Agenda and draft minutes
Venue: Room MP702, 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 FOR ABSENCE COUNCILLOR CARLO GIBBS IN THE CHAIR
At the Chair's invitation all parties in attendance introduced themselves
Order of Business
A request was made that the order of business be varied to enable item 4.1 to be considered as the first item of business. The Chair agreed following which the remaining business was considered in the order published. Accordingly the Chair moved and it was
RESOLVED
That order of business be varied to enable agenda item 4.1 to be considered as the first item of business.
Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Mizan Chaudhury, M.A Mukit and Craig Aston. Councillor Peter Golds attended the meeting as a designated deputy for Councillor Aston.
|
|
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 PDF 100 KB To confirm the minutes of the Audit Committee held on 17th December 2013. Minutes: The minutes of the ordinary meeting held on 12 December 2013 were approved as a correct record of proceedings. |
|
KPMG ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION |
|
External Audit Plan 2013/14 PDF 1 MB To receive the External Audit Plan for the period 2013/14 and note how the external auditor will deliver its financial statements audit work for the London Borough of Tower Hamlets and the London Borough of Tower Hamlets Pension Fund and to inform the Committee of the approach to value for money VFM) work for 2013/14. Minutes: The Engagement Partner, representing External Auditors KPMG presented the report informing the Committee that key risks would be the focus of the audit work to be undertaken. These areas were discussed in detail at section 4 of the report. Sections 5 and 6 of the report detailed the key financial statements, audit risks and the VFM audit approach.
In response to Members’ questions the following information was provided: • Concerning risks and audit work relating to Members’ Enquiries (MEs) on the treatment of assets , the Committee was informed that these concerned surplus assets and disposal. The Audit Partner commented that the Council might look to scrutinise this area more generally. • Concerning risks and audit work fees in relation to MEs, the Committee and was informed that this work was charged in addition to the scale fee. Members were advised that the charges did not include time lapsed between referral and conclusion of investigations but was based on an estimate of the work needed and of the time required to complete any investigations that the auditor considered were needed, based on reviewing the information provided. A Member suggested that, since the duration of works had been estimated, this element might be included into the overall fee. Members were informed that the External Auditors were able to estimate costs for known factors. However other enquiries might arise during the course of such audit work and the effects of these could not be estimated, hence the decision to list fees for MEs separately. It was noted also that, under the current Audit Commission regime , extra audit work was to be itemised separately to the fee and that KPMG was accountable to the Audit Commission for any variation to the scale fees. (The scale fees are set by the Audit Commission for each Council.) A Member further suggested that, in view of the political arrangements at Tower Hamlets, fees for MEs should be incorporated into the overall audit fee. However the cost of abnormal enquiries was not to be a financial disincentive. The Audit Partner advised that it was not possible to provide an estimate but KPMG individually assessed each ME to determine which should or should not be investigated. Because of issues discussed and for other reasons work for audit of MEs were itemised and charged separately. • Concerning whether an ME investigation might be declined because other organisations where more suited to undertake it, Members were informed that the External Auditor would first consider whether the enquiry fell within the auditor’s remit and also whether the relevant investigative skills and expertise were available within the organisation. Reasons would be given where the Auditor declined to investigate a matter. • Concerning whether lack of response from a local authority influenced whether an investigation would be taken up, Members were informed that delays did not have much effect on the cost of an investigation since no work was carried out whilst data was awaited. • Concerning specific cost breakdowns of investigations, ... view the full minutes text for item 3.1 |
|
Certification of Grants and Returns 2012/13 PDF 1 MB To receive a report summarising the results of work on the certification of the Council’s 2012/13 grant claims and returns. Minutes: The Audit Manager advised that unqualified certifications had been issued for grant claims and returns 2012-13 except for the housing and council tax benefits claim. As a result of the level of unqualified certifications, the fee had been significantly reduced and a further reduction was expected in the forthcoming year.
Members queried the reduction in additional tests for the housing benefit scheme and were informed that fewer errors had been found at initial testing and, in accordance with DWP protocols, less additional testing was required.
