Audit and Governance Committee - Tuesday 29 September 2026, 10:00am

Audit and Governance Committee
Tuesday, 29th September 2026 at 10:00am

Speaking:

Start of webcast

Share this agenda point

Cllr Matthew Walsh

1 Apologies

Share this agenda point

2 Declarations of interest

Share this agenda point

3 Minutes

Share this agenda point

Minutes of Previous Meeting

4 External Audit Update- rebuilding of assurance on financial accounts

Share this agenda point

Nicola Gyselinck - Chief Accountant
Cllr Matthew Walsh
Fiona Jump - Deputy Chief Finance Officer
Cllr Matthew Walsh
Sarah Brown - KPMG
Philip Kent - KPMG
Cllr Matthew Walsh
Cllr Chris Poll
Sarah Brown - KPMG
Cllr Chris Poll
Sarah Brown - KPMG
Cllr Stuart Wilson
Sarah Brown - KPMG
Cllr Stuart Wilson
Sarah Brown - KPMG
Cllr Matthew Walsh
Cllr Robin Stuchbury
Philip Kent - KPMG
Cllr Robin Stuchbury
Sarah Brown - KPMG
Cllr Matthew Walsh
Cllr Anna Crabtree
Sarah Brown - KPMG
Cllr Matthew Walsh
Nicola Gyselinck - Chief Accountant
Cllr Matthew Walsh

5 Farnham Park Sports Fields Charity Annual Report and Financial Statements 2025/26

Share this agenda point

Cllr Peter Brazier
Cllr Matthew Walsh
Cllr David Moore
Sophie Payne - Service Director, Communities
Cllr David Moore
Sophie Payne - Service Director, Communities
Cllr Matthew Walsh
Cllr Alex Collingwood
Sophie Payne - Service Director, Communities
Cllr Alex Collingwood
Cllr Matthew Walsh
Cllr Stuart Wilson
Cllr Matthew Walsh
Cllr Robin Stuchbury
Cllr Peter Brazier
Sophie Payne - Service Director, Communities
Cllr Robin Stuchbury
Sophie Payne - Service Director, Communities
Cllr Matthew Walsh
Cllr Simon Rouse
Cllr Matthew Walsh
Cllr Peter Brazier
Cllr Matthew Walsh
Cllr Alex Collingwood
Cllr Peter Brazier
Cllr Alex Collingwood
Cllr Matthew Walsh

6 The Higginson Park Charity Annual Report and Financial Statements 2025/26

Share this agenda point

Cllr Peter Brazier
Cllr Matthew Walsh
Cllr Chris Poll
Sophie Payne - Service Director, Communities
Cllr Chris Poll
Sophie Payne - Service Director, Communities
Cllr Chris Poll
Cllr Matthew Walsh
Cllr Stuart Wilson
Sophie Payne - Service Director, Communities
Cllr Matthew Walsh
Fiona Jump - Deputy Chief Finance Officer
Cllr Stuart Wilson
Fiona Jump - Deputy Chief Finance Officer
Sophie Payne - Service Director, Communities
Cllr Stuart Wilson
Cllr Matthew Walsh
Cllr Stuart Wilson
Cllr Matthew Walsh
Cllr Alex Collingwood
Cllr Matthew Walsh
Cllr Anna Crabtree
Cllr Matthew Walsh
Cllr Robin Stuchbury
Cllr Matthew Walsh
Sophie Payne - Service Director, Communities
Cllr Robin Stuchbury
Cllr Matthew Walsh
Cllr Alex Collingwood
Cllr Matthew Walsh
Cllr Chris Poll
Sophie Payne - Service Director, Communities
Cllr Matthew Walsh

7 Audit and Governance Committee Excellence Programme

Share this agenda point

Russell Heppleston - Head of Business Assurance and Chief Auditor
Cllr Matthew Walsh
Cllr Robin Stuchbury
Cllr Matthew Walsh
Russell Heppleston - Head of Business Assurance and Chief Auditor
Cllr Robin Stuchbury
Cllr Matthew Walsh
Cllr Chris Poll
Cllr Matthew Walsh
Cllr Kelly Thornton
Cllr Matthew Walsh
Cllr Kelly Thornton
Russell Heppleston - Head of Business Assurance and Chief Auditor
Cllr Chris Poll
Russell Heppleston - Head of Business Assurance and Chief Auditor
Cllr Matthew Walsh
Cllr Alex Collingwood
Cllr Matthew Walsh
Cllr Stuart Wilson
Cllr Matthew Walsh
Cllr Robin Stuchbury
Cllr Matthew Walsh
Cllr Stuart Wilson
Cllr Matthew Walsh
Cllr David Moore
Cllr Matthew Walsh

8 Annual RIPA and Communications Data Report

Share this agenda point

Glenn Watson - Principal Governance Officer
Laura Heller - Lawyer
Cllr Matthew Walsh
Cllr David Moore
Laura Heller - Lawyer
Cllr David Moore
Laura Heller - Lawyer
Cllr David Moore
Cllr Matthew Walsh
Cllr Stuart Wilson
Laura Heller - Lawyer
Cllr Stuart Wilson
Cllr Matthew Walsh
Glenn Watson - Principal Governance Officer
Cllr Matthew Walsh
Cllr Robin Stuchbury
Laura Heller - Lawyer
Cllr Robin Stuchbury
Laura Heller - Lawyer
Cllr Matthew Walsh
Cllr Chris Poll
Laura Heller - Lawyer
Cllr Chris Poll
Laura Heller - Lawyer
Cllr Chris Poll
Laura Heller - Lawyer
Cllr Chris Poll
Laura Heller - Lawyer
Cllr Chris Poll
Cllr Matthew Walsh
Cllr Anna Crabtree
Laura Heller - Lawyer
Cllr Anna Crabtree
Cllr Matthew Walsh
Cllr Alex Collingwood
Laura Heller - Lawyer
Cllr Alex Collingwood
Laura Heller - Lawyer
Cllr Matthew Walsh
Cllr Sarfaraz Khan Raja
Laura Heller - Lawyer
Cllr Sarfaraz Khan Raja
Cllr Matthew Walsh
Cllr Kelly Thornton
Laura Heller - Lawyer
Cllr Matthew Walsh
Cllr Alex Collingwood
Glenn Watson - Principal Governance Officer
Cllr Matthew Walsh

9 Action Log

Share this agenda point

Action Log

Cllr Kelly Thornton
Cllr Matthew Walsh

10 Work Programme

Share this agenda point

A and G Work Programme 26 - 27

Cllr Stuart Wilson
Cllr Matthew Walsh
Fiona Jump - Deputy Chief Finance Officer
Cllr Matthew Walsh

11 Date of the next meeting

Share this agenda point

12 Exclusion of the public

Share this agenda point

Webcast Finished

Select an agenda point

Scroll with video

Disclaimer: This transcript was automatically generated, so it may contain errors. Please view the webcast to confirm whether the content is accurate.

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:00:00

Okay, good morning everybody and welcome to the Audit and Governance Committee here at

the Gateway this morning.

A particular warm welcome to people watching on webcast.

And we have Agenda Item 1, which is apologies.

No apologies for absence, Chairman.

1 Apologies

Thank you very much and I'd like to take this opportunity to welcome Councillor Stutchbury

to the Audit and Governance Committee.

We look forward to working with you.

And as we wasn't here last time to welcome Councillor Dillon as our Vice -Chairman.

It's great to have a full team today. Thank you very much.

2 Declarations of interest

It takes us on to Agenda Item 2, which is Declarations of Interest.

Any members? Nope. Okay.

3 Minutes

It takes us on to 3, which is the minutes, which is on pages 3 to 10 of your pack to approve.

As a correct record, the minutes of the meeting held on 21st July.

Are members content with those minutes? Thank you very much.

4 External Audit Update- rebuilding of assurance on financial accounts

That moves us on to Agenda item 4, which is the External Audit Update Rebuilding of Assurance

on Financial Accounts, which is page 11 of your PAC.

And Fiona, did you or Nikki, did you want to do an introduction, please?

Hi, Nikki, Chief Accountant here at Buckinghamshire Council.

Nicola Gyselinck - Chief Accountant - 0:01:17

So for Build Back Assurance, we are looking to gain assurance for the three disclaimed

periods of accounts, which is from 21, 22 through to 23, 24.

This is because we weren't able to have an audit of the actual

accounts, so this is to help our auditors and you as members to

be assured that the numbers that we have provided are as accurate

as they can be for that period.

And this is also to provide the solutions to get to that point.

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:01:50

Thank you. Fiona?

Fiona Jump - Deputy Chief Finance Officer - 0:01:53

Just to add to what Nicky said, we've worked really closely with our auditors KPMG on this

piece of work and they'll come in shortly to sort of let you know the outcome of their

risk assessment and where they feel the council is at. I feel like it's been a really constructive

piece of work that we've done with KPMG and hopefully members can get some assurance from

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:02:11

this when they hear KPMG and explain that to you. Thank you.

Thank you. Well, unless members have any questions at this very early point, I will hand directly

over to Sarah and Philip.

Thank you very much.

I'll just give an overview of where we are,

and then Philip will just provide a little bit more

Sarah Brown - KPMG - 0:02:26

detail around what we've done so far

and what we've got left to do.

I think just for context, we talked about this,

I know, in the last committee.

But essentially, as Fiona and Nikki have said,

as well as undertaking the audit of what

I describe as the business as usual 25, 26 audit,

we also want to, as far as possible, build back assurance

over the previous four years.

We are in a very good place.

So as this report sets out,

we have completed our risk assessment.

We're clear on what remains to do for the remainder

of this year up to the backstop date.

There are categories that we are required to assign, A, B,

We have categorised Buckinghamshire as B,

which is an audit that we consider capable

of getting back to a compliant approach,

but note some operational difficulties.

What I would say there is that this wording is prescribed,

and it therefore applies to a range of scenarios,

and it can perhaps be read as a little bit,

perhaps suggestive that it's less robust

than it is.

And the reason I say that is the category A

is really intended for councils that are perhaps smaller,

less complex with only one year of disclaimed opinion.

The fact that Buckinghamshire is a large council,

the first year that it became a unitary was the first year

it did have an audit and it hasn't had

an unmodified opinion since then.

And there are four years of disclaimed opinion.

And so the guidance therefore points us to B category being appropriate.

Having said that, given the level of work that we've already done both last year and this year

to complete our risk assessment, we feel that we're in a very positive place.

And page nine of our report sets out where we expect the audit position to land.

and that's moving to a qualified opinion for FY26,

with the route to unmodified opinion being in 2027.

And frankly, there would be no way of doing that any quicker

given what the position that we inherited.

I'll just pause there,

let Philip go through a little bit more detail

and then we'll take any questions.

Thank you.

Philip Kent - KPMG - 0:04:58

So as Farah has said,

We have done quite a significant amount of work both last year and have worked plan this year to return the council to an unmodified opinion.

Last year the bulk of our work focused on historic capital expenditure over the periods where the council received a disclaimer of opinion and all that work was completed successfully without any matters arising.

Which puts us in a very good position for now completing the remaining work this year.

On page 8, and it is also summarised on page 9 of our report, it sets out the procedures

which remain for us to get, to be able to issue with an unmodified opinion.

So, firstly, the Council's accounting policy, as it was at the time, was that it only revalued

a portion of its assets each year, because that was what was required by the accounting

framework.

Those historic valuations have not been audited, therefore there is an unknown accumulated

portion of your land and buildings where the valuations have never been audited.

We're planning to look at those this year.

Secondly, in 2022 -23, the Council changed the way it presents its infrastructure assets

and calculates depreciation charges on them.

Historically, there was just a total of infrastructure assets, whereas now they're split out into

into the highways and the street furniture

and the lighting and so forth.

And again, there was no audit that year,

therefore that re -presentation has to be audited

to confirm that it is correct.

And finally, the council will, as you know,

have a large amount of reserves

which are split into the usable reserves

and the unusable reserves portions.

Clearly it's very important for you to be assured over financial sustainability and

your ability to invest in services that you know what the correct split between what is

usable and what is unusable.

So our plan is to perform some procedures to confirm that split and therefore be satisfied

with the position of the funds you have to invest.

And again, we are hoping to complete that work this year.

May well slip into 27 depending on complexity,

but initial signs are that the work is progressing well

and we are hopeful to complete it this year as planned.

