Agenda item

The Chair of Scrutiny to seek approval from the Council for an Executive Scrutiny Protocol

 

The Chair of the Scrutiny Committee, Councillor Cumbers,  moved the recommendation and provided a brief introduction as follows:

 

·         There had been much work in the drafting of the protocol which had included workshops, research from other authorities and considered feedback from Scrutiny and Cabinet Members

·         The purpose of the protocol was to clarify the role of the Scrutiny Committee to provide a framework to define relationships and set out expectations so that scrutiny could function in a positive way

·         The document stated that the key purpose of the protocol was to clarify the relationship between the Cabinet and the Scrutiny Committee to encourage effective communication between the two to enable and enhance the scrutiny function in delivering positive outcomes in line with its objectives. Amongst other things the protocol provided information on the way the Scrutiny Annual Workplan would be formed, the format of scrutiny reviews and how matters would be referred to Cabinet and attendance by Portfolio holders at the Scrutiny Committee

·         The document was not a statutory requirement but was identified in the government’s Statutory Guidance on Overview and Scrutiny  as  a matter of good practice

·         As Chair she had worked with the Scrutiny Committee Members, the Leader and Officers of the Council to develop a document which provided a framework for a collaborative, constructive and proactive approach to the scrutiny executive relationship

·         She hoped Members would support the protocol for inclusion in the Constitution and see it as a positive step on the Council’s scrutiny journey

·         She considered the document would also help public understanding of the scrutiny role

 

Councillor Orson seconded the motion and reserved his right to speak.

 

Councillor Evans requested that the document be revisited following the LGA review if necessary to make any amendments that are suggested and asked the proposer to accept the following addition to the recommendation as follows:

 

‘Upon completion of the review of the LGA of Melton Borough Council the protocol be revisited to ensure that it meets any suggestions that are made or any recommendations that are made.’

 

Councillor Cumbers did not accept the additional wording and felt there was no need to add to the motion.

 

Councillor Pritchett spoke in support of the additional wording and advised he would vote against if the additional wording was not accepted. His concerns related to the lack of reference to risk, business plans, corporate objectives and prioritising work at paragraph 3 which he considered left the protocol open to interpretation and could limit the role of scrutiny. He was also concerned that there was no reference to the personal qualities and responsibilities of the Chair and Members of the Scrutiny Committee as well as how the Chair was selected. He also considered that Internal Audit should audit the performance of scrutiny and therefore would have expected them to have audited the draft protocol against guidance and national best practice and report their findings. He was concerned at the timing of the protocol with the outcome of LGA governance review being imminent in the New Year.

 

Councillor Cumbers highlighted that there were constant conversations with the Cabinet and the Scrutiny Committee Members and she was open to suggestions to make things work better. Should the LGA Review propose changes she would consider these along with the Council but for now the recommendation stood.

 

Councillor Holmes also referred to the LGA Review and due to the robust conversations held with the LGA felt it may be helpful to wait a few weeks until the outcome of the review before approving this document.

 

Councillor Cumbers responded that Councillor Holmes had had the opportunity for input to the document as a Member of the Scrutiny  Committee. She explained that a lot of time and thought had gone into the document by Members and Officers and again recommended the document for approval at this meeting.

 

The Mayor permitted Councillor Evans to speak again following the proposer not accepting his additional wording. Councillor Evans said he felt the amendment was not negative and still considered the protocol should await the LGA review’s advice. He felt the scrutiny function had not always been effectively used to date although there had been some robust reviews. He felt the document would not improve the functionality of scrutiny and there needed be a more open and transparent Council not one where information was difficult to obtain. He added that Members and Officers at all levels needed to work together to achieve the best Council and improve services easily and well.

 

Councillor Cumbers responded that she always looked for  co-operation and agreement. She considered this document would help the Council to be a better Council and she considered that scrutiny worked well with the Cabinet. She reiterated that the document could be reviewed in light of any LGA feedback should that be required.

 

Councillor Orson spoke in support of the  protocol and the work of scrutiny and expressed his admiration for the scrutiny role being democracy at its best. He explained that scrutiny was a critical friend and provided challenge when needed. It was led by independent people who were trying to improve the Council’s services. He felt that the foregoing debate should have been held at the Scrutiny Committee. He offered his full support to the Chair and considered any changes that may be recommended by the review could be considered at a later date.

 

Councillor Pritchett advised that he was not on the Scrutiny Committee therefore this was the first time he had seen the document. Councillor Orson advised that Members of his group, Councillors Evans and Holmes, were on the Scrutiny Committee.

 

Councillor Evans raised a point of order that he was not present at the  Scrutiny Committee when the protocol was considered. Councillor Cumbers responded that the document had been published and circulated to Members, as had the minutes of respective meetings.

 

RESOLVED

 

That Council:

 

Approves the Executive Scrutiny Protocol (Appendix A).

 

(21 for, 5 against, 2 abstentions)

 

(Councillor Chandler lost connection and re-joined the meeting during the preceding item and therefore abstained at the vote.)