Issue - meetings

The Audit and Governance Committee requested an update on the issues at Carter’s Quay as part of the Corporate Risk Register.

This report outlines the due diligence undertaken prior to acquisition, the decision-making process and subsequent activity post-contract.

The Director, Investment and Development, presented a report, a copy of which had been circulated to each Member and a copy of which appears as Appendix 'A' to these Minutes in the Minute Book.

As requested by the Committee, this was a factual report which reviewed the timeline of key events leading up to the Council’s acquisition of Carters Quay, focussing on the governance and processes involved and the role of members and officers in decision making. Paragraph 7 of the report proposed a number of key considerations to support members in scoping an investigation, highlighting issues around time constraints, external pressures, senior engagement, due diligence and risk assessment. The next report would provide more detail on these issues. Any questions or points raised at this meeting would be noted and responded to in full in the next report. The Director thanked current and former colleagues and the senior leadership team for assisting her in highlighting the key issues.

The Chair welcomed members’ input in identifying areas where they felt further work may be required, ahead of considering the investigation already included on the forward plan for later in 2025/26. A number of points were raised in the ensuing discussion and officers had the opportunity to comment on these. The following areas of focus were put forward in relation to the scoping of the investigation:

·       Whether there had been sufficient investigation into the accounts of Inland Homes companies to ascertain their financial stability?

·       How was the valuation agreed: what was the process followed at the time, what were the aims and intentions at the time and had the process now changed?

·       More information to be provided on the three stages of payments and how they were arrived at. It was confirmed that the next report would include more information on the valuation figures and payments, some of which was not yet in the public domain.

·       The difference between the Cabinet decision on the deferred payment schedule and what actually happened and whether this had been fully understood?

·       The speed of the transaction and the apparent pressure to move quickly. Was this to do with the planning consent, were there political and/or external pressures? More understanding of the timings and the relationships between parties would be helpful.

·       In terms of governance, what should happen if an officer raises concerns but a leader / councillors decide to press on?

·       How thorough was the risk assessment in relation to the sale and was this fully understood/monitored?

·       Was the professional / legal advice and information received fully understood by officers?

·       Did the council consider the eventuality of insolvency in the market at the time? What was the degree of advice and due diligence re strength of parent company guarantee?

·       More information on what happened after 7 April 2021 to change the Council’s view that the scheme was not viable?

·       It was noted that changes to ways of working had already been made, however the next report could still consider recommendations for further improvements to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 19