Minute Audit and Standards 20 April

Director Of Corporate Services

Description

THE HIGHLAND COUNCIL AUDIT AND STANDARDS COMMITTEE Minutes of Meeting of the Audit and Standards Committee held in Committee Room 3, Council Headquarters, Glenurquhart thRoad, Inverness on Thursday, 20 April 2006 at 10.30 a.m. PRESENT Mr D W Briggs Mr R J Lyon Mr W Fernie Mr L Fraser Mr M Macmillan Mr F D S Black Mr I MacDonald Mr W Clark NON MEMBER ALSO PRESENT: Mrs G McCreath Officials in attendance: Mr G Munro, Head of Internal Audit and Risk Management Ms R Pieroni, Head of Committee Services Mr B Williams, Head of Corporate Finance Mr G McCaig, Head of Business Support, Housing and Social Work Mr N Rose, Principal Auditor, Internal Audit Miss L MacKay, Auditor Miss J MacLennan, Principal Administrator, Corporate Services Also in attendance: Mr R Scott, Audit Scotland Mr J Convery, Audit Scotland Mr D W Briggs in the Chair BUSINESS 1. APOLOGY FOR ABSENCE An apology for absence was intimated on behalf of Mr A MacKay. 2. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING – 16 FEBRUARY 2006 There had been circulated for information the Minutes of Meeting of the Committee held on 16 February 2006 – which were NOTED. 3. INTERNAL AUDIT REVIEWS PERIOD – 27 JANUARY TO 31 MARCH 2006 rdThere had been circulated Report No. AS/5/06 dated 3 April 2006 by the Head of Internal Audit and Risk Management which summarised the final reports issued since the date of the last meeting, together with other information relevant to ...

Sujets

• management
• risk management
• managers

Informations

• Publié par: Bejuf
• Nombre de lectures: 16
• Langue: English

Extrait

THE HIGHLAND COUNCIL

AUDIT AND STANDARDS COMMITTEE

Minutes of Meeting of the Audit and

Standards Committee held in Committee

Room 3, Council Headquarters, Glenurquhart

Road, Inverness on Thursday, 20

th

April 2006

at 10.30 a.m.

PRESENT

Mr D W Briggs

Mr W Fernie

Mr M Macmillan

Mr I MacDonald

NON MEMBER ALSO PRESENT:

Mrs G McCreath

Mr R J Lyon

Mr L Fraser

Mr F D S Black

Mr W Clark

Officials in attendance:

Mr G Munro, Head of Internal Audit and Risk Management

Ms R Pieroni, Head of Committee Services

Mr B Williams, Head of Corporate Finance

Mr G McCaig, Head of Business Support, Housing and Social Work

Mr N Rose, Principal Auditor, Internal Audit

Miss L MacKay, Auditor

Miss J MacLennan, Principal Administrator, Corporate Services

Also in attendance:

Mr R Scott, Audit Scotland

Mr J Convery, Audit Scotland

Mr D W Briggs in the Chair

BUSINESS

1.

APOLOGY FOR ABSENCE

An apology for absence was intimated on behalf of Mr A MacKay.

2.

MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING – 16 FEBRUARY 2006

There had been circulated for information the Minutes of Meeting of the Committee held

on 16 February 2006 – which were

NOTED.

3.

INTERNAL AUDIT REVIEWS

PERIOD – 27 JANUARY TO 31 MARCH 2006

There had been circulated Report No. AS/5/06 dated 3

rd

April 2006 by the Head of

Internal Audit and Risk Management which summarised the final reports issued since

the date of the last meeting, together with other information relevant to the operation of

the Internal Audit Section.

Speaking to the report, the Head of Internal Audit and Risk Management highlighted the

reviews which had been undertaken as follows:-

Community Ownership Project – confirmed that an approved Project Plan was in place

against which progress was regularly monitored as well as a Staff Communication and

Consultation Plan. A further Plan was to be developed in relation to Communication

with Tenants. A Project Board was also in place although it had still to define its remit.

