Agenda item

Report of the Chair of Overview and Scrutiny

The item was introduced by Councillor Duncan Smith as chair of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee (O&S). The report reviewed the new arrangements for Overview and Scrutiny which were implemented following the elections in May 2012. The annual report set out the achievements of scrutiny over the last 12 months and in particular highlighted the outcomes of a range of scrutiny task groups. He hoped that members would acknowledge that the annual report set out the very positive contributions made by O&S and he thanked all those members who have been engaged in the process during the year. He particularly thanked Rosalind Reeves, the Democratic Services Manager and her team and all the officers who had supported the scrutiny process throughout the year.

Regarding the scrutiny questionnaire, although it had received a comparatively full response from members, he was still disappointed that 25% of the members in the chamber couldn't pick up a pen to complete a simple survey. Whilst excusing some members who felt they were not in a position to comment, that still left 6 members who hadn't bothered to respond in any way. He encouraged those members who had not responded to speak in this debate so that he could understand why they had not engaged in the process. He emphasised that all members had a role to play in scrutiny whether they were Cabinet members, members of the O&S committee or others. The O&S committee had adopted a strategy of supporting every idea that have been put forward by members but it had a very thin agenda going forward so he  encouraged members to suggest suitable topics. These could be a issue causing problems, an area that was going well or a direction of travel which members would like to look at more closely.

The Mayor invited questions and Councillor Smith made the following responses:

• Asked whether Cabinet Members should be more involved in scrutiny task groups, he felt that engagement with Cabinet Members was important but he had some difficulty in them becoming a permanent part of a task group. There could be a potential conflict of interest if the Cabinet Member was then required to be questioned by the task group. He questioned the need for Cabinet Member working groups and felt it would make more sense for Cabinet Members to use scrutiny task groups as a policy development tool.
• Asked to comment on why some members felt they had lost opportunities to be kept informed under the new arrangements, Councillor Smith acknowledged that clearly members wanted to hear more from the Cabinet Members.  In his view there were only 10 members on the O&S committee and he felt the comments about not being informed had come from those members not on the committee. Therefore he felt this should be more of a challenge for Cabinet as how they were going to address this issue.
• Asked to comment on using the results of the skills audit to assist in matching members to working groups, he acknowledged that the information from the audit could be useful but it would still be down to members to come forward with topics for scrutiny. The approach had been to invite all members to join the scrutiny task groups on a voluntary basis and unless they move to a system where group leaders forced members to become part of the scrutiny task group it was difficult to see how some of these skills might be utilised if members were not prepared to put themselves forward.  
• Asked how Cabinet Member working groups fed into the O&S process, Councillor Smith advised that currently there was no feedback from such groups unless the Cabinet Member choose to report back. This was an area that needed to be looked at.
• In response to a question about the costs of the scrutiny process, he confirmed that there was no dedicated scrutiny budget but officers would be able to provide a written response giving more details on the time spent on scrutiny if required.

In the debate that followed, Councillor Regan, speaking as a chair of a scrutiny task group, said that she had found it a very rewarding experience and commended the excellent support from officers that the task group had received. She also highlighted the valuable involvement of the Cabinet Member Sustainability, Councillor Roger Whyborn, who had attended a meeting of the scrutiny task group on allotments to give his views and had responded to the recommendations in the report.  She hoped other members would bring up items for potential scrutiny. 

Similarly Councillor Hall, as chair of two scrutiny task groups, praised the work of the members and the excellent support they had received from officers. She also welcomed the timely involvement of the Cabinet Member in the grass verge cutting scrutiny. The Events scrutiny task group had been stressful and challenging but she was pleased that it had achieved a positive outcome and the Cabinet Member, Housing and Safety had supported its recommendations.

Councillor Sudbury as vice-chair of the O&S committee highlighted the positive achievements of the scrutiny task groups but emphasised that the time commitment from members was higher than that required in attending theprevious O&S committees. She felt that the two challenges for scrutiny going forward were engaging Cabinet and encouraging members to participate. There was a need to look at how Cabinet and O&S worked together and the need for protocols to be clearly set out. She felt that Cabinet Members should attend O&S meetings to brief members. She also supported removing the differentiation between Cabinet Member working groups and scrutiny task groups and making them all report back to O&S.

Another member suggested that it was useful for the Cabinet Member to attend the initial scoping meeting for a new scrutiny task group as they would be able to advise on any current work relevant to the task group. Their involvement nearing the end of the review was also helpful to ensure that there were no surprises when the task report came to Cabinet for consideration of the recommendations. He acknowledged that there could be difficulties if members of a Cabinet Member working group were then asked to scrutinise the policy they had helped to develop but he felt these could be overcome if the roles were clearly defined at the start. Regarding the skills audit, he suggested that this could be used to issue a personal invite to a member to join a scrutiny task group and this could have more success than a global invite to all members. He highlighted the importance of joint overview and scrutiny with other districts and partnerships, particularly where those partnerships may have access to funding such as Local Enterprise Partnerships.

A member highlighted the importance of engaging the public in the scrutiny process and getting community groups to highlight issues.

The Leader of the Council congratulated the chair on a very good report. He advised that Cabinet had tried to address the issue of provision of information to members through a range of member seminars on important issues. He was more than happy to attend scrutiny meetings and had recently attended a meeting of the budget scrutiny working group to set out his vision for the Council moving forward. One of the difficulties for Cabinet had been supporting some of the recommendations arising from the scrutiny task groups when they were not directly linked with priorities in the corporate strategy. An example of this had been the recommendations arising from the scrutiny task group looking at the sex trade. He did not agree with Councillor Smith that policy development should be handed over to scrutiny task groups. He pointed out that it was the Cabinet Member who would ultimately take a report to Cabinet for approval and therefore they must be involved in the development of policy and happy with the outcome. He was happy to have further conversations with scrutiny on this matter to find a suitable solution.

Another member thought it was a very good annual report from scrutiny and there had been some excellent work done by the scrutiny task groups which he hoped would generate further interest in scrutiny. He highlighted the importance of regular follow up of scrutiny recommendations to review what progress had been made on their implementation. He also suggested a number of topics for scrutiny including bereavement services, the nursery, car parking and enforcement, CBH, the council's obligations to young people, HR and appraisals and the policies for the winter workforce.

In responding to the points made in the debate, Councillor Smith was still disappointed that members who had not contributed to the scrutiny process had not spoken up in the debate. He urged them to think about it more deeply and come back to O&S with their views. He was still of the view that the O&S committee meeting was not a suitable place for Cabinet Member briefings. If all members of Cabinet were to attend this could require a three-hour meeting on a regular basis and if they were to have one Cabinet member to each meeting it would take a whole year to get through the cycle.

He thanked members for their comments and it would now be for the O&S committee to work with members to take scrutiny forward and build on what had already been achieved. He looked forward to reporting on their success in a year’s time when the second annual report was presented to Council.

Resolved that the Council the Annual Report of Overview and Scrutiny be noted.