Agenda and minutes

The Chairman welcomed Members and Co?opted Members of the Committee to their first meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee since its reconfiguration.  On behalf of the Committee, he also welcomed Mr Andrew Woodhead, Chief Executive of the Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital.

To note the attendance at this meeting of any duly appointed Reserve Members.

Reserve Members may attend meetings:-

(i)                 to take the place of an ordinary Member for whom they are a reserve;

(ii)               where the ordinary Member will be absent for the whole of the meeting; and

(iii)             the meeting notes at the start of the meeting at the item ‘Reserves’ that the Reserve Member is or will be attending as a reserve;

(iv)              if a Reserve Member whose intention to attend has been noted arrives after the commencement of the meeting, then that Reserve Member can only act as a Member from the start of the next item of business on the agenda after his/her arrival.

RESOLVED:  To note the attendance at this meeting of the following duly appointed Reserve Members:-

To receive declarations of personal or prejudicial interests, arising from business to be transacted at this meeting, from:

(a)               all Members of the Committee, Sub Committee, Panel or Forum;

(b)               all other Members present in any part of the room or chamber.

RESOLVED:  To note that the following interests were declared:

Agenda item 12 - Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital (RNOH) – Summary of application to become an NHS Foundation Trust

(i)                   Councillor Dinesh Solanki declared a personal interest in that his relative was in receipt of medical treatment at the Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital.

(ii)                 During discussion on this item, Councillor Bill Stephenson declared a personal interest in that the University College London (UCL) employed him.

Accordingly, both Members would remain in the room whilst the matter was considered and voted upon.

To consider whether any of the items listed on the agenda should be considered with the press and public excluded on the grounds that it is thought likely, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted, that there would be disclosure of confidential information in breach of an obligation of confidence or of exempt information as defined in Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972.

RESOLVED:  That all items be considered with the press and public present.

RESOLVED:  That (1) the minutes of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee’s Ordinary meeting held on 24 April 2007, the Special meeting held on 14 May 2007, the Special meeting held on 12 June 2007, the Ordinary meeting held on 10 July and the Special meeting held on 12 July 2007 (subject to the inclusion of Mrs J Rammelt as being marked present at the meeting); and

(2)  the minutes of the Adult Health and Social Care Scrutiny Sub-Committee meetings held on 20 March and 18 April 2007, the Safer and Stronger Scrutiny Sub-Committee meeting held on 23 January 2007, the Children and Young People Scrutiny Sub?Committee meeting held on 17 April 2007 and the Sustainable Development and Enterprise Scrutiny Sub-Committee meetings held on 28 March and 13 June 2007, being the former Scrutiny Sub?Committees, be taken as read and signed as correct records.

To receive questions (if any) from local residents/organisations under the provisions of Overview and Scrutiny Procedure Rule 8.

RESOLVED:  To note that the following public question had been received:

1.

[Notes:  (i)  An oral answer was provided to the above question;

(ii)  under the provisions of Overview and Scrutiny Procedure Rule 8.4, the questioner asked a supplementary question.  The Chairman undertook to provide a written answer].

To receive petitions (if any) submitted by members of the public/Councillors under the provisions of Overview and Scrutiny Procedure Rule 9.

RESOLVED:  To note that no petitions were received at the meeting under the provisions of Overview and Scrutiny Procedure Rule 9.

To receive deputations (if any) under the provisions of Overview and Scrutiny Procedure Rule 10.

RESOLVED:  To note that no deputations were received at the meeting under the provisions of Overview and Scrutiny Procedure Rule 10.

(if any).

RESOLVED:  To note that there were no references from Cabinet or Council.

RESOLVED:  To note the terms of reference of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee, as set out at Appendix 1 to the minutes.

To agree the revised membership.

Further revisions to the membership were circulated at the meeting.

RESOLVED:  To approve the revised membership of the Performance and Finance Scrutiny Sub?Committee, as set out at Appendix 2 to the minutes.

