Agenda item

To receive an update on the independent review of the county council’s overview and scrutiny function.

Nichola Vine, Strategy and Commissioning Manager for Legal and Democratic Services introduced this item, which reported on an independent review of the Council’s overview and scrutiny function. Dr Jane Martin CBE was appointed to provide advice upon appropriate principles for scrutiny in light of the statutory guidance, key opportunities to improve upon our current ways of operating scrutiny, and how WCC might move forward to develop its scrutiny approach to deliver on the Council Plan and objectives.

The review document was circulated with a summary of key issues in the covering report. This outlined how the review was undertaken through

a series of remote interviews and a desktop analysis of past scrutiny documents. The feedback was positive, highlighting examples of good practice. However, there was a conclusion that the scrutiny function needed to be reinvigorated and a principles-based approach was recommended.

The report set out the opportunities for improvement and focussed on a series of principles that would drive the refreshed approach. These were summarised within the report. The recommendations reached in the review were:

• The Council should relaunch the scrutiny function, championed by the Leader and Cabinet, with a corporate ‘common purpose’ WCC scrutiny guide setting out the ambition and expectations for the function.
• Create greater alignment with corporate objectives by restructuring scrutiny committees in parallel to foster greater scrutiny of corporate

themes and objectives and corporate performance.

• Provide recognised authoritative leadership and direction for the scrutiny function by creating a new role of Chair of Overview and Scrutiny to chair a new Overview and Scrutiny Panel comprised of all scrutiny chairs.
• Greater use of virtual meetings technology and, where appropriate, social media to engage the public, service providers and external partners and encourage elected member active participation.
• Consider creating a dedicated team of overview and scrutiny officers resourced adequately, to provide data and information, advice and support to O&S chairs and members.
• Review the timetable for scrutiny committees to ensure meetings were held at the optimum time and allowed for greater meeting and agenda flexibility and greater use of task and finish groups for scrutiny work.
• Making use of virtual technology, in-house training and briefings should be provided for scrutiny chairs and members on appointment and ongoing, including subject updates as required and skills development.

Further sections reported the financial and environmental implications of this item, together with the corresponding reports being considered by the other overview and scrutiny committees. Thereafter, officers would prepare an implementation plan for discussion and a report to Council post-elections with recommendations for implementation.

The Committee considered and commented on the above recommendations and the detailed review document, also considering a series of question areas within the report:

• The Chair suggested that members consider the report and submit their views to Democratic Services, in order that he could consider them and formulate a committee response.
• The report was welcomed. Whilst this committee undertook external scrutiny, it should also have more of an internal focus, for example reviewing future cabinet decisions, which could provide for pre-decision scrutiny. This needed effective timing of meetings to dovetail the scrutiny process prior to cabinet meetings.
• A query on the recommendation for an overview panel of chairs, asking how this would improve the scrutiny function. The idea was to enable chairs to discuss cross cutting issues and how best to respond to them or coordinate activity efficiently. The Chair noted that there were joint committees where required for such cross cutting issues. He shared the reservations raised and would like to see evidence of how this would improve scrutiny.
• A view that the Chair’s role could include dialogue with other scrutiny chairs, rather than creating another committee.
• There were capacity issues within Democratic Services to support the scrutiny function effectively. A preference to retain an allocated Democratic Services Officer, rather than splitting the role between a scrutiny officer and a democratic officer.
• The scrutiny function needed to follow corporate priorities and so a realignment should be undertaken.
• There was a need to look at work programming, work with partners and to ensure that the programme was more front facing.
• A need to provide a higher profile for scrutiny work on the county council website, to assist the public in finding current work, such as task and finish groups. The member felt this was an area for improvement.
• This Committee has a statutory duty for health scrutiny and so was unlike other scrutiny committees. A key area was holding the Health and Wellbeing Board to account.
• Further explanation and examples were sought of the proposed methods of working. In some quarters, there were perceptions that scrutiny could be critical. Better scrutiny work could be achieved through working together with a positive ‘can do’ approach.
• It was noted that the statutory aspects would be fed into the final proposals, alongside the feedback from committees.

The Chair asked all members to submit their views to Democratic Services. These would be collated and considered by himself to formulate a committee response. He asked members to submit their views within two weeks. The final proposals would be submitted to members post-election. The Chair welcomed the report and saw the potential for further improvements.

Resolved:

That Committee members submit their comments to Democratic Services within two weeks, in response to the findings of the independent review into Overview and Scrutiny.