This is the time of year when Portfolio Holders (the members of the Council's Executive -- the Cabinet) are called to appear before the Scrutiny Committees to account for their work in that position during the past year. The photograph shows Medway's Cabinet in session, where their decisions are taken.
We have had two Portfolio Holders appear before the scrutiny committee of which I am the vice-chairman already this year -- one in January, and one this month -- and have the Council Leader himself booked to come to our next meeting. The other scrutiny committees have been doing the same with the executive members relevant to their own areas of overview and scrutiny.
The general sequence of events with these "being held to account" agenda items (as they are billed) is that the portfolio holders give a short run-down of what their portfolio covers and what they have been doing during the past year, then the committee members ask questions on any aspect of their work.
At this point I am always reminded of Prime Minister's Questions (PMQs) in the House of Commons, and the difference between the searching and challenging questions from Opposition MPs, and the "friendly fire" from Labour MPs. You know the sort of thing: "Does my Right Honourable friend, the Prime Minister, agree with me that..." It's a dead give-away that it isn't really a proper question at all, merely a way to make the Government appear good. No doubt the PM was notified of the question well in advance and was thus able to get hold of all the facts and figures invariably quoted in reply to any of these "friendly" questions.
Indeed, it is probable that it was the PM's own office that wrote at least some of the questions, and the Whips found some backbenchers who hadn't asked anything at PMQs (or not for a long time, at least) to be, in effect, the PM's mouthpieces.
The temptation is to do the same kind of thing here, when one of our Portfolio Holders comes before Scrutiny. It would be so easy for us to do something similar to what Labour MPs generally do at PMQs -- but we don't. Specifically, I devise and write my own questions, with no input, advice or anything else from anyone, so I can come out with just about anything. I know that my colleagues in the Conservative Group do the same. As a reporter is invariably present at these events, this is genuine scrutiny at work, with no punches being pulled.
The only concession I occasionally make is to let the Portfolio Holder know the question a day or two in advance if it is rather technical (as some of mine are!) as I'd rather have a researched and complete answer in the public domain straight away than a response in the nature of "I shall have to find out what the answer is and let you know."
It is to the credit of our Portfolio Holders that they tend to be very well on top of their briefs, and can usually answer just about any question from any Member -- ruling group or otherwise -- that isn't too technical or in minute detail. Although they'd never admit it in public (and especially not when a reporter is present) in private many opposition members have acknowledged how impressed they are with our Executive members at these times in particular.
Just contrast that with the scenario in Westminster!
This week's Prime Minister's Questions (PMQs) session was interesting (as they often are, though not always) and included some brilliant stuff by David Cameron, starting at eight minutes 35 seconds in. It's a classic!