Report of the Director of Legal and Governance Services.

The Committee considered a report of the Director of Legal and Governance Services, which advised Members on the appointment of non?voting advisers to the Committee for the Municipal Year 2007/2008.

Some Members suggested alternative ways of appointing non?voting advisers to the Committee.  They felt it appropriate to widen the remit and also suggested that a pool of expert advisers would benefit the Committee as their expertise could be called upon, when necessary.  New ways of appointing advisers with due consideration being given to qualifications, suitability, purpose and equality issues, ought to be explored before making appointments.

Other Members were of the view that some seamless transition of non?voting advisers was appropriate and essential in order to ensure continuity, particularly when the advice and contributions received by the former Scrutiny Sub?­Committee(s) had been of immense benefit to its work.

Following further discussion, it was  

RESOLVED:  That the appointment of non?voting advisers to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee for the 2007/08 Municipal Year be deferred to allow officers to submit a comprehensive report to the next meeting of the Committee taking account of the views of Members, as set out in the preamble above, including proposals on how the Committee could engage widely with the local community.

[Note:  The report would be submitted to the meeting scheduled for 9 October 2007].

Paper submitted by the RNOH.

[There will be a presentation from the RNOH on this item].

The Chairman invited Mr Andrew Woodhead, the Chief Executive of the Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital (RNOH) to give a presentation to the Committee on the RNOH’s application to become an NHS Foundation Trust.

Mr Woodhead circulated RNOH’s consultation document in this matter and thanked the Committee for the invitation.  In his presentation, Mr Woodhead:

·                    described the core values of the RNOH and how Foundation Trust status would help further enhance the hospital’s vision for its patients and commissioners, including the services provided;

·                    explained RNOH’s desire to become a Foundation Trust and the difference it would make to the public, patients and staff who would be able to influence how the Trust was run;

·                    referred to issues of governance and accountability and how these would be managed.

Mr Woodhead stated that RNOH would not wish to delay its Foundation Trust status, as the organisation was ready and ‘fit for purpose’.  He described the achievements of the RNOH and how the status would secure the hospital’s future.

Members were supportive of the RNOH’s application to become an NHS Foundation Trust and thanked Mr Woodhead for the recent tour of the hospital, which had impressed them.  Mr Woodhead responded to questions from Members on accountability, election of members, local authority representation, nominations, morale, private care, risks and how relocation or a merger of the RNOH with the Royal Free Hospital would adversely affect the hospital and impact upon its application for Foundation Trust status.  The Committee agreed that any relocation of the RNOH would not be in the interests of the RNOH’s clients.  He outlined the arguments against the hospital being merged with another.

The Chairman thanked Mr Woodhead for the presentation and his responses to questions from the Committee.

RESOLVED:  That (1) the Overview and Scrutiny Committee supported RNOH’s application to become an NHS Foundation Trust;

(2)  the Overview and Scrutiny Committee be informed of the outcome of the application and that the Committee’s policy and performance leads for Adult Health and Social Care be kept informed of developments and also advised of the outcome of the application.  

(See also Minute 174)

Report of the Director of People, Performance and Policy.

The Committee received a report of the Director of People, Performance and Policy, which made a number of proposals regarding the disposal of items outstanding from the work programmes of the previous scrutiny committees.  It also sought authorisation from the Overview and Scrutiny Committee to begin discussions with the Lead Policy and Performance Members, Portfolio Holders, the Council’s senior management and partners to identify those issues that they would like to see included in the scrutiny work programme.

The Scrutiny Manager introduced the report and, in order to assist Members in prioritising projects, drew attention to the criteria included in the Scrutiny Principles and Proposals document agreed in September 2005.  Following consideration of the report, issues agreed as priorities would be taken forward and included in a ‘long list’ of projects from which the final work programme for the next 18 months would be devised.  A further report would be presented to the Committee in October 2007.

