Agenda item
Decision:
RECOMMENDED:
1) That all the current arrangements continue with the exception of those items listed below
2) That the attendance of Audit Members for Audit training should be obligatory as it is for Planning and Licensing initial training.
3) That Panels be encouraged use the powers available to them and therefore make clear recommendations on items coming before them so they can be incorporated into reports in the progress of being prepared, or taken into account at the Cabinet meeting.
4) That Panels should consider their own performance indicators and they be encouraged to monitor the progress in line with the Corporate Objectives through that route.
5) That the number of post implementation reviews undertaken be monitored by the Joint Chairs meetings.
6) That in working on policy development and reviews and project programme work, Panels be encouraged to have discussions with portfolio holders :
For example – Cabinet Members could attend a Panel meeting at the beginning of the year to discuss their plans for the year in order to incorporate potential items into work plans in accordance with the Business Plan.
7) That the Leader nominate the Panel/Committee Chairs for agreement at Council with the Vice-Chairs to be appointed by the Panels/Committee.
8) That terms of reference be approved for Chairs of Scrutiny bodies (set out as an appendix). (NB they include the points raised in question 15 set out in the report)
9) That the amended arrangements be reviewed after a further 12 months of operation.
Reason for Decision
To seek to make the roles and functions of the Council’s policy development and scrutiny panels more effective and thereby enhance the good governance of the Borough Council. Report recommendation 9 contained in the report was deleted to take into account comments made from the Panels.
Minutes:
Councillor Long presented the report which presented the conclusions of the Scrutiny Structures Task Group over a year on from the re-structure which had taken place in 2016.
The report set out the Task Group’s response to the questionnaire issued on Scrutiny structures and arrangements generally which had been issued to all Councillors, and elicited 31 responses. Any proposals to change the current arrangements were included as recommendations to Cabinet and Council for implementation for the 2017/18 Municipal year.
Under Standing Order 34 Councillor Joyce addressed the Cabinet explained that he hadn’t completed the survey but felt that combining policy review and scrutiny meant that a Panel would be scrutinising itself. He also commented that he supported the recommendation that the Leader should appoint the Chairmen.
Under Standing Order 34 Councillor Pope stated that there were many comments about the Audit Committee. He questioned how the Committee could have more training sessions when they currently had them prior to each meeting. He asked why the training should be obligatory when it wasn’t for other Panels and suggested that the numbers on panels would be better suited with a lesser number such as 9. Councillor Pope also commented that he supported the Leader appointing the Chairmen, and also stated that when members couldn’t attend meetings they should obtain a substitute for the meeting as in not attending it was preventing other members from taking up the opportunity.
In response to Councillor Pope’s questions, the Leader explained that in no way was the content of the report or the responses to the questions a criticism of himself or the Audit Committee but a compliment. The responses indicated that the arrangements he had set up for the new Committee were supported by Members and should continue into future years. The reasoning behind the recommendation that Audit training be obligatory was because they were carrying out specific tasks on behalf of the Council and should be trained accordingly. Councillor Long also indicated that making the size of the Panels larger ensured proportionality and membership of more of the opposition members with smaller groups.
In response to Councillor Joyce’s comment on scrutiny, Councillor Beales explained that the Panels were involved in the development of policy which would then come forward to the Cabinet for a decision and recommendation to Council. The Panels would then scrutinise and monitor the decisions of Cabinet.
Each of the Panels had considered the report and had submitted their comments to Cabinet as set out in the extracts published. Cabinet gave full consideration to those comments made.
Taking into account the comments of the Panels it was agreed that recommendation 9 in the report relating to the appraisal of Chairmen be deleted (and the following recommendations be renumbered)
RECOMMENDED:
1) That all the current arrangements continue with the exception of those items listed below
2) That the attendance of Audit Members for Audit training should be obligatory as it is for Planning and Licensing initial training.
3) That Panels be encouraged use the powers available to them and therefore make clear recommendations on items coming before them so they can be incorporated into reports in the progress of being prepared, or taken into account at the Cabinet meeting.
4) That Panels should consider their own performance indicators and they be encouraged to monitor the progress in line with the Corporate Objectives through that route.
5) That the number of post implementation reviews undertaken be monitored by the Joint Chairs meetings.
6) That in working on policy development and reviews and project programme work, Panels be encouraged to have discussions with portfolio holders :
For example – Cabinet Members could attend a Panel meeting at the beginning of the year to discuss their plans for the year in order to incorporate potential items into work plans in accordance with the Business Plan.
7) That the Leader nominate the Panel/Committee Chairs for agreement at Council with the Vice-Chairs to be appointed by the Panels/Committee.
8) That terms of reference be approved for Chairs of Scrutiny bodies (set out as an appendix). (NB they include the points raised in question 15 set out in the report)
9) That the amended arrangements be reviewed after a further 12 months of operation.
Reason for Decision
To seek to make the roles and functions of the Council’s policy development and scrutiny panels more effective and thereby enhance the good governance of the Borough Council. Report recommendation 9 was deleted to take into account comments made from the Panels.
Supporting documents:
-
Scrutiny Review Cab Report Jan 18, item CAB107
PDF 166 KB
-
Scrutiny Chair ROLE PROFILE, item CAB107
PDF 54 KB
-
Scrutiny Review 2510 17 responses, item CAB107
PDF 78 KB
-
Scrutiny Review 2017 Responses rec Q, item CAB107
PDF 4 MB