Agenda and minutes

(Assistant to the Chief Executive)  To report the appointment of any substitute members for the meeting.

The Panel noted there were no substitute members.

(assistant to the Chief Executive). To declare interests in any items on the agenda.

In considering whether to declare a personal or a prejudicial interest under the Code of Conduct, Overview & Scrutiny members are asked pay particular attention to paragraph 11 of the Code in addition to the more familiar requirements.

This requires the declaration of a personal and prejudicial interest in any matter before an OS Committee which relates to a decision of or action by another Committee or Sub Committee of the Council, a Joint Committee or Joint Sub Committee in which the Council is involved and of which the Councillor is also a member.

Paragraph 11 does not refer to Cabinet decisions or attendance at an OS meeting purely for the purpose of answering questions or providing information on such a matter.

There were no declarations of interest pursuant to the Council’s Code of Member Conduct.

To agree the notes of the meeting held on 6 December 2012.

The notes from the 6 December 2012 meeting were agreed as a correct record.

To examine and review the operational aspects of Overview and Scrutiny in relation to the Chairman and Vice Chairmen of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee, developing a relationship with the Leader of Council (OSC/Leader liaison) and the policy on appointments and political allegiance to O&S.

Report to follow.

Role of Chairman of Overview and Scrutiny

(a)        Chairman of Overview and Scrutiny

The Panel considered a report dealing with the role of the Overview and Scrutiny Chairman and Vice-Chairman.  It was noted that the constitution did not say that the Chairman should not be a member of the ruling group. The Panel considered whether the constitution should introduce a new rule providing for the position to be held by a member not from a majority group.

Councillor Sartin said that the wording that was in the constitution seemed OK to her and should be left as it stood although it should be an experienced councillor. Councillor Whitehouse added that it should also be a member with experience of scrutiny.

AGREED: Councillor Sartin suggested that the following wording be added to the constitution, that:

“The Chairman should have experience and understanding of our Scrutiny System.”

(b)        Party Whips

The Panel discussed the perception that Scrutiny Councillors may not be “whipped” meetings.  Councillor Waller noted that the whip only functioned in appointing substitute members but not in instructing members how to vote. 

The Panel thought that although there was no whip applied in the context of Overview and Scrutiny meetings there was maybe a psychological element on the part of members based on party loyalty. The Chairman said a lot of this was perception and not reality and this could be handled through suitable training. Councillor Stallan as a Portfolio Holder involved in call-ins, assured the meeting that although he had asked members for their support they had never been whipped. However whether this was just a perception or had an actual basis in fact, Overview and Scrutiny should not be based on political considerations.

AGREED: that the constitution should not be altered but, with an emphasis on any training given to members on Overview and Scrutiny that it was not and should not be whipped.

To consider arrangements for pre-scrutiny of Cabinet business, annual Cabinet priorities, the meeting arrangements and the questioning of Portfolio Holders.

Report to follow.

(a)        Leader Liaison

The Chairman introduced Councillor Waller who had made representations to the Panel on the issue of Cabinet and O&S liaison. He proposed holding a Q&A session between the Leader and the O&S Committee. He had based this on what presently happens with the Prime Minister who meets with a Liaison Committee, made up of the Select Committee Chairs, around three times a year.

He envisaged the Leader attending a dedicated O&S Committee meeting at the beginning of the year, where he could outline his strategy for the year and where the committee could quiz him, in detail, on the Cabinet’s plans for the year ahead and how he saw the Council developing in the future. This could happen once or twice a year. This meeting would also be opened up to all members to attend.

A similar meeting could involve other Cabinet members, along with their relevant officers, giving members time and space to dig down into the Cabinet’s work and plans for the coming year. The O&S Committee should discuss in advance which questions they would like to ask the Portfolio Holders at these meetings. This could also be a role that the Standing Panel could do for their own Portfolio Holders. It would also strengthen scrutiny for the Council, as at present Overview and Scrutiny tended to focus on outside bodies.

Councillor Stallan thought it was a good idea to question the Leader and Cabinet members twice each year. As for the Portfolio Holders they could go either to the main O&S Committee or the Scrutiny Panels. Currently Portfolio Holders do not have any obligation to respond to these Panels. A Q&A session could be put into the work programmes of the Panels for a once a year meeting, these special meetings could be held in the Chamber and opened to all members.

Councillor Sartin noted that the Portfolio Holders always tried to attend O&S Committee and their relevant Standing Panels meetings and be available to answer questions. She would like to see the Portfolio Holders questioned by their Standing Panels and have Leader questions one or two times a year.  Councillor Stallan added that it should be remembered that O&S could summon any Portfolio Holder to attend their meetings.

Councillor Whitehouse agreed that the Leader should be questioned at the Overview and Scrutiny Committee. The Standing Panels tend to see the Portfolio Holders as part of the Panel’s regular meetings. At Essex County Council the Portfolio Holders tended to sit with the officers and the public; this was to separate them from the Panel members. There was also more emphasis on internal scrutiny as opposed to external. Following on from this Councillor Stallan said that there was a need to consider the layout for the Standing Panels.

Mr Willett informed the Panel that it was already in the Constitution that the Leader should be questioned by O&S. Also in the Constitution was provision for  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

To consider the membership and the roles of Scrutiny Panels; how progress reporting and outcomes of Panels could be achieved and the managing of Scrutiny Panel business.

Report to follow.

Mr Willett noted that the Panel would be receiving a separate report concerning the Finance and Performance Management Standing Panel.

Concerns were raised on the pro-rata membership of the Standing Panels. This tended to result in members on Panels being there just to make up the numbers without a real interest in the subject. Members of Task and Finish Panels were more likely to be members because they wanted to be involved and had an interest in the subject.

Councillor Waller commented that his group did not have any problems in filling the places allocated to them. Councillor Angold-Stephens said that his group did not have any problems in allocating member places on the various Panels except for the Finance Standing Panel. He thought that if a group could not fill a place on a Panel, they should be allowed to opt out. The Panel would be prepared to relax the rules on this and indicating that a group which did not want to put anyone on a particular Panel could leave the place vacant. This would allow the question to be asked whether an  interested member but of a different Party could be a suitable substitute.

It was noted that concerns were raised that Chairmen of the Panels were not attending the O&S Committee to give an update on their work programme. However, it had improved recently after the Chairman of the O&S Committee had asked all Panel Chairmen to attend the OSC.

AGREED: The Panel agreed that the Constitution should be strengthened to say that Panel Chairmen are expected to attend the main O&S Committee to give progress reports on their Panel’s work.

The Panel noted that the public only engaged with Standing Panels when there was something contentious on the agenda. A further report on the public profile on O&S would be submitted to a later meeting. 

To note the next meeting has been scheduled for 14 February 2013.

The Panel noted the date of their next meeting to be held on 14 February 2013.