As Sarah says, if we are able to complete all this work

this year, we would anticipate issuing a qualified opinion.

That would reflect that we've been able to gain assurance

over all of the balances for this year,

but the comparative figures for last year were not audited

and therefore we cannot assure those.

This is the best case position.

It's where we're hoping to get to

and we are on track for doing so.

If we get to that place,

the council would automatically move

to an unmodified opinion for 27,

assuming no issues came up.

If we are unable to complete the work as planned

or any issues were to come up

as part of us completing our work,

we still expect we'll be able to issue an opinion with significantly more assurance than you received last year.

For instance, it may qualify particular balances as having risk for uncertainties inherent to them.

But certainly as the position stands today and thanks to the hard work of your finance colleagues,

we are on track to issue an opinion qualified solely by virtue of those prior period figures.

And we hope that we will have completed all our routine business as usual work for November

and then the remaining build back work for the end of the year,

so that early in 27 we can confirm with certainty the form of opinion we intend to issue.

I think with that we'll be happy to take any questions.

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:09:00

Thank you.

Questions from members?

Councillor Pong.

Thank you, Chairman.

Cllr Chris Poll - 0:09:09

Two questions for you.

The B category.

So we've got B category and we've got qualified and unqualified opinions.

So you've just said that A, possibly is not attainable

for us because that would generally be for smaller councils.

So B is as good as it gets.

So is the, are we wanting to be in B, unqualified,

and is that as good as it gets?

And the other question I had was just how on earth

do you value assets from five years ago?

So I think in answer to the first question,

it's slightly confusing because I guess the category B is

where is the risk category that we put you in.

So what is the risk that we won't be able to get

to an unmodified opinion by 2027?

Sarah Brown - KPMG - 0:10:04

And that reflects that we need to accept

that there have been a number of years of disclaimed opinion

and therefore there is some risk associated with it.

However, what we expect to get to is a qualified opinion

by the end of this year, and that is, as Philip described,

sort of as good as it gets using your language.

But we couldn't get to any better position than that

because the comparatives are unaudited.

Now obviously if we're able to get to a position

where we can audit all of the balances

in the profit and loss account and the balance sheet.

This year, then next year, those comparatives

will be fully audited and the current year,

next year will be fully audited.

So then you'd move to an unmodified opinion

and that's basically back to business as usual.

Cllr Chris Poll - 0:10:58

And how do you value assets from five years ago?

Sarah Brown - KPMG - 0:11:01

So it's not that the assets haven't been valued.

So there have been valuations undertaken.

Then indexation is applied in those intervening years.

And that indexation is effectively based on industry published indices, which we have

access to.

So what we're able to do is go back and look at the costs of those assets and then the

indexation that's been applied in each intervening period.

and then to make sure that obviously that builds up to a position that we're

comfortable reflects the value of the assets as at now.

Cllr Stuart Wilson - 0:11:47

Councillor Wilson. Thank you Chairman. It's like getting an auctioneer's nod or

something you look at me and say have you had a question. I just want to be

clear in terms of what you've said here so that I come away understanding the

situation. So what's in the report is the best case scenario that we can expect.

And what I was just wanting to cheque was if you are not able

to complete all of your audits on profit and loss

on the balance sheet, are we still going to be in a position

to deliver in terms of the qualified

and unmodified timings that you've got in here?

It's just that it won't be as clean if you like,

but we could still get to a qualified opinion in 2026

and we could still get to an unmodified opinion in 2027.

So what I was hearing was best case,

and I just wanted to understand what the backstop position

against that, because I think all of us would like to,

excuse me, all of us would like to feel that we can still

get to that unmodified opinion in 2027,

regardless of whether or not you can complete

the work this year.

So I just wanted to be clear, my understanding.

Yeah, so no, it's very important to clarify.

Sarah Brown - KPMG - 0:13:04

So we, in order to get to a qualified opinion

at the end of, for FY26, we do need to have completed

all of our work over the income statement

and the balance sheet.

So it's important that we're able to do that

because the only way we can give an unmodified opinion

in FY27 is if we've audited in full the comparatives.

So that's what we're aiming to get to.

And I think as we may talk about in a moment,

but this is the reason why our intention

is to bring our opinion to the January audit committee

so that we are able to give ourselves

as much time as possible to complete the work

that we need to so that we can get to a qualified opinion.

We could, in theory, provide an opinion earlier

that wouldn't be quite as robust because we might have had

to down tools earlier than necessary.

Cllr Stuart Wilson - 0:14:06

So just clarity of understanding,

there is in parentheses a potential of a slippage

of one year to each of these.

And I just want to be clear in terms

of what that possibility is, if you can't complete the work this year.

But obviously we're all hoping that we will complete the work this year.

So I just wanted to be clear on that, Jen, so thank you.

Sarah Brown - KPMG - 0:14:29

And I think just to add to that, because I think it is really important that the Committee

does understand, is that they're not capable of supporting a compliant approach as in categories

C and D would be if we didn't think we could get there by FY28.

So I guess in the terms of booking, I'm sure what we're saying is best case scenario

and what we think we have a route to is that you have an unmodified opinion in FY 27.

Worst case would be that you have a compliant, an unmodified opinion by FY 28.

We do not think there is a risk that you won't get there at all,

which is where some other local authorities are if they're in category C or D.

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:15:16

I hope Councillor starts breathing Councillor Travers.

Thank you, Chair.

Cllr Robin Stuchbury - 0:15:20

Reading through your report, and I'd like a little bit more background on Chris's point on how you evaluate assets, because I don't think I really got that.

And then as I read through your kind summary on page three or page 15, you go into your complaints procedure,

which I presume that's what we would go into if we're not compliant and we haven't met all the regulations.

All looks quite frightening, to be honest, if you get down to the last bit of it.

It says refer to complaints to the Ombudsman and servers, which is your last point of avenue.

And I really pop in and out of this often enough to realise that we've been trying to dovetail the accounts from Festing Day.

And we're still trying to dovetail the accounts there, which is partly known to what Stuart said.

But the two questions outside, I don't think were really answered.

And a little bit about the complaints procedure. Thank you.

Philip Kent - KPMG - 0:16:26

On the evaluation point, the majority of the Council's assets are things like schools and swimming pools and libraries and so on.

where these don't come up for sale in the market.

So the valuation approach that the Royal Institute

of Chartered Surveyors has come up with

is you work out how much would it cost

to rebuild that school for sake of argument today,

and then you apply adjustments to reflect dilapidation,

age, is the school too big for the number

of pupils, for instance.

And that valuation is based on data which is available online for

how much it costs to build a school because we do do that as a country fairly regularly.

Because that data is available, it is possible for

us to go back in time and say, well, how much did it cost to build a school in 2023?

and then apply that and to then cheque that the council's valuers have correctly plugged in those figures and correctly plugged in the size of the schools and so forth.

And that does allow us to go and validate what the valuation would have been back in that time previously.

But just to be clear, the council did obtain the valuations at the time and can provide them to us.

It is just a matter of checking if the figures that were plugged

into the valuation calculation were the correct ones

to plug in at the time.

After 24, for the sake of argument, as Sarah says,

the council was required to index those valuations

to keep it up to date for changes in building costs

over time, which is again all publicly available information.

So it is quite straightforward to go and cheque

that those percentages have been correctly applied on top of what the historic valuation

was several years ago.

Cllr Robin Stuchbury - 0:18:26

And the other point, you put in about the complaints where it explained what that would

be and the point that Stuart made as well, I don't think that was sufficiently answered.

I come back with the, I presume at some point the audit committee sees the full valuation

of the assets at some point, I hope, I hope they do, because we base all our going forward

on the value of your assets, you do it in your personal life, so I presume we do this,

it's a little bit more than that and the explanation of the complaints is you put it in your report,

which means you consider it. Thank you.

So I think just on the valuation of properties, within the financial statements that have

already been published reflects what the council believed to be the valuation of all of your

properties as at 31st of March, 2026.

That includes the valuation of investment properties, which are the commercial properties

that the council owns.

Those properties are valued every year by an external valuer.

So that valuation represents what the council

and the council's independent valuers believe to be

the appropriate valuation.

We also include our own real estate valuation specialists

who are RIC's qualified surveyors

to undertake their own review,

effectively challenging the council's independent valuers

to make sure that we are comfortable

that the valuation of those properties

within the financial statements is materially correct.

So that's where that information is published.

And when we provide our opinion,

we are effectively saying that we agree

that that valuation is materially correct.

For the property, plant and equipment,

which is for example, your schools,

Phillips just described the way that they are valued.

Again, that valuation is already included

in the published financial statements.

And when we conclude our work, our opinion is effectively saying that we agree that valuation is correct.

Thank you. And the last thing which we didn't touch on was you put a very, which interested me, a long list of complaints procedures,

which I presume if we don't meet the mark then that's what we go into, which is in the public domain.

And it's interesting to understand what they are.

Sarah Brown - KPMG - 0:21:00

Yep, so that I would say is standard wording, so it's there to make sure that the committee

has a route if you were dissatisfied with the quality of the audit service that we were

providing.

I think it's quite common, well it's very common wording within particularly local government

report because there have been periods of time where, as we've just discussed, for various

reasons audit firms have been unable to deliver a high quality audit service and provide an

opinion.

Obviously, we would hope that what we are providing is a high quality service.

We are doing all of the things that we think we need to do, not only to audit this year's

financial statements, but to put all of the resource

and expertise that we have to hand in place

to make sure that we can build back assurance

for this council as quickly as possible.

If you have any questions, obviously about, you know,

the quality of the service, the resource that we're

providing, the timeliness, you know, we would be very,

very happy to answer those questions.

My name is there as the first point of contact.

Tim Cutler is also named who leads our local government audits nationally.

And then there is a further route to raise any complaints.

So we would hope that you're not in a position where you feel you need to do that,

but we do need to make sure that we give you access if you so wish.

Thank you for your openness.

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:22:37

Thank you. Councillor Crabtree.

Cllr Anna Crabtree - 0:22:41

Thank you. Good morning.

I wanted to say thank you first of all for the plan

for rebuilding assurance, which I think is very helpful

and quite self -explanatory.

At risk of jumping ahead to some other items that are

on our agenda today, as we've got you here at the moment,

there are a couple of other charities that are consolidated

into our group accounts, and there is discussion about whether

or not those should continue to be audited in the future.

So I wanted to ask you whether or not KPMG are relying

on the audit work done by other auditors

and if the charity accounts were to be stopped,

would there be cost implications for our main audit

if you were no longer able to rely on that?

Thank you.

Sarah Brown - KPMG - 0:23:21

Philip may want to jump in in a moment,

but essentially, simple answer is no.

So those charities, neither of those charities,

either individually or in aggregate,

are considered to be significant components.

Therefore, we do not rely on that work

for us to be able to conclude on the group opinion

for the accounts.

We did have some debate last year

as to whether those charities needed to be consolidated.

In the previous year, management chose to consolidate,

but that was not necessary under auditing standards.

We may, as you say, come on to this,

but our understanding is that the council

intends not to consolidate the charity accounts.

this year and we have already consulted on that

and we consider that to be appropriate

on the grounds of materiality.

So there would be no cost implications either way

from our perspective.

Okay, thank you very much for your time.

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:24:22

Any further questions from members?

No, okay.

So just on to the point that Philip alluded to.

Apologies, Nicky.

Nicola Gyselinck - Chief Accountant - 0:24:33

We just wanted to respond to that just to say that

for the 25, 26 financial statements

we haven't consolidated the two charities into the accounts this year.

Thank you.

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:24:44

So just going back to my point, Philip, we talked about the potential for bringing the

opinion in the January meeting and then it will need to be signed off a few days later,

is that correct?

I just wanted to cheque that members are content with that approach.

Yep.

Okay, agreed.

Thank you very much.

Okay, then we now move on to the next agenda item,

5 Farnham Park Sports Fields Charity Annual Report and Financial Statements 2025/26

which is agenda item five,

the Farnam Park Sports Field Charity Annual Report

and Financial Statements to be presented

by Councillor Brazier.

Good morning.

Over to you, Councillor Brazier.

Cllr Peter Brazier - 0:25:19

Thank you, Chairman.

Good morning, everybody.

