Agenda item

2019/20 Scrutiny Annual Report and 2020/21 Work Programme

Report by the Director of Law and Assurance providing an evaluation of the impact of scrutiny at the County Council during 2019/20 and the work programme for July 2020 – September 2021.

 

The Committee is asked to scrutinise and comment on the report, with a particular focus on:

 

a)    reviewing scrutiny performance and making any recommendations for improvements. It should also consider its role in improving scrutiny practice and, if appropriate, identify any training or development needs for scrutiny members;

 

b)    ensuring that the highest priority areas for scrutiny are included within the work programme for this committee (see Appendix 2);

 

c)     supporting the work programmes of the service scrutiny committees (see Appendix 3) and recommending that County Council in July approves the scrutiny work programme for all committees;

 

d)    considering whether the capacity and resources available for scrutiny are sufficient to ensure the work programmes can be achieved; and

 

e)    giving an early indication of any topics from the work programme for debate at future County Council meetings.

Minutes:

74.1  The Committee considered the 2019/20 Scrutiny Annual Report from the Director of Law and Assurance (copy appended to the signed minutes). 

 

74.2  The Head of Democratic Services introduced the report which has an updated format to make it more accessible and focused on outcomes.  Scrutiny activity at the Council has continued through the COVID-19 pandemic, unlike a number of other councils, and this should be highlighted as a success.

 

74.3  The Committee made comments in relation to the 2019/20 Scrutiny Annual Report including those that follow.  It:

·       Thanked officers for a helpful report, and thanked Democratic Services staff for their excellent Member support through the year.

·       Commented, as only 19 responses were received out of 70 Members, that perhaps the Member Scrutiny Survey is overlooked and suggested small feedback workshops by Committee or political group may give a better rate of feedback.   The Head of Democratic Services commented that feedback workshops or sessions after the last Committee meeting of the year could be considered.

·       Commented that the Report cannot show the outcomes of the difference scrutiny makes to service outcomes for residents, and suggested that successes should be noted in the Committee meetings.  The Head of Democratic Services agreed that showing soft influence is a challenge for all councils, and welcomed comments on how to do this.  Framing results and considering possible outcomes at the work planning stage could be useful.

·       Noted the feedback that less than half of Members responding to the survey felt scrutiny reflects issues of greatest public concern/importance, and queried whether the survey comments provided guidance on how Business Planning Groups could improve this aspect.  The Head of Democratic Services will share the details of the survey with the Committee Chairmen and BPGs, but there were no comments received to explain this point.

·       Queried how many suggestions for scrutiny topics were received from the public via the website form and how many were taken up.   Suggested that potential matters for scrutiny could be requested from the public via pro-active press releases put out ahead of Business Planning Group (BPG) meetings, via standing item on County Local Committee (CLC) meeting agendas, or by including public questions at Scrutiny Committee meetings.  The Head of Democratic Services explained suggestions were mostly received from members of the public via their local Member, but also from interested partner agencies, charities etc.  Scrutiny committees all have a standing agenda item for Members to raise suggestions, and any Member can make a suggestion directly to a Committee Chairman or Committee member.

·       Highlighted the need for better business and agenda planning to ensure timely and effective influence, as reports provided are sometimes superseded before the meeting takes place, and the importance of scrutiny focusing on the policy and strategy issues rather than detailed delivery methods.

·       Regarding the Council’s organisational culture and attitude, commented that there are still some concerns around this, evidenced by Unison not being formally recognised for negotiating annual pay reviews by the Council.  The Head of Democratic Services commented that the Governance Committee was reporting to Full Council in July on the organisation culture and should also highlight the timeliness of reports coming to Committee.

·       Queried whether any joint scrutiny was planned with district and borough councils in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic.  The Head of Democratic Services confirmed there is a network in place to consider joint scrutiny if suggested topics arise. 

 

74.4  The Committee considered the 2020/21 Work Programme report from the Director of Law and Assurance (copy appended to the signed minutes). 

 

74.5  The Head of Democratic Services introduced the 2020/21 work programme, and highlighted the need for the programme to be flexible at this time, whilst remaining mindful of Member and officer capacity to support demands on the scrutiny committee work programmes.  The scrutiny committee Chairmen outlined the priorities of their committees as supported by their committee work programmes.

 

74.6  The Committee made comments in relation to the report including those that follow.  It:

·       Queried whether there will be further opportunities after the Committee’s September meeting to review the Council’s Reset process, and suggested this be included in the Committee’s November Project Day.  The Chairman confirmed the Reset process will be a focus of the Committee’s Project Day in November. 

·       Queried whether, subsequent to the July Budget/Savings Member Day, there will be a further Member Day on the Budget.  The Director of Finance and Support Services confirmed the 2021/22 budget progress could also be incorporated into the Committee’s November Project Day.

·       Sought reassurance that opportunities will be scheduled for scrutiny of the reset Capital Programme and proposals for the prioritisation of schemes.  The Cabinet Member for Finance confirmed this will happen as part of the budget process.

·       Queried whether the Treasury Management Strategy 2021/22 should be scrutinised earlier than December/January.  The Cabinet Member for Finance confirmed this is part of the usual budget process as it needs to reflect the Council’s borrowing requirements and would therefore be presented for scrutiny in January.  No significant changes are expected, however if this became the case it could be brought forward if necessary. 

·       Commented that the cross-cutting Home to School Transport Task and Finish Group (TFG) should be a priority due to increased costs from COVID-19.  The Head of Democratic Services explained the formation of this TFG is due to be discussed soon, and details will be confirmed to the Committee in due course. 

·       Agreed that the proposed Scrutiny Committee Work Programmes were appropriate and prioritised the most critical items.

·       Commented that joint scrutiny with district and borough councils on climate change could be considered.  The Chairman of the Environment and Communities Scrutiny Committee (ECSC) agreed this was a good suggestion, and confirmed that the Committee will give it consideration and review with service leads.

 

74.7  The Chairman thanked officers for a comprehensive report and acknowledge the increased volume of scrutiny that will be required as a result of the COVID-19 effect on Council finances.

 

74.8  Resolved:

 

1)   That the Committee agree the PFSC work programme, and support the service Scrutiny Committee work programmes;

 

2)   That the Committee recognise the importance of agenda planning around the timing of items coming to Committee, the importance of scrutiny focusing on policy and strategy issues rather than detailed delivery methods, the need to develop a mechanism to highlight the outcomes of scrutiny and the difference it makes to our residents, the need to look at different ways of gathering Member feedback on the effectiveness of scrutiny, and the need to find ways to engage with the public and receive their priorities for scrutiny;

 

3)   That Members of the Committee should attend the Committee’s Project Day on 12 November which will include details of the plans and priorities of the reset work, and an update on the 2020/21 budget process; and that

 

4)   The Committee noted that the Environment and Communities Scrutiny Committee would consider climate change as a topic for future scrutiny.

Supporting documents: