Audit and Governance Committee - Thursday 26 March 2026, 10:00am - Buckinghamshire Council Webcasting

Audit and Governance Committee
Thursday, 26th March 2026 at 10:00am 

Agenda

Slides

Transcript

Map

Resources

Forums

Speakers

Votes

 
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Matthew Walsh
Share this agenda point
  1. Leslie Ashton - Principal Committees and Governance Services Officer
  2. Cllr Matthew Walsh
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Chris Poll
  2. Cllr Matthew Walsh
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Robert Carington
  2. Harry Organ
  3. Harry Organ - KPMG
  4. Cllr Matthew Walsh
  5. Cllr Lesley Clarke OBE
  6. Cllr Matthew Walsh
  7. Harry Organ - KPMG
  8. Cllr Matthew Walsh
  9. Cllr Stuart Wilson
  10. Cllr Matthew Walsh
  11. Harry Organ - KPMG
  12. Cllr Stuart Wilson
  13. Cllr Matthew Walsh
  14. Cllr Chris Chilton
  15. David Skinner - Director of Finance and S151 Officer
  16. Cllr Matthew Walsh
  17. Harry Organ - KPMG
  18. Cllr Matthew Walsh
  19. Cllr Martin Tett
  20. Cllr Matthew Walsh
  21. Cllr Alex Collingwood
  22. Cllr Matthew Walsh
  23. Fiona Jump - Deputy Chief Finance Officer
  24. Cllr Alex Collingwood
  25. Cllr Matthew Walsh
  26. Harry Organ - KPMG
  27. Cllr Matthew Walsh
Share this agenda point
  1. Chris Ward - Senior Member Services and Governance Officer
  2. Cllr Matthew Walsh
  3. Glenn Watson - Principal Governance Officer
  4. Cllr Matthew Walsh
  5. Cllr Lesley Clarke OBE
  6. Lisa Marie Williams - Service Director for Legal & Democratic Services
  7. Cllr Lesley Clarke OBE
  8. Cllr Matthew Walsh
  9. Cllr Lesley Clarke OBE
  10. Cllr Matthew Walsh
  11. Cllr Alex Collingwood
  12. Cllr Matthew Walsh
  13. Cllr Simon Rouse
  14. Cllr Matthew Walsh
  15. Cllr Martin Tett
  16. Cllr Matthew Walsh
  17. Cllr Lesley Clarke OBE
  18. Cllr Matthew Walsh
  19. Lisa Marie Williams - Service Director for Legal & Democratic Services
  20. Cllr Matthew Walsh
  21. Cllr Lesley Clarke OBE
  22. Cllr Matthew Walsh
  23. Cllr Lesley Clarke OBE
  24. Glenn Watson - Principal Governance Officer
  25. Cllr Matthew Walsh
  26. Cllr Stuart Wilson
  27. Cllr Matthew Walsh
  28. Cllr Stuart Wilson
  29. Cllr Matthew Walsh
  30. Glenn Watson - Principal Governance Officer
  31. Cllr Matthew Walsh
  32. Cllr Chris Chilton
  33. Glenn Watson - Principal Governance Officer
  34. Cllr Matthew Walsh
  35. Cllr Chris Chilton
  36. Cllr Matthew Walsh
  37. Cllr Alex Collingwood
  38. Cllr Chris Chilton
  39. Cllr Matthew Walsh
  40. Cllr Martin Tett
  41. Cllr Matthew Walsh
  42. Cllr Alex Collingwood
  43. Cllr Matthew Walsh
  44. Cllr Alex Collingwood
  45. Cllr Matthew Walsh
  46. Cllr Martin Tett
  47. Cllr Matthew Walsh
  48. Cllr Martin Tett
  49. Cllr Matthew Walsh
  50. Cllr Martin Tett
  51. Cllr Matthew Walsh
  52. Cllr Martin Tett
  53. Cllr Matthew Walsh
  54. Cllr Chris Poll
  55. Cllr Matthew Walsh
  56. Cllr Chris Poll
  57. Cllr Matthew Walsh
  58. Cllr Alex Collingwood
  59. Cllr Matthew Walsh
  60. Cllr Martin Tett
  61. Cllr Matthew Walsh
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Simon Rouse
  2. Cllr Matthew Walsh
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Lesley Clarke OBE
  2. Cllr Matthew Walsh
  3. Cllr Simon Rouse
  4. Jo Baschnonga - Service Director for Major Projects
  5. Cllr Matthew Walsh
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
  1. Webcast Finished

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:00:00
Good morning everybody and welcome to the audit and governance committee here at the Gateway on Thursday the 26th of March a
Particular warm welcome to those residents watching on webcast this morning

1 Apologies

Starting with a gender item one, which is apologies
Leslie Ashton - Principal Committees and Governance Services Officer - 0:00:20
Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:00:23
Thanks chairman. We've received no apologies for absence. Thank you very much gender item two declarations of interest

2 Declarations of interest

Remembers how many declarations of interest they wish to declare?
None. Thank you very much.
We then move on to agenda item three,

3 Minutes

which is the minutes to approve the correct record
of the minutes held of the meetings on the 28th of January
and the 10th of February.
Are members content with those minutes?
Clarification, thank you, Councillor Powell.
Yeah, I'm just wondering why we've got
printed set of minutes.
Cllr Chris Poll - 0:00:49
Yes, thank you for that observation.
Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:00:52
The minutes electronically that were circulated
were a duplicate.
that these are the correct meeting minutes
of the January meeting.
On that basis, our members can tend to agree the minutes.
Grood, thank you very much.
We then move on to agenda item four,

