The usual suspects


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 anyone who doesn’t get put off by the bureaucracy of it all, right?

Me “Yeah, I get that, I’ve heard people being described as ‘experienced activists’ instead* which fits I think. I have a friend Alex, who’s a chair, who always takes time to talk to anyone who comes to ask a question. He tells me he’s learnt a lot about how scrutiny really works that way.


Jo “Ah, nice. But it isn’t just that. We’ve done so many things over the years to get people involved and some have worked really well. I wish people would focus on that more.


Me “Like what?


Jo “Well, we always like to get out and meet people when we do task and finish. We’ve been to youth clubs, carers’ centres, we even went to the high street with clip boards and grabbed people! And folks will always talk to you if it’s an issue they’re already worried about.


Me “I do wonder if a lot of stuff gets forgotten. You must have done so much over the years?


Jo “Sure. You’d probably have to ask some of the organisations we work with when we set things up. People like Age Concern and Shelter probably have a better handle on what we’ve done in the past than we have!


Me “Sounds like working with these outside bodies has helped then?


Jo “Oh it definitely has. I mean otherwise you are just sending out invitations into the ether. I mean, it helps so much to have organisations on your side that people know and trust, that they have a connection with. I do try and keep those relationships going if I can, even if it’s just grabbing someone after a meeting.


Me “And do you get any other help?


Jo “We had a fantastic community engagement team that we were able to work with and youth workers when we had them. You can still usually find someone that has engagement in their role, even if you have to look a bit harder these days.


Me “Ah, I’m guessing you don’t have everything you need in the support team, so you have to be creative?


Jo “That’s right. And we try not to forget that our councillors have a lot of ongoing contacts with residents and some of that is really helpful. Although, now I think of it, we could do more to collect that.


But yeah, it’s not always easy, getting people involved, which is why I’m grateful for those people who will come and talk to us, even if my colleagues don’t always see it exactly the same way. Experienced activist did you say?


Me “Yes.


Jo “I think I’ll use that. Thanks. Sorry, I’ve got a meeting…


*Beresford, P (2013) Beyond the usual suspects. Towards inclusive user involvement https://shapingourlives.org.uk/report/beyond-the-usual-suspects-research-report/

Dear scrutineer,

Get reflections like this straight to your inbox. I also share them on LinkedIn.

Read more from Dear scrutineer,

It’s the 31st October and the scrutiny committee are on their annual Halloween trick or treat night out. Let's see how it goes. First off, you’ve got to admire their costumes. You can see all sorts of scrutiny ghouls. There is death by PowerPoint, the ‘devil in the detail’, the monster agenda, a zombie question and one, dressed in a sheet with holes cut for eyes, has come as the ghost of the committee system. There is even Pennywise the clown. Maybe for budget scrutiny I guess. Spooky! Scary!...

“What’s the best structure for scrutiny? And why is it the single committee system?” This is what Chairperson Alex said to me last week and, although she was half joking, I think I agree with her. So, if you are looking to review your scrutiny arrangements, involved in creating a new council or just wondering if your structure is the right one, see if my thinking stacks up for you. I’d say, the single committee system is best for scrutiny because: It’s more strategic. A single committee gets...

How does scrutiny actually make a difference? What are the exact mechanisms through which scrutiny influences the executive? It’s a tricky topic but here are ten suggestions. See if they ring true for you. I’m looking at this from a realist perspective. This is an approach that encourages us to identify the social mechanisms that might explain how a particular programme might achieve its outcomes. Take the example of CCTV in car parks, discussed by Pawson and Tilley in their book Realistic...