This report presents the Farnam Park Sports Field Charity

Annual Report and Financial Statements for 2025 -26

for review and approval in the Council's capacity as trustee. The accounts have

been externally audited by AZET and the audit is substantially complete. All

queries have been resolved and an unqualified opinion is expected. The

auditors have made one minor control recommendation relating to the review

of fully depreciated assets on the fixed asset register and officers have

confirmed that this is being progressed. Financially the charity recorded income

of $1 .177 million and expenditure of $1 .428, resulting in a reduction of funds of $251 ,000

in the year.

As previously reported to the committee, a new leasing model was agreed by the Council

as its trustee.

This order reduced the financial pressures on the charity and enabled investment into

the facilities by the new leaseholder.

The lease has now been implemented and operational responsibilities for the facilities transferred

to Wickham Wanderers Football Club and that happened in August this year.

This is already bringing investment and benefits for local users.

For example, Wickham Wanderers Football Club have recently carried out a range of ground

works improvements to the condition of areas of the golf club that have suffered during

this particularly hot summer.

and people will also see extended opening times as well as an improved

catering offer at the clubhouse. The report also asked members to consider

future audit arrangements. This is because changes to legislation from

October 26 mean that Farnham Park may no longer require a statutory audit if

income falls below the revised thresholds. However, officers view is that

it would be helpful for the charity to continue to be externally audited for at

the first year following the change in requirements and in light of the in -year transition to

the new leasing arrangements. I therefore commend the accounts to the committee and

invite members to approve the financial statements and consider the proposed approach to future

audits. I have Sophie and David with me here who are going to be in a much better position

to answer your questions. So thank you Chairman and we're happy to take questions.

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:27:52

Thank you, Councillor Brazier. And thank you, welcome to Sophie and David.

Councillor Moore, do you have a question?

Cllr David Moore - 0:27:58

Thank you, Chairman. I just want to firstly declare as the local ward member I have received representations about this,

but I do not have any pecuniary interest on this item.

I continue to have an open mind, especially with a potential planning application coming forward with the Academy.

So my questions, Chairman, are on governance

in terms of the mechanisms for what are in place

to safeguard the public access of the lease.

So obviously we have the golf club,

and then we have the farm park playing fields.

And as the council acting as the trustee,

to ensure that compliance is there

and that public access is there,

what mechanisms are gonna be put in place

to ensure that's monitored and that the charitable objectives are being followed, especially

the statutory legislation of the Eton Royal District Council Act in place.

Sophie Payne - Service Director, Communities - 0:28:57

So firstly just to provide reassurance that within the lease itself it is enshrined in

terms of that continuing use of the management of the property in line with the Eton Royal

The council obviously does remain

as the sole corporate trustee for the trust

and will continue to be monitoring on an ongoing basis.

Cllr David Moore - 0:29:20

And what would happen if I mentioned,

what would happen if,

what safeguards are there if let's say in a future time,

that those objectives are not being met by the leaseholder?

Sophie Payne - Service Director, Communities - 0:29:34

I think that would be for the council as trustee

to consider by effectively,

depends on whether there was a material breach of the lease arrangements for

example so I think the kind of route of action taken would depend on the

circumstances so future access would be safeguarded under these arrangements in

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:29:58

your view okay I'll leave it to you thank you

Councillor Collingwood. Thanks for having policy delay I was doing another council meeting. You said

potentially you want to have external legal audit for a year. Just

remind me I thought the new lease holders was for a minimum of five years

Cllr Alex Collingwood - 0:30:24

with the potential to extend thereafter. I would be uncomfortable just doing it

for a year, I would be expected to marry with the lease itself.

So if you've got a five -year lease,

you've got a five -year external audit,

because actually you're making sure

that actually whatever happens in those first five years

marries together, both internally, but also

with an external view.

So curious as to why it's only one year,

I would expect five years because then it

marries with the lease.

And if I don't get a Saturday answer,

I would propose actually we do a fundamental amendment

to the proposal that actually says it's going to be a five year external audit.

Sophie Payne - Service Director, Communities - 0:31:01

I think it's open to the committee to determine the length of time.

We're just recommending as a minimum at least a year from an officer perspective we're really

happy for that continuing audit to continue into the future.

We can obviously see the benefit in terms of the transparency of the financial records

of the trust.

So yeah, I think, you know, as I say, we've just gone for a year because we usually come

to this committee on an annual basis.

So it leaves it open to the committee to review in front

of 12 months, hence whether you still feel

that that is appropriate.

But entirely up to you.

Thank you.

I think in terms of recommendation,

Cllr Alex Collingwood - 0:31:36

I get we would review it every year.

But I think we might want to amend the wording

in Chairman's slightly,

it just reflects that it should marry with the lease.

But the expectation we review that on a basis,

the annual basis if that makes sense thereafter.

But that it would marry with the lease.

Thank you.

Councillor Wilson.

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:31:53

Thank you, Chairman.

Cllr Stuart Wilson - 0:31:55

Firstly, I want to say that I support

the officer recommendation that we should continue

with an audit given the history of this location

and I would have some sympathy with my colleagues comments

that we will continue it for as long as we deem necessary.

The second one is a kind of minor point,

But I wonder whether we get some standardisation of language

between our auditors.

So an unqualified audit opinion, is that the same

as an unmodified audit opinion?

Because we have a disclaimed qualified

and an unmodified from KPMG.

But as it's appeared to be talking

about unqualified audit opinion,

and I think it would just be helpful to have a standardisation

of language across that.

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:32:49

I don't know who's going to change, but we'll put it to the audience.

I suspect, I know.

Thank you. Any further questions? Councillor Stutterbury.

Cllr Robin Stuchbury - 0:33:00

Yeah, thank you for the report. Forgive me if I know little about golf and probably more about football.

For the, because it is in the public domain, a little bit about, I believe I understand

how the asset became ours from Wickham, the Zelfbucks Council.

But we haven't got an asset like this in North Buckinghamshire, where we have a golf club

which we're trustees of.

In fact, there's very few assets at all, but of this nature.

So I just want to be assured that the income,

I'm taking it from the cabinet members response

that he's trying to make it revenue neutral.

So there's no drag on the public purse.

It was there any drag on the public purse historically,

and if there was, what was the amount of drag

on the public purse and are you envisaging going forward

that this will not be the case,

which rather brings it back to the point made

by Mr. Collingworth about carrying on an internal audit of this if we have an asset of such

public worth to this end of Buckinghamshire, that end of Buckinghamshire, we need to be

assured that A, it doesn't end up costing us money and B, that we are not net beneficiaries

but we are neutral in where we are because I don't think we're in a position of being

beneficiary financially.

If you can help with that, that'd be kind.

Yeah, I'll let Sophie fill you in the detail, but yes,

Cllr Peter Brazier - 0:34:46

the overriding thing here was to stop the loss and put us

in a much better position.

And also, Wicca Wanderers are going to be investing heavily

in the area.

And it's not just the golf club.

There's Softball UK there.

We've got rugby club hosted there.

There's various other activities.

There's a martial arts centre.

But the softball and the baseball

is quite a big element to it.

But I'll let Sophie address the trust issue there.

I just wanted to be clear that, obviously,

Sophie Payne - Service Director, Communities - 0:35:18

in this committee and as a council,

we're acting in our role as sole corporate trustee here.

So it was in terms of considering

the ongoing financial pressures upon the trust itself.

And that has been what's informed our decision making

has been around the best interests of the trust.

That's just an important point to be clear on.

Everything that Pinterest said obviously does apply

to the trust.

In terms of your broader question, which I think was

around our wider leisure portfolio and whether

that is net neutral, our leisure sites around the county,

then yes, the answer is they are.

No, it wasn't.

It was on this asset.

On this asset, okay.

Yeah. So, but basically this model in terms

of the leasing arrangement, it's a full operating lease.

So the operational expenditure and the operating income

will be within with the new lease holder.

So effectively it takes away that operating cost pressure

from the trust.

Cllr Robin Stuchbury - 0:36:11

And we'll be encouraged by the amount of people who use it.

That's very encouraging.

So basically what are we doing to ensure

that public access remains because it is council asset.

And that probably covers a large area of self -bucketing

you probably benefit by what you said.

So it's important that I understand

that that public access,

so it shows its value can be protected.

And I'm presuming that was written in the lease.

And I'm presuming that was done.

I didn't see it, so I apologise for asking the question.

I didn't see it.

And I just need to be reassured that that goes,

but otherwise it isn't an asset, is it?

Sophie Payne - Service Director, Communities - 0:36:55

Yeah. So to confirm as stated previously, yes,

that usage is enshrined within the lease documentation.

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:37:05

Thank you. I have Councillor Rales. Thank you Chairman. I just want to explore this

Cllr Simon Rouse - 0:37:13

recommendation from Councillor Collingwood because whilst my default

position would always be that clearly transparency is good, I do just want to

whether we're in slight danger of over -engineering this.

Because if I understand correctly the context,

the operational income will move outside of the charity

into the leaseholder.

And therefore, what we will effectively be auditing

is simply the income coming from the rent,

plus any other costs that are associated with the charity.

And so my slight nervousness is that effectively,

if we take the recommendation of Councillor Collingwood has suggested we're committing to a five -year

audit over something that my instincts is will actually be very very light not lights wrong phrase

That there will not be a great deal toward it because there will simply be rent income coming in

And if I read the paper correctly as well, there is already existing governance that will sit within the council structure

To maintain it. So I do just wonder Chen whether we're in slight danger of just going

and look over the top.

And I wonder whether actually the recommendation

from officers which is that we have a year's audit

post this so that we can actually look at

what is going through the charity's accounts.

Is it something that really merits the level of cost

and complexity in office?

Because whilst we've got the time for audit fees,

I assume it also will involve officer time

in pulling the audit together.

I wonder if we do that and alongside that

when we review the audit next year,

we look at the controls, governance oversight

that the council has in place as part of its role

as the corporate trustee, look at those two things

and then take a judgement after year one

about whether or not we feel we want to continue with audits

rather than commit now to a full five year period.

So just, can I cheque?

That's my understanding from officers

and then I'd just like to push that as a sort of slightly

different recommendation.

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:39:01

We have a counter proposal.

So if you'd be anything you'd like to add.

Yeah, I think that's sensible.

Cllr Peter Brazier - 0:39:08

And we've also got the situation this year

where we've transitioned partway through the year

from the previous operating arrangements of the new lease.

And it would obviously make entire sense to have a full audit next year.

And then we'll present this to this committee and have that discussion then as to whether or not we feel it's wise to continue.

Because yeah, there's obviously a cost to the audit.

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:39:34

Okay, Councillor Collingwood.

Cllr Alex Collingwood - 0:39:39

Quite answer Councillor House's question, what he said was,

is the size of audit going to be much less than where we are today?

Not, are we going to have one or not have one?

It's more, if you've got a massive audit to do as of today,

because you've got all the statutory income stuff coming through it and

going forward, that's going to push to one side.

Then I then, except Councillor Bowne's point,

you've gone from a massive audit to a tiny audit.

So why would you necessarily have a tiny audit for five years going forward?

So just clarify is it going from a massive audit

to a much more manageable audit if that makes sense?

The simple answer to that is yes.

Cllr Peter Brazier - 0:40:14

It's going to be a much, much smaller, put simply,

we've got a small income from the leaseholder

and that's pretty much it.

Thank you.

In which case, Chairman, I'm happy to go

with Councillor Rask's suggestion

Cllr Alex Collingwood - 0:40:27

and not go for the five year piece on that clarification.

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:40:29

So we are all content that we'll be happy to approve the report

and we'll see you here again in 12 months to discuss future

watching climate. Is that agreed? Thank you very much.

6 The Higginson Park Charity Annual Report and Financial Statements 2025/26

We now move on to Agenda item 6, which is the Higginson Park

charity annual report and financial statements back to you

Councillor Brazier.

Cllr Peter Brazier - 0:40:51

Thank you chairman.

And yeah, this report presents the Higginson Park charity

annual report and financial statements for 25 -26 for approval

in the Council's capacity as trustee.

Again, the accounts have been externally audited by the ASECS

and the audit is substantially complete.

All audit queries have been resolved

and an unqualified opinion is expected.

The audit resulted in some adjustments to the accounts

but no issues affecting the proposed audit opinion.

Three internal control recommendations were identified

and officers have accepted these

and are progressing the associated actions.

During the year, the charity's income increased from $271 ,000 to $311 ,000, and it generated

an operating surplus of $39 ,000 before depreciation.

Valuation movements and fund transfers.