4 External Auditor’s Final Reports 2024/25

which is the external auditors final reports for 2425.
Council Carrington.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
And just very briefly say pleasure to be back here.
Cllr Robert Carington - 0:01:19
And what you have in front of you is the final reports
for the 24 -25 financial year.
You'll ask for these in November in their draught form.
And I will hand over to KPMG to sort of go
into the depth of it all.
Thank you very much, Councillor.
Harry Organ - 0:01:39
So if I take the three reports that we've provided for you,
which are effectively the final versions of the reports that
Harry Organ - KPMG - 0:01:48
came to you in November when we were significantly
progressed in our audit but hadn't concluded,
and these effectively finalise the completion of the 24 -25 audit and to give you the final outcomes of those documents and reports.
Just in terms of the first of those reports, so you have our annual auditors report, the final version of that report's already been published on the Council's website,
in line with our completion and signing of the accounts at the end of February.
This includes the annual reporting on the completion of the statements accounts audit,
and I'll cover that a bit further as part of the ISO 260 report, which has a bit more detail.
And then within the annual orders of the report as well, that includes our conclusions
on the value for money arrangements that are part of our audit.
There were no changes to our value for money risk assessment and our identification of the risk
over the delays in EHCPs that were reported and communicated to you in November.
We then concluded that work and that's set out within the report.
One thing to note, so we did not identify a significant weakness as part of that
report and as part of concluding in that we can considered the extent of action
that the councils had already taken in response to the poor performance
of the EHCP service and the financial risk for 24 -25, but we did not
identify the significant weakness to secure economy efficiency and
effectiveness and the use of resources and whilst the nature of that financial
and quality risks faced by the council are significant,
the action taken by the council during 24, 25,
that we considered as part of our audit
was robust and reasonable in responding to those risks.
So we therefore not sought to include a recommendation
of any further action to be taken by the council.
One thing that we would note though,
is that we anticipate due to the nature of that risk
to continue our work in that area in 25, 26,
and considering the improvements in the HCP service
and they're being made promptly and sustainably.
And we envisage performing further procedures in 2526
to assess the effectiveness
of those governance arrangements as well.
The quality of the financial forecasting
associated with that,
and then seek evidence as well about whether that supports
longer term improvement in the quality of services
provided to residents.
And that concluded our value for money piece of work.
In terms of the audit of the statement of accounts,
So we've then included and in detail within our ISO 260 report, so that
includes the key findings from the audit and that reflects now the completion of
our audit of the statement accounts. Just a couple of things to note in terms of
that report which will look very similar to the ones you saw in November, there
were no additional audit misstatements or control findings between what we
reported to you in November and the final report. We reported in that
meeting verbally in November that we'd completed our work over the evaluation of
investment properties as well and there was no further findings to note as part
in terms of completing our audit work in that area. One particular element that we
did want to draw your attention to which was something that we worked on between
the November committee and finally signing the accounts by the backstop
date at the end of February was on page 39 and 40 of the PAC within our report
that sets out the implications of the statutory backstop and that the work we
did with officers to build back assurance.
As we've mentioned, when we met in November,
we've been able to progress the 24 -25 audit and the testing
of those balances.
But because of the historically disclaimed opinions
that the authorities had, we needed
to issue a disclaimed audit opinion for 24 -25.
However, during the audit cycle of this year,
we've had very proactive input from officers,
and we were able to start the build back procedures that
needed to move the authority away from a disclaimed opinion in the future.
And whilst that didn't alter the, I suppose, end opinion for 2425, what it does mean is
we've got greater levels of assurance built up in order to move away from a disclaimed
opinion going forwards.
On page 66 of the pack, which is a bit further on and into page 32 of our report, that sets
out in more detail the specific balances where we've completed work to rebuild assurance
and the specific balances where further work is needed.
And I wanted to draw those particular things out because actually that's the main point
of change between November and the conclusion of the audit.
We're then continuing to work with officers to incorporate the build back procedures into
the 25 -26 audit timeline and look at options in particular around the
valuation of land and buildings which is the one sort of sticky issue in terms of
how we how we work through that with offices and potential options we've got
in terms of how we will rebuild that assurance and the timeframes that we
that we do that in. One final thing that we wanted to draw to their committee's
attention though was that in agreement with Dave and Fiona and the finance team
was that we prioritised the build back procedures
in early 2026 and that meant we deferred
some of our planning and risk assessment work
for the 25 -26 audit which we've now started.
That means as a result we've not tabled
our audit planning report to this committee meeting
which if you catch my mind back to this time last year
we presented that report and that was a strategic decision
that we don't think will impact the overall audit timetable
but means we've put the investment of resources
into building back assurance to help set up the 25 -26 audit with greater levels of assurance
to, like I say, move away from the disclaimed opinion, and that supports that audit and
our ability to do that.
The final thing that I just wanted to flag that actually we've reflected and debriefed
the audit and as we start to plan the 25 -26 audit, and we're really grateful of the input
of officers and their commitment to supporting the first year of our audit of Buckinghamshire.
As in any first -year audit there are things that will do better that we've identified to improve the audit process
But actually their proactive engagement with us has enabled us to complete that
audit of 24 -25, start the build -back
procedures and hopefully move Buckinghamshire away from a disclaimed opinion as the earliest opportunity.
The final report that you've got from us is the
