Agenda item

5.1

Alan Kewley raised three questions and responses were provided, as follows:-

(a)       Please clarify how members of the public and community groups can influence the content and priorities of the Council’s Scrutiny Committees’ work programmes?

The Chair stated that members of the public and community groups can influence the Council’s Committee agendas in a number of different ways, including raising questions at meetings of the Council, Cabinet or Committee meetings.

(b)       Please clarify the overview role of this Committee?

Response – The role of this Committee, as stated clearly on the Council website, was to provide an overview and co-ordinating role regarding the four Scrutiny and Policy Development Committees, rather than challenge the Committees.

(c)        Please clarify who is responsible for the overall effectiveness of the Council’s statutory duty for self-scrutiny?

The Chair stated that the Leader of the Council (Councillor Julie Dore) and the Chief Executive would be responsible for the overall effectiveness of the Council’s statutory duty for self-scrutiny whilst Councillor Cate McDonald, as Chair of this Committee, and Michael Bowles (Head of Elections, Equalities and Involvement) were responsible for the day-to-day function of scrutiny.

5.2

Neil Fitzmaurice questioned whether the Committee was aware that certain important items that used to be considered annually by Scrutiny Committees no longer do so, meaning that partner organisations are no longer seen to be publicly accountable?  In the case of certain conservation charities responsible for large areas of public land, there has been an obligation to appear annually before a Scrutiny Committee, which has been simply ignored.  What can this Committee do to restore accountability and scrutiny?

The Chair stated that it was no longer the role of Scrutiny Committees to scrutinize individual Service Level Agreements, as it had been in the past.  However, members of the public could raise questions at Council or Cabinet meetings with regard to specific agreements.  If it was then decided that the relevant Scrutiny Committee should scrutinize any agreements, the Committee would have to determine whether this would be prioritised over other topics which the Committee had agreed to scrutinise.