CHILTERN DISTRICT COUNCIL

MINUTES of the Meeting of the SCRUTINY COMMITTEE

held on 17 JULY 2001

APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE were received from Councillor Miss P A Appleby

IN ATTENDANCE Councillors D W Phillips, N M Rose and Mrs E P Stacey

14.     MINUTES

The Minutes of the meetings of the Committee held on 22 June 2001and 10 July 2001, copies of which had been previously circulated, were signed by the Chairman as correct records.

Note: Councillor J E Ford entered the meeting at 6.38pm.

15.     DECLARATION OF INTERESTS

     None were declared

16.     CONSIDERATION OF THE FORWARD PLAN OF THE EXECUTIVE

Copies of the Forward Plan were tabled at the meeting.  The plan had been prepared until November 2001 and the Chief Executive highlighted some of the potential decisions that would need to be looked at when formulating the Committees work programme.

     Members requested that any changes made to the Forward Plan were highlighted to help identify the changes.

     RESOLVED -

     That the Forward Plan be noted.

17.     SCRUTINY WORK PROGRAMME

A number of factors would determine the work programme of the Committee. These would be a mixture of items referred by full Council and those the Committee chose itself which were then agreed by Council. Members were cautioned to proceed with care and to take into consideration the workload on both Members and existing senior staff.  Some policy support, for example on programming and scoping reviews, would be given.  This Committee did not have officers dedicated specifically to Scrutiny work.

The review process could be undertaken in a number of ways, as set out in the report, and other parties could be invited to assist the Committee. The Best Value Reviews would be ongoing and involve staff over a five year period and the work instigated by this Committee must not duplicate that undertaken by Best Value Reviews.

Members were encouraged to develop a draft work programme, which would need to be reviewed as the year progressed.  Officers would submit a work programme for the following year to the next meeting. It was also agreed that Members be nominated to undertake scoping exercises for reviews that would be undertaken in the next six months.

Members looked at the mandatory elements of their programme, i.e. the development of the budget and policy framework, which would be led by the Executive but approved by full Council only after the Scrutiny Committee had been formally consulted. It was noted that the policy framework included the following plans and strategies:-

Members then discussed the items that they would like to review, but agreed that the timetable must not be made too full in the first instance so as to allow changes to be made as the year progressed.

Optional items -

Members discussed the way reviews could be undertaken and, as in the case of a Best Value Review, each topic/project could be taken by three people with the ability to co-opt others. The Committee would take responsibility for the final report.

As it was likely that the Scrutiny Sub-Committee would be charged with the conduct of many of these reviews, it was then agreed that the Sub-Committee consider the list of items, both mandatory and optional and report back to the Committee with their recommendations.

     RESOLVED -

Note: Councillor N M Rose left the meeting at 7.03pm.

18.     REPORT OF THE CHAIRMAN

This Committee had a wide remit and the Chairman recommended that a set of procedures should

be drawn up.

Members agreed that a group should be formed to produce a draft procedure. This group to consist of the Chairman, both Vice Chairmen and two other Members of the Committee. The group would be cross party and Councillor Lacey agreed to join.

Members had undergone some general training and agreed that more focused training would be welcomed. Members would like training on the budget and this would be arranged when the staffing in Corporate Services Department was back to full compliment.

     Note: Councillor D G Meacock left the meeting at 7.40pm.

19.     DECLARATION OF PREJUDICIAL INTERESTS

The necessary statutory instruments had now been received to fully adopt the Leader and Executive arrangements. The Head of Legal Services had carried out an audit to establish whether any amendment to the Council's Constitution would be required.

The Head of Legal Services informed Members that a provision in one of the statutory instruments restricted Members from speaking, voting or remaining in a meeting of the Scrutiny Committee, or one of its sub-committees, where they had a 'prejudicial interest'.

Members would be obliged to declare a prejudicial interest if the matter under consideration related to a decision made or an action taken by another committee or sub-committee of the Council of which they were a member.

If a Member with a prejudicial interest wanted to attend a Scrutiny Committee meeting and speak and/or vote, dispensation could be given by the Secretary of State. Further, the Proper Officer was required to maintain a register of prejudicial interests, which would be open to inspection by all members.

Members discussed the implications, especially with regard to the Best Value review of Planning and requested that the Head of Legal Services apply to the Secretary of State to obtain dispensations for any members involved in the conduct of Best Value Reviews, who might have their contributions restricted by virtue of having a prejudicial interest.  

RESOLVED –

The meeting ended at 7.55pm.