Introduction
The Local Government Act (2000) introduced a new political governance system for councils in England and Wales, requiring them to have a separate ‘executive’ in the form of a leader, or elected mayor, and cabinet. To provide a counterweight to this, the Act also introduced the concept of ‘overview and scrutiny,’ whereby every council with an executive governance structure is required to have an overview and scrutiny committee. This enables the rest of the council to scrutinise the decisions and policies of the executive, issuing reports and recommendations informed by evidence and understanding of the needs of local communities.
Then, the Localism Act (2011) gave councils the option of converting to a committee system form of governance. Councils that have chosen this option are not required to have a separate overview and scrutiny committee, although they may choose to do so. It is still expected that scrutiny will take place within committees to identify where improvements need to be made, and arrangements for scrutiny of community safety partnerships and health are still required.
This has been supplemented by statutory guidance on overview and scrutiny, which is intended to ensure that local authorities are aware of the purpose of overview and scrutiny and how to conduct it effectively. Section 1 of the guidance includes a number of policies and practices authorities should adopt or should consider adopting when deciding how to conduct their overview and scrutiny functions.
Whichever governance system a council operates, scrutiny is an essential part of ensuring that local government remains transparent, accountable, and open– resulting in improved public policies, services and outcomes.
As a councillor, you have been elected by your local community because they believe that you will represent them, and ensure that the council provides the services they need, to the standard they expect. One of your primary roles in overview and scrutiny is providing constructive challenge to achieve better outcomes for residents. Scrutiny achieves this by questioning cabinet or committee members, officers, and other council partners to gain further knowledge around an issue and make effective, evidenced-based recommendations.
Your role also provides an important opportunity for all councillors to be involved in policy development as part of the ‘overview’ aspect of overview and scrutiny and to enable councillors to ensure the interests of their communities are considered.
Whether or not you are directly involved in the scrutiny function, it is important that you understand how scrutiny works and the benefits that it can bring. This workbook will:
- explain what scrutiny is and how it works in practice.
- describe the scrutiny review process.
- look at who is involved in scrutiny.
- give an overview of useful skills for carrying out scrutiny.
Throughout this workbook you will encounter different types of information, and suggested actions, indicated by the symbols shown below:
Guidance
– this icon indicates guidance such as definitions, quotations and research
Challenges
– this icon indicates questions asking you to reflect on your role or approach
Case studies
– this icon indicates examples of approaches used in different settings
Hints and tips
– this icon indicates best practice advice
Useful links
– this icon indicates sources of additional information
Powers of scrutiny
The principal power of a scrutiny committee is to influence the policies and decisions made by the council and other organisations involved in delivering public services. The scrutiny committee gathers evidence on issues affecting local people and makes recommendations based on its findings.
Scrutiny has statutory powers to scrutinise decisions the executive is planning to take, those it is planning to implement, and those that have already been taken / implemented.
When undertaking scrutiny, it is important to think about not only scrutiny’s legal powers but also about how to build a positive working relationship with those who are the subject of scrutiny’s recommendations. This ensures a much higher chance of scrutiny’s recommendations being implemented.
Generally, a scrutiny committee has the legal power to require that:
- information relating to business transacted at decision-making meetings, individual councillor decisions, or decisions delegated to officers under executive arrangements, is made available in the form of written reports to enable their scrutiny, and to require attendance by relevant officers and cabinet members at committee meetings
- the cabinet responds to its recommendations within a set timeframe.
Scrutiny also has powers relating to certain external partners.
Details of several topic-specific guides which might be of relevance to you in your role are listed at the end of this workbook.
More information can be found on the Centre for Governance and Scrutiny (CfGS) website.
Effective scrutiny
For scrutiny to be effective it needs to act and be seen as a ‘critical friend,’ identifying where decisions could be improved and how to prevent mistakes being made or repeated. Scrutiny is, by its nature, political; that is, it is driven by politicians whose insights are a fundamental part of scrutiny’s work to review decisions which are themselves political and may be politically contentious. However, the focus should be on forward thinking and enabling positive outcomes, rather than apportioning blame and focusing on the negatives or political point-scoring. The challenge for you, as a scrutiny councillor, is to use your political skills and understanding of the needs of local people to shape the discussions, while not acting in a party-political manner or using the discussions to further party-political objectives.
More information can be found in the Good Scrutiny Guide published by the Centre for Governance and Scrutiny.
Keeping your focus on this will help to foster positive and constructive relationships between scrutiny, the executive and officers.
Successful scrutiny relies on the following conditions:
- while everyone in a council has a role to play in creating an environment conducive to effective scrutiny, the process should be led and owned by councillors.
