PAPER D

CO-ORDINATING COMMITTEE – 11 MARCH 2004

TOWARDS EXCELLENT OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY – THE NEXT STEPS

HEAD OF SELECT COMMITTEE AND BEST VALUE SUPPORT

REASON FOR SELECT COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

To respond to recommendations arising from the IDEA peer review, the Ofsted LEA inspection and in particular, the areas discussed informally by the Co-ordinating Committee on 15 January 2004.

ACTION REQUIRED BY THE SELECT COMMITTEE

1. To compare the Isle of Wight Council’s Select Committees structure, size and control with all other unitary authorities.

2. To make recommendations to the Full Council in relation to improving current constitutional arrangements for Select Committees, in respect of:

(a) Allocation of Select Committee Chairs.

(b) Size, frequency and time of meetings.

(c) Select Committee agenda and workplan setting.

(d) Call-In.

BACKGROUND

Members of the Committee took the opportunity to meet with Richard Masters (who headed the IDEA review team last year) and Kevin Wilson (a lead member for the IDEA as well as an elected member and group leader for Milton Keynes Council) on 15 January 2004. The purpose of which was to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the Council’s current overview and scrutiny arrangements. In addition, a range of processes adopted by other authorities, with some success, was highlighted.

Based upon best practice from around the country and including reference to the Centre for Public Scrutiny, the Head of Select Committee and Best Value Support would now advise a number of changes that will continue to ensure that the Scrutiny function continues to develop a robust, independent and challenging style. Each of the main areas will be examined in turn:

(i) Allocation of Select Committee Chairs

Evidence of the findings contained within this report clearly prove that there is no direct correlation between those unitary authorities with a good CPA score compared to the basis of how the Select Committee Chairs are apportioned.

Work undertaken by my staff, and supported by the Centre for Public Scrutiny, does reveal that ‘good scrutiny’ is Member driven and is linked directly to the quality and leadership of the Select Committee Chairmen. Current new training initiatives for Select Committee Members, with South East Employers, should assist the current and future Select Committee Chairmen to make their committees more challenging, inclusive and structured.

I believe that the present arrangements for allocating chairmen should remain in place and be reviewed in twelve months’ time, after training has been completed.

(ii) Size, Frequency and Time of Meetings

The current size of membership is creating a huge burden of work on Members and some officers and as a consequence scrutiny and to a greater degree Policy Development work, is often not focused and as creative, or challenging as it should be. It is considered that our scrutiny function would be improved if we reduced from 12 to 10 Members. This would have a consequential impact upon the proportionality leading to a 6:3:1 split.

The current frequency of meetings creates a cyclical workload for Members and officers and would likely be improved if the Select Committees scheduled informal meetings/summits, in place of diarised meetings. This would permit more opportunities for in-depth scrutiny or perhaps ‘blue sky thinking’ without the press and public and enable support staff to capture new ideas and policies that can be presented to the Executive at a later stage.

Support staff have again reviewed the timings of meetings and recently used the Island Voices Citizens Panel to determine the most convenient time for the public to attend Select Committee meetings. The results gave a relatively even spread between morning (26%), afternoon (24%) and late evening (24%) with the rest indicating either early evening or no preference. I would recommend that the current times remain, but committees have a flexible approach, subject to their agenda, stakeholders and public interest. The recent example of the Health Consultation adequately demonstrates that Members are flexible to meeting times to ensure a wider and more inclusive response.

(iii) Select Committee Agenda and Workplan Setting

The constitution allows the Select Committees to determine their own work programmes and priorities. This freedom to scrutinise what is important to Members has been criticised in some quarters, yet the ability to examine in detail any aspect of Council service, must by definition demonstrate a challenging, independent and transparent administration.

The freedom to maintain ownership and management of Select Committee agendas and Workplans must remain with the Select Committees if good Scrutiny and Policy Development is to develop. However, as best practice develops throughout the country, committees should take into consideration alternative routes for items to be included. Recent examples of issues referred by the Executive/Portfolio Holder, such as the “Second Homes”, has demonstrated the ‘added value’ that the Select Committee can provide and the additional recommendations that resulted. In the same way, issues could also be referred by the Full Council, Directors Group, Heads of Service, Partner Agencies and most importantly, appropriate stakeholders and members of the public.

In deciding the priority for the work programme and agenda items, the Chairman and the Select Committee Members will always take cognisance of the six corporate objectives. To improve this process, I am recommending that a Pro-Forma be introduced for any items to be added after the Select Committee development days, scheduled to take place in May 2004 and replacing the diarised meetings. The draft Pro-Forma can be examined in Appendix I.

(iv) Call-In

The Call-In process has not been a great success and so far has not resulted in any new recommendations that have resulted in change. In order to assist the process, remove some of the confusion and protect members of the public or the Council from the consequences of poor decision making, I am advising Members to adopt a proposed Pro-Forma as an aide to all Select Committee Members to help structure the process, provide a clear purpose for their actions and state their objectives. The new Pro-Forma can be examined in Appendix 2.

In this report, I have targeted a number of constitutional issues that I believe will have an immediate impact upon the operation of Select Committees. Should Members follow the advice and best practice, I consider that the improvements will lead to more open, focussed and transparent overview and scrutiny in the coming year.

I would also remind Members that during the coming year, Select Committee Support will be constantly examining alternative scrutiny models, encouraging wider stakeholder and public engagement and reviewing the impact of our comprehensive training programme with South East Employers.

CONSULTATION PROCESS

The arrangements for Select Committees are essentially a matter for the Council.

FINANCIAL, LEGAL, CRIME AND DISORDER IMPLICATIONS

Overview and Scrutiny is a statutory requirement under 5.21 of the Local Government Act 2000, health scrutiny is a statutory requirement under 5.7 Health and Social Care Act 2001.

APPENDICES ATTACHED

Appendix 1 – Pro-Forma for Work Programmes and Criteria for Selecting Topics for Review

Appendix 2 – Notification of Call-In

Contact Point : Alistair R Drain, Head of Select Committee and Best Value Support

Tel: 823801 Fax: 823068 Email: [email protected]

ALISTAIR DRAIN

Head of Select Committee and Best Value Support