Agenda item
Overview & Scrutiny Annual Report and Revenue of the Work of the Board
Minutes:
The Chairman presented a draft of the Overview and Scrutiny Annual Report 2015/16. In so doing he highlighted some of the key achievements of the Board and a number of Task Groups during the year and he thanked Members and Officers for their hard work supporting the scrutiny process.
In line with best practice Members were invited to consider action that could be taken to improve the scrutiny process in future years. A number of potential options to enhance the scrutiny process had been identified by the Chairman and Vice Chairman, in consultation with Officers, during briefings as well as following discussions at Board meetings. These ideas were discussed in turn by the Board:
(a) Finance and Budget Scrutiny Working Group
Members were advised that a small working group could meet in private to investigate budgetary matters in detail and report their findings back to the Board. Group members would develop expertise which would be helpful when considering the budget. Meetings could be scheduled to take place in a timely manner so as to enable Members to scrutinise both future budget proposals and information about progress in securing efficiency savings as and when the information became available.
Members concurred that a Finance and Budget Scrutiny Working Group would be useful to establish. There was general consensus that the financial situation for local government would continue to be challenging and under these circumstances detailed consideration by Members of budget proposals would be essential. Furthermore, Officers advised that the external auditors had recommended that there should be greater Member involvement in the budget setting process and this working group would help to achieve this objective.
(b) Performance Dashboard Scrutiny Working Group
Similarly it was proposed that the Board could establish a small working group to review the measures dashboard. To date Members had received limited information about the dashboard, though it had become clear during a presentation on this subject earlier in the year that this would become an increasingly useful tool for the Council. The dashboard contained a vast amount of complex information. A Working Group meeting regularly in private might be in a better position than the Board to develop familiarity with the dashboard and to identify ways in which this could be used to support the scrutiny process. As with the Finance and Budget Scrutiny Working Group the outcomes of these meetings could be reported to the Board.
Again there was general consensus that a working group dedicated to reviewing the measures dashboard would be a useful addition to the scrutiny process. Members noted that a lot of the content of the dashboard appeared to be focused on service performance. There was the potential that the group could help to widen the scope of the dashboard by suggesting content that would focus more on issues which mattered to local residents. Once familiar with the dashboard Members of the working group might also identify key areas of service performance which might be considered suitable for further scrutiny, whether by the Board or by a Task Group. Members were also reminded that the monitoring and scrutiny of performance came within the remit of Overview and Scrutiny.
As with the budget process Members were advised that the Council’s auditors had recommended that Members should be more greatly involved in managing service performance and a working group would help the Council to achieve this aim. The Board was also asked to note that the launch of this Working Group would coincide with the provision of access to the dashboard on Members’ iPads which would make it easier for Members to access this tool more regularly.
(c) Member Champions on the Board
A further option that had been identified was the potential for members of the Board to be appointed as champions of particular issues. A Member Champion for Risk Management had been appointed to the Audit, Standards and Governance Committee at the beginning of the year and this role had worked well by enhancing member involvement in the Council’s approach to managing risks. Member champions on the Board would have an opportunity to learn about particular subjects in detail which could enable them to gain expertise in those areas.
Members expressed some reservations about this suggestion and it was questioned how this would work in a meaningful fashion. There was general agreement that the concept of a scrutiny Member Champion required further consideration. The Board therefore agreed that this should be discussed further in the new municipal year.
(d) Training
A training session had been delivered to Members of the Overview and Scrutiny Board and other non-Cabinet Members in June 2015. Officers suggested that the content could be adapted to focus on particular areas of interest to ensure that it remained useful and interesting.
Members concurred that the training which had been delivered in 2015 had been very good, having provided both an introduction to the scrutiny process and an opportunity for Members to consider subjects that might be suitable for scrutiny during the year. Further consideration of the previous list of proposed subjects for scrutiny, in respect of the outcomes that had been achieved, was considered worthwhile. Members also suggested that future training should provide additional opportunities to discuss suitable subjects for scrutiny in 2016/17.
(e) Additional Points
Officers explained that the introduction of Working Groups could impact on the workload of both the Officers who supported the scrutiny process as well as on the workload of Members. For this reason it was suggested that if the Working Groups were introduced only 1 Task Group or Short, Sharp Review should take place at any one time, rather than the 2 that were currently permitted, to ensure that workloads remained manageable. In 2015/16 there had only ever been 1 Task Group / short sharp review taking place at any point and therefore it was not anticipated that this would have a negative impact on the outcomes of the scrutiny process. The Board would, however, be able to review the impact on the scrutiny process at the end of 2016/17 and could make further amendments to working arrangements then if considered appropriate.
RESOLVED that
(1) A Finance and Budget Scrutiny Working Group should be established, with effect from the start of the municipal year in 2016/17.
(2) A Performance Dashboard Scrutiny Working Group should be established, with effect from the start of the municipal year in 2016/17.
(3) The membership of both working groups should be determined by the Board at its first meeting in 2016/17.
(4) Further scrutiny training should be provided to Members early in the new municipal year.
(5) The concept of scrutiny Member Champions should be considered further by the Board in 2016/17.
(6) Subject to recording the plans for the future of the scrutiny process, as detailed in the preamble above, the content of the Overview and Scrutiny Annual Report 2015/16 be approved and referred to Council for consideration.
Supporting documents:
PDF 4 MB