Contact: David Hinxman, Head of Democratic Services; ext: 7339,

e-mail: [email protected]

1. SCRUTINY WORKING GROUPS - PROPORTIONALITY

1.1 The Council asked for the issue of whether or not the Scrutiny Working Groups should be proportionate to be considered further.

1.2 The cross-party members' group which led the development of the County Council's scrutiny function had taken the view that, the groups would be set up as and when required by inviting particular members to take part because of their personal skills, expertise and experience. Applying proportionality in every case, therefore, could be a limiting factor although any members with an interest could be invited to contribute, albeit not necessarily as a formal member of the working group. Members of all the political groups could take part, therefore, whether or not the working groups are proportionate given the flexibility inherent in their style of operation. The Policy Review Committee (PRC) which would consider each working group's final report would be proportionate and minority views, regardless of political group, would be the subject of a separate report as sometime happens with Parliamentary Select Committees.

1.3 The operating protocol approved by the Governance Committee in September 2006 says that the working groups will be established on a proportionate basis as far as reasonably practicable. This reflects that, when Best Value work was done under that regime, member involvement was usually by between three and five members formally appointed to the task with representation across the political groups. The proposal put before the Council at its previous meeting sought to mirror those successful arrangements and, by including an officer in the working group membership who will support and facilitate each group's proceedings, avoid the need for the Council to pass a unanimous resolution that the working groups shall not be subject to the statutory proportionality rules.

1.4 In the context of the County Council's current composition (46:28:4) to apply proportionality and give each of the political groups an entitlement to a place on every working group would require a minimum working group size of 11 (6:4:1). It is at this number that the Labour Group becomes entitled to one place.

1.5 Whilst there may be occasions when a full PRC (12 members allocated on a proportional basis) conducts a review itself, the expectation has always been that the working groups will be significantly smaller than that as was the case successfully during the Best Value regime.

1.6 Applying proportionality to the working groups, therefore, is still not recommended. However, the protocol could be revised to state unequivocally that the working groups should not normally comprise less than three elected members of whom at least one shall be selected from the largest minority group; or more than six elected members of whom at least two shall be selected from the largest minority group. Where the second minority group wished to nominate, then that nomination - whether for a working group of 3,4,5 or 6 elected members- would be accepted. The PRC which receives the working groups' reports of scrutiny reviews will always be proportionate in accordance with legal requirements unless and until the Council unanimously resolves that proportionality rules shall not apply to its PRCs.

2. SCHOOL PERFORMANCE MONITORING

2.1 The Council will recall concerns expressed at its previous meeting about the monitoring of schools' performance following the Democratic Review. As he alluded at that meeting, the Executive Member with Special Responsibility for Education plans to keep the minority group education spokespersons and local members informed of current topics and issues relating to school performance by hosting a series of informal briefings each year. Where the Executive Member considers that schools would benefit, he would set up ad hoc informal groups of elected members and others to problem solve or offer support. Membership of such groups would be considered on the merits of each case taking into account members' experience and expertise and with a commitment to minority group participation as described in paragraph 1.6 above.

2.2 The scrutiny function would have access to annual reports monitoring the work of the School Improvement service written for the Executive member to enable them to keep an overview on the work.

2.3.1 The HATs will receive information and annual briefings on the work with Children and Young People in their area, including agreed data about local schools, which will enable them to perform the function on monitoring the local effectiveness of the services provided for them.

RECOMMENDATION:

a) That scrutiny working groups be established with a minimum of three County Councillors of whom at least one shall be a Liberal Democrat, or a maximum of six County Councillors of whom at least two shall be Liberal Democrats and that, where the second minority group wishes to nominate, that nomination - whether for a working group of 3,4,5 or 6 elected members- would be accepted;

b) That the Policy Review Committees operating protocol approved by the Governance Committee in September 2006 be revised accordingly.:

c) That the Executive Member with Special Responsibility for Education's plans for keeping members informed about schools' performance be welcomed and that, when required, ad hoc informal groups of elected members and others be appointed on the basis set out in (a) above, led by the Executive Member with Special Responsibility for Education.

Section 100 D - Local Government Act 1972 - background papers

The following documents disclose facts or matters on which this report, or an important part of it, is based and has been relied upon to a material extent in the preparation of this report.

NB the list excludes:

1 Published works.

2 Documents which disclosure exempt or confidential information as defined in the Act.