Establishing a strong organisational culture
(extracted from the statutory guidance on overview and scrutiny in local and combined authorities, paragraphs 11a, b, c, d, j)
Local and combined authorities can establish a strong organisational culture by:
- recognising scrutiny’s legal and democratic legitimacy
- ensuring that all councillors and officers recognise and appreciate the importance and legitimacy the scrutiny function is afforded by the law – it was created to act as a check and balance on the executive and is a statutory requirement for all authorities operating executive arrangements and for combined authorities.
Councillors have a unique legitimacy derived from their being democratically elected. The insights that they can bring by having this close connection to local people are part of what gives scrutiny its value. These insights include:
- identifying a clear role and focus
- local and combined authorities should take steps to ensure scrutiny has a clear role and focus within the organisation, that is, a niche within which it can clearly demonstrate it adds value – therefore, prioritisation is necessary to ensure the scrutiny function concentrates on delivering work that is of genuine value and relevance to the work of the wider organisation – this is one of the most challenging parts of scrutiny, and a critical element to get right if it is to be recognised as a strategic function of the local or combined authority
- local and combined authorities should ensure a clear division of responsibilities between the scrutiny function and the audit function – while it is appropriate for scrutiny to pay due regard to the authority’s financial position, this will need to happen in the context of the formal audit role – the authority’s Section 151 officer should advise scrutiny on how to manage this dynamic
- while scrutiny has no role in the investigation or oversight of the authority’s whistleblowing arrangements, the findings of independent whistleblowing investigations might be of interest to scrutiny committees as they consider their wider implications– councillors should always follow their local or combined authority’s constitution and associated monitoring officers' directions on the matter (see further guidance on whistleblowing)
- ensuring early and regular engagement between the executive and scrutiny
- local and combined authorities should ensure early and regular discussions take place between scrutiny and the executive, especially regarding the latter’s future work programme
- local and combined authorities should, though, be mindful of their distinct roles, in particular:
- the executive should not try to exercise control over the work of the scrutiny committee – this could be direct, for example, by purporting to ‘order’ scrutiny to look at, or not look at, certain issues, or indirect, for example, through the use of the whip or as a tool of political patronage, and the committee itself should remember its statutory purpose when carrying out its work– all councillors and officers should consider the role the scrutiny committee plays to be that of a ‘critical friend’ not a de facto ‘opposition’ –scrutiny chairs have a particular role to play in establishing the profile and nature of their committee (see chapter 4)
- the chair of the scrutiny committee should determine the nature and extent of an executive member’s participation in a scrutiny committee meeting, and in any informal scrutiny task group meeting
- managing disagreement
- effective scrutiny involves looking at issues that can be politically contentious – it is, therefore, inevitable that, at times, an executive will disagree with the findings or recommendations of a scrutiny committee
- it is the job of both the executive and scrutiny to work together to reduce the risk of this happening, and local and combined authorities should take steps to predict, identify and act on disagreement
- ensuring scrutiny members are supported in having an independent mindset
- formal committee meetings provide a vital opportunity for scrutiny members to question the executive and officers. Inevitably, some committee members will come from the same political party as a member they are scrutinising and might well have a long-standing personal, or familial, relationship with them
- scrutiny members should bear in mind, however, that adopting an independent mind-set is fundamental to carrying out their work effectively– in practice, this is likely to require scrutiny chairs working proactively to identify any potentially contentious issues and plan how to manage them.
In addition, the process of scrutiny can be aided by:
Effective work programming
Work programming is the planning stage of scrutiny, where subjects for detailed consideration are identified. It is most effective when there are clear criteria for the selection of subjects and agenda items. This is covered in more detail later in the workbook.
Positive attitude of the council executive and council officers
Scrutiny works well when the council’s executive and officers view it in a positive light and as an opportunity to improve council performance. Scrutiny’s effectiveness will be reduced if the executive experiences it as aggressively critical, which will leadto defensive behaviour and make it difficult for scrutiny to influence change.
Similarly, scrutiny will be more effective where council officers provide information and assistance proactively and when required.
What is effective scrutiny?
Fundamentally, all scrutiny work must add value– it must make a positive contribution to the lives of local people and scrutiny committee members must be veryclear about how their work will do this. When scrutiny is conducted properly it is constructive and focuses on the priorities of local people, which feeds into the priorities of the council and its partners.
Good scrutiny:
- tackles priority issues of direct relevance to local people
- tackles issues where, through the unique perspective ofcouncillors, it can add the most value.
- is informed by high quality evidence.
- is about talking to a wide range of people, drawing them together and building consensus.
- is about challenging the accepted ways of doing things and acting as a champion for developing a culture of improvement in the local area.
Adding value
The purpose of scrutiny is to improve the lives of local people through improved public services. It is important to be able to demonstrate that scrutiny work adds value and makes a difference to local people.
