council meeting with him on that occasion.

Ross Denny, Administrator, Ascension Island