Agenda item

(Office of the Chief Executive) To consider the attached report.

The Senior Democratic Services Officer, Simon Hill, took the Committee through a report looking at the arrangements of the Scrutiny Standing Panels in the light of the directorate restructuring and the outcome of the OS review.

The Panel structure had not been considered as part of the review and had been discussed at officer level since the council’s directorate restructure. The report brought forward several options, such as keeping the present 5 Panel structure and appointing new lead officers to each; moving to a commissioning model based upon a work programme; or moving to a 4 panel structure aligned around the new directorates. The report had gone through the Council’s Management Board and had gained their support.

Attention had been drawn with the proposed Governance Scrutiny Panel (aligning with the Governance Directorate) and the need to avoid duplication of responsibility with the Audit and Governance Committee and the Standards Committee. However it was noted that the Audit and Governance Committee would have to be reviewed as the government had introduced a new Local Audit Act. It was suggested that when drawing up the terms of reference for this Panel it should be done in consultation with the Chairmen of the Audit and Governance and the Standards Committee.

The O&S Review had envisaged a more structured way of devising the work programmes to include requests from the public as well as Councillors. It was also noted that there was no Cabinet Review item on this agenda as it was agreed that the Cabinet’s Forward Plan be used to monitor their work and pick up on any future points that the Committee may wish to scrutinise.

Councillor Knapman noted that the proposed panel workloads seemed to be considerable and that the various service areas had very little in common. He was also concerned about councillors that did not have a role and would like to have something to do. The proposals in this report did not hold water for him as he could not see how this brought about greater member involvement.

Councillor Waller commented that at first sight it looked like a neat structure but there were a few problems such as the word ‘Cabinet’ hardly appeared in the report and the most important role of scrutiny was to hold Cabinet to account and he did not feel that this had been addressed.  Another problem was that the workload of the Panels would vary considerably; such as the Neighbourhood and Communities Panels would have more work than the Governance and Resources Panels. It would also be difficult to get councillors sit on these Panels as we would need members with appropriate skills sets to slot them into the Panels. He also noted that there was no mention of Country Care in the Neighbourhood section. Also, Community Safety was a big job to scrutinise; Portfolio Holders would have to cross the directorates and make it more untidy. He thought that this needed more consideration maybe by setting up a Task and Finish Panel.

Councillor Watts noted that the best thing of last years Scrutiny was a review of its own processes.  The committee should take the opportunity to go back and look at that report and see how this proposal met that reports recommendations. He had never accepted that things should be done to fit a timescale. Overview and Scrutiny needed to review its Panels to see the best way it should be done. It could just as easily be based on a horizontal basis, cutting through the directorates, such as performance monitoring across the directorates. The committee could use Task and Finish Panels or keep to Standing Panels. There were some cross cutting problems on the proposed Governance Panel and the Audit and Governance Committee that could look at just about anything. He had looked at the calendar and noted we could fit in a few extra meetings if needed in May to consider this in depth, or the committee could ask the Constitution and Member Services Panel to look at this. The opportunity here was to look at this report and see how to do things better, but we need an extended period to this.

Councillor Webster supported everything that Councillor Watts had said. She would like to see a Task and Finish Panel set up to look into this. Tonight’s meeting had a lack of members attending and so would like to defer a decision.

Councillor Stallan said that as a Portfolio Holder he had attended most of the Housing Scrutiny Panel meetings, they could go on for a long time and covered things in depth. He supported the proposal that this be looked at again, maybe in the new municipal year.

Councillor Angold-Stephens noted that if this report was not supported then a delay in the decision would mean that any changes could not be implemented until the 2015/16 year.

Councillor Watts was happy to propose the setting up of a Task and Finish Panel to look into this. Simon Hill suggested that, given the timescales involved and that April was their last meeting with elections in May, the only time a new Task and Finish Panel could be appointed was at the Committee’s first meeting in July. He suggested that they reappoint the members of the recent Overview and Scrutiny Review Task and Finish Panel to consider the whole matter further. This was agreed by the Committee.

Councillor Knapman noted it was not the worst thing to postpone any changes for a year, members could see how the new directorate structure fitted in with the existing Panel structure and it would have time to consider all the issues.

Councillor Stallan asked that an amended version of recommendation 3 of this report be kept as part of the Terms of Reference for the Task and Finish Panel. This was agreed. It was also agreed that the review should specifically look at the relationship of the Governance Panel with the terms of reference of the Audit and Governance Committee and the Standards Committee. The final scope of the Task and Finish Panel to be agreed at their July meeting.

RESOLVED:

(1)  That a Task and Finish Panel be constituted at the first meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee meeting in July 2014;

(2)  That this Task and Finish Panel mirror in membership, as far as possible, the membership of the recent Overview and Scrutiny Review Task and Finish Panel;

(3)  That the Panel be set up to consider the future structure of the Scrutiny Panels and how they would fit into the new Directorate Structure of the Council;

(4)  That the scope for this Panel be agreed at the July meeting and is to include how the Governance Directorate and any proposed Scrutiny Panel set up to look at this directorate interrelated with the terms of reference of the Audit and Governance Committee and the Standards Committee; and

(5)  That the following proposals also be agreed:

(i)            Progress against the annual Key Objectives for the Council to continue to be reviewed by the main Overview and Scrutiny Committee on a quarterly basis;

(ii)           Quarterly Key performance Indicator performance monitoring be delegated to existing Panels, with requests for further in depth scrutiny of the performance of any indicator being approved by the main committee; and

(iii)          That publicity for public requests to the Committee be launched prior to the elections period.