Written evidence submitted by Ken Lyle [OSG 032]
Written evidence submitted by Ken, a resident of the east London borough of Newham, frustrated by lack of accountability by the council.
Newham has an elected executive mayor;
AND has no opposition councillors;
AND is one of the few councils still delivering its 'propaganda' magazine fortnightly, holding out against the DCLG maximum of quarterly.
All my actual evidence comes from posts on forestgate.net, by its owner unless otherwise stated there, which seems to be the only publication dedicated to what is going on in Newham politics. It is far more informative on this than the sole local newspaper, which generally gives the council an easy ride, and more carefully written too.
Executive Summary
It will become obvious that my *conclusion* is that in Newham scrutiny is not effective, so my *recommendation* is for anything that forcibly increases its effectiveness, and anything which makes the council more accountable generally, and less likely to be a single-party authority.
All posts linked are in section 6 anyway.
--
1. Whether scrutiny committees in local authorities in England are effective in holding decision-makers to account
No - see for example the last quarter of https://forestgate.net/2016/05/13/visions-of-scrutiny/
2. The extent to which scrutiny committees operate with political impartiality and independence from executives
Not - see for example the first third of https://forestgate.net/2016/05/13/visions-of-scrutiny/
3. Whether powers to summon witnesses are adequate
No - see paragraph 5 of https://forestgate.net/2015/11/23/more-cuts-less-scrutiny/
4. How topics for scrutiny are selected
See paragraph 4 of https://forestgate.net/2015/11/23/more-cuts-less-scrutiny/
5. The support given to the scrutiny function by political leaders and senior officers, including the resources allocated (for example whether there is a designated officer team)
See especially paragraphs 6 to 10 of https://forestgate.net/2015/11/23/more-cuts-less-scrutiny/
6. Examples where scrutiny has worked well and not so well (all the latter)
6.1 Mayor & Cabinet pensions:
Lead-up to scrutiny meeting - https://forestgate.net/2015/07/15/gold-plated/
Account of meeting - https://forestgate.net/2015/07/23/the-geezer-is-underpaid/
Mayoral overruling - https://forestgate.net/2015/07/24/kerching/
6.2 Staff pensions:
Councillor's concerns and mayoral overruling - https://forestgate.net/2015/09/03/pensions-again/
6.3 Reducing funding:
Mayoral contempt - https://forestgate.net/2015/11/23/more-cuts-less-scrutiny/
6.4 Contest for scrutiny chair:
Candidates' pitches - https://forestgate.net/2016/05/13/visions-of-scrutiny/
Depressingly predictably, the mayor's favoured candidate, the first one featured in this post, won.