RESOLVED
That the report be noted
|
|
TOWER HAMLETS ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION |
|
Quarterly Assurance Report PDF 78 KB To note the quarterly assurance report. Additional documents: Minutes: The Head of Audit and Risk Management presented the report. He summarised the work undertaken in the period December 2013 to February 2014 and noted assurance rating of each audit finalised in the period. He also reported the following audit performance: o Under performance in audits undertaken in quarter 1 had been recouped. o the Audit Team ensured that all priority 1 recommendations were implemented on time. o a number of priority 2 recommendations remained to be implemented.
Four limited assurances had been returned and relevant officers were present to answer questions from the Committee.
Assessment and Commissioning of Placements for SEN Children and Young Persons
The Service Head, Learning and Achievement apologised that due to short notice, she was unable to attend the meeting to answer questions. The Head of Audit and Risk Management agreed to respond or, for more detailed answers, refer questions to the Service Head. He advised that:
In response to Members’ questions, the following information was provided:
Concerning where the authority to spend money resided, the Committee was informed that the Local Authority was authorised by the Health Authority. However the Health Authority's contribution was not clearly defined. Concerning whether the absence of controls placed pressure on social workers to accept particular solutions, the Committee was informed that the service was looking to improve speed of decision-making as delayed or slow decisions might mean that children would have to accept interim accommodation and this could be detrimental.
Management and Control of Markets
The Head of Audit and Risk Management advised that: o The audit had been carried out to assess assurance on the Control of Markets Framework. o The procedure for day-to-day management was compliant as was allocation of temporary and additional pitches. o There were three areas of non-compliance. These were: – Dealing with arrears - these were not dealt with quickly. – Subletting - there was subletting of pitches which was a risk factor to the Council. It was also noted that processes were insufficient to detect sublet pitches. – Public liability insurance cover - in some cases inspectors had accepted lesser forms of proof of insurance cover.
The Service Head Community Safety and Head of Consumer and Business Regulations were present to answer questions from the Committee. The Service Head Community Safety informed Members that efficiency was impeded by the following factors: o The last Market Panel meeting had been cancelled because accurate information on arrears was not available or provided to the market service from finance. |
|
Annual Audit Plan for 2014/15 PDF 72 KB To receive and endorse the annual audit plan 2014/15. Additional documents: Minutes: The Head of Audit and Risk Management presented the report. He advised that some of the audits, in previous years, undertaken by Deloitte would in future be managed by Mazars. The proportion of the audit work to be managed had not changed. He also highlighted the planned areas of work, review of the risk registers, and the summary of the audit work days allocated to these.
In response to Members’ questions the following information was provided:
Concerning the reduction of planned audit work days for Education, Social Care and Welfare audits, the Committee was informed that these areas had the second highest proportion of critical financial systems therefore this areas were given a significantly higher level of audit. This accorded with the overall risk assessment for service areas within the Authority. The Head of Audit and Risk Management advised that the allocation of auditor days could be reviewed if Members felt that additional resources were required. Additionally DMT had identified risks around adult services and asked that additional audit time available be dedicated to this area.
Concerning why management of sickness absence had been reintroduced into the audit plan, the Committee was informed that this had been done because
RESOLVED
That the annual internal audit plan for 2014-15 as set out in Appendix 1 be endorsed
|
|
Anti-Fraud and Corruption Strategy and Proactive Anti - Fraud Plan PDF 149 KB To note the anti-fraud and corruption strategy and the anti-fraud plan. Additional documents: Minutes: The Anti-fraud Manager introduced the report highlighting the following:
Concerning fraud detection performance by DWP the Committee was informed that under present arrangements where a fraud was detected in one area it could provide an investigative lead via benefits records, this form of data matching might not be available in future and in Local Government, there general concerns around what data would be shared by DWP
RESOLVED
That the antifraud and corruption strategy and proactive antifraud plan 2014-15 be noted.
|
|
Treasury Management Activity Update Report to 31 January 2014 PDF 224 KB To note the quarterly treasury management update. Additional documents: Minutes: The Chief Accountant presented the report. He advised that although the Bank of England had maintained a low base rate, the Council's investments remained on target to achieve their budgeted returns. Additionally the investment portfolio had been expanded and an account opened with Svenska in order to better access short-term returns.
RESOLVED
That the Treasury management activity report period for the ending 31 January 2014 be noted.
|
|
ANY OTHER BUSINESS THE CHAIR CONSIDERS URGENT Minutes: Nil items.
|