I’ve sometimes been asked to give advice about scrutiny best practice. What I’ll say is sorry, I’m not sure there is any. Even good practice might be a bit of a stretch. Let me explain in case this sounds strange. The key thing here is context. I’ve seen enough scrutiny to know that everywhere is different. The places are different, the councils are different, the committees are different, the people are different, the rules are different and perhaps most important of all, the cultures are...
11 days ago • 2 min read
I know it’s hard to make time, but now it’s spring, are you giving any thought to how your committee will get started in the next municipal year? And have you considered having a conversation about how everyone might work together?Maybe it’s not a priority and I can understand that. You might have elections and inductions and then there is committee memberships, setting dates and work planning. A lot to do!And maybe there’s no obvious need to think about team development for the committee....
about 1 month ago • 2 min read
Councillor Bob doesn’t go to scrutiny committee pre-meetings. He says he’s happy to do his own thing and doesn’t need telling what to do. This is a problem for Vice Chair Jo, though, as she thinks that pre-meetings are really important. But what do you think? Let me tell you a little more. Jo thinks that it’s better if everyone goes to the pre-meeting. Her committee gets together for 30 minutes before the formal meeting to agree who is going to lead on what questions and to pick up anything...
about 1 month ago • 1 min read
Something that I know bothers Chairperson Alex is when papers come to her scrutiny committee with the recommendation ‘that the report be noted'. “What does that even mean?”, she says. “It feels like we are not even expected to read it, just say ‘oh yeah,’ there it is, thanks’.” She’s had some fun with the word ‘note’ though, suggesting it might stand for: Needs Only Ticking Exercise or Not Open To Engagement or No Objective Transparently Expressed And yes, it is a little unfair to those...
about 2 months ago • 2 min read
Here’s conversation I had with Vice Chair Jo last week about involving the public in scrutiny. We started by talking about the ‘usual suspects’ of course. Jo “Yes, it really bothers me when people say we have to go beyond the usual suspects in our scrutiny work. I mean, I think that’s all they notice from the outside, those same faces standing up and asking questions at committee meetings. I mean, don’t get me wrong, it can be hard hearing the same points over again, but you have to admire...
about 2 months ago • 2 min read
Showing you’ve made a difference is a tough one, isn’t it? Last week, thinking about next month’s Centre for Governance and Scrutiny (CfGS) conference, I was visited by the ghosts of workshops past. Back in 2018 I hosted a workshop on demonstrating the impact of scrutiny, maybe you were there? And, as I know this is something that plays on your mind from time to time, I thought it was worth revisiting.It’s always nice to hear about what’s already working for people and so we spent time making...
about 2 months ago • 1 min read
I’m looking forward to the Centre for Governance and Scrutiny Annual Conference next month and I hope you are too. Have you been before? Do you find these types of events useful? I certainly do. I think I’ve been to maybe seven or eight over the last 15 years. The first one held by the Centre for Public Scrutiny (as it was then) must have been around 2003, although I reckon my first one was 2010 - the legendary ‘Accountability Works’ event at the historic Brewery venue near the Barbican in...
2 months ago • 1 min read
“Listen to the whispers and you won’t have to hear the screams.” This Native American proverb was mentioned in a newspaper article about gossip that I read recently. It reminded me of scrutiny of course! For ‘whispers’ think of those examples of things that you and your committee members raise from time to time, things heard in the community or from casework. Sometimes these things are dismissed as ‘mere anecdotes’ but I prefer the term ‘anecdata’ as they are indeed a form of data. Down...
2 months ago • 1 min read
“What’s the secret of a good scrutiny recommendation?” Chairperson Alex asked me this the other day and we spent a little time trying to work it out over a coffee. It’s not so much, Alex tells me, that recommendations from scrutiny inquiries don’t get accepted, they nearly always do, it’s more that not much seems to happen as a result. The response that annoys Alex the most is ‘accepted in principle’. For Alex, this often means: “Sounds like a good idea but we’re not going to do anything as...
3 months ago • 2 min read
On your website it says that scrutiny’s purpose is ‘holding decision makers to account’. But is it clear to you what this actually means? If you were writing an annual report, could you confidently say scrutiny 'held the executive to account’ or ‘ensured accountability’? And how might you back that up? OK, so perhaps it doesn’t worry you too much. After all, everyone knows what accountability means, right? Well, maybe. Let’s unpack it a little and see if we are on a similar page. We can start...
3 months ago • 1 min read