Agenda item

[To consider a report on Statutory Scrutiny Guidance and the role of Scrutiny Board]. 

The Chief Operating Officer gave a presentation on the Statutory Scrutiny Guidance and the role of Scrutiny Board. The presentation also covered potential proposed changes to the Scrutiny procedure rules within the Constitution.  Any changes to the Constitution if they were to go forward would go to Governance and Ethics Committee and then to Full Council for  approval. 

 

The Chief Operating Officer remarked that the foreword of the Statutory Scrutiny Guidance was written by the current Prime Minister who at the time of publication of the guidance was a Local Government Minister.  The guidance was published in May 2019 to ensure that local authorities were aware of the purpose of overview and scrutiny, what effective scrutiny looked like, how to conduct it effectively and the benefits it could bring.

 

The Chief Operating Officer stated that effective overview and scrutiny should:

 

·       Provide constructive, critical friend challenge.

·       Amplify the voices and concerns of the public.

·       Be led by independent people who take responsibility for their role.

·       Drive improvement in public service.

 

Scrutiny was more than just holding the Executive to account it was also about having a defined impact on the ground, with the Committee making recommendations that would make a tangible difference to the Local Authority and the lives of Wolverhampton residents.  He gave an example of the scrutiny of the Blue Badge Service conducted by Scrutiny Board which had led to significant improvements and made a real positive difference in people’s experience of the service.  He also cited the work of the Fire Safety Scrutiny Review Group which had led to a great deal of improvements in fire safety following the tragedy of the Grenfell Tower Fire.

 

The Chief Operating Officer spoke on the matter of culture.  Identifying a clear role and focus was important as was prioritisation.  It was also important to have early and regular engagement between the executive and scrutiny.  It was good to bring the executive work programme regularly to Scrutiny Board.  The Statutory Guidance stated that it was for the Chair of the Scrutiny Committee to determine the extent of an Executive Member’s participation in a Scrutiny Committee.  An Executive-Scrutiny protocol was one way of helping to manage the relationships between the Executive and Scrutiny. 

 

The Chief Operating Officer commented that the Statutory Guidance had a section on performance monitoring and Members access to information.  The guidance stated that Scrutiny Members should have access to a regularly available source of key information about the management of the authority and in particular information on performance management and risk.   A quarterly performance report was received by Scrutiny Board on the performance of the authority, alongside an assessment on the budget.   

 

The Chief Operating Officer stated Scrutiny must be aware of the context in which it was operating and seek to understand how national and regional issues could impact on the City.  There were implications on how the City worked with the West Midlands Combined Authority and other organisations.

 

The Chief Operating Officer stated that effective scrutiny needed to have a clear idea of what it was going to do over a long period of time, whilst maintaining enough flexibility for it to respond to any unexpected or short-term issues that might occur.  The Statutory Guidance stated that when considering an item for the work plan the following questions as a minimum should be considered:-

 

1.     Do we understand the benefits that scrutiny would bring to the issue?

 

2.     How do we best carry out the work on this subject?

 

3.     What do we expect to be the outcome of this work?

 

4.     How does this work link and engage with the work of the Executive, other decision making bodies, partners and the Council Plan.

 

The Statutory Guidance also covered the topic of training, outlining that authorities should ensure Committee Members were offered an induction when they took up the role and ongoing training so they could carry out their role effectively.  He recommended that Councillors should attend two seminars by Link Support Services over the Summer.  These were on:-

 

·       Best Practice Scrutiny – Useful for new Members and also as a refresher for experienced Scrutiny Members.

 

·       Committee Scrutiny – Assisting Members to prepare, participate and add value in the Scrutiny Committee environment.

 

He advised that the Scrutiny Team and Organisation Development Team would be in contact with Councillors about the courses in due course.  

 

The Chief Operating Officer spoke on the overall purpose of Scrutiny Board.  He commented that the Scrutiny System in Wolverhampton was based on a “Hub and Spoke” approach.  There was a co-ordinating Scrutiny Board with a series of Scrutiny Panels.  The Centre for Governance and Scrutiny Good Practice on Scrutiny recommended that where multiple work programmes existed that it was necessary for them to be co-ordinated to avoid duplication and imposing too great a burden on reporting Officers. 