Sorry.

Unrestricted funds increased from $264 ,000 to $340 ,000 at year end.

The charity's principal assets remained the land and buildings within Higginson Park.

Following depreciation and the annual re -elevation of those assets, total net assets reduced

from $6 .285 million to $6 .027 million.

This reflects valuation and accounting movements rather than the underlying operational performance

of the charity.

I therefore commend the accounts to the Committee and ask members to approve the annual report

and financial statements for 2526.

As for the previous report, we are also asking the committee

to consider the continuation of external audit agreements

following the change in requirements.

Again, Sophie and David are here

to answer your technical questions.

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:42:40

Thank you.

Thank you, Councillor Brazier.

Anything that officers wish to add at this stage?

Okay, thank you.

Cllr Chris Poll - 0:42:48

Councillor Powell and Councillor Wilson, please.

It either sounds like, or I guess I'm asking the question,

Is this a result then of the lack of our audited accounts over the last five years since since resting day?

That the revaluation that KPMG and I were talking about earlier that this is the consequence of that

Sophie Payne - Service Director, Communities - 0:43:16

No, that's not right so so basically I think has probably was described

Earlier there's an annual

revaluation of the assets, which for Higginson Park Charity

principally relates to obviously the property, the land.

And then there's a calculation that's

done around the kind of rental income that comes from some

of those assets as well.

So that's why we see some of these changes

in terms of the valuations each year.

So a factor that would change the valuation of rental income

Cllr Chris Poll - 0:43:51

could be something as benign as the general economic conditions.

Sophie Payne - Service Director, Communities - 0:43:56

Yes and so for example just to give you a specific example this year so we've

got one part of called garden house office buildings which is vacant

currently and so that is taken into account in terms of the valuation.

Cllr Chris Poll - 0:44:06

Thank you, that's perfect.

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:44:07

Councillor Wilson.

Cllr Stuart Wilson - 0:44:10

Thank you, Jen.

I'm not sure I heard what the officer recommendation was with regard to the audit so it would be useful to understand that.

On paragraph 3 .4, it states that gross assets are totaling 6 .154 million pounds, and the

asset -based test is exceeding 5 million pounds.

So it doesn't sound like we've got a choice.

Or there's an error.

So I just wanted to cheque my understanding as to whether or not we actually have a choice

here because it seems to, the report seems to suggest we do have a choice, but the report

suggests that we don't.

And obviously the same comment around qualified and unqualified.

I suppose the other point I would suggest looking at this, and we kind of come to it

once a year, is it's such a fantastic asset, and I'm always slightly underwhelmed by the

income that we generate from it.

But I guess that's not for here.

That's for a different select committee to scrutinise.

So just taking the first question,

and I might defer to finance colleagues

Sophie Payne - Service Director, Communities - 0:45:26

with some expertise on this.

But my understanding is it's about meeting

both of those requirements, so the income as well as the asset

value, which is why there is the option here.

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:45:40

So I have to say before we go to finance, my understanding alongside Councillor Wilson,

I know the limits have been raised but in my own involvement in local charities it's

one or the other. You don't have to meet both thresholds. So like Councillor Wilson said,

if the threshold is now five million we're comfortably above that but if it has changed

then guidance from officers would be appreciated.

Fiona Jump - Deputy Chief Finance Officer - 0:46:07

So I believe my understanding, I think it's both that need to be met.

I suggest we take that one away if that's all right to confirm to committee.

Councillor Wilson.

Cllr Stuart Wilson - 0:46:16

Paragraph 3 .3 says a statutory order is required where either of the above thresholds is met.

So I'm only going on what's in the report, Chairman.

Fiona Jump - Deputy Chief Finance Officer - 0:46:28

And sorry, just to add to that, the second sentence says for the asset based threshold,

Sophie Payne - Service Director, Communities - 0:46:32

both the asset and income conditions must be satisfied.

You're right.

Cllr Stuart Wilson - 0:46:34

I should read both sentences on the paragraph.

I stand corrected.

As do I. Okay.

And your second part of your question, Councillor Wilson.

No, it was another comment on the qualified, unqualified and it was a general question

about the assets.

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:46:53

But I think that's for another select committee.

Cllr Stuart Wilson - 0:47:05

Okay on that point as we are the people that approve the accounts do you want us to draught a note to the relevant select committee asking them that it was flagged by members of audit and governance about the income levels at Higginson Park?

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:47:17

If you wish I think I'd be interested to get Councillor Collingwood given that it falls in his ward and his view on this so I defer to those who are closer to the asset.

Okay, and I'm sorry and Councillor Crabtree.

Oh, I was just going to say and Councillor Crabtree.

Cllr Alex Collingwood - 0:47:26

Next on my list is Councillor Collingwood.

Thanks, Jeremy.

Obviously, you declare a non -precuniary interest because obviously it is in my ward and obviously

you can Councillor Crabtree's ward.

So to second what Councillor Wilson was saying, the bit that struck me is when you read the

actual detail of the audit of accounts, it talks about events and the number hasn't changed.

It's like, well, hang on, how does that work?

And then, yeah, weirdly, the charitable activities have increased.

So again, I think it raises questions of that whole process of how has it been,

the income being generated, but also how has it been physically monitored,

and also how has it been physically posted in terms of what is it, income,

not income, and the rest of it.

So I think it's a question to a different set committee at a different time.

but it was just the principle of everything always changes

unless it's a fixed thing that always happens

in the next 10 years.

Unusually you would not normally see,

you always see some variation in some numbers

somewhere along the line.

To have them the same number all the time is unusual, champ.

So that's why I'll leave it at that.

But yeah, so again, I think the other second,

you can have a look at that in more detail.

Thank you.

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:48:39

Councillor Crabtree.

Yeah, thank you.

Cllr Anna Crabtree - 0:48:42

I think going back to Councillor Wilson's point that it looks like the Higginson Park Trust does not meet the requirements of the new audit standards,

but I think we should be cognisant that this is a very unusual governing set up for a charity.

And looking at the assets report, they've identified five different ways in which they believe that these accounts are at very high risk of fraudulent misstatement.

I think due to the nature of the corporate setup.

So I would probably propose that we follow the same process

that we've had for the previous item,

where I would be more comfortable if we carried

on with an external audit initially, hopefully to iron

out the issues we've had with the internal controls

and the recent audit adjustments, and then review this

on a year -by -year basis to see

if that's appropriate going forwards.

I also just wanted to say on the balance sheet,

the fixed asset numbers are incorrect,

So it'd be good if those could be tidied up before this goes through. Thank you

Thank you

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:49:41

Councillor Starchbury

Cllr Robin Stuchbury - 0:49:44

Thank you

You know, forgive me if I'm not familiar with this asset or burden which are we look at it can have a little bit of a

expression around the

beneficiaries because on page 33

It states the objectives of the charity trust. So on

ERDC Act 1971, and for the rural district of Eton,

and adjoining areas and facilities

for physical education.

So I really want to go back to the point that some assurance

through the cabinet member that we are protecting public access

to this facility, and that we are ensuring that,

I'm sure when this was drafted very, very many years ago,

many of us probably weren't even in short trousers.

It looks like a very old charity.

So, or dress is that point.

But I think we need to establish that

because listening to my colleagues points

around their concerns about the asset financially,

their points around all areas around that,

I do think that that's a really important point

because if we are in any way,

it appears still fiscally challenged by this asset.

It needs to carry on being governed.

And the point raised about going to the finance

scrutiny committee is a good point.

But the public access going back to the first point I made,

I clearly need to understand that there is going to be

public access because I'm sure that 50 mile trip up there

from Buckingham will not be increased to public access

But I'm sure that the people around it will it's just marvellous that we've got such facilities in South broken. She thank you

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:51:35

Sophie Payne - Service Director, Communities - 0:51:45

So I think the council's question was actually relating to the previous report with the Eton Royal District Council that which applies to the Farnam Park

facilities for this charity

It's actually the kind of the beneficiaries are set out within the main reports

So it's at the bottom of page four of the annual report

and accounts under the section objectives and activities.

And I'll just read that out for you quickly.

So the provision and maintenance for the benefit

of the inhabitants of the district of Wycombe,

with particular regard for the inhabitants of the town of Marlow

of a public park, ornamental gardens, et cetera.

It goes on to list the facilities

for physical exercise training, lectures, classes,

and other forms of recreational leisure time occupation

in the interest of social welfare with the object of improving conditions of life as

said inhabitants as the trustees shall from time to time think fit. So that's where it's

defined for this trust.

Cllr Robin Stuchbury - 0:52:35

Thank you for that because you know these are public meetings and though we may refer

to all the stuff in here I wouldn't imagine the public are going to read everything that

we do. I bet they're trying to pay their bills but so you're showing me that the public access

will remain it was just the terminology probably interests me that it was for the

rural district of Eton I thought it interests me I've got to make sure I'm

reading the wrong paragraph and you're reading the wrong report well I'm sorry

about that but forgive me I mean it was just tricking me and I just needed to

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:53:14

ask questions about it thank you. Chairman just clarity it was the Marlowe Urban

Cllr Alex Collingwood - 0:53:18

District Council pre 74 then became part of Wickeham District Council post

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:53:26

1974 and came part of the energy in 2020. And I'm sure both Councillor

Collingwood and Councillor Crampton will be happy to show you around with

Higginson Park Councillor Stutchbury if you've travelled the 50 miles in that

Cllr Chris Poll - 0:53:40

direction at any point. Okay I take now have Councillor Pol. Thank you.

Councillor Crampton has reminded me of something that while I was reading this

over the weekend.

The audit sort of reads, it's so qualified,

it's almost like it's an internal audit rather than

an external audit because they're relying on,

it says in item two, the key risk areas,

that the risk of material misstatement is very high

because of they're just relying on the information

that's been provided to them.

Now that may be standard audit practise,

but it seems to me then there is a risk

that the trustees may or may not,

I make no accusation, but if they don't provide

the information, then the auditors can only

give an opinion on what's in front of them.

So am I reading too much into that

that isn't really there.

Sophie Payne - Service Director, Communities - 0:54:49

I think you're probably asking me to go beyond the realms

of my expertise in terms of audit practise,

but in terms of the provision of information,

certainly the auditors and David might want to comment on this.

They do go beyond just taking the information

that we provide to them, and they do come back

and cheque various transactions, et cetera,

to ensure that it does accord with what we're

presenting to them similarly.

So you'll see.

I think that plays through in actually one of the recommendations for action was, you

know, wanting to see the complete sets of the lease paperwork, et cetera, to provide

that assurance.

Okay.

Thank you.

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:55:25

Any further questions from members?

No.

Okay.

So based on the topic of the conversation and our previous agenda item, we're looking

to approve the report, continue with the audit, come back to audit and governance in 12 months'

time so we can make further decisions and to write to the relevant select committee

just to highlight the income potential for expansion at Higgins Park.

Is that the general consensus?

Is that agreed?

Thank you very much.

7 Audit and Governance Committee Excellence Programme

We now move on to agenda item 7 which is the Audit and Governance Committee excellent programme

which is page 111 of your pack.

I will just say a couple of words to this point.

Huge credit to Russell and the team for drawing up this programme.

And I will hand over to Russell to take us through the detail.

Thank you.

Russell Heppleston - Head of Business Assurance and Chief Auditor - 0:56:16

Thank you Chairman and good morning members.

So this programme has been designed to support the Audit Committee

in fulfilling its duties under this terms of reference.

It's a maturity programme.

so it's something that develops over the next two years.

And it's designed around kind of three main principles,

which is to assess and understand the effectiveness

of the committee, to put in place a programme

to strengthen and continue to drive effectiveness

of the audit committee and its impact it has

on the organisation, and to put in place

a development programme.

This effectively knits together a number of work streams

that are already in place.

So the committee already receives training and briefings

and other presentations to help keep them up

to speed with what's happening.

This is around putting a greater shell around that

and a bit more structure.

And the committee will also present an annual report

each year that's about evidence in how they

have fulfilled their duties.

that goes to full council.

And again, this is about bolstering and strengthening

the evidence base behind how the committee is discharging

those duties in lines of its terms of reference.

There's also a forward -thinking element to this,

which is around ensuring that we have the right capabilities

and skills and expertise around the table

to continue to challenge effectively

and provide the right scrutiny over the council's operations

as we continue to develop maturity around risk management,

assurance and internal control.