ICE 260 completion report with a pension fund audit which forms part of the Buckinghamshire Council accounts.
That has also gone to the pension fund committee but as part of the governance process is presented to you as part of the annual statement of accounts.
Hopefully that covers everything but happy to take questions.
Thank you. Do any officers want to add anything on this report?
Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:08:45
Okay, thank you. Okay, we'll go to questions from members.
Councillor Clark.
Cllr Lesley Clarke OBE - 0:09:00
It's actually a complaint to KPMG. I don't know whether you are aware that if you have
a sight issue you're supposed to print things in 12 font, not 8. And as a person who suffers
with a problem with sight, I find it incredibly difficult to actually read this. And you're
not the first auditor to come and audit this council that's had that complaint levelled
at them. So could you please from now on ensure that your reports are a little
larger in print. So and I do have some questions but later on if I may. Thank
Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:09:40
Harry Organ - KPMG - 0:09:41
you. Yeah no we'll certainly do that. I know we've tried really hard to do that
and as part of this completionist that got missed because it was a
completing report but absolutely we'll do that in the future council. Any further
Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:09:52
questions from members? Okay, Councillor Wilson and Councillor Chilton, please.
Cllr Stuart Wilson - 0:09:57
Thank you, Chairman. There was an awful lot in that overview, I was trying to follow that
and having read through the report. Mine's actually perhaps a question for you, Chairman,
which is reading this, clearly the EHCP matter is one that stands out in this. And I think
this committee has often talked about real -time transparency.
So we're looking in the rearview mirror at an audit for 2425.
And in a sense, the description that's been provided
is at the point of the audit, there
were concerns that have been raised through this audit.
But clearly, the overview description
that's been provided takes into account the remedial actions
that are being put in place now.
One of the things I think we've always talked about is
how much, what was transparent at the time to,
and I'm thinking here particularly elected members
because we've historically said both from an internal audit
and an external audit is how much is being shared.
I wasn't part of the risk management group
and as the reports rightfully note,
there is now a plan to put the risk register to cabinet and also to this committee as opposed
to the risk management group. But at the time, did the risk management group have visibility
in real time of the issues that were going on in the children's services that raised
the concerns that KPMG have now highlighted? Through another committee, I was aware of
some remedial action in terms of the then deputy chief executive being put in to look
at this area, as my colleague would have done as well. But I think it raises a question
from an, perhaps I use the word inquiry, but to what extent did this committee, perhaps
through the risk management group, have visibility of what was happening? And I think of a seriousness
of the EHCP situation, but perhaps also the procurement one.
And we are aware of steps that have subsequently been taken,
but it is a sense of transparency in real time.
And I don't know where, I'm directing the question to you,
as chairman, but I think it is an issue
that this committee needs to consider.
Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:12:31
Yeah, I mean, I'm happy for KPMG and officers to weigh in,
but I think, obviously, when we come to look
at the Children's Directorate
as part of risk management group.
I certainly think that's something we can ask officers
to provide an update prior to the meeting,
and then that will obviously work
with RMG will feed back into audit and governance.
Okay, just looking at you, Harry, please.
Harry Organ - KPMG - 0:12:52
Yeah, the only thing I'd add is we are,
we will always be backward looking as an audit service,
and we'll always be sort of backward reporting
in terms of what we provide to you and provide assurance on.
The one thing that I would flag is that our work
is limited around what we do as part of the value
for money arrangements, but I think that's then right
for you as a committee to consider how you gain
assurance and comfort over that,
and appreciate we are part of that.
But yeah, that's the limit of what our scope is
and what we work on.
Cllr Stuart Wilson - 0:13:32
And that's in a sense why I directed the question to the Chairman, because you're providing
this response of a situation that was occurring over a year ago.
Our question as an Audit and Governance Committee is how do we understand these things in real
time?
And we've raised the issue with internal audit reports going to Cabinet members being shared
with this committee and the role of audit and governance
and risk management.
There's not a lot we can do a year after the event.
That's the point I'm trying to make.
Yeah, and I think it's important that we do try
Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:14:10
and get a little bit more historical information
prior to the risk management group
when we see the children's director.
Okay, thank you, Councillor Wilson.
Councillor Chiltern.
Yes, thank you, Chair.
Cllr Chris Chilton - 0:14:24
I know this report refers to the 2024 -25 financial year.
And at that time, the conclusion that the Dedicated Schools Grant utilisation of the statutory override was clearly one of the five critical areas of financial stability for BOCS.
Since then, of course, we had the December announcement from the government about the High Lead Stability Grant,
which will fund 90 % of the dedicated schools grant shortfall,
provided that we have a suitable SEND development plan.
I think that, to me, means that the dedicated schools grant,
the utilisation of the statutory override,
is probably no longer a critical area for Box Council,
one of the five critical areas.
I assume that the statement stays
because it applies to the 24 -25 financial year and that was the case at the end of the
25 financial year. So I don't know whether that's a question or a statement or a can
you inform me point or... I'm going to ask our section 1A SIC officer to come in at this
point please. Thank you, Chairman. So I'll let Harry speak for the 24 -25 but I think
I think the answer will be that it's relevant
because that's what it was at that point in time.
David Skinner - Director of Finance and S151 Officer - 0:15:41
I'm not sure that I agree with your view
in terms of the 25, 26 and onwards
it's been completely addressed
through the high needs stability grant.
I think that there is still a degree of uncertainty
in terms of that going forwards.
We need to see confirmation
in terms of what that will actually mean.
Yes, that there is set out the government will fund
90 % subject to the production of a plan. Confirmation of the timing of that money