 

The Chief Operating Officer presented a slide on the official remit of Scrutiny Board.  There was a proposal to strengthen the emphasis on Scrutiny Board’s role in its co-ordinating role and determining the most suitable Scrutiny Panel for a particular agenda item to be looked at.  Major infrastructure projects that cross-cut Scrutiny Panels had been added to the Board’s remit to avoid future duplication of items. 

 

The Chief Operating Officer outlined some suggested changes to the Call-in rules, but he made clear it was ultimately for Members at Full Council to decide if they wished to change the Constitution.  Currently the decision to call-in could be made by:-

 

The Chair of the Scrutiny Board

The Vice-Chair of the Scrutiny Board

The Leader or Deputy Leader of the main opposition group

 

  

It was suggested to make it possible for more Members to call-in a decision by recommending that three members who were not members of the Cabinet could call-in a decision.  This would make it more in line with the region.

 

The Chief Operating Officer presented a slide on agenda setting.  The current constitution allowed for any Scrutiny Member to request an item to be included on the next available agenda.  Taking the Statutory Scrutiny guidance on prioritisation into account, it was not always practical to consider every requested agenda item within the Scrutiny Work Programme.  There was therefore an option available to be recommended that all agenda items requested go through Board or the relevant panel to determine if the item could be considered.  Thought should be given to the key questions set out in the statutory guidance on determining the suitability of an item to be added to the work plan.  Consideration must also be given to where it was best placed for the discussion to take place. 

 

The Chief Operating Officer stated that he recommended for a Constitution update report to be received by the Governance and Ethics Committee on 6 July, but he wanted feedback from Scrutiny Board.

 

The Vice-Chair commented that over recent years the Scrutiny function had improved at the Council.  There had been more items coming forward for debate and discussion.  Scrutiny Board had a very busy agenda in the previous municipal year.

 

The Vice-Chair remarked that Call-in was rarely used at the Council and this was because most items did receive scrutiny.  He agreed with widening the rules so more backbench Members could call-in a decision, but he did not believe the ability should be removed from the Leader of the Opposition and the Deputy Leader of Opposition and the Vice-Chair of Scrutiny Board. 

 

The Vice-Chair commented on the importance of recommendations.  He asked the Chief Operating Officer to strengthen how the Scrutiny process could make recommendations and be monitored. 

 

The Vice-Chair also questioned the need to change how items could be added to agendas, he was not aware of any issues in the previous municipal year.   He commented that the Chairs of Scrutiny Panels and Board at Wolverhampton were all from the Administrative Group, which was not the case at all authorities.  He referred to the Statutory Guidance which referred to every authority considering having a secret ballot to select Scrutiny Committee Chairs.  He was in favour of this proposal and proposed that the constitution be amended to allow Scrutiny Chairs to be selected by a vote by secret ballot.  He was of the view that every Member outside of the Cabinet should be able to put themselves forward a position as a Scrutiny Chair.  The motion was seconded by Cllr Wendy Thompson. 

 

Cllr Thompson spoke on the motion and commented that she thought everything had been working successfully last year.  She believed that Scrutiny Chairs should not be from the controlling group.  She also spoke on the need for Members to be independent minded and not whipped.  She expressed concern about the proposed changes to the Scrutiny rules in the constitution. 

 

The Chair commented that the Constitution was being reviewed to ensure the authority and the Scrutiny process could be run efficiently and effectively.

 

The motion proposed by the Vice-Chair and seconded by Cllr Thompson on the secret ballot for appointing Scrutiny Chair’s was put to the vote and was lost. 

 

The Chair then proposed that the next steps outlined by the Chief Operating Officer in his presentation be put to the vote. 

 

 

Resolved: That the next steps outlined in the report, namely that a report on the constitution be received by the Governance and Ethics Committee be agreed.