| AU.285 | Councillor Rothwell declared a personal interest in Minute AU.287 - Financial and Performance Monitoring as he was a tenant of Six Town Housing and a Governor at a Bury school. |
| AU.286 | There were no members of the public present to ask questions at the meeting. |
| AU.287 | The Director of Finance and E-Government presented a report updating Members of the Committee on the Authority’s financial and performance position in line with the Committee’s Statement of Purpose to ‘provide independent scrutiny of the Authority’s financial and non-financial performance to the extent that it affects the Authority’s exposure to risk and weakens the control environment’.
The report indicated that the Authority was projecting an underspending of £0.287m for the year based on spending and income information as at 30 September 2010.
The report also gave a summary of performance during quarter two of the 2010/2011 financial year. The table set out at 4.1 of the report highlighted areas of concern which were classed as “double-red” (performing worse than at the end of 2009/2010 and not forecast to achieve current year target, or are in the Local Area Agreement or Bury Plan and not forecast to meet targets).
Members were given the opportunity to ask questions and make comment on the contents of the report.
|
| AU.288 | Further to Minute AU.151 of the meeting of the Audit Committee on 26 August 2010, the Executive Director of Children’s Services, Eleni Ioannides, attended the meeting to report on the financial situation within the Children’s Services Department.
The Children’s Services budget was 85% grant funded. 23% of the area based grant had been cut in year at the end of June 2010, it was difficult to immediately implement savings to services which had created a funding time-lag. There had also been a number of other grants cut to many of the services provided by Children’s Services.
The Children’s Agency (looked-after children) was the most volatile budget within the department as this was an area that was out of the Council’s control. The number of referrals under Child Protection and Children in Need powers had risen since the Baby P case. There was also a new integrated Children’s System which had made most cases more time consuming and requiring extra resources and it was explained that there was also greater pressure to place more children into care, which then places more pressure on the Child Placement expenditure.
It was reported that Children’s Services had been taking action with regard to budget pressures and this had resulted in savings being made across the service and the financial position within Children’s Services had been improving month on month.
The actions that had been taken included the creation of a Child in Need Team which had focussed on prevention work. Following an evaluation by Salford University it was concluded that the team had avoided incurring costs to approximately £750,000.
Other actions taken were explained, £570,000 savings had been identified following budget surgeries being carried out across the department. Authorisation levels of spending had been lowered giving less freedom to staff over expenditure and requiring Assistant Directors to give approval for lower levels of expenditure. Where possible, conferences and meetings that would incur a cost have been cancelled and requests to attend such events would require a business case to be made. Two leased premises were due to be vacated during 2011/2012 and staff relocated to Athenaeum House. It was also explained that there was a bar on any new IT hardware purchases. Any requests for overtime required the approval of the Executive Director.
The restructuring and down sizing of the School Improvement Service has led to the removal of 11½ posts and the merger of the Inclusion Service and Behaviour and Attendance Service into a single service had led to the removal of 2 management posts.
|
| AU.289 | Barrie Strothers, Head of Internal Audit gave a presentation explaining the Audit Commission’s Green Book “Protecting the Public Purse”. It was explained that the document considered the key fraud risks facing Local Government and identified good practice.
The book identified three areas needing more attention:-
•Housing Tenancy Fraud
•Single Person Discount Fraud
•Recruitment Fraud
And six areas where Local Authorities must “stay focussed”:-
•Housing and Council Tax Benefit
•Procurement
•Social Care Direct Payments
•Disabled Parking Concessions
•Insurance Claims
•Abuse of position
The document contained a checklist which contained 11 points that Local Authorities should follow to ensure that fraud risks facing them were being identified and resolved.
It was also reported that an effective audit committee was an essential element in the corporate governance of all public bodies.
Members were given the opportunity to ask questions and the following points were raised:-
• Councillor O’Hanlon asked how much time was taken and money spent on investigating cases of fraud across the authority.
