Agenda and minutes

To elect a Chair for the meeting.

It was moved, seconded and agreed that Councillor Awale Olad be elected chair for the meeting.

RESOLVED –

THAT Councillor Awale Olad be elected chair for the meeting.

There were none.

There were none.

There were none.

There were none.

There were none.

Joint Chairs of Scrutiny Committee

1.         To consider the Leader’s Annual Statement to Council at a meeting held shortly after the Statement is given (with the Leader’s Annual Statement being usually delivered at the first Council meeting after the annual meeting) and any other relevant cross-cutting business of the Cabinet, or business deemed relevant by the advice of the Chief Executive;

2.    To consider, in particular, areas and a programme of joint working by the scrutiny committees (see Part 3 of the Constitution) with the power, for the purposes of individual projects, of agreeing to vary terms of reference between the committees (subject always to statutory provisions) to facilitate joint and cross-cutting scrutiny working; and

3.      To agree the allocation of scrutiny panels between scrutiny committees for the forthcoming year based on the council’s agreed priorities within existing resources.

RESOLVED –

THAT the following terms of reference be noted

Joint Chairs of Scrutiny Committee

1.         To consider the Leader’s Annual Statement to Council at a meeting held shortly after the Statement is given (with the Leader’s Annual Statement being usually delivered at the first Council meeting after the annual meeting) and any other relevant cross-cutting business of the Cabinet, or business deemed relevant by the advice of the Chief Executive;

2.    To consider, in particular, areas and a programme of joint working by the scrutiny committees (see Part 3 of the Constitution) with the power, for the purposes of individual projects, of agreeing to vary terms of reference between the committees (subject always to statutory provisions) to facilitate joint and cross-cutting scrutiny working; and

3.      To agree the allocation of scrutiny panels between scrutiny committees for the forthcoming year based on the council’s agreed priorities within existing resources.

To consider the minutes of the meeting held on 23^rd September 2015

RESOLVED –

THAT the minutes of the meeting held on 23^rd September 2015 be agreed and signed by the Chair as a correct record.

Report of the Assistant Director, Strategy and Change.

On 16 November 2015, Council agreed to broaden the remit of the Joint Chairs of Scrutiny Committee (‘the Committee’), to include consideration of cross cutting scrutiny matters and joint working.  This amended remit recognises the need for greater co-ordination between committees, particularly given the tight squeeze on council resources.  The Committee is asked to advise on the following matters at its meeting:

·         Whether to develop a shared scrutiny work programme with the assistance of the Centre for Public Scrutiny;

·         What the priority cross cutting scrutiny matters are for 2016/17;

·         How scrutiny panels should be allocated and operate moving forward;

·         How scrutiny members could hold the administration to account more effectively;

·         How scrutiny meetings could be changed to operate more efficiently; and

·         Whether there are comments on the draft guidance for Chairs in Appendix C.

Following the advice of the Committee, work will be taken forward to implement and put in place processes as appropriate.

Consideration was given to the report of the Assistant Director, Strategy Change.

Rachel Stopard, Deputy Chief Executive (Transformation and Partnerships)   took members through the report highlighting that the revised terms of reference of the Joint Chairs of Scrutiny Committee (the scrutiny committee) allowed the scrutiny committee to consider cross cutting scrutiny matters; joint working; co-ordination between the scrutiny committees; and how scrutiny panels should be allocated and operate for the future.

Rachel Stopard informed the meeting that a new appendix B had been circulated that provided a full list of the scrutiny panels (24 in total) that had been taken forward since 2010 by the respective scrutiny committees.

Rachel Stopard and Anne Rasmussen, Committee Services Manager, gave the following key responses to Members questions:

·         The report was not proposing any structural change to the current scrutiny arrangements that were in place, rather it sought to ensure that best practice was shared and a more consistent approach to supporting the scrutiny process where put in place.

·         The scrutiny process would benefit from developing a shared sense of partnership with the administration especially in relation to policy development. Cabinet members may want to consider proposing matters that could be looked into by scrutiny committees to help in taking this shared agenda forward.

·         As set out in the guidance for scrutiny chairs attached at Appendix C to the report, scrutiny committees had the power to make references to Cabinet when considering Cabinet reports ahead of decision making. References should add value and could include a recommendation to Cabinet for consideration. The power to make recommendations to Cabinet not part of a reference was also set out in the guidance, however it was noted that this practice had not been historically been used at Camden and was not always the best option. The better approach was to ensure that a scrutiny committee considered an issue well in advance of when the final report was to be considered, so any alternative proposals could be fully considered and covered in the final report. 

The scrutiny committee then went through the respective proposals outlined in the report.

Shared scrutiny work programme and identifying priority cross cutting scrutiny matters

The scrutiny committee felt that they were not yet in a position to develop a shared scrutiny work programme and identifying cross cutting scrutiny matters, and that they would benefit from working with the Centre for Public Scrutiny (CfPS) to take these issues forward. Once a shared scrutiny work programme and cross cutting scrutiny matters had been developed, then these would be forwarded to the respective scrutiny committees for them to endorse. Also further work should be undertaken regarding whether the scrutiny committee should play a bigger role in managing these issues, which could include whether cross cutting scrutiny’s reviews should report directly to this scrutiny committee.

ACTION BY: Assistant Director, Strategy and Change (LR)

It was noted that a number of scrutiny committees undertook a statutory overseeing role on behalf of the authority and officers, along  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

There were none.