was only, as you say, set out in December. I think the promise from memory is that
we'll receive that money if successful in the autumn with no end date for that
and there is definitely then the ongoing position for 26, 27, 27, 28 that is still
to be resolved. I know the government has said that they will take an appropriate
and proportionate response to that, but that is still detail
that is yet to be confirmed
and could still be a significant sum
of money for us going forward.
So I think it would still count in the critical five areas
for us to be aware of and to be monitoring those risks going
forward, so I don't think it would remove
that from the critical five in entirety.
If more detail comes through, then obviously we'll review
that on an ongoing basis.
Harry.
Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:17:07
Harry Organ - KPMG - 0:17:08
Yeah, I just echo what Dave said in terms of the 24 -25 audit and that's the point in
time of where we were at in terms of delivering that.
And I think we will then as part of the 25 -26 audit, the consideration of the dedicated
schools grant will change slightly because it will consider the risk level and where
it's at and then we will design our risk assessment and considerations in response to that and
whatever has come out from central government
as part of that process,
and that will feed into our 25, 26 risk assessment
of the value for money arrangements as well.
Thank you.
Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:17:45
Councillor Tef.
Cllr Martin Tett - 0:17:49
Yes, I just wanted to come in to support the 151 officer,
because I think that it can be slightly misleading.
My colleague, Councillor Chilton, has said,
in terms of this problem's now gone away,
because the government has magically waked a wand.
I mean, that is just completely and utterly incorrect.
The role of this committee clearly is looking backwards predominantly at the historic performance,
also obviously looking at the risks going forward.
It's probably the role of the Education and Children's Services Select Committee rather
than ourselves to look at that policy in detail that the government's announced.
But when you look at it and you actually dig into some of the details, you know, as our
head of finance has said, you know, it's 90 percent, it's not 100 percent.
There's the accumulated deficit.
There's what happens on home to school transport, which is still opaque, I believe, in terms
of the government's announcement, which is a major risk in terms of financial input.
And also the additional funding the government's announced, which I think from memory was $3
billion, there is no actual increase in the budget, as I understand it, at central government.
That money is likely to come from the school's budget.
So there may also be a consequential knock -on impact on schools of that funding being diverted
into this area.
So I would not be comfortable with the view
that this is now solved
and it can be removed from the risk register.
I just wanted to put that on the record as well.
Thank you, Councillor Collingwood.
Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:19:08
I'd echo what Councillor Chase just said.
Cllr Alex Collingwood - 0:19:12
It's my view, being part of the risk management group,
absolutely it's going back to risk management group
and we'll be flagging in very detail
what we think is the actual consequence
for not just the individual schools,
because I think we're apparently individual schools,
but also us as a council as a whole.
So I'm again, Mr. Skinner, very much the view
this stays on the register.
We flagged it in the first place
through this register team previously.
That's why it got flagged in the first place.
So to cancel this, would you,
what's his point?
No, we were fully on top of this.
We had one that actually flagged the issue
in the first place in terms of EHEPs and the rest.
So the risk team who work within this part of the group
is very much hands -on and very much about
of live and transparent, if that makes sense.
So then bring to this committee,
as I say, these are things we're not happy with.
Mr. Committee, what do you choose to do?
I've got a separate question
about controlled efficiencies and stuff.
So mine were on page 78,
stroke 79.
I noticed they relate back to priority two and three,
some of which have obviously been implemented,
which is great, but some I think are due to come on 30th of June.
So my question both to the auditors and to Mr Skinner, Chairman, is when would that be appropriate for those to come back to us to then say,
okay, have they been dealt with? In what way? How has it improved service?
Because some are improving our service, so the green ones improve our service.
Others are still not fundamental, but are still important, if that makes sense.
So therefore, we really understand that dynamic.
particularly important ones, when would it be appropriate
or possible to bring back to us and say,
okay, how did that play out?
And how has that then impact on the 25, 26,
or would it going forward, if that makes sense?
Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:21:11
So just in response to the areas that Alex has mentioned,
Fiona Jump - Deputy Chief Finance Officer - 0:21:16
so in terms of the first one,
which relates to expected credit losses.
So we are incorporating an improvement in our processes
already as part of our preparation
for the 25, 26 accounts.
So we will have concluded that work
by the time the draught accounts need to be published.
So after the 30th of June,
it would be possible to give an update to committee
to say where we are on that particular piece.
The second recommendation is around the review
of our capital balances.
I think this is a more ongoing piece of work.
So again, we can provide an update to committee in July
as to how we have progressed
on that particular piece of work.
But it is also linked to our use of systems in order to actually record our capital balances and the information that goes into the
Account so I don't expect that to be concluded within the next three to four months
It'll be an ongoing piece of work, but we certainly can bring an update to committee in July
That's great in July whenever it is chairman, that'd be great
Cllr Alex Collingwood - 0:22:08
Thank you. Are there any other questions from members?
Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:22:09
No, okay. Just a couple of small points from me then if that's okay and
In terms of the audit plan, when do you envisage that coming back?
That we bring that to make the next committee meeting.
Harry Organ - KPMG - 0:22:21
Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:22:25
Okay. And also just to, you know, as part of our regular ongoing communications, we do need to diarise the meetings between the chair and the vice chair and KPMG.
We need to make sure that that's organised sooner rather than later, please.
Okay. All right. If there's no further questions from members, the recommendations the committee has asked to note,
the final order design you report appendix 1 and the ISA 260 appendix 3
and appendix 2 our members content agreed thank you very much that then

