Issue - meetings

Consideration was given to a report on a proposal to allow relevant Heads of Service the opportunity to comment in writing on scrutiny recommendations during the scrutiny process.

It was explained that rather than Heads of Service formally commenting on scrutiny recommendations at a Cabinet Meeting, it was proposed that the relevant Head of Service should be requested to give a brief written comment earlier on in the process and this would be first considered by the relevant Scrutiny Task Group.

It was clarified that if Heads of Service did not support a recommendation, it did not mean the Task Group or Scrutiny Steering Board would have to amend or withdraw a particular recommendation.  It was also agreed that Scrutiny Members should be probing and challenging officers and other witnesses during a scrutiny investigation.  However, there was still concern that having a form for Heads of Service to complete and submit to the Task Group, Scrutiny Steering Board and Cabinet regarding scrutiny recommendations could restrain scrutiny and it might be seen as a ‘gatekeeping’ exercise.

RESOLVED that rather than the relevant Heads of Service completing a form commenting on scrutiny recommendations (as proposed within the report), the views of the relevant Heads of Service be sought by a Task Group on all scrutiny recommendations before a Scrutiny Report is finalised and submitted to the Scrutiny Steering Board.