The Democratic Services Manager advised that the purpose of the report, was to provide Members of the Committee with a list of potential Forward Work Programme items for formal prioritisation. He referred to paragraph 4.1, that the  Committee has a responsibility for setting and prioritising the overall Forward Work Programme for the Subject Overview and Scrutiny Committees. He outlined the items/topics that had been prioritised and agreed by this Committee, which had been compiled from suggested items at previous meetings of the Overview and Scrutiny Committees and included information proposed from Corporate Directors.

The Chairperson asked Members if they wished to add anything to the list of topics.

A Member asked for homelessness to be included given that there had been a role for Scrutiny in the past when looking at, e.g., housing and empty homes. However, he did not wish for Scrutiny to duplicate any other work undertaken on the topic. In response, the Chairperson stated that Welsh Government would be instrumental in how the Authority can address the issue and that it will be dependent upon resources, but agreed that Scrutiny should play a role in homelessness.

A Member felt that putting Homelessness on the Scrutiny Forward Work Programme would be duplication as it was something that was already being addressed. The Authority had already looked into claiming some of the £20M provided by Welsh Government for the temporary accommodation provided to the homeless and is awaiting a reply. The Authority must be able to rehouse those people who have been placed into temporary accommodation across the borough to avoid returning to living on the streets. The Chairperson agreed that we need to look at how successful we have been in solving the problem of homelessness in the future.

A Member asked if the Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Committee could look at the PSB in September to coincide with the expected completion of the Community Impact Assessment. This will have a greater bearing on what the Panel wishes to tackle. In response, the Chairperson advised that the Panel would be meeting with the PSB Team shortly. The Member further explained that a Community Impact Assessment will identify what has been done well and the things it needed to do longer term to manage further pandemic spikes. For example, in relation to schools, opening to all pupils on 14 September with a 2-week delay to put all necessary measures into place. Thus by the middle of September there could be problems with schools and there are many other issues that need to be looked at. She argued that homelessness is a long-term issue and Welsh Government should have funded it a long time ago and that Local government needs to be vocal about the lack of funding available and it is something the Panel needs to consider going forward.

A Member asked if Scrutiny could have a part in the role of governors and how governors are appointed, organised and trained. She felt that schools, now more than ever, needed to have their governance as stable and professional as possible and that schools were being let down. She felt that governors were not being recruited properly, the right people were not sitting on governing bodies, and the training from Central South Consortium was not effective or frequent enough. The Member did not feel that all schools had a full complement of effective governors and if they did it would make a huge difference to how we respond to the pandemic crisis.

In response, it was the Chairperson’s understanding that the only governors the Authority had any choice over were the LEA representatives. All others are voted for by parents or by the governing body agreeing to appoint a community member. While Scrutiny can advise Cabinet, it was not within its remit to appoint. She felt that on the whole, Cabinet’s criteria was good for electing members from the Authority, Town and Community or retired teachers that have the necessary experience to make a contribution.

A Member agreed on the issue of governing bodies. Although she believed the governing bodies had become a lot more effective, she did not feel they were effective enough.

A Member commented that it was his understanding that only LEA governors are appointed by the Local Authority. All other governor posts are appointed by the school. The Member has, in the past, proposed that more should be centralised to save Head Teachers from becoming experts in absolutely everything as well as the school. But this would mean a change in budgeting arrangements because schools have autonomy on how they spend their money. The Member agreed that not all governors seem to have the right acumen or skills, but in smaller schools the issue is securing governors at all, let alone being able to select from a list. The Member concluded by stating it was a complex area.

The Chairperson then reminded the Committee of the Recommendations at paragraph 9.1 of the FWP. The Recommendations at paragraph 4.2 were agreed and confirmed:

Recommendations

(1) That the items prioritised as outlined in paragraph 4.2 and those items delegated to the Subject Overview and Scrutiny Committees be confirmed;

(2) That any additional items be identified using the Criteria Form for future consideration on the Scrutiny Forward Work Programme.