Title

SCRUTINY

McKinlay: Why peer-reviews should be mandatory

Jacqui McKinlay outlines why the Centre for Public Scrutiny believes the Local Government Association peer review programme should be mandatory.

I'm a self-confessed fan of the LGA peer review. I lived through the Comprehensive Performance Assessment and other regulatory inspections, and been involved on both sides of a peer review process. In a contest of Key Performance Indicator driven inspections versus sector-led improvement, there is only one winner.

So why at a select committee evidence session last week did I reiterate our stance that the LGA peer review should be mandatory?

Since joining the Centre for public Scrutiny, I have had the privilege of working with a wide range of councils, councillors and senior leaders. My understanding of the types of leaders and organisations that seek out or accept improvement support has increased dramatically. I am also much more passionate about the power and benefits – some tangible, many not – that an act of scrutiny or involvement can bring when it is done well.

We all know that the leaders that are open to scrutiny and want to learn from others generally lead organisations that look outwards and are ambitious for their people and place. For those that are less forthcoming, it is obviously not as simple as they don't care or are bad. Resources are reducing, the corporate capacity to invest in and manage a review may not exist and the time is often never right to invite this small team of extremely bright people in to prod around your organisation.

At times of pressure however its often the drawbridge that's the first thing to go up. This can manifest itself in many subtle ways to start with – not getting out and about as much to learn from others, turning away from partnership activities, and less engagement with scrutiny and other functions that provide a different perspective. The consequences of this mindset can quickly impact on organisational culture: less confidence to challenge, inward looking, dismissive of involvement in decision-making and a sense of having nothing to learn.

Mandatory gets a foot in the door. Yes, it would change the dynamic of the review. But this is a small price to pay and one that we should confidently take with a tried and test product.

A healthy democracy is one that embeds scrutiny and challenge. We've seen the impact that a crisis in one area can have on the whole sector. We want the best for local government and all public services, that means supporting every council to be the best they can be, not just the volunteers.

Jacqui McKinlay is chief executive of the Centre for Public Scrutiny

SCRUTINY

Don't make politics the enemy of good governance

By Hamida Ali | 06 August 2026

Hamida Ali and Mel Stevens argue politics is not an obstacle to good governance. The challenge is creating the relationships, information and rigour that all...

SCRUTINY

No10 North: Whitehall reimagined

By Kate Josephs | 06 August 2026

As Andy Burnham launches No10 North to boost growth and devolution, former senior civil servant turned council chief executive Kate Josephs, suggests the re...

SCRUTINY

The severed links in health and care integration

By Martin Ford | 06 August 2026

Despite recognition of the benefits of closer integration between health and social care, recent months have seen a flurry of breakups in partnerships betwee...

SCRUTINY

Embedding the conditions for successful care collaboration

By Aidan Rave | 06 August 2026

Health and care integration hasn’t failed, we just don’t yet take it seriously enough, argues Aidan Rave.

Jacqui McKinlay

Popular articles by Jacqui McKinlay