Brent Council reduces Opposition and Scrutiny time to speak at tomorrow's Budget and Council Tax Setting meeting. Leader gets more time.

 A late change announced yesterday evening deprives Brent opposition parties of time to present their alternative budget proposals at tomorrow's Full Council Budget Setting Meeting. It also reduces the time allocated the the chair of the Scrutiny Budget Task Group.

The new order is set out below with previous timings set out on Monday February 26th in brackets:

• Leader to introduce the main budget report - up to 20 minutes. (15 mins)

• Leader of the Conservative Group (or their nominated representative) to respond and move their alternative budget proposals –up to 10 minutes. (15 mins)

• Leader of the Liberal Democrats Group (or your nominated representative) to respond and move their alternative budget proposals – up to 5 minutes. (10 mins)

• Deputy Leader & Cabinet Member for Finance & Resources – up to 15 minutes to speak on the budget and alternative proposals that have been moved. (10 mins)

• Councillor Conneely (as Chair of Scrutiny Budget Task Group) – up to 5 minutes to introduce the main outcomes and recommendations within the Scrutiny Budget Task Group report. (10 mins)

These timings will be subject to a Procedural Motion moved at the start of the meeting by the Majority Group Whip.  Once the debate on the budget has concluded (for which any members wishing to speak will still have up to 3 minutes each to contribute) the Leader will then have up to 10 minutes  (5 mins) to sum up and close prior to the Mayor moving on to conduct separate roll call votes on firstly the alternative budget proposals moved by the Conservative Group and then the Liberal Democrat and then the final substantive budget recommendations, which will all be taken en bloc.

Cllr Paul Lorber, Leader of the Liberal Democrat Group said:

This is not acceptable to the Lib Dem Group.

This is total abuse of power and should have (but has not been) discussed at the Constitutional Working Group.

To increase the time allocated to Labour Leader and others and reduce the amount of speaking time for the Conservative and Liberal Democrat Leaders is a pathetic attempt to suppress democratic debate.

The result of the recent Alperton by election clearly shows how unpopular the Labour Party has become in Brent and this action by the Labour Leader is another example of his dictatorial abuse of power.

I trust that the Chief Executive will at long last intervene and to stop the nonsense which is turning Brent into a laughing stock.

 

Labour's Budget Proposals

Conservative Group Proposals

Lib Dem Group Proposals

Scrutinising Brent Council' new scrutiny arrangements

The Wembley Matters reader who scrutinised Brent Council's new scrutiny arrangements in 2014 LINK  looks at the proposals which were adopted by Full Council yesterday evening in this Guest Blog:

On the positive side, it should be welcome that Brent Council has acknowledged that a single scrutiny committee with a very limited ability to set up Task & Finish Groups to investigate issues in depth has failed to deliver. It would have been more honest, though, if the committee report had not claimed that ‘the disadvantage of a single Scrutiny Committee structure could not necessarily have been foreseen’. The fact that Brent Council alone of all the London Boroughs thought it could manage with a single scrutiny committee with a very limited ability to do work outside of committee meetings ought to have been flashing red warning signals from the outset.

The overall objectives set for the new system are fine, but whether the new arrangements will be able to deliver those objectives is questionable. The proposals are still very committee-oriented ─ but experience over the years from elsewhere shows that Members develop a thorough understanding of key policy and service issues (one of the stated key objectives) best through in-depth Task and Finish Working Groups. There is no indication that more officer time will made available to resource such Working Groups.

More alarmingly, the report says that “Strategic and Operational Directors would still be expected to take a central role in developing the work programme”. This is contrary to the standard good practice of scrutiny being a Member-led function. It is Members who should be taking the central role in developing the work programme, while calling on and using the advice of, amongst others, strategic and operational directors. The danger here is Members are channelled to look at only what Directors are comfortable with Members examining, rather than what really needs a spotlight being shone on it.

Two final points: why is a review of scrutiny arrangements concerning

strategic matters such as budget setting and policy formation delayed until later in the year? And there is no stated commitment to review how the new system is working so that changes might be made to correct any imbalances or deficiencies in its functioning.

Marks out of 10: five.