5 Annual Governance Statement 2025/26

moves on to a gender item 5 which is the annual government statement 25 26 which
is page 115 of your packs
Chris Glenn.
Thank you, Chairman.
Chris Ward - Senior Member Services and Governance Officer - 0:23:18
So members will recall that the approach to drafting the annual government statement was agreed at January's meeting,
and the document before you reflects the outcome of this work.
As a reminder, the annual government statement is a requirement to reflect on the past year of governance.
This draught meets the SIPFAR guidance by containing an executive summary,
an assessment of effectiveness with examples,
an opinion on the effectiveness signed by the Chief Executive and the Leader of the Council,
a conclusion from the Chief Finance Officer and the Monitoring Officer,
and an action plan for 26 -27, as well as closing comments on the previous action plan for 25 -26.
Members will note that this year's statement includes comments on the Council's governance from external organisations,
such as CITFA, the Care Quality Commission, Ofsted, and the LGA peer review.
Members are asked to agree the statement subject to any comments or amends agreed by the committee.
Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:24:14
Thank you. Glenn, is there anything you'd like to add?
Glenn Watson - Principal Governance Officer - 0:24:20
I don't think so, Chair. Do you want to mention that?
The main paragraph which commences councils across the country are under acute financial pressure and Buckinghamshire is no different.
And this next sentence, although inflation is showing signs of coming back under control, the embedded high inflation over recent years and
cost of living pressures continue to present a significant challenge to our residents and council services.
It's whether the committee considers we perhaps should amend that sentence to reflect more of the present position.
Thank you.
Councillor Clark.
Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:25:04
Cllr Lesley Clarke OBE - 0:25:08
Thank you, Chairman. For a long time now we haven't been reviewing our KPIs and even in
the governance document there's no mention of KPIs and to ensure their effectiveness.
Because I understand that within the peer review we were rather criticised about our
KPIs being out of date. So there's nothing really here to say how we're
going to review with the action plan the KPIs. So is there
anything that you would like to add on that? Yes so I can take that if I may
Lisa Marie Williams - Service Director for Legal & Democratic Services - 0:25:52
Chair. So we do an annual review of corporate KPIs through that
that goes through Cabinet, if that isn't clear in this,
we can certainly make that point.
And we are currently undertaking a review of KPIs
as we speak, so there will be an updated set going forward.
But absolutely, that isn't in here, and we can amend that.
German, through you, could we perhaps ask
Cllr Lesley Clarke OBE - 0:26:12
that audit and governance actually look at KPIs?
It's part of the audit and governance review,
I would have thought,
because they're not brought to us
in perhaps a proper fashion that we can actually review
and make sure that we're actually achieving
what we're hoping to achieve.
Sorry, is that KPIs for the whole of the Council?
Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:26:37
They're individually done by the select committees
at the moment.
You'd like them to be brought here?
Do the select committees look at the KPIs?
Cllr Lesley Clarke OBE - 0:26:45
I can assure you they very much do.
Certainly.
Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:26:48
But in others they don't.
Okay, I mean I think Councillor Clark raises a point about is every single KPI
being covered by a relevant select committee and I think that's certainly a
piece of work that we can look at to ensure that they are. Councillor
Collingwood? I think Councillor Clark's point is very valid because I think we are an
overarching committee for the whole council and I think that's where each
Cllr Alex Collingwood - 0:27:18
committee has a fantastic job looking at their little bits but then actually
looking at the whole matrix of social care versus education
versus transport, whatever, actually
understand the dynamic of how are each of those
interrelating to each other.
So homeschool transport, for example,
covers both two sets of committees, technically.
So you actually would then have a good understanding
of where the KPIs sit and how they then
deliver against the council's overall government statement,
but also corporate plans, just understanding that dynamic
of how it works in reality.
So I'm not necessarily saying we're gonna look at them
like every single one of these shows,
but more understanding the dynamic of where they sit
and how they interact with each other,
and actually are they achieving a strategic aim,
are they seeing a sort of delivery aim,
or a situation where you actually need to deliver
5 ,000 homes or whatever it might be.
So that's why I think the council part's point
is very valid, is we need to re -look at the overarching
piece rather than just the individual.
Thank you.
Councillor Rous.
Yes.
Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:28:13
Yeah.
Cllr Simon Rouse - 0:28:17
So I probably have a slightly different view to that because I think we need to be careful
we don't end up with this committee trying to run the council and bore the ocean a little
bit.
I think, certainly on the select committee I sit on the KPIs are reviewed.
I can't necessarily speak for every other committee.
But I wonder whether, given that we are talking, we talked separately about the strategic risk
register coming to this committee, which just before that one point on that is I guess I'm
really keen to just be confident that is going to be done in a way that will not diminish
the transparency of what officers put in that strategic risk register because I think there
is a bit of a risk that the more that strategic risk register is put forward there's an attempt
to make sure that it doesn't lead to concerns over things that are being mitigated and I
think what's happened in the risk management committee is it's led to quite good high quality
discussions certainly when I was on the risk management group. So I think we just need
to be really confident that the quality of the strategic risk register isn't diminished
by coming to the committee in public session. So just good to understand what the plan is
about where that is, where that's coming to the public session or the private session.
Good to just understand. I do think against that context though, if a select committee
has concern about KPI and is concerned about how that KPI might be increasing the risk
to the Council, I do think we ought to be clear about
what's the mechanism by which,
so that committee could be asking the Audit Committee
to be looking at the implications of that KPI
in the context of the Strategic Risk Register.
If that made sense.
Thank you, Councillor Ralston.
Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:29:49
With regards to the Strategic Risk Register,
that will be coming to the private element of the session,
and it was a recommendation of our auditors
that this committee and cabinet started to look at that.
So that's timetabled in for the main meeting
the confidential session.
And again, this committee's predominant function
is about assurance and framework.
And I think the point about the KPIs
and how they're being looked at by select committees
and who's looking at what KPI
and if there is cross fertilisation
between the different committees,
I think we can definitely get a paper and look at that
and then seek the assurance that members want.
Is everybody content with that part?
Council Clarke, are you happy with that?
Okay, excellent.
Councillor Tett.
Cllr Martin Tett - 0:30:29
I think you just made my comment unnecessary
because I was just going to follow up what Councillor Rous has just said.
We are actually discussing a document on governance. I think it is important just to
remember the role of going through the KPIs from an executive point of view is that of cabinet,
which I know they do. It is not the role of this committee to act as a quasi cabinet.
It is quite correct that each scrutiny committee should examine the KPIs for their various services
and they can comment on them,
but they are commenting on them,
not running them and managing them.
I do think there is a real role,
and I completely take Councillor Collingwood's
and Councillor Rios' point,
which is, there is a question which is,
how well are those other committees scrutinising?
And if there is actually a view
which is that one or two committees
are not giving enough attention to key risks,
that I think is a quite legitimate role
for this committee to comment on.
Likewise, if there are interlaced KPIs, which we don't think are being dealt with effectively
by an individual scrutiny committee, then again, I think that's a legitimate role for
us to comment on and to bring that together.
I do not think it is the role of this committee to act as a quasi -cabinet.
Councillor Clark.
Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:31:49
Cllr Lesley Clarke OBE - 0:31:51
I'm not suggesting that we act as a quasi -cabinet.
What we do know is that when we had the peer review,
we were told our KPIs were out of date.
