Agenda item

This report sets out details of the review carried out on the scrutiny structures introduced in May 2011.

The Scrutiny Committee received a report of the Committee and Scrutiny Officer setting out details of a review of the scrutiny structures introduced in May 2011.

Executive Decision Progress Report

The Committee and Scrutiny Officer informed the Scrutiny Committee of the Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2012 and how it affected scrutiny.  She explained that the Forward Plan was no longer required and instead the Council had to give 28 days notice of any executive decision.  The notices were included in one document, which was similar to the Forward Plan.

The Committee and Scrutiny Officer advised that prior to the new regulations she had been working with the Democratic Services Manager on a new way of reporting relevant information about the Forward Plan to Overview and Scrutiny Committee.  Following the introduction of the new regulations the new reporting mechanism had been developed further and was attached to the report as Appendix 1.  The new document would be built up over a year from May and would form a comprehensive list of decisions which had been proposed and completed or withdrawn.  Explanations would be provided as necessary.  The document would also highlight where the item had not met the 28 days deadline and that the Chair of Overview and Scrutiny Committee had been informed.  It would also report on items where the Chair had been asked to agree whether a decision could be classed as urgent and then exempt from call-in.  Officers were required to provide a reason an item was urgent which would then be explained to the Chair.

As part of the new Regulations, if the Scrutiny Committee believed a non-key decision should have been classed as a key decision it could ask for a report to be submitted to Council.  The document would also make it clear whether an item was key or non-key.

Councillor Khan advised that when Members received notification that a new plan had been published, it only referred to the Intranet and not the Internet.

The Committee and Scrutiny Officer asked if the Councillor could forward the email to her and she would investigate the matter and amend it as necessary.  She assured Members that the notice was published on the Council’s website.

The Chair said that she felt the document was much clearer and Councillor Bell said that he was pleased with how it was set up.

Revised Scrutiny Proposal Form

The Committee and Scrutiny Officer informed the Scrutiny Committee that the revised Scrutiny Proposal form would become a complete record of a review.  She explained that additional information had been included to assist people when putting forward suggestions.  It would also record Overview and Scrutiny Committee’s decision and the agreed membership.

General comments

Councillor Rackett stated that scrutiny was the main way other Members could hold the Executive to account.  Under the previous structure there had been two main scrutiny committees and various Task Groups.  He said that he was frustrated with the way scrutiny was moving.  In his view the system was not working.  He was concerned that things would be missed. 

Councillor Martins asked the Councillor for an example where there was a deficit in scrutiny.

Councillor Rackett said that he had noted that there was a scrutiny suggestion on the agenda but there were likely to be other suggestions.  Officers had said that only one Task Group could be carried out at one time. 

The Committee and Scrutiny Officer advised that a number of local authorities were reviewing their scrutiny arrangements.  She had recently responded to an enquiry from Stevenage Borough Council about the scrutiny structure at Watford.  She agreed that officers had stated that only one time limited Task Group could be set up since the introduction of the new Outsourced Services Scrutiny Panel.  Officers had, however, agreed to monitor the team’s workload and if there were capacity for additional Task Groups they could be set up.  She reminded Members that she was only able to present scrutiny suggestions to Overview and Scrutiny Committee when suggestions had been proposed.

Councillor Aron said that she was pleased that officers had attended the meeting and updated officers on the progress of the Housing Benefits Team.  She asked that when Task Groups were established they should be party to all information.  It was frustrating when Members were not provided with information as they could not make a decision.  Councillor Hastrick agreed with these comments.

Councillor Bell said that he agreed with Councillor Rackett.  The agenda for this meeting had been very heavy.  He understood the officer’s comments, but previously there had been an officer working solely on scrutiny.

RESOLVED –

1.      that the Executive Decision Progress Report, attached as Appendix 1 to the report, be approved and included as a regular report to Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

2.      that the revised Scrutiny Proposal Form, attached as Appendix 2 to the report, be approved and used with immediate effect.

3.      that the report be noted.