And then the final point is around bringing in

some independent expertise.

Now this is considered good practise by CIPFA

and has been for a long time,

but also it will become a statutory requirement

at some point to be determined.

So we need to be on the front foot on that.

In terms of the recommendations,

This is the committee's chance to endorse and influence and steer the programme of work

to agree the overarching principles so that then we and myself and my team working with

the chairman and keeping the committee up to date can then seek to execute these things.

So this isn't necessarily a plan that says this is exactly how we're going to do it,

but if you agree with the principles and the main steps, we will then put that into place.

I'm happy to take any questions as I'm sure it changes.

Thank you.

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:58:56

Okay, Councillor Stutchbury.

Cllr Robin Stuchbury - 0:58:58

Yeah, thank you.

So it's the English De -Volution in Communities

and Powers Act then which drives us to bring in

a independent member to this committee

which leads to question, what will we be doing

to make sure that independent member

either has the knowledge to be able to do this

and adds value to the committee.

Because if they need to have some expertise,

they need to have some knowledge,

which some of us have demonstrated today

with reading papers probably missed.

So in all honesty, so I think that what's the procedure

in doing that, because if we just bring somebody in,

sit here, and they're not going

to contribute any additional value

to the process, it would be a miss.

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:59:52

And I'll let Russell take you over the detail.

But the proposal is for two independent members

so that we have the benefit

of people being a different type of skill.

And I think you and I know, alongside Councillor Wilson

and Councillor Pohl, our time on HASC,

the valuable contribution we had

from the Chief Executive of Health Watch.

So this is in effect similar to that,

that they would be two non -voting members

of the committee.

In terms of how we recruit and how we bring them in,

that's a detailed question that I'll ask Russ

to take you through, but I would expect members

of this committee to play a significant role

in the recruitment process.

Russell Heppleston - Head of Business Assurance and Chief Auditor - 1:00:28

Yeah, I'll just provide a short overview on that.

So the proposals to have an independent member

is not uncommon, so a number of committees I've worked with

have independent members as part of them.

The committee has the ability to set the terms of reference

and to design the role profile.

So ensuring that we have the right independent skills

brought into the committee.

That also includes how we then recruit them.

So whether you have a member panel to do the assessment,

how they're on -boarded, and that sort of thing.

But there is also, as I said, it's

recognised good practise.

and certainly through the Heads of audit network that I'm part of, I'll be looking across other

councils to see how they've designed their independent member roles, things like remuneration,

job profile and the conditions that come with appointing somebody.

So it's not just a case of bringing somebody in, there'll be a fully structured process

to design that role to make sure it complements what the committee most needs.

Cllr Robin Stuchbury - 1:01:39

I'm reassured and also reassured by the Chair's understanding of where it goes from working,

as you rightly said, in the health field where independent people bring something really

marvellous to the table which is their independence.

And I think I'm reassured by that.

Thank you.

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 1:01:56

Thank you, Councillor Starchbury.

Councillor Poul.

Cllr Chris Poll - 1:01:59

The example you used, Chairman, of Health Watch, I mean government interference, they're

being disbanded.

So, you know, what are the protections?

What are we looking at?

And I'm sorry if you mentioned that.

I was looking up, you know,

I thought I'd heard Health Watch had been disbanded

or proposed to be.

Could you explain to me again, you know,

who these independent representatives may be?

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 1:02:29

Yeah, I mean, I'll leave Russell if he wants

to do the granular detail.

But, you know, my reference

to Healthwatch was just an example of a committee

that already has an independent person on, of course it did.

That wasn't a pointer on, no longer on the health committee.

But I think we can all, we've all,

the members of the House could have valued

that independent experience and we can have people,

for instance, that may be independent members

that are experts in cybersecurity.

We all look at the councils, risk register.

Now forgive me if I'm wrong, I don't believe any

of us are experts in cybersecurity.

That person could bring that dynamic.

That may be what the committee want.

the committee may want a different type of skill set.

And again, that's the advantage of going

for two independent members,

that you can potentially have people

with two very different skill sets

that still come along to advise us as members

on overseeing the portfolio.

Thank you.

Councillor Wilson, did you have a question?

Sorry, and then Councillor Thornton.

Okay, Councillor Thornton.

Sorry, I've got two.

Cllr Kelly Thornton - 1:03:26

Just the first one was just an admin point.

Are we being asked to approve option B or option C because there seems to be conflicting

recommendations about the scope and maximum cost and approval authority?

And I'm not sure if it's just that I've misunderstood the papers there.

If I wait for you all to...

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 1:03:49

Thank you.

So B is to develop the proposals, as I've outlined, for the two independent members.

and then C is to launch the Audit and Government Framework,

which are you referring on the framework itself?

So that's the training programme.

I apologise, that wasn't clear.

Okay, so it would be both effectively,

but we'd be fine, okay.

Cllr Kelly Thornton - 1:04:11

And then just on this line of sort of improved scrutiny

and independence, which I think is a great idea,

and I know it's in line with statutory requirements anyway,

but I think it's very important,

particularly for a committee like this

with such high stakes.

Will the reviewer hear directly and confidentially from all members of the committee and the

independents and sort of have access to the information they need to challenge anything

going wrong and how it works in practise?

Because I think ideally something like a sort of published findings and an action plan would

be really useful.

But my main concern is about who will independently assess whether the plan is completed given

how potentially political the committee could be, for example.

It's a really good point.

Russell Heppleston - Head of Business Assurance and Chief Auditor - 1:04:53

So if we commission a reviewer, they would report back to this committee in public domain.

I think that's really important for the transparency.

I would say in terms of how we monitor progress against implementation of any associated action

plan, we would do it through your independent audit function, so by myself.

But we could also include a programme of independent verification.

and we could even commission that as part of the review

that they come back on at 12 months later

to see how we're getting on.

Great, thank you.

Cllr Chris Poll - 1:05:27

Councillor Pohl and Councillor Collingwood.

Just a very quick one on the practicalities.

I think I read we'd have training sessions

before committee meetings.

Say we've all done the necessary, the required training.

If we then need somebody to substitute on a committee,

Would that then preclude them from that?

No.

Russell Heppleston - Head of Business Assurance and Chief Auditor - 1:05:51

No, this isn't a, unlike some regulatory committees,

you wouldn't have to be trained to come sit

on the audit committee.

It would be supplementing knowledge and experience.

But we do have the capability to start to maybe record some

of the trainings so we can make those available to all members

because good governance is something that we're all responsible for.

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 1:06:23

Okay sorry I've got Councillor Pole, then Councillor Collingwood, Councillor Wilson

and then Councillor Stutchbury. Councillor Pole you've been sorry. So Councillor Collingwood.

Cllr Alex Collingwood - 1:06:37

Thank you Chairman. Looking at the paper I can see why the Councillor was

slightly mis -defined because the first paragraph talks about option A, B and C

recommendation being C, but I get that way,

you've got the two independent members

and the full assessment.

And then below the next page line,

it talks about options A and B.

But what they're talking about is that options

for the recommendation are being one or two in effect.

My curiosity with the option two,

yes, it relates back to CIFRA and the RASP,

but there must still be some limitations there,

anyway because you just put only benefits and whereas option one is

there's one of the payments that there are limitations option two there must

still be limitations at some point so I think it's one of these things it must

be able to develop and grow it's in the in the relevant tables you put down

there were no limitations at all for two whereas there must be some sort of

limitations and I think we only find out what the limitations of that are when we

you do the process if that makes sense chairman so I would support the option

C with the two independent members having read through the Brent report to

the outside public they're looking at going you've got option B and option C

so what does it mean so now it's option C I hate doing the members and then

there's a subset of that that says it's option B but I would go with the

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 1:08:05

Cllr Stuart Wilson - 1:08:08

recommendations. Thank you, Jim. Thank you. Councillor Wilson. Thank you. We need to do

this anyway and I think an organisation of this size, scale and complexity. I

think having two people allows us to have people from potentially two

different fields and I think that's beneficial. I think if we were a simpler

organisation, you may say one could probably satisfy,

may satisfy our needs.

So I think it does allow us to go for a more diverse range

of candidates with different skills.

So I think that's good.

Just whilst I remember it, obviously, this

is one of those committees where no substitutions are allowed.

So this and standards.

so I think obviously we want everybody to turn up

to the training because we can't substitute.

On my one build, I think it's most welcome

as an overall programme, my one build on the ambition

or question, and it's the bit in italics involved,

so I guess it's the important bit.

It says as an exemplar of local government good practise,

but there isn't a reference to the local government

association, for example, or other benchmarking.

So there's plenty of references to SIPFA,

but I wonder whether or not the paper should also

reference the local government association,

particularly if we want to be an exemplar

of local government good practise.

I hope we're gonna be an exemplar of local government

best practise, but I understand that there's

and the modest ambition to start off with.

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 1:09:57

Yes, thank you, Councillor Wilson.

We'll add in the LGA stuff.

That's an excellent idea.

Thank you.

Councillor Stutchbury.

Cllr Robin Stuchbury - 1:10:04

Yeah, thank you.

Obviously this issue of those who apply for these jobs

is going to have costs.

I'm assuming that the committee will work at a,

obviously we don't want them to pay to come here,

so obviously we must work at a section

of principal allowance for them.

At least cover their expenses and time that they come here.

Otherwise I should imagine we'd be double -taxing,

there wouldn't be, because they might be paying

as their council tax them, paying to come to our meeting.

So I presume you're gonna work up a principal thing

that the committee will look at and recommend on that,

because we mustn't be relying on people's goodwill

in that sense, thank you.

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 1:10:48

Thank you Councillor Stutchbury. It's a question that I raised with Russell early on in the process and there are a range of different authorities some that provide volunteer up to a level of renumeration.

That is a very important point in terms of recruitment and retention as well and we will bring that back to the committee as the proposal to make a decision on that.

I can assure you it's near the top of my list.

Councillor Wilson.

Cllr Stuart Wilson - 1:11:12

We already have an approved scheme of outside allowances as part of our member allowances

proposals.

So there is also already a start point that's already approved by council.

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 1:11:27

Thank you and I can see our soon to be appointed tomorrow interim monitoring officer nodding

in agreement.

So thank you, Councillor Wilson.

Are there any further questions on this?

No?

Okay.

Councillor Moore.

Cllr David Moore - 1:11:39

Just regarding the investigation surveillance powers, one of the huge problems, not just

in my ward, but in many wards.

Councillor Morel.

Oh, sorry.

We're not on the written paper yet.

It's the next one.

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 1:11:54

No problem at all.

Okay.

Having taken all questions from members, we will go through the SEQA agreement for the

proposals outlined in front of you, which is A, B, to approve two and to develop proposals

in the appointment of two independent members to launch the audit and governance framework

to adapt the ambition statement and to commission independent effectiveness review of the audit

and governance committee. Our members attempt to agree those points.

8 Annual RIPA and Communications Data Report

Thank you very much. Right. We now move on to agenda item eight, which is the annual

Ripper and Communications Data Report to be presented by Glenn Watson, our Senior Governance

Manager, and Laura Heller, our Team Leader in Criminal and Licencing Team. Welcome to

you both.

Glenn Watson - Principal Governance Officer - 1:12:45

Good morning, Chair. Good morning, Councillors. I will be presenting the report today with

Laura Heller - Lawyer - 1:12:57

Glenn's assistance on behalf of the report author, Maria D 'Amigos, the Council's current

RIPA coordinator who was not able to attend today and sends her apologies.

For your information, I will be taking over the role as RIPA coordinator from Maria at

the end of October.

The report seeks to provide an update on the use of surveillance powers since the last

report to committee on the 26th of March, 2025, as well as the inspection conducted

by the Investigatory Powers Commissioner's Office, known as the IPCO, in July 2026.

It also seeks approval for amendments to the Council's CoVet and Surveillance Policy,

found at Appendix 1, with proposed amends in track changes,

following a review which has been undertaken since the last committee meeting.

By way of an overview, Ripper Powers are found within the Regulation of

Investigatory Powers Act 2000.

R .I .P .A. allows the council to undertake directed surveillance,

which is the covert monitoring or recording of a person's

activities, behaviour, movements, communications,

or social media activity where the surveillance is

planned in advance.

And the use of covert human intelligence sources, or CHIS,

which is the establishing or maintaining

of a covert relationship with an individual to obtain information.

