Agenda and minutes
Venue: Room MP702, 7th Floor, Town Hall, Mulberry Place, 5 Clove Crescent, London, E14 2BG
Contact: Antonella Burgio, Democratic Services Tel: 020 7364 4881, E-mail: antonella.burgio@towerhamlets.gov.uk
No. | Item |
---|---|
Apologies Apologies for absence were received from Councillors, Mizan Chaudhury, M.D. Mukit, Haque and Aston.
Councillors Zenith Rahman and Peter Golds substituted for Councillors Mukit and Aston respectively.
|
|
DECLARATIONS OF DISCLOSABLE PECUNIARY INTEREST PDF 56 KB To note any declarations of interest made by Members, including those restricting Members from voting on the questions detailed in Section 106 of the Local Government Finance Act, 1992. See attached note from the Monitoring Officer.
Minutes: No declarations of disclosable pecuniary interests were made.
|
|
MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING(S) PDF 114 KB To confirm the minutes of the Audit Committee held on 26 September 2013 Minutes: The minutes of the meeting held on 26 September 2013 were approved as a correct record of proceedings.
|
|
Protecting the Public PurseFraud Briefing 2013 PDF 83 KB To note the contents of the report and take account of the matters raised by the Audit Commission in their report; and also to make suggestions and recommendations as necessary to assist in the management of fraud risks. Additional documents: Minutes: Mr Bryce, Head of Counter Fraud at the Audit Commission presented in his annual fraud briefing. He advised that the focus of his briefing this year would be the antifraud activities of local authorities and that further national data was available via the Audit Commission.
The context of his presentation was “Tower Hamlets’ fraud detection performance and its comparison with other local authorities”. In his presentation he asked the Committee to consider the returns gained against the resources employed in addressing its priority fraud areas and whether
National Picture - It was estimated that fraud activities caused an annual loss of over £2 billion.
Mr Bryce argued that that fraud was not a victimless crime since its consequence was the availability of fewer resources, in terms of access to financial support and housing, to those in genuine need. Noting that councillors were charged with governance of public funds, he asked the Committee to consider how the Council compared to other authorities in terms of fraud detection (strategy and priorities) and its local priorities. He also challenged the Committee to consider how resources were targeted and whether, in the local context, the best returns were to be gained from addressing high-value fraud or high-volume fraud.
Mr Bryce advised that, nationally, of the fraud cases detected in 2012 - 13 (excluding social housing fraud), the largest proportion concerned housing benefit fraud. He noted that housing benefit fraud was the area where most detection work was directed and asked member to consider whether the focus on other areas would be more efficient to pursue. The Committee noted that the scope of Tower Hamlets’ comparative performance against that of other London boroughs was reported within the appendices to the report.
In terms of the total detected cases in 2012 - 13 (1440 cases) and the monies recovered valued at £989,565, Mr Brice challenged the Council to consider which areas of fraud it would be most efficient to address.
The areas of fraud which the Audit Committee monitored and reported were: housing benefit fraud, council tax benefit fraud, council tax discount fraud social housing fraud, right to buy fraud and disabled parking (blue badge) fraud.
Mr Bryce advised that forthcoming changes would be brought about by the establishment of the Single Fraud Investigations Service that would be organised by the DWP and which would take over the authority's caseload in relation to housing benefit fraud. This transition would occur in the forthcoming 18 months and therefore data-matching in relation to this type of fraud would be affected.
Noting that this large area of work would then fall to the DWP, Mr Bryce advised that councils would need to consider where their investigative resources then would best be focused. He challenged the Committee to consider some common areas of fraud such as single person discount fraud and student (Council Tax) discount fraud, whether retrospective sanctions would be appropriate and what principles it wished to pursue in following these.
The Committee was informed that it would receive ... view the full minutes text for item 3. |
|
TOWER HAMLETS ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION |
|
Quarterly Internal Audit Assurance Report PDF 89 KB To note the report and to take account of the assurance opinion assigned to the systems reviewed during the period. Additional documents:
Minutes: The Head of Audit and Risk Management presented the report circulated agenda item 4.1. He offered his audit opinion based on work performed in the year-to-date and gave a substantial level of assurance on the systems and controls in place within the authority. He noted that performance against the indicators formulated at the beginning of the year to monitor the delivery of the internal audit service was lower than target in relation to ‘priority one recommendations implemented by auditees at 6-monthly follow up audit stage. He suggested that this had been because of staff absence and competing priorities. Therefore the Head of Service would ask Deloitte to delay its audit. He also advised that most delays had not been accepted, although some had been agreed because of other inspections or project implementations.
He noted the assurance rating of audits finalised in the period and discussed each of the three limited assurances that were returned during the quarter.
Management and Control of Probationary Tenancy - Follow Up Audit
The Interim Head of Neighbourhoods Tower Hamlets Holmes attend for the discussion of this item.
The Committee heard that four main areas of weakness were identified:
The following were also noted:
The Interim Head of Neighbourhoods Tower Hamlets Holmes was confident that all issues would be resolved on schedule. She confirmed that procedures were now in place to ensure that the targets would be met and agreed to monitor these to ... view the full minutes text for item 4.1 |
|
Revised Internal Audit Plan for 2013/14 PDF 86 KB To note the changes proposed and to endorse the revised 2013/14 internal audit plan attached at Appendix 2. Additional documents:
Minutes: The Head of Audit and Risk Management advised that the internal audit plan had been refreshed during which time some audits had been removed and others added as appropriate.
Members’ request that, for security reasons, information around the security of children's homes should be remaining exempt was noted.
RESOLVED
That the report be noted |
|
Treasury Management Activity for Period Ending 31 October 2013 PDF 236 KB To note the contents of the treasury management activity report for period ending 31 October 2013. Additional documents: Minutes: The Acting Corporate Director, Resources and Interim Service Head Finance and HR Development presented the report highlighting the following: · Treasury activity for the period 1 April to 31 October 2013 · The market update in the context of the economic recovery in the UK · The current cash balance which was due to capital expenditure during the financial year · There had been additional deposits into reserves in the financial year · The composition of the current investment portfolio and graph of investments maturity · The majority of investments were presently short-term investments · Although no Lloyds rating had been available at the time of agenda publication, this was the same as that of Barclays.
RESOLVED
That the report be noted |
|
ANY OTHER BUSINESS THE CHAIR CONSIDERS URGENT Minutes: East End Life (EEL) Councillor Golds tabled an issue concerning the Council's EEL publication, noting that the Government Local Audit and Accountability bill which would abolish council-run newspapers was nearing consent. He advised that the new legislation was likely to come into force shortly and the Council had yet to determine how it would address this matter; additionally the District Auditor had referred to out of date advice on the matter. He asked that the Committee require the District Auditor to give an account in relation to this issue. The following discussion was noted
RESOLVED
That the discussion be noted |