Havering Council's Place Overview & Scrutiny Sub Committee met on Tuesday, 15 September 2026, to discuss and plan future scrutiny activities for the 2026-2027 municipal year.
The committee began by endorsing a draft scrutiny working protocol, designed to set out the working relationship, pledges, and commitments between the Cabinet and the scrutiny function. This protocol aims to complement the council's constitution and is a legal requirement, based on previous scrutiny cycles, national best practices, and national case studies from an annual survey. Sources informing the protocol include work guides from the Local Government Association and the Centre for Governance and Scrutiny Excellence.
Key elements of the draft protocol include a commitment to ongoing informal dialogue between the Cabinet and scrutiny, with an annual discussion on the effectiveness of scrutiny and potential protocol amendments. This dialogue is intended to be visible to the public and overseen by the Overview and Scrutiny Board. The protocol also clarifies the calling-in procedure, emphasizing it as a mechanism for issues where pre-decision scrutiny was not available or sufficient, rather than implying it occurs due to scrutiny not being done properly. Members are encouraged to carefully consider the reasons for calling in items, ensuring it is for appropriate purposes and not purely political, as calling in is described as a blunt instrument.
Discussions also focused on recommendations for effective scrutiny in the upcoming year, with the committee beginning to populate its work programme. Proposed topics for discussion include: Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) for Parking Enforcement, Park Security, Waste and Recycling Services (FCC Contract), Town Centre Maintenance and Development, Emergency Plan Preparedness, Lessons Learned from Regeneration Projects (Placemaking), Housing Allocation Scheme, and Housing Stock and Resident Stability.
A significant point raised was the potential for a longer tenure for scrutiny members. Some members felt that the current one-year term is insufficient to gain confidence and contribute effectively, impacting continuity. The report proposed a discussion with the Cabinet about whether a longer tenure might enhance scrutiny effectiveness, with implied benefits of increased confidence, more effective contribution, and improved continuity. The specific challenge identified is that each program is looked at by the incoming scrutiny members,
suggesting a lack of continuity in ongoing work.
This recommendation, along with the endorsement of the scrutiny working protocol, will be referred to the Cabinet for discussion. The meeting agreed to endorse the recommendations in the report, subject to proposed circulation and consideration. The scrutiny working protocol, if endorsed by the committee, will then go to cabinet and cabinet will be asked to endorse it as well.
The report also states that recommendations 1 and 2 (which include the discussion on longer tenure and the endorsement of the scrutiny working protocol) are to be referred to Cabinet for discussion.
The protocol complements, rather than overrides, the council's Constitution, and any changes to constitutional matters would require a separate process.