Examples of covert surveillance include monitoring social media, audio or visual recording, including CCTV,

certain test purchases, and other covert observation activities.

The Council may use Ripper Powers only in connexion with its core functions of preventing and detecting crime,

and only for investigations involving offences carrying a custodial sentence of six months

or more imprisonment or offences relating to the underage sale of alcohol or tobacco

products.

These powers are mainly used by colleagues in the Council's Waste Enforcement and Trading

Standards teams.

Before any Ripper activity can take place, there are safeguards in place, so an authorising

officer within the council, which is currently two corporate directors, must be satisfied

that the activity is necessary and proportionate, and thereafter approval must be obtained from

the Magistrates Court before any surveillance activity can commence.

There are also strict rules relating to the duration of authorisations, renewals, cancelations,

and record keeping.

With the investigatory powers commissioner overseeing the use

of Ripper powers by public authorities,

including the council.

And the council's use of Ripper is governed

by its surveillance policy and procedure, which is overseen

by a senior solicitor.

The council must also appoint a senior responsible officer,

or SRO, to oversee Ripper compliance and operations.

and that role is currently held by the Assistant Chief Executive.

Please note, Chairman, that paragraph 1 .6 of the report states that the SRO role will be assigned to the Chief Executive from the beginning of October,

which is now not correct.

Following a service review, the role of Service Director legal services will be recruited into,

and therefore the role of SRO will remain with that role.

Accordingly, the chief executive will not be the SRO

from the beginning of October.

And chair, the council also have powers

under the investigatory powers act 2016 or the IPA,

which provides for the lawful acquisition

of communications data,

such as mobile phone and internet data.

And that power may be used for serious crime investigations to obtain data about specific

activity taking place on a network at a specific time, such as the duration and time of telephone

calls or specific IP address connexions.

But this power only applies to serious crime offences carrying 12 months or more imprisonment.

Or the council can obtain non -content data such as subscriber information, so name, billing

address, account creation date, those kinds of details for the prevention or detection

of any crime or disorder.

Again there are safeguards in place in respect of obtaining this type of information.

So first there is internal notification process to the council's approved rank officer which

is the head of business assurance and chief auditor at Russell Hefelstam and the approved

rank officer has been updated since the last report to committee due to officer changes

within the council.

Applications for communications data are then sent to the National Fraud Network or NAFM

who act as an intermediary between public authorities, the Office of Communications

Data Authorizations and telecommunications providers.

They review applications to ensure that they are necessary, proportionate, and meet all

other legal tests.

And finally, the Office for Communications Data Authorization, or the OCDA, provide independent

approval for any applications.

Moving on to the use of the Council's powers, surveillance powers, since the last committee

report to committee in March 2025.

The report demonstrates a limited and infrequent use

of Ripper Power since the last report

to committee in March 2025,

with two directed surveillance applications submitted,

and they relate to August 2025 and March 2026,

and one CHIS application submitted,

and they all relate to activity by trading standards.

All three applications were given judicial approval by the courts.

The authorised activity has since been carried out in relation to all three applications and the authorizations were subsequently cancelled.

The report also confirms that there have been no applications for communications data under the IPA since the last report to committee in 2025.

And to bring the position completely up to date, there are no current live RIFA authorizations,

however there is one currently under consideration.

Local authorities are also required to provide an annual statistical return to the IPCO.

The last return took place in January 2026 and included two directed surveillance applications,

one from February 2025, which was actually reported to the last committee,

and one from August 2025, which is being reported to you today.

It's WANCHES application also formed part of that statistical return.

The direct and surveillance application for March 2026 will be reported to the IPCO for

the 2027 return.

And the CHIS application reported to the IPCO in 2026 is the same one being reported to

committee today.

As you can see, Councillors, overall there has been extremely limited use of these powers

since the matter was last before you.

The IPCO also completed an inspection of the Council's use of covert powers in July 2026

through a document review and questionnaire process.

There were two recommendations made to review the application process and to deliver updated

training.

And as part of the application process, internal template and guidance documents have been

updated to support authorising officers in carrying out their role.

Training for authorising officers any to be appointed.

The new SRO, the new Ripper coordinator and potentially relevant applicant officers is

in the process of being arranged and will take place subject to availability by the

end of January.

Chairman, the report indicated that training would be completed in October, but due to

officer availability it could go beyond that, but is being dealt with as a priority due

to staffing changes.

Chair, Ripper powers are used as a last resort, however, clearly officers must remain aware

of the legislation and be suitably trained in the application, authorization and oversight

of investigatory powers.

The training programme already referred

to will support this requirement.

The next IPC inspection is expected in 2030,

which is in line with the usual frequency being every

three years.

Officers also undertook the opportunity

to conduct a wider review.

And measures have been taken to strengthen oversight

and governance arrangements.

This included a review of the council's covert

and surveillance policy with proposed amends

to the policy arising from that review.

The committee are asked to approve the proposed amendments

which appear in track changes

on the draught policy appendix one.

A summary of the proposed amendments

to the policy include the inclusion

of a policy assurance review, which is a sense cheque

of the work. Paragraph 95 to 99 of the policy sets out this process, which involves the

RIFA coordinator reviewing applications and authorizations to ensure they contain sufficient

detail and consideration of the relevant legal requirements. Removal of references to statutory

instruments that are not required for the purposes of the policy, clarification of references

to the applicable codes of practise to avoid confusion arising from different publication

and update dates for accessible and PDF versions.

The removal of superseded statutory references and inclusion of updated legislative references.

Updates to reflect changes in the council's organisational structure,

including references to the assistant chief executive directorate and updated officer roles.

and an increase in the number of authorising officers from two to five to be determined

by the service director of legal services.

This will build organisational resilience and increase senior officers' knowledge of Ripper powers.

Ripper and IPA powers provide the council with extensive investigatory powers which are inherently intrusive.

It's therefore essential that the council's governance arrangements ensure these powers are exercised lawfully

Proportionately and in accordance with the council's policies and relevant legislation

Independent oversight is provided through regular inspections by the IPC. Oh

So to conclude the report the committee is

Recommended to note the contents of the report by way of update and adopt the updates to the Buckingham chair councils

Covert surveillance policy and procedure

Subject to approval, the policy will be updated to incorporate the proposed amendments and

will continue to be reviewed annually with a further update presented to the committee

setting out any proposed policy changes and the use of Ripper and IPA powers going forward.

And Chair, may I also suggest that the next report to committee for this matter remain

scheduled for the first meeting after January 2027 to keep it coordinated with the IPCO

statistical return which happens yearly in January. That concludes my report Chairman.

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 1:25:34

I'm happy to answer any questions you may have. Thank you very much. Councillor Moore, then

Cllr David Moore - 1:25:40

Councillor Wilson, then Councillor Stutt, then Councillor Pohl, then Councillor Crabtree. Thank you.

Thank you Chairman.

Fly tipping is a huge problem across the county.

Whether it be my ward, the wards of all the members here,

and there seems to be a huge issue of fly tippers who essentially are quite obviously there when it comes to surveillance.

They may be passing a number of different cameras.

I understand that the fly tipping team does have covert camera technology which we do use.

But my concern is whether the Ripper powers are strong enough for our fly tipping enforcement teams who catch a lot of people,

but need all the tools they can to use surveillance to catch fly tippers and to use FPNs.

Because I understand FPNs, fixed penalty notices, are civil.

And it says here it relates, it's kind of engaged when an offence carrying a custodial sentence of at least six months or more

or related to alcohol, tobacco.

Is there any way that could be expanded to include all fly tipping cases?

So, some of the offences that the waste team deal with are,

Laura Heller - Lawyer - 1:26:49

when the FPNs are issued, they do go down the criminal route.

So, for some matters, like littering from vehicles,

an FPN is issued and that goes down the civil enforcement route.

And so, Ripper Powers wouldn't be suitable for those types of cases.

But for the majority of offences that the WAIS team investigate, they are offences which are either way offences, so can end up in the Crown Court.

And so potentially do meet that threshold of 12 months or more.

And the team would need to conduct an investigation and get to the end of that investigation,

determining whether or not the sufficient evidential threshold is being met,

and also consider the public interest test to determine whether or not they were going to prosecute the matter or issue a

financial penalty

Or indeed a caution or take no further action. So and potentially Ripper powers are something that the

waste -team could utilise in appropriate circumstances

But certainly for offences which are being dealt with by down the civil route

then that wouldn't be an appropriate use of ripper powers.

Cllr David Moore - 1:28:08

If I may, Chairman, most fly tipping fines are civil

for the very reason that going to the Crown Court

is too expensive for the council,

the taxpayer takes forever.

Is there any way we can include civil wrongs

such as most fly tipping cases to this?

Laura Heller - Lawyer - 1:28:22

The majority of FPNs, as far as I'm aware,

that are issued by the fly tipping team

are issued as an alternative to prosecution.

So what happens is, if those FPNs are not paid,

the waste team prepare a prosecution file

that then comes to legal services for consideration for prosecution.

So they are investigating offences which can end up in the court

if those FPNs are not paid.

So at the early investigation stages,

Ripper is potentially something that the waste team could use.

However, of course, they would need to consider not only the maximum penalty for that particular

offence, but also whether or not the evidence can be gained in any other way.

So, rippers should be an absolute last resort because it is very intrusive in nature.

And so, the proportionality and the necessity of using ripper powers would need to be carefully

considered by the applicant officer and then by the authorising officer if it

got that far before those powers were were engaged but it's certainly

something that that could be made use out of by the waste team. Thank you Joe

Cllr David Moore - 1:29:39

I just want to note that it would be good to see those powers maximised

because in my view dumping on a field is worse or the same level to underage

alcohol sales. In fact, I think it's worse, but thank you.

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 1:29:50

Thank you. Councillor Wilson.

Cllr Stuart Wilson - 1:29:52

Thank you, Chairman. Thank you for the introduction. I just wanted to clarify

who will be the senior responsible officer in an interim period because

you said effectively the role is going to stay where it is,

but I'm not sure on what the recruitment timetables are, so

I just wanted to be clear in terms of what the interim arrangements were, should there need to be so.

And I wanted to pick up on the point around extending the authorising offices from two to five,

which I think you said was for resilience, organisational resilience.

I sort of understand that, but there is also merit of having continuity, and in terms of we don't do many of these.

And I think having a more compact group of individuals

means there are certain standards

and we have sort of continuity of performance

and assessments as to whether or not standards have been met

so I'd be interested to understand why five

as opposed to say three or you know,

two to five seems quite a big jump.

And so I just wanted to understand

And are we trying to bring too many people into the fold to try and do that?

But I can understand that two may be problematic given absences and what have you.

So I just wanted to, as you say, these are very, very serious and intrusive powers.

So we want to make sure that we're keeping it under control and review.

Laura Heller - Lawyer - 1:31:37

My understanding Councillor is that the interim SRO will be Hayley Norman Thorpe who will take over that position I believe on the 8th of October.

If I may Chair, on the 1st of October.

1st of October, apologies, Councillor.

In relation to increasing the authorising offices,

my understanding is, yeah, the reason behind that is to increase that resilience at senior officer level.

So clearly having two authorising offices could be an issue with annual leave

and if people aren't in the office and so on and so forth.

And so really at senior officer level, because the legislation sets out limits and parameters

on which officers can exercise these powers, will ensure that if those powers need

to be authorised, that there is somebody available, but also builds that knowledge

across very senior officer level in the organisation in respect of use of these powers.

Now, all of the officers who are new to these roles will be sufficiently trained and they

won't be able to exercise any of these powers before they have that training to enable them

to properly carry out that role.

And the point that you've made about almost having too many people may kind of water down

those skills.

In the policy, there is a new provision

for the Ripper coordinator, which from October

will be myself, to work closely with applicants and also

authorising officers when they are carrying out this role

to provide support and ensure that they are covering

all of the legal tests that they need to

and fully explaining their rationale in any decisions.

And so there will be, although they don't come up very often,

and we don't expect them to come up hugely often going forward,

obviously we don't know, there could be an increase.

But when they do come up, each officer will have that additional support

from the Ripper coordinator, which hopefully should assist

with the concern that you have with them not being exposed to many of these

applications over the years or over a number of years. I don't have an

answer for you on why five specifically were chosen. I can take that away if you

want an answer to that and try and come back to you but I think the idea was

just to build that organisational resilience and make sure that very

senior officers within the authority had skills to be able to understand and

authorise these types of applications. And as I've said,

there is additional inbuilt support within the changes that are being asked to

be approved today in order to support them in that role going forward.

