Issue - items at meetings - CfPS possible

Verbal presentation by Ed Hammond – Research & Information Manager for the Centre for Public Scrutiny.

107.1  The CfPS Research and Information Manager gave a presentation on Developing Scrutiny. He said in general across the country it had taken a number of years to develop strong and sustained quality scrutiny outcomes. It would take time for Brighton and Hove City Council to develop a successful scrutiny system but it has an advantage over other Local Authorities in that it could draw on experience elsewhere.

107.2  Ed Hammond outlined the four principles of public scrutiny:

a)     Provide critical friend challenge to executives as well as external authorities and agencies

b)     Reflect the voice and concerns of the public and its communities

c)      Take the lead and own the scrutiny process on behalf of the public

d)     Make an impact on the delivery of public services

107.3  He said that scrutiny should not be party political and should be objective and based on evidence; though not necessarily shying away from what he called para-political debate. It was a constructive process, focussing on the future, not ‘anti-Executive’ or duplicating existing work but relevant topics aligned with Council and Local Strategic Partnership objectives.

107.4  Scrutiny had the advantage that it could actively cut across many organisations to have a positive impact, especially in relation to the area focus of the Comprehensive Area Assessment. It could help bring in partners, and overcome ‘silo’ working in organisations.

107.5  Though there may not be easy relations with the Executive and Partnerships there needed to be collaboration and there were many ways to be constructive. With new legislation opportunities for closer working between scrutiny and partners organisations have increased.

107.6  Answering questions he said the national average of scrutiny support officers was 3, ranging from 0 – 23. A good way to attract further resources was to demonstrate the value of the process to the authority; however this would be over very long time-scales.  Scrutiny recommendations stood on their merits and over time, if administrations changed and members with scrutiny experience moved to Executive, the Executive could be found to be more open to recommendations.

107.7 It was sometimes difficult to maintain independence from the Executive and at the same time identify useful matters for scrutiny. In devising a work plan it would be worthwhile to try to manage expectations and identify the risks at the outset; if recommendations were not all agreed by the decision-makers at least there had been discussion.

107.8  Scrutiny can be used to look to the future and learn from high performing areas.

107.9  Regarding public engagement, Ed Hammond said that nationally scrutiny is generally not good at getting effective evidence from the public. He said that other than traditional public meetings and surveys, alternative ways included co-option and working with Panels in developing recommendations. Some scrutiny committees developed a set of criteria to judge the importance of a matter for scrutiny, such as whether the cabinet had suggested it.

107.10 LSP partners may view O&S as a way to provide an independent view of their work.

107.11 Members and officers could contact the Centre for Public scrutiny for advice and help.

107.12 The Chairman thanked Ed Hammond for his presentation.