Overall, the project had been well planned and progress was being closely monitored and

reported in order to ensure that the ballot took place and, if applicable, the transfer was

completed on target. There had been one recommendation made with a prioritisation

classification of 2.

Lochaber Area – Heating Oil Contract – confirmed that the packaging of the Equipment

and Adaptations installations had been inefficient, ineffective and uneconomical. Also,

no clear and consistent specification had been issued and there had been a reliance on the

‘good faith’ of the contractors concerned due to an absence of inspections. Although

elements of the installation work had been subject to Building Regulations, warrants had

either not been obtained or had been granted without the performance of appropriate

checks. It had also been noted that there had been no qualified or experienced Building

Services Inspectors at the time when the works had been commissioned. Overall, a

substantial number of shortcomings had been identified which had resulted in the need

for remedial works at all the properties concerned. However, measures had now been

identified to ensure that there was no recurrence of the problems which had been

identified.

Risk Management – confirmed that there was no framework for identification of the

risks affecting the Council’s business objectives on an ongoing basis and no corporate

risk register containing all of the risks identified by Service Management teams. There

was also no clear link between the Service Risk Registers, Management Action Plans,

Service Plans, Service Goals and the Corporate Plan. In addition, there were

inconsistencies in both the way in which risks were recorded and linked to plans and in

the level to which the process had permeated across different Services. Overall, twelve

recommendations had been made to address areas of concern – two at Grade 1, three at

Grade 2 and seven at Grade 3 – and it had been recommended that all should be

addressed within the following six month period.

Following discussion, it was

AGREED

that a short presentation should be made to the

next meeting to update Members on the strategy adopted by the Council in Risk

Management.

Capital Budgetary Control – confirmed that it had been found that, after initial

agreement of the budget, adjustments to budgets had not been highlighted in the

narrative part of the monitoring report. Also, all reports focused on the current year and

no reference or summary was presented at the conclusion of a major capital project. In

addition, monitoring statements were not presented to every Service Committee. Overall,

four recommendations had been made – one at Grade 1 and three at Grade 3 – all of

which were due to be implemented with the following twelve month period.

Highland Opportunity Ltd – confirmed that, although the procedural guidance stated that

personal references should be taken up in respect of loan applications, this was not

always the case. Also, where the loan was for less than £5,000, it could be approved by

delegated powers but it had been found that there was not always formal authorisation on

file in this regard. Overall, two recommendations had been made – one at Grade 3 and

one at Grade 2 – both of which had been implemented by 31 March 2006.

Income and Recovery (Manual Receipting etc) – confirmed that overall there were good

income manual receipting procedures but these were being undermined by poor holiday

cover and the distances between those involved in processing income onto the Oracle

system. As a result, problems were also being caused with the reconciliation process at

Headquarters. Three recommendations had been made – all at Grade 3 – which were to

be addressed by the Oracle 11i project team during the development of the new package

and completed by April 2006.

Social Work – Duplicate Payment – confirmed that a review had established that there

had been three contributory factors surrounding an overpayment to a Day Centre,

namely all grant payments to Voluntary Organisations were being paid centrally from

Headquarters for the first time, an invoice had been sent to the Area Social Work Office

from the Centre when this had not been required and the Team Leader had failed to

scrutinise the payment request details sufficiently prior to authorising the payment. It

was however considered that this had been a one-off occurrence which, if the

recommended action was taken, should not happen again. Overall, four

recommendations had been made – two at Grade 2, one at Grade 3 and one at Grade 4 –

all of which had been accepted by management and were due to be fully implemented by

April 2006.

Following general discussion, the Committee otherwise

NOTED

the terms of the report

as circulated.

4.

EXTERNAL AUDIT REVIEWS

There had been circulated Report No. AS/6/06 dated 4

th

April 2006 by the Director of

Finance which contained reports from the Council’s External Auditors (Audit Scotland)

as follows :-

Financial Strategy

Following the Public Pound

The report detailed the recommendations made in the activities reviewed and included an

Action Plan which had been agreed by the relevant Service Managers.