Cllr Stuart Wilson - 1:34:59

Thank you. I'd be interested to get a sense of what others think.

My sense would be we have the two that are named currently

in the document and whether

or not we should have named substitutes.

It just feels to me a little bit random to say we're going

to have five and, you know, pick two from five.

So I'd kind of like to keep it focused,

more focused if possible.

Okay. Well, we'll let the conversation continue.

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 1:35:29

Just on one point regarding interim roles

and Hayley Norman -Forp.

I do keep mentioning this to officers on a regular basis.

There are numerous changes with the departure

of the assistant chief executive who leaves next week.

Obviously, regarding the interim monitoring officer,

that was a full council appointment,

so the paperwork was provided for that.

Buried on Buck's net is the appointment

of Hayley Norman -Forp as the interim role.

But there's nothing else gone out to members.

As the governance committee, I want to flag that.

We need to get much better at letting elected members know

who's filling what roles especially with the big changes coming to the former

ACE directorate so can I ask Mr Watson if that can be noted and members can be

Glenn Watson - Principal Governance Officer - 1:36:11

updated please. It absolutely can be noted Chairman and that it's being

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 1:36:14

actioned and I'll date you on that. Thank you very much.

Cllr Robin Stuchbury - 1:36:17

Councillor Stutchbury. Thank you I was interested in Councillor Wilson's point

about continuity I think that needs to be listened to because of decisions being

taken.

But my question is, Ripon Power's right.

They're investigating powers under the Powers Act 2016.

The extent of them is probably quite limited, I think.

It's to do with crimes up to 1 ,000 pounds, which

means they're quite serious.

And I took note of Councillor Moore's point

about where we could use these powers for fly tipping, which,

of course it's very difficult to decide what the sentence would be because in advance of

them being charged. So I see a difficulty in that, although I share the enthusiasm to

stop fly tipping. But as we move into this world of observation and observation, I had

the privilege with my late wife of visiting a communist country once and she worked for

the Ministry of Defence and we were very well observed all over the entire journey.

We were there, we were never alone. So I think we need to then explain the powers of the

Act a little bit more as we're in the public that people don't feel that their rights are

being infringed. This isn't about infringing people's rights, this is about protecting

climate. I think a little bit of explanation around that. Why I joked about observation

in a communist country. I think it was to bring people's fears about observation and

peers about their lives being interrupted. If you're not doing hate crime, you will not

be subject to these things, but people always gather moss on this stuff, or the ball rolls

forward and the storey grows. So I had a little explanation around that, why I made the jocular

remark about it. Thank you.

Yeah.

Laura Heller - Lawyer - 1:38:18

Um, Councillor, just to come back on your point regarding the potential centres that

somebody may receive.

So we are considering the potential maximum sentence.

So there are statutory, there are guidelines, sentencing guidelines for the courts and also

for each offence it's set out in legislation what the maximum sentencing powers are for

the court.

So, although the officers do not know at the start of an investigation how an investigation

is going to go and how serious an offence would be, if they're investigating fly tipping,

for example, they can look to see what the potential maximum sentence is, which I can't

remember off the top of my head, but what I can tell you is it's an either way offence,

which means it's capable of going to the crown court and so has a fairly substantial upper

And that therefore would potentially be an offence for which they could utilise Ripper

powers.

But as you rightly said and identified, use of these powers is extremely intrusive.

And that is why the use of them has so many safeguards in place.

So we have internal safeguards in place.

So there is a stringent authorization process and hurdles that have to be overcome with

legal tests that are applied before then the application goes before a court.

So although we have authorised it internally, that isn't where the oversight stops because

an officer then has to go to a court and before a magistrate or a judge and present their

application and it's then for the court to determine whether or not to allow that surveillance

activity to take place.

And under the new policy, there's also this additional safeguard, if you like, of the

Ripper coordinator's role, which will be to act as this sense cheque.

So to provide additional support in checking officers' applications to make sure that they

contain all of the information the authorising officer needs

to have in order to make their decision,

and then to double cheque the authorising officer's rationale

and reasons and their statement of reasons

to, again, make sure that that is sufficient in order

to demonstrate that the relevant legal tests have been met

before the matter goes to court.

Before officers even get to that point,

they really need to consider whether or not

is appropriate because for the majority of investigations,

they will be able to evidence gather

without ever having to use Ripper powers.

And as part of the assessment of whether or not

it is necessary and proportionate to utilise these powers,

they need to consider whether or not the evidence

that they intend to gain can be obtained

in any other non -intrusive way.

And if it can be, then officers shouldn't be going down

the Ripper route.

And so hopefully for anybody at home who may be watching this,

because I know that you're concerned

about how they may view this.

There are many safeguards in place.

It should be used as an absolute last resort.

There are lots of layers of protection in place.

Even for communications data, it goes through NAFIN,

who acts as an intermediary.

They cheque applications to make sure they're thorough.

And it's gone through an internal notification process.

and then it gets approved by a separate department, the OCDI.

So there are lots and lots of layers of protection, and rightly so,

because it's a very intrusive use of powers.

However, in limited circumstances, it will be appropriate to use Ripper.

But I hope that yourself and also members of the public are reassured

by the extremely limited use of these powers since we were last before committee in March 2025.

So there has been three separate occasions in that time period,

which hopefully demonstrates that it is very, very limited and rare that these powers are exercised.

Obviously just a follow up.

Very quick follow up.

Cllr Robin Stuchbury - 1:42:46

Worked historically on something where there's dangers in a criminal action that with not

full knowledge to police of what they're doing to make sure that if there's a criminal investigation

going on our actions don't then interfere with that criminal investigation.

So I presume like the Swan unit there will be some shared intelligence just to cheque

that we're not treading into a major criminal investigation,

which is ongoing, which we wouldn't know about,

and our actions effectively blow that criminal investigation

out of the water.

Laura Heller - Lawyer - 1:43:23

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 1:43:26

Yeah, Council, let me note that, thank you.

Thank you, Councillor Pong.

Cllr Chris Poll - 1:43:32

Thank you, Chairman.

I'm gonna break this into two, if I may,

and I'll try and be as quick,

But I've got some short but very important questions.

First of all, the report, I thought it was excellent.

I read through it this morning, having missed it.

I was busy this weekend.

But I read through it in 40 minutes this morning,

and I thought it covered everything.

So well done for that.

So as has sort of been touched on,

some would want more intervention.

Some would be horrified at the level of intervention.

But how do we get involved?

Is it a police referral?

Would a member of the public phone and say,

I believe there's some modern slavery going on,

some money laundering.

Why would we get involved, not the police?

Would the police refer it to us?

And then just as Councillor Moore said, fly tipping.

Would that ever reach the threshold

of us getting involved to the extent of Ripper,

like Kidlington for example.

Laura Heller - Lawyer - 1:44:36

So the council become aware of potential criminal matters

for which they would investigate through either,

yeah, intelligence reports from members of the public.

It could be officers that are out on the street

and might come across something that then leads them

to an investigation.

And the reason why we investigate certain offences

is because the council have investigation powers in relation

to some of their functions.

So for example, licencing functions, the waste team,

private sector housing, fraud.

There's lots of departments within the council

that some matters wouldn't be appropriate for us to take on and we may need to refer to the police,

but there are lots of offences that the council investigate and lots of enforcement action which can be taken.

Cllr Chris Poll - 1:45:44

Would something like Hiddlington be within our competence?

Laura Heller - Lawyer - 1:45:52

Now the massive fly tip next to the A34.

I don't think it's right for me to comment on individual sites.

Just because I don't have all of the information before me.

What I can say is that for very large scale fly tipping matters,

they can end up in the Crown Court.

So they can receive fairly heavy custodial sentences.

And so there is a potential for large scale fly tipping matters to fall within Ripper if it was necessary and proportionate to do so.

Cllr Chris Poll - 1:46:29

So thank you for that. I wasn't asking you to, you know, I just wanted to use the scale as an example.

If that were the case, have we got the resource to deal with that?

Would we just say to the police, you've got to deal with it because we just can't handle something on this scale?

I'll just leave that one hanging.

Very briefly, page 33, no, not page 33, item 33,

what is covert surveillance?

Monitoring, observing, or listening all persons,

I think that should be of persons,

and I assume that this has just been copy pasted

from the Ripper guidelines, so maybe Ripper's wrong.

Being pedantic.

And then the strikethroughs, you've explained,

presumably just updates from 2018 to 2024.

So I thought it was excellent.

And then just finally the audit in January.

What are the sanctions though if we, if they, somebody feels

that we were, you know, over eager or not proactive enough?

You know, what happens with that report?

It comes to here, but is there a sanction against us?

Laura Heller - Lawyer - 1:47:41

I will need to come back to you on sanctions if that's okay.

I'm Councillor because I don't have that information to hand with me.

Maria D 'Amigos provided this report, so I'm presenting it on her behalf today.

But I can certainly come back to you on that point.

And your first question, could you just repeat that for me, please?

Cllr Chris Poll - 1:48:02

So, yeah, it was just on the Kidlington,

that example of a massive implication of a flight.

I mean, it was tonnes and tonnes and tonnes.

Clearly, European scale organised crime

was involved with that.

Would that be left to us, or would we have to say,

look, it's just too big for us,

it's gonna have to be the National Crime Agency

or something like that?

Laura Heller - Lawyer - 1:48:33

Yeah, I think it's difficult because those are operate it's difficult for me to answer because those are operational decisions

Which would need to be dealt with on the ground by the enforcement teams

but I can say that some very large scale fly tippings would fall into the remit of the Environment Agency rather than the

the council to investigate

So but as I said, I couldn't comment on individual matters

that would be an operational decision for the the enforcement teams. Thank you

Cllr Chris Poll - 1:49:01

and I'm happy to wait till January if that's when you're coming back for the

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 1:49:06

response to that. Yes thank you. We'll take a written response so we don't

have to. I will add if we do come back in January I also think it would be

helpful if we schedule part of the briefing in confidential session so you

can provide a little bit more granular detail so members can be aware. Okay I

I try to keep up with the agenda.

Councillor Crabtree.

Thank you.

Cllr Anna Crabtree - 1:49:26

And there is a chance that what I'm about to ask might be something

that we've better discussed in confidential session in the future as well.

I was interested in paragraph 2 .1 where you set out the cases that have been used,

which you then described since the last report came to the committee.

I was just wondering whether there's any review that's done after the event.

So it's good that there are the cases are closed as needed

But do we look back and consider whether or not they were justified whether or not there were

Prosecutions brought whether the outcomes we were hoping for were achieved and I'm just thinking in terms of

Councillor Wilson's concern about how many approving officers we need

We might for example see an increase in cases in future if we have more people available to approve them

Will we then go back afterwards and look and see whether or not those cases were justified and whether we got the outcomes we were hoping for?

Laura Heller - Lawyer - 1:50:23

What's gone on previously I yeah, so there are the

The authorizations are subject to a review process to make sure that their continued

need is still in place and so that they are cancelled as soon

as they need to be.

And certainly all investigations will be reviewed to make sure

that there are any learning outcomes that are actioned

as a result of that.

And that will certainly continue going forward when I take

on the role of RIFA coordinator.

Cllr Anna Crabtree - 1:51:10

I'm just wondering really maybe whether there could be a second

paragraph in that section of the report when we see you again in the new year

just to say for example there were four cases used and all four of them had the

outcomes we were hoping for and have now been closed or there have now been eight

cases and only five of them turned out to be justified and the other three we

probably shouldn't have done will be a bit more careful in future.

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 1:51:28

We'll get that into the confidential programme. Okay Councillor Collingwood.

Thank you Chairman. Following on that point that was coming from the member of the sources.

Cllr Alex Collingwood - 1:51:40

was what a bit like when we look at standards, you have a scenario where so

many cases have been requested, so many have been reviewed, so many have been actions,

so many have been closed, but actually then what lessons learned thereafter are.

Cuz curiously I was looking at the paragraph through and it was like, okay.

So generic, and some generically wrong, case specific, but

it reads the way it reads.

You could have a scenario where either the place or other outside agencies request us

to perform some functions because of our nature of what we do.

And vice versa, we could then potentially ask them, so it wasn't clear from this whether

or not there was any joint work in cross agencies there, or was it just us doing standalone

pieces rather than going actually, it's part of a wider piece of work in terms of community

safety and or highways or whatever it might be.

