Local Government Lawyer Insight July 2017 LocalGovernmentLawyer 30 Every year for over a decade the Centre for Public Scrutiny has surveyed the local government sector to find out more about how overview and scrutiny – and broader council governance – operates at local level. When we started doing this work, scrutiny was a relatively young council function, and we asked questions about its structures – numbers and size of committees, how recommendations were made, number of dedicated scrutiny officers. It gave us, scrutiny councillors, and the officers who support them a sense of how scrutiny was developing and maturing. More recently, we have started asking more about the softer aspects of scrutiny work. How do people (principally Cabinet members and senior officers) perceive it? Is it valued? Do people see it as effective – and what does “effectiveness” mean? Are non-executive councillors fully engaged in its work? The answers to these questions are often mixed – and very revealing not just about overview and scrutiny, but also the way that decision-making and governance works in the sector, particularly insofar as it engages with politicians. For respondents to our survey there are two keys to scrutiny success – the first is the development of an organisational culture that encourages scrutiny and recognises the value that it brings. The second is that scrutiny itself is prepared to prioritise its work, and maintain a clear focus on what is most important. To address the first point, scrutiny’s success is as much about the esteem in which it is held by key decision-makers (and other prominent local figures) as The Centre for Public Scrutiny’s most recent annual survey highlights improving attitudes to the scrutiny process but some areas of concern remain. Scrutiny – valued and effective?