Agenda item

The Overview and Scrutiny Performance Board was asked to:

·         Note progress to date on the 2016/17 Scrutiny work programme; and

·         Consider the issues not completed from the 2016/17 work programme, including those recommended by the 2017/18 Budget Scrutiny Task Group and those suggested at previous meetings of OSPB, and agree which issues it would wish to recommend should be carried forward to the 2017/18 work programme following the County Council elections in May.

The Chairman introduced the agenda item by suggesting that the report (including Appendix 1) be forwarded to the first meeting of the new OSPB following the May elections.  He felt there should be a strong recommendation that the new OSPB should take up the initiatives highlighted by the Budget Scrutiny Task Group and other issues which had not been completed in 2016/17.

(At this point, the Chairman thanked Councillor Wells for chairing the Scrutiny workshop in February when he had been unable to attend.)

Members were given the opportunity to comment and the following main points were made:

·         It was disappointing that there were still outstanding issues from the current year, given that it was always clear when work would need to be completed.  It would be good to empower Panels to establish their own task and finish groups but the resources available within each Panel – in terms of experience and knowledge - needed to be considered.  Task and finish groups had to have the buy-in of the executive side, both political and from senior officers, as there were also resource issues there.

·         The Chairman agreed that Scrutiny could be frustrated by the Executive as had been the case in his first 2½ years as Chairman.  He felt that the last couple of years had been easier and Scrutiny was now pushing at a more open door.  Whoever took on the role of Chairman of OSPB would have to have a good working relationship with the Leader of the Council.  As Chairman he felt he could do anything except things that the majority group did not want him to do.

·         Concern was expressed that Scrutiny meetings often resulted in too many recommendations for the Cabinet Member which became lost in the minutes.  It was suggested that three key recommendations should be distilled from the discussion.

·         Concern was expressed about the level of resources allocated to Scrutiny and reference was made to a previous experience of a task group not being able to start for several months due to a lack of staff resources.  The Council needed to back Scrutiny with sufficient staff resources and time.

It was agreed that the work programme update on issues still to be completed should be passed to the new OSPB for consideration with a recommendation that more task and finish groups should be established.

Members were reminded that OSPB controlled how many task and finish groups were set up.  The Chairman informed Members that he would like OSPB to continue to manage the process.  Panels would be able to make recommendations to OSPB, but OSPB should decide whether the issue was a priority.  Although it was agreed that Scrutiny business should be managed by OSPB, it was suggested that other Members of the Council should not be excluded simply because they were not a Panel Member.  The Chairman agreed that membership of all task and finish groups should be open to all Members of the Council (except Cabinet Members) which is the current position.

Whilst agreeing that the responsibility for agreeing task and finish groups should rest with OSPB, there should be a mechanism for urgent issues to be taken forward.  It was suggested that this could happen by delegation to the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Board.