That there may be other agencies who ask us to work with them and vice versa, we want

to work with other agencies.

So it wasn't clear in that bit how that works in practise as a generic piece rather than

a case specific piece.

Laura Heller - Lawyer - 1:52:48

It would be the council who are exercising their particular functions in relation to,

as I've said, the prevention and detection of crime.

Agencies like the police and other organisations

have their own ripper powers.

And some organisations, such as the police,

don't have to go to the courts to get judicial approval.

So there are lots of government departments

and different organisations that have their own ripper powers

and would utilise those in appropriate circumstances

for what they are investigating.

So it's very much us exercising our powers in conjunction with different council departments

who are investigating criminal offences.

Cllr Alex Collingwood - 1:53:41

What I was trying to allude to was are there situations where you may be doing joint work

with police, fire, whatever else it might be because you've both got a common goal,

if that makes sense, and therefore by combining whatever they do and whatever we do, actually

you get a better outcome, better result, if that makes sense.

Laura Heller - Lawyer - 1:53:58

So do we do joint working as well as trying to articulate?

Yeah, I guess that there could be joint working where

matters spans the remit of different organisations.

But it would still need to be an appropriate and proportionate

use of powers in relation to what

the council are investigating.

Thank you.

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 1:54:20

I have Councillor Roger, then Councillor Thornton.

Cllr Sarfaraz Khan Raja - 1:54:22

Thank you Chairman. Moving on from Councillor Moore and Councillor Pohl. These powers are really good but in my area where my ward is, we have a problem with car traders dumping cars and what they do is cover number plates and cover the wind numbers on the cars.

So when we go to the DVLA and the police report the incidents and all that, because they're

parked in Buckinghamshire car parks or on verges, which are Buckinghamshire -owned verges,

could we use these powers in that situation to detect who the owners are or put surveillance

on them to find them, et cetera, et cetera?

Laura Heller - Lawyer - 1:55:06

It's difficult to say having such limited information, but there are certainly overt

techniques that the, you know, an evidence gathering that enforcement teams could use

to try and track down the owners of those vehicles.

So if there was CCTV in the area that were already operating, then officers could cheque

that CCTV to see whether or not that could assist in their investigation and that wouldn't

necessarily fall under Ripper. So I'm not sure because it would be very case specific and

I'd need more information in order to assess whether or not it would be an appropriate use

of those powers and also have to consider what the potential sentence is by the court and so on and

force, but there are lots of investigation techniques the enforcement teams have which

don't fall under Ripper, which are not covert, which they can utilise in those types of circumstances

to try and gather enough evidence to bring proceedings or take enforcement action against

offenders.

Cllr Sarfaraz Khan Raja - 1:56:24

Thank you. Why I mention that is because in the Berkshire Press has mentioned this car

cars parked there with 30, 40 penalty tickets on there and nothing happened. So that, you

know, obviously the community get fed up because there's lack of parking enforcement. Our enforcement

are doing their jobs, putting the tickets on the police can't do anything. And, you

hoping something you know could be done like flight tipping or something in our

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 1:57:00

Cllr Kelly Thornton - 1:57:03

powers to do something like that. Thank you. 90 Councillor. Thank you. Just

leading on from what Councillor Crabtree and Councillor Collingwood said I think

it would be useful to use the standards committee sort of reporting process as a

template so that we could have potentially the confidential information

obviously would have to be in a confidential part of the meetings.

But even if it was anonymized,

a document that says when the powers were used,

who the officer was that signed it off,

what the proportionality assessment was and what the outcome was so that there's

some process where we can review all these powers being used properly.

How often are they getting the outcomes we want?

Are there other mechanisms we could use that are more efficient?

And of course the other way around to go, actually,

if it's all going really well, then having that data to show this is how we're using

that quite invasive power in relation to rights to privacy properly, I think is very useful.

And the problem is at the moment we don't have any of it to really go through. Whether

that needs to be in a confidential appendix in a meeting or not depends on I guess what

data you guys have. And it may be that it's already being collected, we just don't have

it in the agenda. But I think that would be useful for the quarterly updates. Thanks.

Laura Heller - Lawyer - 1:58:15

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 1:58:16

Thank you, Councillor noted.

Okay, I think that concludes members' questions on that.

So, three elements here.

Firstly, are members happy that we moved this agenda item in the Work Programme to January to line up with the thing?

Taking on board members' points about additional information and then looking at the papers to see what can be discussed in public and what we will have to put into the confidential session.

Are members content with that element?

Excellent, thank you.

We then had Councillor Wilson's comments. Is there any further comments on increasing the numbers or are we happy to increase it to five for now and then caveat an update in January to yeah?

Councillor Collywood.

Cllr Alex Collingwood - 1:59:03

I think it'd be helpful to understand which role they hold because the obvious one would be the first four corporate directors would be the obvious answer.

there's two of the quadrants or you do it anyway.

But it'd be just a note in between now and January

just telling you which posts they were

and why they were chosen just so we understood,

just so we had a bit of context in the meantime,

rather than to wait until January to find out

who the five happened to be.

Perfectly fair point.

Yeah, are we happy?

I'm looking at Glenn here.

We happy to circulate the posts once they're all in place?

Glenn Watson - Principal Governance Officer - 1:59:36

Yeah, absolutely, yeah.

Okay, and then we'll review it at our January meeting.

Is that agreed?

And everyone happy to note the overall report?

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 1:59:43

Okay. And approve the Co -Lerks

Maintenance Policy as per our recommendations.

Yes? Thank you.

9 Action Log

Right. We now move on to Agenda Item 9,

which is the Action Log, which you will find

on page 135 of your PAC.

Questions for members on the Action Log?

Councillor Thornton?

Thank you, just a quick one.

Will the log preserve original deadlines alongside things

Cllr Kelly Thornton - 2:00:12

like revised deadlines and then explain each slippage

and the interim risks and some level

of evidence before we close the individual actions?

Because my main concern is what the revised completion date will

be for performance indicator and scrutiny mapping.

So if we could have that broken down, that would be useful.

I'll have to ask the author.

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 2:00:32

Leslie?

Yeah, I think we can work that in.

I think it's a good idea.

Thank you.

We will do that.

Okay.

Any further questions?

No? Okay.

10 Work Programme

Then we then move on to Agenda item 10,

which is the work programme.

Obviously, we have discussed the operations to the signings

that we bring the report back in January

and then a confidential element potentially to go

into the granular.

Is there any other comments members want to make

on the work programme. Councillor Wilson.

Cllr Stuart Wilson - 2:01:04

Just the discussions we had earlier on about the audit opinion. I think the suggestion

was that we defer that to January so we can give the greatest possibility of moving forward.

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 2:01:17

So I think the work programme is just to reflect that.

Thank you, Councillor Wilson. Fiona.

Fiona Jump - Deputy Chief Finance Officer - 2:01:20

Just to add, in terms of the November meeting, our external auditors would still expect to

their value for money report and also the pension fund accounts as well so

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 2:01:32

that will come to that meeting so just for clarification.

I know that Fiona and Dave and Robert will be looking forward to having some

additional time to review Treasury management at the half year point for all

concerned. Okay and on the basis of the points just raised by members I'll be

happy to agree the work programme. Thank you very much that moves us on to

agenda item 11 which is the date of the next meeting which is the 10th of

11 Date of the next meeting

November at 2 p .m. can I remind members I know we normally meet in the morning

but this time we will be having an afternoon session there and that then

moves me on. Give my apologies for that meeting Chairman. Okay your apologies have been

noted by Leslie thank you councillor Collingwood. Moving on to agenda item 12

12 Exclusion of the public

which is exclusion of the public to resolve under section 100 a4 of the

local government Act 1972 the public be excluded from the meeting on the grounds

involved the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in the paragraph

indicated in part 1 of Schedule 12 of the Act. I'd like to thank everybody that has

joined us online today and wish you all a pleasant afternoon. Thank you.

Cllr Peter Brazier

Conservative

View profile

Cllr Alex Collingwood

Conservative

View profile

Cllr Anna Crabtree

Liberal Democrats

View profile

Cllr David Moore

Conservative

View profile

Cllr Chris Poll

Conservative

View profile

Cllr Sarfaraz Khan Raja

Conservative

View profile

Cllr Simon Rouse

Conservative

View profile

Cllr Robin Stuchbury

Independent

View profile

Cllr Kelly Thornton

Liberal Democrats

View profile

Cllr Matthew Walsh

Conservative

View profile

Cllr Stuart Wilson

Independent

View profile

We welcome your comments in relation to the webcast.

Required field

Name

Comments

Need an accessible hCaptcha?
Check available options.
Sign up to hCaptcha or Log in to hCaptcha.

By clicking Send feedback, you agree that Buckinghamshire Council and Public-i can use the information above to review your feedback and contact you about it. See our Privacy Policy for more details.

Interactive webcast player

Audit and Governance CommitteeTuesday, 29th September 2026 at 10:00am

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:00:00

1 Apologies

2 Declarations of interest

3 Minutes

4 External Audit Update- rebuilding of assurance on financial accounts

Nicola Gyselinck - Chief Accountant - 0:01:17

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:01:50

Fiona Jump - Deputy Chief Finance Officer - 0:01:53

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:02:11

Sarah Brown - KPMG - 0:02:26

Philip Kent - KPMG - 0:04:58

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:09:00

Cllr Chris Poll - 0:09:09

Sarah Brown - KPMG - 0:10:04

Cllr Chris Poll - 0:10:58

Sarah Brown - KPMG - 0:11:01

Cllr Stuart Wilson - 0:11:47

Sarah Brown - KPMG - 0:13:04

Cllr Stuart Wilson - 0:14:06

Sarah Brown - KPMG - 0:14:29

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:15:16

Cllr Robin Stuchbury - 0:15:20

Philip Kent - KPMG - 0:16:26

Cllr Robin Stuchbury - 0:18:26

Sarah Brown - KPMG - 0:21:00

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:22:37

Cllr Anna Crabtree - 0:22:41

Sarah Brown - KPMG - 0:23:21

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:24:22

Nicola Gyselinck - Chief Accountant - 0:24:33

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:24:44

5 Farnham Park Sports Fields Charity Annual Report and Financial Statements 2025/26

Cllr Peter Brazier - 0:25:19

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:27:52

Cllr David Moore - 0:27:58

Sophie Payne - Service Director, Communities - 0:28:57

Cllr David Moore - 0:29:20

Sophie Payne - Service Director, Communities - 0:29:34

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:29:58

Cllr Alex Collingwood - 0:30:24

Sophie Payne - Service Director, Communities - 0:31:01

Cllr Alex Collingwood - 0:31:36

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:31:53

Cllr Stuart Wilson - 0:31:55

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:32:49

Cllr Robin Stuchbury - 0:33:00

Cllr Peter Brazier - 0:34:46

Sophie Payne - Service Director, Communities - 0:35:18

Cllr Robin Stuchbury - 0:36:11

Sophie Payne - Service Director, Communities - 0:36:55

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:37:05

Cllr Simon Rouse - 0:37:13

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:39:01

Cllr Peter Brazier - 0:39:08

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:39:34

Cllr Alex Collingwood - 0:39:39

Cllr Peter Brazier - 0:40:14

Cllr Alex Collingwood - 0:40:27

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:40:29

6 The Higginson Park Charity Annual Report and Financial Statements 2025/26

Cllr Peter Brazier - 0:40:51

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:42:40

Cllr Chris Poll - 0:42:48

Sophie Payne - Service Director, Communities - 0:43:16

Cllr Chris Poll - 0:43:51

Sophie Payne - Service Director, Communities - 0:43:56

Cllr Chris Poll - 0:44:06

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:44:07

Cllr Stuart Wilson - 0:44:10

Sophie Payne - Service Director, Communities - 0:45:26

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:45:40

Fiona Jump - Deputy Chief Finance Officer - 0:46:07

Cllr Stuart Wilson - 0:46:16

Fiona Jump - Deputy Chief Finance Officer - 0:46:28

Sophie Payne - Service Director, Communities - 0:46:32

Cllr Stuart Wilson - 0:46:34

Cllr Matthew Walsh - 0:46:53

Cllr Stuart Wilson - 0:47:05

Audit and Governance Committee
Tuesday, 29th September 2026 at 10:00am