Issue - meetings

The Board considered a report on the Annual Review of the Call In Procedure and discussed the Call In that the Scrutiny Board had considered in January 2010.  The Constitution required the Scrutiny Board to review the Call in procedure annually. Members’ attention was drawn to several inconsistencies within the procedure, the details of which are set out below:

17.1 stated that a Call In should only be used when Members of the Scrutiny Board have evidence that the Cabinet had not made the decision in accordance with article 13.  However, it is not the Scrutiny Board that decides to call matters in, the Board considers matters that have been called in.  A Call In could be made by any five Members of the Council or the Chairman of the Scrutiny Board and the Monitoring Officer considers whether the Call In is valid in the first instance (17.4). 

17.1 detailed the criteria for a valid Call In.  These were listed in article 13.   Later on at 17.10 it stated that the Board could refer matters to full Council if it found that the decision was in conflict with the Council’s Policy and Budgetary framework or was on a matter outside of the Cabinet’s legal/constitutional remit.  These criteria were not listed at 17.1 so Members would not be able to call it in on these grounds in the first instance.  These seemed to be good grounds to call a decision in, and were usually part of a Council’s call in criteria.  An alternative wording for 17.1 could be:

“Decisions can be called in if they:

·         Are not in line with Council policy

·         Are not in accordance with the Council’s budget

·         Are not in accordance with the principles of decision-making set out in Article 13 of the Constitution”

17.7 stated that the Scrutiny Board can consider a Call In in such a manner as it considered appropriate.  However, it is usually asked to consider it against the criteria given at 17.1. 

At 17.9b and 17.4 it suggested that the Board can refer the decision back to Cabinet in a report which gives its reasons.  It was not clear how, in practice, such a report would be prepared and agreed by the Board in time to go to Cabinet and would the “report” need to come from the Board.  In practice, officers could prepare a report on behalf of the Monitoring Officer/Head of Service and/or the Cabinet could consider the minutes of the Board. 

17.9c stated the decision should only be referred to Council when the Board recommends a change to the policy and budgetary framework.  Otherwise Council could only refer the matter back to Cabinet.  The Board should refer the decision back to Cabinet – i.e. to ask it to re-consider its decision.

At 17.10 these points should be included at 17.1 for consistency.

After lengthy discussion it was

RESOLVED that the Scrutiny Officer in consultation with Legal Services make the relevant amendments, in track changes, to the Call In procedure  ...  view the full minutes text for item 88