Agenda item

1.    Ms Fitch explained that the paper had been produced following the last discussion had by the Scrutiny Committee and was to support the formal discussion looking at ways of working and improvements to ways of working.  Members’ views were sought on a draft work programme for the Committee and for further new Select Committee Topics from Members. 

2.    The Chairman, along with other members thanked Mr Sass for producing the excellent report.

3.     A Member was pleased with the emphasis on the Scrutiny Committee being politically impartial and it was requested that any Select Committee agendas did not have any political agenda.

4.    A Member agreed with the work programme for the Committee and this should include budget and performance, crime and disorder and flood risk management issues.  It was considered more sensible to discuss the work of the Flood Risk Management Committee before next winter to ensure preparedness.  In relation to briefings for Members it was considered that the Chairman and Spokespeople briefings had been used in a more interactive way and if it was the intention to continue in this way then they should be expanded to include all Committee Members, however they should not be referred to as briefings, but rather exploratory or preparatory meetings.   

5.    It was considered that Members needed to be involved before decisions were made.  Directors should report to Scrutiny with their plans for the future for scrutiny by the Committee.  If the authority was to become a commissioning authority there would have to be major changes in the way the Council worked.  The Member was supportive of the paper and particularly para 4.6 but there was a need to go a stage further and be involved earlier in the process.

6.    Mr Garten, the Parent Governor Representative, was asked for his view and he considered that more public involvement was needed, perhaps with the co-option of other members from outside the authority. 

7.    A Member commented that the Scrutiny Committee was a highly political committee, it would be necessary to look at the role of Members in the transformed authority, and the role of Scrutiny and the Cabinet perhaps with the use of a workshop.   There was a view that Cabinet Committees were not working in relation to pre scrutiny of decisions, the discussion of the paper was the start of a dialogue and should continue. 

8.    A Member concurred that the Scrutiny Committee should be scrutinising before the decisions were taken, there was also a view that the Scrutiny Committee should be chaired by a member of the opposition, it was considered that this would improve the perception of the Committee, there were also concerns over the frequency of ‘urgent decisions’.  The Chairman confirmed that the frequency of urgent decisions would be looked at, with regards to the Chairmanship this was contained within the constitution and it was suggested that this be the subject of a discussion with the Group Leaders.  

9.    Another Member supported the work programme for the Committee.  Referring to public involvement this had been done in the past and this opportunity should be given to the public and managed correctly.

10. The Parent Governor representative reiterated his view that the Scrutiny Committee ought to be non-political and this should be strengthened particularly as the public were disenchanted and this would help bring decision making back to the public.   

11. A Member commented that when members of the public had been present at meetings, Members had accused witness of being politically motivated.  Guests and witnesses should be welcomed and not treated as a threat.  The Member explained that following a meeting with the Leader and Group spokespeople that the next Select Committee might focus on the Troubled Families Programme. 

12. Referring to public involvement and questions at Committee meetings this had not been discarded, meetings were webcast; it was considered that the public would be more engaged if there was real debate and grilling at an earlier stage. 

13. A Member expressed the view that all Members held their own philosophy.  It was not possible to deny that those views were held and that members would be influenced.  In relation to pre-decision scrutiny, Members were informed of decisions to be made, and this provided members with the opportunity to make comments.  The ideal situation was a parity of esteem between the Executive and Scrutiny, pre-decision scrutinywas a good way of moving forward.

14. The Chairman reminded members of the Cabinet Committee system which was an excellent way of pre-decision scrutiny. 

RESOLVED that the Scrutiny Committee

15. Thank the officers for the report,

16. Request a report back on the way forward for the Scrutiny Committee via the Chairman and Spokespeople.