|
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. *Beresford, P (2013) Beyond the usual suspects. Towards inclusive user involvement https://shapingourlives.org.uk/report/beyond-the-usual-suspects-research-report/ |
Get reflections like this straight to your inbox. I also share them on LinkedIn.
Last week, dear scrutineer, I was talking to Chairperson Alex, and she had been pondering how to demonstrate that her scrutiny committee had been effective. “Can you show me the dialogue?” I asked. What do you mean? She said. Well, if it’s helpful, this was the thinking that I shared with her. If your scrutiny work is being assessed, peer reviewed or, for better or worse, inspected, what kinds of things do you think the assessors, reviewers or, for better or worse, the inspectors, might be...
The other day I was speaking to Cabinet Member Kate and asked her if there were any scrutiny councillors that got her attention more than others. Sure, she said, some definitely have the credibility factor. Maybe I shouldn’t, but I listen more when they speak. Wanting to know more about this ‘credibility factor’ I asked her to explain it. Well, she said, It’s not any one single thing. I’m not sure I can describe it exactly. I suggested she pick some examples to see if we could make sense of...
As you know, dear scrutineer, I do like a metaphor, and I’d like you to try this one for size: local government scrutiny as an iceberg. The idea is a simple one, the public meetings are visible, but more than two thirds of the work is done below the surface and can’t be seen from outside This reflects a relational view of scrutiny where most of the effort is put into the informal working and relationship building that creates the conditions for the public meetings to be productive. Rather...