Yes, but that still does not mean that he is not there strictly because of the job he does and the responsibility he holds for the area of policy. We expect that it will usually be the chief executive and a senior officer responsible for the area of policy. It will be for the local authority to decide how that is managed.
Clause 16 requires, as a minimum, that the head of paid service and the most senior officers responsible for the delivery of services come. It is up to the overview and scrutiny committee to decide which of the officials would be most appropriate in relation to the service that is the subject of the petition.
I shall say a little more about how the scrutiny will be carried out. It is extremely important that it is appropriate and fair. Officers must not be exposed to inappropriate public scrutiny, harassment or bullying. Therefore, Clause 16 provides that the grounds for attendance at a meeting of the overview and scrutiny committee must relate to the officer’s job and cannot relate to his personal circumstances or character. Guidance under the Local Government Act 2000 is already in place to cover the way in which overview and scrutiny committees should conduct themselves when questioning an officer of the authority, the appropriate seniority of witnesses to ensure that junior officers are not put under undue pressure and so on. Some local authorities have charters; for example, City of York Council has developed a charter for scrutiny witnesses.
The only innovation introduced by this provision is the ability for local people to have a little more scope to invite overview and scrutiny committees to invite their officers to come and discuss their responsibilities within the scope of the jobs that are delivering the services with which people are concerned. The overview and scrutiny committee has the discretion to say that that would not be appropriate.
Amendment 130 removes the power for the appropriate national authority to make an order or provide guidance in relation to specifying the officers who would be called to give evidence. I reassure noble Lords that any order or guidance in relation to this will be focused squarely on supporting authorities to respond effectively. We do not intend to use it to create red tape. We want to keep that to a minimum. Throughout this process, we will be working very closely with the Local Government Association, but I am very happy to talk to noble Lords. I understand their concerns, so we will talk to each other before Report.
Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Andrews
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 28 January 2009.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Bill [HL].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
707 c130GC Session
2008-09Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-22 01:39:21 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_523808
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_523808
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_523808