Contact your Parish Council

Interview

                              Summary

Improvements to Scrutiny

Cabinet Members

·         Pre-decision scrutiny is not being used effectively;

·         There is a natural defensiveness over call-in, members cannot impact decisions effectively with call-in;

·         Scrutiny has done it’s job and is now stale, as a result there is a lack of interest in scrutiny;

·         The principles of scrutiny as a system of checks and balances is good, but it is not being used effectively;

·         The value of cross-party input is before the decision is made through pre-decision scrutiny, not once the decision has been made through call-in;

·         Members need to have a clearer understanding of the role of scrutiny in order to really use it effectively;

·         Scrutiny is being misused too often to score political points, and being overshadowed by political agenda;

·         Effective pre-scrutiny can be used to better engage members

·         Programme of training to educate members on the role of scrutiny and the tools available for members to influence decisions

·         Members need to be proactive – it is up to members to add key decisions to the agenda not the Cabinet member;

·         Cross party collaboration between Cabinet and Scrutiny would provide better value to the decision makers - but is it for Cabinet to lead the scrutiny agenda?

·          Have one committee to scrutinise cabinet decisions and one committee to provide the overview;

·         Scrutiny is member driven should be proactive, rethink the format of meetings, bring back Officers and external people;

Members

·         Too much focus on scrutiny and not enough overview;

·         Scrutiny chairmen are not being held to account – they need to have a clear understanding of their role;

·         Pre-scrutiny meetings hold too much influence members are ‘dragged’ along and therefore challenge is difficult;

·         Scrutiny reports have not impact, as a result members feel as though they have not been involved or had any influence over decision making;

·         There should be a more proactive and effective use of pre-decision scrutiny and should not be Cabinet led;

·         Chairmanship should not be the same as the administration;

·         Quality of chairmanship should be improved;

·         Better programmed training for new members to provide better induction and better continuous professional development;

·         There needs to be improved training over the role of scrutiny;

Senior Officers

·         Pre-decision scrutiny is the most effective way to influence decision making and it is not being used effectively;

·         Scrutiny is not having the right impact – decisions are not being influenced / changed;

·         Improve the appetite for pre-decision scrutiny to allow the Committee to actually influence decisions – and choose the right decisions;

·         Reduce to one scrutiny committee – with support from individual working groups – to allow adequate overview and scrutiny;

·         Re-consider the format of meetings, and adopt more innovate and flexible Officer reports and interviews;

·         Reduce scrutiny from 3 committees to one;

·         Improve collaboration between Cabinet and scrutiny

·         Improve the accountability of scrutiny recommendations and implement a system to capture and recommendations and report on the actions taken;

·         Improve the understanding and quality of the chairmanship;

·         Members should be proactive to be involved in decision before they are made;

Question

Thinking about the present Cabinet and Leader System what do you like and/or dislike?

How could the present system be improved

Key Points

Liked:

·   Speed of decision making

·   Ability to be decisive

·   Allows clear strategic direction

·   Efficiency of decision making

Dislike:

·    Lack of transparency

·     Not enough members involved in decision making

·    Undemocratic

·    Disempowerment of ward councillors and their residents

Greater pre-decision involvement

More input from Members

More use of the scrutiny system

Better forward planning of decision making

More consultation