[Mark Ewbank]

Is that in addition to pre-scrutiny party group meetings? If applicable, of course. Otherwise, do you find that attendance varies by party?

The Comms select committees mainlyuse them to negotiate privately. Gets the members talking about strategy / questioning line - especially if controversial.

Mark

[Mark Sayer]

Hi Mark

As far as I'm aware, we don't have party pre-meetings in Leeds. We certainly wouldn't encourage them ourselves, although the individual groups might organise them from time to time.

Ideally we'd like to use pre-meetings as you describe - to encourage members to plan lines of questioning for the public meeting. However, this doesn't always work, so I was wondering whether people find it more useful to hold preparation meetings on a different date, in order to fully focus on preparing the agenda. Or do people do without them altogther, and provide members with written ideas for questions?

Laura

[Robert Jakeman]

We have pre-meetings. We hold at least one meeting with the Chairman (and recently we have started inviting the Vice Chairman as well) to discuss issues arising from the papers asap after they have been sent to the Committee. The Chairman and scrutiny officer will then lead discussion in a pre-meeting lasting between 30 - 45 minutes directly before the committee meeting. These are scheduled in a long time in advance so attendance is always fairly good.

The scrutiny officer typically prepares 'key lines of enquiry' to help start discussion in the pre-meeting and, in my opinion, is very useful in providing a structure for planning how to tackle the topic at hand.

[Ed Hammond]

Mark is correct - effective pre-meetings are central to the success of the commons select committee process.

When you watch a select committee on TV and think, "gosh, those are good questions", this is owed entirely to the members getting together beforehand to decide what their line of attack is going to be. This is the only way to effectively carry out properly forensic questioning.

The usual danger of doing this in the context of council scrutiny committees is:

1) Members already have group-based pre-meeting that they do not want to give up.

2) Members misunderstand the point of the pre-meeting and treat it as an opportunity to try and discuss the issues substantively.

3) Problem 2) is often compounded if the relevant officer is present at the pre-meeting, which means that it actually turns into the meeting itself. (This is, however, the usual and accepted position in respect of cabinet).

4) Members take umbrage (often rightly) at being "presented" by officers with a detailed brief and a set of questions.

Sorry to be so relentlessly negative. I think if their purpose is very clear they can be crucial, but members have to agree that they are a sensible way forward otherwise they end up being misused.

[Robert Jakeman]

I agree with Ed. I imagine the culture of the organisation is also important in determining whether pre-meetings are useful.

In terms of the Council I work for, there aren't any political group meetings before the scrutiny pre-meet and the officers who present the reports are also not present (just scrutiny and democratic services officers present). It wouldn't work if they did attend in my opinion.

However, Ed's 2nd point can definitely happen - a briefing with the Chairman helps to mitigate.

[Mark Sayer]

Thanks everyone

The key thing seems to be establishing a consensus on what pre-meetings are for, so I will have a go and let you know how I get on!

Ed - do you have any tips on avoiding the various pit-falls? How do select committees get round these issues?

Laura

[Earl Piggott-Smith]

Laura Nield Wrote:Hello everyone

I'm trying to think of ways to improve the use of scrutiny pre-meetings here at Leeds. At present each of our boards has a half-hour long pre-meeting before the main meeting starts. However, these are often poorly attended, and their effectiveness varies widely from board to board. Does anyone have any tips on how to use pre-meetings? Do you have them? What are they used for? How do you encourage attendance?

Thanks in advance for your help

Laura Nield - Leeds City Council

Hi Laura, I am assuming that the all members are invited to the pre-meeting?? I think pre-meetings should be focused on what information the chair and vice chair need to manage the business of the meeting, for example updating them on apologies or changes to the agenda. It may be an idea to plan the meeting around the chair/vice chair with an open invitation to other members to attend. This may encourage members to attend on topics on the agenda that may be of interest to them.I think to encourage member attendance, you need have things on agenda which they have a interest in, not just things which officers think they need to know. This is often easier said than done . It would also be good idea to look at the agenda to see if there is a mix of topics which might get members to come to a pre-meeting. Hope this helps.

[Howard Boots]

Laura,

It is intersting to see again people's take on the use and success of pre meetings for scrutiny committees.

In Tameside we have had a system of members' briefing meetings for our scrutiny panels (committees) from 2000, after I visted a house of Commons Select Committee and witnessed the committee after it had had a briefing and I realised what a valuable use of time they would be.

A lot of our success has been down to the pre meeting system where immediately prior to the commencement of the panel the members receive for approx half an hour a presentation on the subject under review to support the written briefing that was sent to them with the agenda. They can them acting as "team scrutiny" agree their line of questioning and any matter they want clarified. It also enables them to air their views in private before meeting witnesses.

It works very well and is generally appreciated by members - it also does give them more of a non party political team approach.

Howard