Issue - meetings

Report of the Interim Head of Shared Assurance to follow.

The Interim Head of Shared Assurance Services presented the Internal Audit Progress Report, including internal audit reports with limited assurance opinion.

It was reported that there had been 5 audit reviews where the opinion of the control environment had determined that only limited assurance could be placed on the controls in place and substantive control weaknesses existed in those areas.  The reviews with limited assurance were:

u  Environmental Health – Food Safety

u  Car Park Management and Enforcement

u  Tree Inspection and Maintenance

u  Commercial Properties Follow up

u  Shared Services – Creditors

In addition to reviews with limited assurance, a further 2 reviews in the opinion of internal audit no assurance could be placed on the effectiveness of controls in place and the extent to which risks are mitigated.  The reviews with no assurance were:

u  Procurement of Utilities and 2 other contracts

u  Health and Wellbeing Campus – review of procurement of provider and project governance arrangements.

Committee Members raised the following queries with regards the report:

u  Clarification was provided that the limited assurance provided to tree inspection and maintenance was separate to the corporate plan project of planting 110,000 trees as the audit was ensuring the necessary policies were in place to help deal with insurance claims.  The newly planted trees would be classified in line with the proposed new policy.

u  Confirmation was provided that the consultant’s report on the Asset Management Strategy concluded in May had considered all of the Council’s assets.

u  The purpose of reporting on the internal audit reports was to allow the Committee to consider and note the reports, not to debate the contents.  The reports feed into the Annual Governance Statement, which will be presented to Council and that would be the opportunity for Members debate any issues, such as the Health and Wellbeing Campus.

u  The quality assurance approach taken to ensure that internal audit reviews were rigorous and robust was explained, which includes a manager checking the evidence file, discussion with the client/service lead, presentation to the director and a final sign off. 

u  Where internal audit reviews have looked at elements where relevant officers are no longer with the Council, the evidence available has been considered.

The following two questions were received from members of the public:

Question 1

“I have just read the internal audit that has been presented at Governance meeting tonight written by Janice Bamber.  The report is very comprehensive and paints a damming state of the running of SRBC by senior management.  But the ultimate responsibility lies with the councillors who enable the poor practise and not holding senior management to account.  I cannot comprehend how much ratepayers money has been wasted by this council as it states in the report major failure to demonstrate value for money in the procurement.

I have 2 questions that I require answering:

1. How many managers have been disciplined or dismissed?

2. Why have councillors allowed this happen?”

Question 2

“On the basis of the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 33