And if they're out of date, that means
that scrutiny is not doing their job.
So where do we scrutinise out of date KPIs?
That's my point.
And that's why we should actually be looking at KPIs.
To be told that they're out of date is a bit of a concern.
And if we're not following them up, even more so.
Thank you.
Lisa Marie, do you want to?
Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:32:22
Lisa Marie Williams - Service Director for Legal & Democratic Services - 0:32:23
So I think I probably took a different inflexion from the report, which was to ensure that
everything that we were doing in terms of having KPIs that they linked really clearly
to our corporate plan and the strategic plan that the council is supposed to be delivering.
And so that's the one I mentioned the work earlier.
We will be aligning the KPIs with the corporate plan.
So that's the planned work, but I still stand by.
we can add something into the report to reflect KPIs.
Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:32:51
Cllr Lesley Clarke OBE - 0:32:53
So rather the gate has been shut and the horse has bolted, isn't it?
Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:32:59
You're now going to make sure that the KPIs reflect the corporate plan.
Cllr Lesley Clarke OBE - 0:33:02
Surely to goodness it should always reflect the corporate plan.
Glenn Watson - Principal Governance Officer - 0:33:13
I think it's a germane point to this particular item in the annual governance statement.
looking back at the year, you say that the horse has bolted to that extent, this annual
governance statement is looking back at the year gone. If that activity was being reflected
upon in any case, it attains to that year, it is appropriate, as Lisa Mee says, to reflect
that here so that it has that double recognition, partly in the External Orders Report, also
in your own annual governance statement, which is a committee you're responsible for. If
you flag that too, you've endorsed that you've taken that point, you've seen it there, and
effectively looking to the futures to then how you can in the ways the debate has just expressed
ensure that those things are in place and are happening which as Councillor Tetz said is what
that would hit the right inflexion point not pretending to be a cabinet not taking the role
of the scrutiny committee but of the audit and governance committee which is are those things
are they happening in practise as a system,
as a governance approach?
And we can reflect that in here,
and it would be appropriate to put it
in the name of governance statement,
which looks back at the year,
which the auditors have commented upon.
Yeah.
Thank you, Glenn.
Councillor Wilson.
Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:34:24
Thank you.
Cllr Stuart Wilson - 0:34:27
Chris Ward will know this was a particular passion of mine
that we used to try and do them all
in finance and resources.
and I asked for individual portfolio KPIs
to go to each of the select committees,
so I'm glad all colleagues have come
on the Damascene journey with me
that they should be doing the job properly,
and I would hope they're doing the job properly,
but that should be for the chairs of the select committees
to ensure that that is the case.
I do think with the new corporate plan,
there is an opportunity to,
and I hope Cabinet will take that opportunity
to consider if there are twists in the corporate plan.
And I think it was a previous external audit recommendation
that KPI should be allocated against the segments
of the corporate plan.
So I do think there's an opportunity
to do that going forwards.
I agree with colleagues.
I'm not sure that it's a place of this committee
to be looking at the KPIs,
but I do think we need to ensure
that the governance of the council
through the scrutiny committees is done
as we would wish it to be done.
To that point, if I can then move on,
the officer report to the annual governance statement
says there's no annual report of the scrutiny committees
for 2526 in paragraph 2 .2 part B. Why?
And there is a section in the annual governance statement
which obviously does cover some of the work that the scrutiny committees have undertaken this year.
So ordinarily we would have a report of the scrutiny committees that will be going to
either the April or the May council, I can't remember which. Why is that the case this year?
Because, you know, why are we changing something that we've ordinarily done?
Because we all know the role of the scrutiny committees is important. So I don't know why the officer report
Would suggest that this isn't done this year
Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:36:36
Thank you councils and could you just give us the page reference sorry for
Perhaps that's page one one six
Arrogance 2 .2 B. I think council Wilson's referring to
Okay, is that correct, Councillor Lawson?
Cllr Stuart Wilson - 0:36:57
Excellent, okay. Chris, Glen?
Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:36:58
Thank you, Chairman. I think what that's meant to say is missing the word
Glenn Watson - Principal Governance Officer - 0:37:03
yet to that extent. I think there will be one coming in any event. However,
with regard to the annual governance statement and what you've seen before
you know, we've had regard to the work of the select committees in any case.
But I take the point that perhaps that is not as clear as it should be.
Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:37:23
Any further questions from members? Councillor Chilson.
Cllr Chris Chilton - 0:37:30
Yeah, I'd like to start by saying the annual governance statement, very good.
And Chris, thank you very much particularly for asking for feedback and including in the report the items that you got feedback to include.
I'm now going to bring up something else which I didn't include in my feedback and hopefully you can answer it.
And it's a little bit of a bonus about my understanding.
Should the annual governance statement reflect,
for example, issues that brought up in the external auditors
report?
And I refer particularly to the external auditors report
that talked about procurement.
It's not clear that previous weaknesses have been resolved,
is a statement in the external auditors report.
Should we expect to see in the annual governance statement
something that discusses to that point what
the actions which are currently taking place to address the previous weaknesses which haven't
been resolved as reported in the external auditor's report should we have expected to see that.
Glenn Watson - Principal Governance Officer - 0:38:31
Thank you Chairman. Is it appropriate for that to be included in an annual governance statement?
Yes. Where would it be included, particularly when you're talking about what actions have
taken to address that. That's exactly the sort of thing that the action plan on page 144
of the agenda would be to capture that. Issues of significance, that's what the SIPFAA guidance says
about what should be reflected in an annual governance statement and there's some judgement
as to what you regard as the significant issues that should be reflected that you would like to see
in there and tracked. It could be added in more clear terms to the action plan
for 26 -27 to say how the council is addressing that should you wish that to
be the case as a committee and that's where normally that you would expect
that to be the case if that was your agreement. Okay so I'll open that
Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:39:23
discussion point up to members. Do members wish for that to be amended to
be included? I would have wished it to be amended to be included but I know
Cllr Chris Chilton - 0:39:35
Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:39:37
Cllr Alex Collingwood - 0:39:41
your preference Councillor Chilf
hub. So I was trying to work out in my mind, well, if that's already in the government
statement already, that appears that everybody's taken actions to start to change the whole
ethos and process anyway. So I'm just trying to work out in my mind, if that's already in there
for 24, 25, I don't disagree, if that makes sense, Kaz Chil but I'm trying to work out
how you make it sure it wasn't almost doing the work twice over, if that makes sense.
And that was, I probably didn't ask the question very well.
Cllr Chris Chilton - 0:40:21
It's the external auditor's report for 24, 25
says procurement, it's not clear that previous weaknesses
have been resolved.
We've seen some action plans taking place for some work.
Because, and I'm, okay, should we be addressing issues
which were raised formally associated with a 24, 25 external auditors report,
I'm repeating myself, even though we know that some actions are being taken
to address those because we've seen them presented in these meetings. I personally
think it should have been. I think the issues, the weaknesses identified with
procurement were significant. They haven't yet been resolved. There is an
action plan taking place to resolve them.
And I think that should probably be addressed in the annual government
statement as a result.
Okay, Councillor Tapp.
Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:41:19
Yeah, I feel slightly on this topic that I can do with the last topic that just
Cllr Martin Tett - 0:41:22
came up, in terms of what are we here to do and what are we trying to address?
