Vast majority of councillors see senior officers as supportive of scrutiny, survey shows

The "overwhelming majority" of council members see senior officers as supportive of their scrutiny committee's work, according to a survey conducted by the Centre for Governance and Scrutiny (CfGS).

The survey – aimed at assessing the effectiveness, structure, and impact of scrutiny committees across various local authorities – detailed a "large positive perception" that senior officers are supportive of the work of scrutiny, with 85% agreeing or strongly agreeing with this statement.

The CfGS conducts a survey on the topic every year. This year, 229 members and officers from 113 councils took part.

In a report on the data, the CfGS said: "This was closely followed by a large majority of respondents 79% (180 respondents) agreeing or strongly agreeing that councillor engagement with scrutiny is good.

"Additionally, a large number of respondents also reported that there is a constructive relationship between the executive and scrutiny, with 77% (176 respondents) agreeing or strongly agreeing with this statement.

"However, 23% (53 respondents) either disagree or strongly disagree, indicating some level of contention or uncertainty in this area."

Concerning the work of scrutiny committees, there was agreement among survey respondents that scrutiny has an impact on the way the council manages its finances (69%) and on the lives of local people (68%).

In addition, 65% of respondents agreed that scrutiny is "well placed to tackle the big challenges".

Although 35% expressed disagreement, "indicating some level of scepticism or uncertainty about scrutiny's capability here," the report said.

On public involvement, the survey found that just half (51%) of the respondents agreed or strongly agreed that their council scrutiny function works hard to involve and engage the public in its work, while just under half (49%) disagreed or strongly disagreed with this statement.

Regarding obtaining information on finances, some 34% of respondents reported facing challenges in obtaining information in a timely manner.

Most respondents (63%) agreed or strongly agreed that there was effective scrutiny of the council's budget, and 77% agreed that scrutiny's work is closely informed by an understanding of the council's financial position.

Concerning political make-up of scrutiny committees, the survey found a "strong inclination" towards the majority party holding chairing positions, with a total of 65% of respondents indicating either all or most chairs are from the majority party.

In contrast, 29% of the responses showed a preference for the opposition holding these positions.

Only a small portion, 6%, reported a politically balanced distribution of chairing roles.

The survey also showed a dominance of the majority party in vice-chairing roles, with a combined 70% of respondents reporting that these positions are either all or mostly held by the majority party.

The survey meanwhile uncovered a "much higher level of political proportionality in task & finish groups, with the majority of respondents [62%] telling us that they are either politically proportionate, close to being politically proportionate or politically inclusive," the CfGS reported.

In a statement on the survey, the CfGS said: "Ultimately, it is effective relationships that makes for the most effective scrutiny, and responses continue to be mixed when we ask about scrutiny's relationship with the executive.

"However, an overwhelming majority (slightly over three quarters) do feel that senior officers are supportive of scrutiny's work – and a similar majority consider that scrutiny is able to take a cross-party approach to its work."

Adam Carey