A scrutiny review is successful if it fulfils one or more of the following conditions:
- it meets the objectives set out by the scrutiny committee.
- feedback from the public shows that they think there has been the service improvement they desired.
- the work has helped to achieve corporate or partnership priorities.
- there is a return on investment, demonstrating scrutiny’s impact and outcomes in financial terms.
The impact scrutiny has can be measured in two ways:
- high-quality recommendations are accepted and implemented by the executive
- understanding how those recommendations lead to positive outcomes for local people.
The COVID Step Back Review
Councillor David Andrews – Chairman of Overview and Scrutiny, Hertfordshire County Council
The COVID Step Back Review was an opportunity to scrutinise Hertfordshire’s response to the pandemic. The prospect of trying to unpick one of the most impactful events in modern history provided several challenges, with the most obvious being scale. We based our approach to this scrutiny on a Centre for Governance and Scrutiny webinar hosted in May 2020 which advised scrutineers to concentrate on a key service or service to ensure much more focus and stronger recommendations.
My vice chairmen and I agreed to narrow our focus to examine how the county council’s services have responded to COVID-19, specifically adult care services and the council’s resources directorate which includes both finance and communications.
Our key lines of enquiry for this scrutiny were to identify lessons learned and establish how innovations developed as part of the council’s response to the pandemic can be adapted to improve services. We conducted the review which enabled our voluntary sector colleagues to participate fully. It also meant we could hear from our director of public health around his other pressing commitments.
Being able to hold these meetings throughout the pandemic has ensured that the quality of our scrutiny has not suffered despite the significant changes to our working practices.
Over a one-day scrutiny, five county councillors heard evidence from officers from local authorities, the chair of the Community Reassurance Cell of the Local Resilience Forum and chief executives from community and voluntary sector organisations. The latter had been instrumental in ensuring services were maintained to our most vulnerable residents. One commented:
“It was an honour to be asked to present evidence to this important review and to contribute to the report the impact that Hertfordshire charities made working together as part of Operation Sustain should not be underestimated.” Simon Aulton, Chief Executive Officer – Community Action Dacorum
Councillors recognised that services and staff continued to work in challenging circumstances. They were particularly impressed with the quality of partnership working and identified some notable innovations. Members commended that the approach taken by the authority in its work with the voluntary and community and social enterprise (VCSE) sector was based on trust and mutual respect and was instrumental in maintaining vital services to our most vulnerable residents.
Councillors were also impressed by the way officers redesigned services and how approaches were modified in real time. What I noted most during the review were the formidable challenges associated with ensuring the wellbeing of our most vulnerable residents. I was impressed with the efforts, pace and adaptability shown by all our witnesses.
Officers of local authorities and the NHS have worked determinedly to safeguard residents and the enormous effort and achievements of the voluntary sector was impressive to hear.
The review made five recommendations all of which are being implemented by the authority and its partners:
- that the authority maintains and builds on existing and new partnerships for agile working and clear evidence of this is shared at Impact of Scrutiny Advisory Committee
- that adult care services, children’s services and public health look at creating opportunities for greater joint working with the community and voluntary sector; in addition, adult care services, children’s services and public health reviewexisting funding allocation processes to engender co-operation rather than competition in the voluntary and community and social enterprise (VCSE) sector
- that the authority revisits its resilience planning in light of the pandemic to prepare for future sustained emergencies and clear evidence of this is shared at Impact of Scrutiny Advisory Committee (ISAC)
- that the council identifies how the innovative and more agile practices developed during the pandemic can be built into Shaping Our Future and specific service initiatives
- that Hertfordshire County Council (HCC) ensures that the Communication Strategy maintains multiple approaches to reach all residents so that no group is left behind or marginalised.
Evidence was presented at the Impact of Scrutiny Advisory Committee (ISAC) six months after the review.
Further reading:Scrutiny frontiers 2020/21 – experiences from the scrutiny frontline | Centre for Governance and Scrutiny (CfGS)
Being cost-effective
Scrutiny committees need to work effectively with limited resources. They can do this by:
carrying out work more efficiently – for example, holding single-topic committee meetings, so that a group of councillors can speak to a large number of witnesses in a round-table format
targeted and effective work programming – having processes in place to plan and prioritise effectively so that scrutiny’s work adds value– this will better enable resources to be planned and used more cost-effectively and to time reviews to be to achieve greatest impact
providing officer support more efficiently – for example, by thinking more carefully about what support scrutiny committee members want and need from officers and what skillsets officers have and require
circulating information – providing information to councillors prior to meetings – councillors and officers can work together to limit the volume of material councillors are sent to material that is relevant and useful to them.