Barrie explained that it was difficult to estimate how much fraud was being carried out but the cost of the team was more than paid for by the amount of fraud they detected.
• Councillor Matthews asked whether when employing a person their qualifications were checked.
Barrie reported that this was best practice and that the authority was in the process of ensuring that it was carried out.
• Councillor Rothwell stated that the companies that had been used for data matching held a lot more information than the Council required and asked whether the information they provided to the Council was only the proven addresses.
Barrie reported that the Council also carried out investigations to ensure that the information provided was correct.
• Mr Gremson asked what the most prevalent type of fraud was.
It was reported that the most common type of fraud against the authority was in relation to housing benefits.
|
| AU.291 | It was explained that at the last meeting of Audit Committee on 26 August 2010, Members had asked for information relating to absenteeism across the authority. The Head of Strategic Finance presented Members with a briefing note which set out details of the number of staff who had not taken sick leave in the previous twelve months, analysed by department and also a comparison of Bury’s sickness with that of other public bodies and the private sector.
It was explained that there were a number of options available to enable improvement in relation to sickness absence and these were currently being reviewed.
Mr Gremson asked whether there was a breakdown of the types of sickness reported.
Councillor O’Hanlon stated that based on the comparison of the other AGMA authorities Bury was the 3rd worst. There also seemed to be some disparity with the figures from Adult Care Services compared to other departments. Councillor O’Hanlon asked whether the Director of Adult Care Services could be invited to the next meeting of the Audit Committee to discuss the sickness levels within the department.
Councillor Wright asked whether the Committee could be provided with a breakdown of the sickness figures relating to Environment and Development Services.
Barrie Strothers presented Members with a briefing note explaining that the Financial Management Standard in Schools had been halted with immediate effect. It was explained that the Government had recognised the importance of ensuring that schools have the right arrangements in place to manage their budgets effectively and therefore a new, simpler way of achieving this would be developed.
|
| AU.292 | The Head of Strategic Finance presented a report providing Members with a quarterly update on the Annual Governance Statement which had been approved by the Audit Committee at its meeting on 22 June 2010.
The report gave an update on the continuous monitoring that was carried out and highlighted any relevant issues with regards to Risk Management, Business Continuity, Budget Monitoring, the work of Internal Audit, Review of Ethical Governance, the work of the Governance Panel, Gifts and Hospitality and the Local Pay Review.
It was reported that the governance panel had met eight times since its inception in November 2008, and was proving a valuable arena to exchange information and concerns regarding the Council’s governance arrangements including Ombudsman Report and Data Loss risks.
The up to date Corporate Risk Register was included within the report and informed Members of the risk event and status.
Mr Gremson asked whether it would be possible to include whether the risks were low, medium or high within the information provided in the report.
|
| AU.293 | The Head of Strategic Finance presented a report giving Members an update on the system to declare, monitor and report gifts and hospitality offered to and received by staff.
The report set out a summary of declarations made for the period July to September 2010.
Paragraph 2.6 of the report included an analysis of the declarations by Department of the Council and gave the lowest, highest and the average value of the gifts or hospitality.
|
| AU.294 | Heather Garrett, representing KPMG presented the Annual Audit Letter to the Committee. The letter summarised the key issues arising from their 2009/2010 audit of the Council and incorporated their findings in relation to Use of Resources, Financial Statements and High Profile Issues.
It was reported that KPMG had issued an unqualified value for money conclusion for 2009/2010 which confirmed that they were satisfied with the arrangements in place for securing economy, efficiency and effectiveness in the Council’s use of resources.
An unqualified opinion was issued on the accounts which meant that the external auditors were satisfied that the accounts gave a true and fair view of the financial affairs of the Council and the income and expenditure recorded during the year.
The report also contained a breakdown of the fees for 2009/2010
|
| AU.295 | Heather Garrett, representing KPMG presented the Committee with the Progress Statement for the External Audit Programme 2010/2011.
It was explained that the detailed audit plan for 2010/2011 would be reported to the Audit Committee at its next meeting in February 2011.
|