In regard to Financial Strategy, it was confirmed that overall the Council had well

developed procedures in place, particularly in regard to budgetary control mechanisms,

Member involvement in the Budget Working Group, effective treasury management

procedures and useable reserves and balances. Key areas where it was considered that

arrangements could be improved included linking resource allocation to Council

priorities within the Corporate Plan and Service/Operational Plans, developing a

systematic approach to ensure that the Council’s financial performance and strategy was

integrated with wider performance management, progressing medium and long term

revenue and capital planning in line with the approach approved by the Budget Working

Group and ensuring that asset management plans for all of the Council’s assets showed

that investment decisions were soundly based.

Following discussion, it was

AGREED

that, in relation to the recommendation to

introduce a structured programme of staff development and training on financial issues,

specific consideration should be given to including Members where appropriate.

It was also

AGREED

that, in relation to the recommendation for the preparation of an

asset management plan for all services, specific consideration should be given to the

inclusion of information in relation to the Council’s land assets in terms of possible

future financial advantage from land sales, etc.

In regard to Following the Public Pound, it was confirmed that overall the Council had

effective arrangements in place, including an approved Voluntary Sector Policy,

Corporate Guidance, standard Service Level Agreements, clear separation of duties

between officers and a right of access to key records etc for External Audit. Areas for

improvement included the need to maintain a corporate register of all support provided

to arms length external organisations (ALEOs), use of existing policies on the

community use of school buildings and sub market leases in the development of a

corporate policy on non- cash support for ALEOs, introduction of a formal corporate risk

assessment process for service departments to apply before entering into funding

arrangements with ALEOs, the issue of further guidance on the monitoring of financial

and operational performance for significant funding arrangements and confirmation that

appropriate insurance cover and indemnity arrangements were in place in order to

safeguard Members and Officers from potential risks in their dealings with external

bodies.

Thereafter, the Committee otherwise

NOTED

the terms of the report as circulated.

5.

TACTICAL AUDIT PLAN 2006/07

There had been circulated Report No. AS/7/06 dated 5

th

April 2006 by the Head of

Internal Audit and Risk Management which contained details of the annual review which

had been undertaken during January and February in order to revise Audit Plans for the

financial year 2006/07. In accordance with best practice, the previous 3 year ‘Strategic’

plan had been replaced with an annual ‘Tactical’ plan which reflected the current and

future pace of change within the authority and was the result of needs assessment

undertaken with the support of Service Directors, including consideration of the current

Risk Assessment methodology adopted by the Council.

The Committee

NOTED

the terms of the report as circulated.

6.

STANDARDS COMMISSION: COUNCILLORS’ CODE OF CONDUCT:

INVESTIGATIONS INTO COMPLAINTS

There had been circulated Report No. AS/8/06 dated 12

th

April 2006 by the Director of

Corporate Services which advised of complaints received by the Standards Commission

during the period August 2005 to March 2006 in relation to alleged breaches of the

Councillors’ Code of Conduct by four Members of Highland Council and of the outcome

of the Standards Commission’s investigations into these complaints.

During a summary of the report, it was confirmed that, in respect of the complaints dealt

with over the period, the Standards Commission had made no findings of breach of the

Code of Conduct and there were no cases outstanding at the present time.

During discussion, a number of Members questioned the wording within Section 2 of the

Code whereby it was stated that Councillors “

must respect

all other Councillors and all

Council employees…” and it was suggested that this would be better phrased in terms of

“

respect must

be shown

to all other Councillors…”. Members were also of the view that

the requirement to show respect should be extended to cover other individuals present at

any meeting where the Councillor was representing the Council.

It was

AGREED

that Officers should ask the Standards Commission whether there was

likely to be an opportunity for further consultation on the Code of Conduct in the future

which would enable these points to be made.

The meeting ended at 11.40 a.m.