Rather than sort of trying to score points, it's actually,
this is a commentary on governance for 25, 26, yeah?
Unless I've misread the title.
Therefore, it should comment on those items that are relevant
to that period of time.
Now, if it is true that during
that period there was still a substantial weakness
in procurement, then I think it's legitimate to include that.
If, on the other hand, you're referring back
to a previous year and those issues have either been
addressed or are on the road to being addressed, then actually,
to me, the comment in maybe the action plan should just
to reference those things which are being done.
Not reference, not harkening back, you know,
where do we stop?
Do we go back to sort of, you know, 2019, 2020?
You know, where do you draw the line then?
It's a government statement for 25, 26.
That's what we should be commenting on,
plus any outstanding and unresolved issues
from previous years that are relevant to governments,
in my humble opinion.
Thank you for your humble opinion, Councillor Tack.
Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:42:34
Do any other members wish to speak on this?
I mean, having consulted with the Vice Chair as well and listening to group, I think the
majority view here is that the paper is in the right place.
I take counsel to the children's point, but I think we are where we are, and I don't think
we need to make an amendment at that point.
Are members content with that?
Okay, thank you.
Cllr Alex Collingwood - 0:43:00
The point I was going to talk about, Jem, was the bit that Mr Watson brought up about
the first paragraph.
I think I think I think the yeah, I've got that. Thank you. Oh, yes
Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:43:09
Cllr Alex Collingwood - 0:43:11
I guess maybe I was gonna say that taking out the bit about embedding face and talk about that
International volatility just leave it at that because I think that sums up very much where we are today
Yeah, thank you changing times except your chairman Jeremy, but yeah
He probably said me summing up of where we are now
Thank you.
Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:43:28
Councillor Wilson, did you have a question?
Same point.
Okay, well, inflation was the next thing on my thing.
Are members content to recognise the changes in the movement
and can officers provide suitable adjustment in wording?
Okay, thank you.
Can I just cheque, will the wording come back to us?
I mean, it's lovely to always delegate stuff to officers,
but this paragraph is really very important in terms of setting the context.
I'm a bit uncomfortable with just simply saying,
can officers just go away and fix it?
I think we should see as a committee what fixes and agrees,
even if that's done by correspondence.
Cllr Martin Tett - 0:44:01
Okay. I mean, yeah,
Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:44:03
I'm very content for the committee to sign off on that.
In terms of timescales, estimate revised text.
Yeah, exactly.
Yeah, absolutely, yeah.
Okay. And then in terms of a timescale
for members to come back,
can we say end of the week meeting?
Chairman, I'll be honest with you.
Once I'm in agreement with Councillor Wilson,
I could call it.
It's not once, it's happening quite often.
It is, it is, it is worrying Trent.
Cllr Martin Tett - 0:44:29
I actually think this is such a simple amend
that actually if officers could put a bit of a thinking cap on
and get something drafted during this meeting,
we could agree this before we depart.
I'm a bit worried about kicking it into the Longridge Raft.
That's fine, we can do that.
I'm sure we can ask Glenn and Chris and Lisa Murray
Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:44:48
over there to come up with a revised text
that members can agree that can be supported.
Okay, are there any other questions on the annual government statement before I go into one point that I'd like to make?
Okay, okay well if you look at page 133 of the agenda pack
and you'll see it mentions about in reviewing the publication of the government statement I met with the leader and the chief executive to
to discuss governance and assurances and there was an agreement that was a useful exercise that could be timetabled into the drafting process and future
iterations of the document.
I wasn't quite content with the wording,
which I discussed with officers,
because I actually thought it was a very useful meeting,
and I have asked the leader and the chief executive office
in preparation for our new chief executive
that it becomes subjects, diaries,
point where both the leader and the chief executive
come toward it in governance.
So my proposal is to slightly change the wording,
and this is to say that in preparing
the annual government statement,
the chairman of the Audit and Governance Committee
met with the Legion Chief Executive's co -signatories
to review governance matters
and confirm the robustness of assurances.
There was agreement that this dedicated discussion
enhanced the quality of the statement.
As a result, the discussion will now form part
of the preparation for future statements,
ideally at the Audit and Governance Committee.
Are members happy for that slight change of council set?
Cllr Martin Tett - 0:46:21
Sorry, I just always like clarity on what we're being asked to agree and I'm not totally clear because obviously we don't have this text in front of us.
Are you saying you want the leader and the chief executive to come to this committee as part of that process?
Yeah. In future.
And can we just cheque whether the leader and chief executive have been consulted upon that and agreed that?
They have. They have. They have indeed.
Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:46:42
Of course.
Okay, so in preparing the annual governance statement,
the chairman of the Audit and Governance Committee
met with the leader and chief executive as co -signatories
to review governance matters
and confirm the robustness of assurances.
There was agreement that this dedicated discussion
enhanced the quality of the statement.
As a result, this discussion will now form part of the preparation
for future statements, ideally at the audit and governance committee.
Councillor Ted.
Again, just for clarity then, there's a process by which,
Cllr Martin Tett - 0:47:17
I sound like Keir Starmer talking about process.
Will you have your hands in the arm?
I understand the comparison.
But it's, there will be a meeting prior to this report being produced at which the leader
and chief executive come and are,
and I have to use the word scrutinised,
because that's sort of our role,
on governance matters in their totality
prior to this report being put to bed effectively.
It's not that they appear to present this report,
they appear as part of the process to developing it.
Yep?
And they have both agreed to that.
They have.
Okay, thank you, Councillor.
Councillor Powell.
Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:47:59
Cllr Chris Poll - 0:48:03
Thank you Chairman. I'm not sure I like the word ideally. They either will or they won't.
Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:48:12
Can we change ideally to something more positive?
Cllr Chris Poll - 0:48:21
Attend at some point, you just haven't agreed to date. You know they're going to attend,
Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:48:27
just whether it's May, June, July, August, whatever it might be.
Cllr Alex Collingwood - 0:48:34
Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:48:38
Members, this is an evolving thing, this is part of us building back, doing the peer review
and things like that. I have no legal authority, this is not a select committee of parliament.
I cannot summon the leader or the chief executive who is yet to join.
You said he's already agreed to come anyway.
I committed on behalf of the leader. I can't commit on behalf of the chief executive.
I was very clear on two occasions just to confirm that the leader and the chief executive
Cllr Martin Tett - 0:49:03
had both agreed and you said yes.
Yes, the leader has agreed to come and we're not trying to be pedantic here.
Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:49:08
I'm trying to ensure that, Councillor Tam, I'm trying to ensure that this committee gets an
opportunity to meet with both the leader and the chief executive something that never happened previously
in a hope of improving our annual governance process
And I've had assurances from the leader who I'm led to believe and I know you have some experience in this role to counsel
tech that the leader will have some influence over the chief executives diary and that they will ideally attend and
Bearing in mind we've spent more time on a few words here than we have in some of the other parts of the framework
We're discussing today. I've put a proposed
I take the point about ideally, I'll try and strengthen it in future iterations, Council
Cole, but are members content with the revised wording?
Thank you very much.
Okay.
So are there any further questions on the paper?
No.
Just out of interest, Glen, Chris, I don't suppose we've managed to get that wording
on the inflation thing?
We are working on it at the moment.
Okay.
Back to you shortly.
We'll come back to show you that.
Okay, subject to the agreements,
are members happy to approve the annual governance statement?
Agreed. Thank you.
Okay, then that moves us on to the next part of the agenda,

