MEMORANDUMApril 2005

______

To:All Members of the County CouncilFrom:County Secretary's

All Chief OfficersDepartment Ask For: David Roberts

Ext:25562

My Ref:

Your Ref:

SCRUTINY CO-ORDINATION PANEL

6 APRIL 2005

MINUTES

ATTENDANCE

M V Bayes, K J Coleman M Downing, G D Game, S Quilty,

I H Laidlaw-Dickson (Chairman for this meeting), R Mays (substitute for T G M Kent)

1.ELECTION OF CHAIRMAN

AGREED:

I H Laidlaw-Dickson was appointed Chairman for the meeting.

2.MINUTES

AGREED:

The minutes of the Panel held on 16 September 2004 were confirmed as a correct record.

  1. SCOPING DOCUMENT

The Panel were invited to comment on the limited use of the scoping documents to date.

In response to Members' queries the Head of Scrutiny outlined the anticipated workflow for the use of the documents:

  1. Member raises issue for scrutiny (at an earlier Committee or between meetings.
/ Issues of concern are filled out in consultation with the Member.
Comments of officers added. (inc. comments on resources implications)
  1. Document reviewed at agenda setting meeting with Spokesmen
/ Proposed framework for scrutiny is developed
  1. Document considered at Scrutiny Committee meeting
/ Framework for scrutiny approved
Topic Group established (if required)
  1. Scrutiny completed by the Committee or Topic Group
/ Outcomes recorded

AGREED:

1. / That the continued use of scoping documents be supported as a means of improving the focus of scrutiny work.
2. / The use of scoping documents as the norm would not prevent urgent issues being scrutinised by Committees when circumstances did not allow the scoping process to be applied. / David Moses
  1. REVIEW OF THE MARCH CYCLE OF SCRUTINY COMMITTEES

The Panel discussed which items of scrutiny had work well at the March cycle of Committees (not including Resources which was to meet on 14 April).

AGREED:

1. / The visits undertaken by Members of Adult Care & Health prior to scrutiny at the Committee were found to be very useful and were recommended to other Committees. / David Moses
2. / The selection of witnesses was vital to successful scrutiny and needed further thought: for example, to attempt to hear the views of people who did not receive services. / David Moses
3. / Topic Groups were generally thought to be working well and were a good medium for scrutiny: enabling small groups of Members with interest in an issue to meet witnesses in an informal setting such as site visits. / David Moses

5.REVIEW OF SCRUTINY

The Head of Scrutiny described to the Panel (with the aid of diagrams on display) three possible structures for scrutiny which he had formulated following a review of structures in operation in other authorities across the country. Depending on the outcome of the elections it was possible that a report would be made to the 24 May County Council meeting on changes to the Constitution to effect changes to the scrutiny committee structure.

Arising from discussion of the role of the Joint PCT Health Scrutiny Committees it was noted that the Head of Scrutiny was in the process of development a set of protocols for joint health scrutiny. One of the aims of this was to clarify for all concerned the role and remit of the Joint PCT Committees.

It was suggested that a workshop should be arranged for all members of the Joint PCT Health Scrutiny Committees sometime after the County Council elections. It was suggested that this would be best held in the evening at County Hall.

During discussion on the various structures described, Members expressed the view that structures that departed too much from the status quo might entail a loss of focus and areas that were being scrutinised under the current structure might be neglected.

AGREED:

The Panel favoured the 'enhanced status quo' structure with:
  • an enhanced role for the Panel
  • separate Health Scrutiny Committee
  • Community Services combined with Resources
/ David Moses

Note:Diary Dates

  • 27 May 2005 - facilitated informal meeting of the Scrutiny Co-ordination Panel - 10 to 4 Ashbourne Room
  • 1 June 2005 - Scrutiny Seminar - 10 to 4 (it has not been possible to rearrange this owing to the number of Member induction events taking place across the calendar and the availability of the Centre for Public Scrutiny/ I&DeA consultants)
  • There will not be a meeting of the Panel on 28 April (provisional date)

Andrew Laycock

County Secretary

1

050406 scp minutes