[Nick Beale]

Currently, we don't have question times at OSCs. The way I've seen it, OSCs aren't supposed to answer for things, they're supposed to seek answers. In that situation, all a member of the public could really ask is "have you investigated X?" or "will you investigate X?" But if contributors here have examples of what can usefully be done outside that rather narrow range, I'll be happy to steal their ideas.

[James Walsh]

In Hartlepool at the discretion of the Chair (who normally allows Members to ask question first) members of the public can ask questions at anytime during the scrutiny meeting, although questions need to be on the item under discussion at that moment. We have no prior warning about what the questions will be and if a member of public will randomly arrive at our meeting which can result in some 'interesting' scenarios.

We also have 3 resident representatives (representing the 3 areas of the Town) co-opted onto our scrutiny forums.

[Tim Bowers]

Somerset says the following on agendas.... although in practice no-one from the public asks questions or contributes.

"At the Chairman's invitation you may ask questions and/or make statements or comments about any matter on the Committee's agenda. You may also present a petition on any matter within the Committee's remit. The length of public question time will be no more than 30 minutes in total.
A slot for Public Question Time is set aside near the beginning of the meeting, after the minutes of the previous meeting have been signed. However, questions or statements about any matter on the agenda for this meeting will be taken at the time when each matter is considered.
If you wish to speak, please tell the Committee Administrator, before
the meeting.
You must direct your questions and comments through the Chairman. You may not take direct part in the debate.
The Chairman will decide when public participation is to finish.
If there are many people present at the meeting for one particular item, the Chairman may adjourn the meeting to allow views to be expressed more freely.
If an item on the agenda is contentious, with a large number of people attending the meeting, a representative should be nominated to present the views of a group.
An issue will not be deferred just because you cannot be present for the meeting.
Remember that the amount of time you speak will be restricted, normally, to two minutes only."

James - am interested in your 3 resident representatives - how are they chosen and how do they differ from members (who surely should be representing their residents?)

[James Walsh]

"James - am interested in your 3 resident representatives - how are they chosen and how do they differ from members (who surely should be representing their residents?)"

Apologies in the delay for replying....We have 3 Neighbourhood Consultative Forums covering the North, South and Central areas in Hartlepool; with more details on how they operate available on our website at

http://www.hartlepool.gov.uk/site/script...mentID=441

As for serving on scrutiny, we have annual elections each year when one nominated resident representative per Consultative Forum is selected / voted to serve on each of the scrutiny forums. Normally a resident representative will only serve on one scrutiny forum, with additional nomination from these to serve on our Scrutiny Co-ordinating Committee.

The major difference that resident representatives have over Members is that they do not have voting rights and cannot attend 'closed-session' meetings (which of course we try to avoid with scrutiny). Although I take your point about Members representing their residents, although perhaps we are formalising and guarenteeing public engagement by having resident representatives. Our Children's Services Scrutiny Forum has an additional 6 young people selected from various youth groups and school councils in the Town.

Please feel free to drop me a line if you want anymore information.

James

[Paul Dean]

I'm with Nick on this one. Public 'question time' at scrutiny committees makes no sense to me, and is potentially very confusing for the public, because scrutiny committee Members do the asking rather than answering (by and large). So it begs the question - to whom are the public asking their questions and will they get satisfactory answers in a scrutiny arena?

Public questions of decision makers is surely better and more efficient in executive arenas, especially on politically sensitive topics?

Public statements, views and evidence is certainly needed in scrutiny forums - but not public questions I suggest.

Therefore, I would certainly like to hear others' experience of allowing a 'public platform' of some kind at scrutiny committeees. We don't do this formally at the moment but I'd really like to see how it could be developed in a way which iscan provide evidence to support scrutiny recommendations, and certainly not as a feel-good-by-involving-the-public tick box exercise!

[Howard Boots]

I know that a number of authorities do have question times and I have witnessed the session in action, but in Tameside we do not do this like Nick and Paul I am far from convinced that they are really appropriate.

We have a system of area committees and they all have question time sessions that are well attended and do attract the usual suspects as well as people seking to raise issues of concern.

I tend to feel that this is the most appropriate venue.

[Paul James]

In common with a number of others Herefordshire Council invite the public, via a public infomration sheet in the agenda, to submit questions (2 days prior tot he meeting) for consideration at the meeting on issies that appear on the agenda. This has proved usefull particularly when there is a hot topic and lots of public want their say on a simmilar theme.

We also include on the agenda, following the minutes, an Item 'Suggestions from members of the public on issues for future scrutiny.'

'At the meeting the Chairman will ask the members of hte public present if tehy have any issues which they would like the Scrutiny Committee to investigate, however, there will be no discussion of the issue at the time when the matter is raised. Councillors will research the issue and consider whether it should form part of the committee's work programme...' In my view this has had mixed results.

Member of the public will also be able to contribute to the discussion at the meeting (on the basis that the Committee want information/evidence) however, this is very much at the Chairman's discretion.

Paul James
Democratic Services Officer
Herefordshire Council