Agenda item
Revised Internal Audit Plan for 2012
- Meeting of Replaces Postponed meeting 11 December 2012, Audit Committee, Monday, 14th January, 2013 7.00 p.m., NEW (Item 5.2)
- View the background to item 5.2
To endorse the revised 2012/13 internal audit plan.
Minutes:
The Head of Risk Management and Audit advised the Committee that, at the start of the financial year, an audit plan had been set that identified the key risks for all operations of the Council. The report provided an update of audit activity planned in this year and also advised of changes to be made to the original internal audit plan as a result of changing priorities and available resources.
The Committee was also informed that the data given at paragraph 4.2 of the report had been amended as follows:
Additional audits added to the plan had increased to 225
Number of days per the revised plan had increased to 1435
The revised current internal audit plan 2012 - 13 was printed at Appendix 2 of the report.
In response to questions from the committee the following information was discussed:
It was confirmed that the internal audit plan incorporated audits carried out by Deloitte and KPMG and included an audit of the management of Baishaki Mela contract.
The Head of Risk Management and Audit advised that in June 2012 the Council had written to the Baishaki Mela Trust recommending certain controls. An audit of these has been completed by Deloitte seeking also to verify the expenditure that the Trust claims to have incurred.
At Members’ request, The Head of Risk Management and Audit agreed to present a report on the findings of the audit of the Baishaki Mela Trust before the next Mela festival took place. The Head of Legal Services – Environment advised that the event was to take place in Spring and preparations were mostly underway leaving insufficient time for a report and recommendations to be actioned. Members therefore requested that officers ensure that the recommendations of the audit be implemented and were informed that most recommendations were financial and should already be in place. The Head of Risk Management and Audit agreed that an audit would be carried out before the Mela Festival took place and confirmed that if areas of concern were identified, these matters could be raised at senior officer level. The Head of Legal Services – Environment advised that, if it were found that audit recommendations were not being followed, the event could be halted if necessary. Members considered whether an audit post-event should be carried out and were concerned that such an audit brought exposure to risk into the following Mela Festival preparation cycle. Additionally they were concerned that the present audit had taken six months; and enquired whether the audit controls were sufficient to address previous allegations around human trafficking. They were advised that the audit process had started in October 2012 but had taken longer than expected. It was now advanced although some work remained to be done. The audit emphasis had been to ensure that any claims could be justified before being paid. At present 80% had been paid to the Mela Trust and the remainder would be paid after the audit had been completed.
Concerning human trafficking allegations, the Head of Risk Management and Audit advised that the Mela Trust was charged to ensure that artists used at the festival possessed the right credentials. An external company was used to verify credentials and it is believed that some artists have been refused participation after vetting.
The Chair asked that a report on the audit of the Baishaki Mela Trust be prepared for the next meeting
Members queried whether the allocation of 15 days for Oyster Card audits was wise use of staff resources and were advised that the first audit of Oyster Card usage had identified an abuse. Therefore it had had been necessary to re-audit the provision. It was also noted that because of staff reductions, audits generally took longer.
Concerning the audit of right to buy scheme, Councillor Ullah highlighted that two different valuations had been given against one property. He was advised that right buy scheme is planned and valuations were generally made by professional bodies; however the discrepancy in the valuations offered by competitive valuers and the possible implications and costs to the Council were noted. It was agreed that this matter would be pursued outside of the Committee by the Head of Risk Management and Audit.
RESOLVED
That the report be noted
Supporting documents:
- 5.2 Revised Audit Plan 2012 13 v3, item 5.2 PDF 81 KB
- 5.2a Revised Audit Plan Appxs, item 5.2 PDF 289 KB