6 Update report on resources required to achieve a 'substantial' Chief Auditor audit opinion

which is agenda item six to update on resources required
to achieve a substantial chief auditor audit opinion.
we are deferring this paper so that we can have a group meeting as in the audit
and governance committee with senior officers to look at getting the paper in
a position where it provides the questions that were raised at previous
meeting I think late last year. So that then moves us on to agenda item 7 which

7 Work Programme

is the work programme which is on page 147 to 150 of members packs. Do members have
any questions on the work programme? Councillor Rous. Sorry I'm gonna join that item with this and then
Cllr Simon Rouse - 0:51:21
with the action log if I can push the boundaries. Cool. So I was going to ask why it had been
deferred. I'm not sure I'm tired of saying but it's obviously fine. Could we therefore add it
to the May work programme that we're getting the paper for that May work programme so it
doesn't refer that and then just to make a point on the action log it's marked as
complete and it clearly isn't so that needs to be amended. Yes we'll take those
Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:51:45
points and it will definitely be on the May agenda it will definitely be on the
May agenda and though I am mindful that this is going to be a very busy May
agenda. Okay any further questions on the work programme? No okay thank you that

8 Action Log

then moves us on to agenda item eight which is the action log obviously noting
Councillor Browses point about complete and obviously not yet complete
Councillor Clark.
Cllr Lesley Clarke OBE - 0:52:21
I had a go at KPMG earlier about the size of their font. Mr Ashton.
No further words?
Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:52:33
That has noted and we will look at and prove that. Thank you.
Councillor Rouse.
Thank you, can I just ask on item number four which was the PMO deferral which I see
Cllr Simon Rouse - 0:52:42
it updates due to us at the May meeting. Can we get a verbal update? Has it been
raised with the appropriate internal board and is there any verbal update you
Jo Baschnonga - Service Director for Major Projects - 0:53:00
can give us on it? We have discussed the paper that is starting to take shape in
draught with the chair. The approach that we're looking to take is to look back at
the work we've done over the last six months in particular to frame proposals
for a restructure to our improvement team, a revised approach to our change
governance, so that's a service improvement board and everything that
sits below it, and the project management tool which it was the subject of the
assurance review and the PMO function that sits around it.
So those three blocks have been redesigned
within the last two or three months
and we have had proposals agreed at the relevant boards
across all of them now in terms of how we're gonna
take that work forward.
So we believe that addresses the gaps that were identified
in the original assurance review and so the paper
that we're planning to bring in May sets out the detail
around that and it will propose then that we reschedule the review to come
towards the end of this year so that we can then test the implementation of
those three blocks of work. Are you content with that Councillor Ayles? Okay
Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:54:21
any further questions from members on this agenda item? No okay thank you very

9 Date of the next meeting

much then we then move on to agenda item 9 which is the date of the next meeting
which is here at the Gateway on the 13th of May at 10 a .m.
Agenda item 10, which is exclusion of the public

10 Exclusion of the public

to resolve that under section 100A4
of the Local Government Act 1972,
the public be excluded from the meeting
on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure
of exempt information as defined in the paragraph
indicated in part one of the Schedule 12A of the Act.
Our members content to agree.
For those of you watching your webcast,
thank you very much,
I wish you all a very pleasant Thursday morning.