Members commented on individual topics/projects, listed at Appendix 1 to the officer report, and the rationale behind them.  They referred to projects, which ought to be addressed as they satisfied the criteria and would address the issue of accountability.  It was essential that projects which made the best use of scarce resources and had a greater impact on the Council’s budget by accruing larger savings were scrutinised first. 

A Member suggested that Scrutiny ought to avoid duplication of work being carried out by other bodies of the Council, such as the review on the budget. However, it ought to be recognised that Scrutiny’s contributions effected change and that its role was persuasive.

The Vice-Chairman identified important pieces of work from Appendix 1, some of which could be merged.  She stated that the list was not exhaustive and would be guided by issues as and when they happened.  It was important for Scrutiny to produce outcomes which would benefit the Council and to be less prescriptive about the number of reviews that were necessary.  She supported the standing review on the budget and the need for the scope to be presented to the next meeting of the Committee.

In light of the comments made, the Chairman of the Performance and Finance Scrutiny Sub?Committee suggested a meeting between the Chairman and the Vice?Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee and its Sub?Committee, together with the Scrutiny Manager, with a view to presenting a further report on the Work Programme for agreement.  He acknowledged the need to retain flexibility.

The Scrutiny Manager clarified that the report was not seeking approval of the Work Programme that evening, and that she would provide detailed commentary on the projects to the next meeting of the Committee and seek advice from ‘other’ parts of the Council on ‘burning’ issues that Scrutiny ought to include in its Work Programme.  She referred to the scrutiny review on the budget and the proposals made by the Corporate Director of Finance and the methodology that would be adopted in the future.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 185.

Report of the Director of People, Performance and Policy.

Members received a report of the Director of People, Performance and Policy, which updated them on the implementation of the reconfigured scrutiny function, as agreed by Council on 12 July 2007.

The Scrutiny Manager introduced the report and outlined the key points set out in the report.  She referred to the proposals to hold joint meetings of the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee and Performance and Finance Scrutiny Sub-Committee and the training programme, which was mandatory.

In response to the concerns expressed by some Members about the lack of information flow from some officers to Scrutiny, the Chairman of the Performance and Finance Scrutiny Sub-Committee asked that such matters be brought to his attention. He referred to a meeting he had had with the Chief Executive on this matter.  It was essential that the Portfolio Holders attended meetings of the Committee or sent their support Members, if necessary.  The status of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee needed to be maintained. 

The Scrutiny Manager acknowledged that lack of information available would devalue the scrutiny process and defined scrutiny’s statutory rights.  She asked Members to make her aware of where the blockages were, with a view to working constructively to improve information flow.

In response to questions from Members on the training programme, the Scrutiny Manager explained that the second stages of the training on performance management would concentrate on practical and real issues and challenges facing the Council.

Members noted the dates of meetings of the Performance and Finance Scrutiny Sub?Committee, commented on the Scrutiny newsletter and enquired about the seminar scheduled to be held on 10 September 2007.  The Scrutiny Manager agreed to check on the latter and inform Members accordingly.  

RESOLVED:  That the following programme of activity and associated proposals made in order to deliver a successful reconfiguration of scrutiny be agreed:

·                    role of Lead Members;

·                    links into the Integrated Planning, Budgeting and Performance Management Framework;

·                    programme of meetings to support the Committees;

·                    Member development programme;

·                    proposals for communicating the changes;

·                    proposals for monitoring the changes.

Report of the Director of People, Performance and Policy.

The Scrutiny Manager introduced the report, which informed Members of the invitation to reaffirm their participation in the Evidence for Accountability projects, agreed in 2006.  She added that there were no direct financial costs associated with participating in the project.

RESOLVED:  That (1) the terms of reference of the project be noted;

(2)  Scrutiny’s ongoing commitment to participate in the project be re-affirmed.

RESOLVED:  That the following dates for future meetings be noted:

[* The themes for these meetings had been swapped round].