To receive any public questions, statements or petitions submitted in accordance with the Constitution. Further information on the requirements for submitting these is available to view at the following link:-
https://democracy.bcpcouncil.gov.uk/ieListMeetings.aspx?CommitteeID=151&Info=1&bcr=1
The deadline for the submission of public questions is 4 clear working days before the meeting.
The deadline for the submission of a statement is midday the working day before the meeting.
The deadline for the submission of a petition is 10 working days before the meeting.
Minutes:
The Committee was advised of the receipt of the following Public Question.
Question
REGARDING THE COUNCIL’S INTERNAL AUDIT PROCEDURES IN RESPECT OF CERTAIN ASSET TYPES
QUESTION
Will this overseeing Committee ascertain & confirm regarding the relevant balance sheet “Long-Term” & “Current” Assets –
- Scope of intended internal audit verification test procedures for asset types including investments where - as applicable - not only physical existence & authorised custody but also Council title & asset impairment are considerations. The Core Audit Plan 2022/23 at agenda 9 is silent / not entirely specific regarding this.
Philip Gatrell. Question submission date: 7.4.22
Response
Grant Thornton, the Council’s external auditor, as a result of their work give their opinion on the completeness, accuracy and compliance with legislative requirements of the Council’s balance sheet. This includes the two asset categories in Mr Gatrell’s question.
Internal Audit does not seek to duplicate work that Grant Thornton performs and conversely Grant Thornton are not able to place reliance on the work of internal audit and must perform their own testing. Built up over a number of years there is an understanding between Internal and External Auditors on the scope of audit work each party covers.
The Core Internal Audit Plan 2022/23 at agenda item 9, Appendix B, first line of the table, in the section headed Key Assurance Function, shows the heading Asset Management (Facilities Management\Estate Management) and shows a planned resource allocation of 40 days.
As described in the Audit Charter the scope of each individual audit assignment within the plan is not ‘set in stone’ at the start of any given audit\financial year and instead is risk based. In practice this means that prevailing risks, views and comments from a wide variety of sources including Internal audit’s own professional judgement, senior managers, councillors, external audit and public opinion\interest all feature in determining the scope of each audit assignment within the constraints, of course, of resources available.
Scope determination happens in practice in the build up to an audit and remains dynamic throughout the audit and can be subject to change as issues present.
The Asset Management Audit is part of the ‘Key Assurance Function’ section of the audit plan – this recognises that asset management is key to the Council achieving its stated objectives. As such there is a ‘core work and testing programme’, although this does not necessarily mean every element is covered in every audit assignment, however it does cover areas such as physical existence and title record keeping as identified in Mr Gatrell’s question.
In summary therefore Mr Gatrell and the A&G Committee can be assured that the 2022/23 Internal Audit Plan has an initial 40 days allocated to cover Asset Management Key Assurance audit work. The exact scope of this audit work is yet to be determined and will be finalised in the lead up to the planned fieldwork.
The Committee was advised of the receipt of the following Public Statement.
Statement
AGENDA ITEM 5 REGARDING PUBLIC ISSUE PROTOCOLS FOLLOWING THE INACCURATE RESPONSE TO THIS LOCAL RESIDENT’S RELATED QUESTION AND STATEMENT TO THE COMMITTEE ON 31.3.22
STATEMENT
“Public participation” isn't the “discretionary facility” defined in the response. It’s a stated Constitutional right. Enabling, for example, regulatory Committees’ scrutiny of issues otherwise escaping their awareness, following senior Officers’ failures to respond adequately to notice of significant contraventions of law & procedure.
Consequently, the six minutes invested in Councillors’ & public initial recognition on 31 March aren’t dismissible as - quote - not “efficient … effective use of committee time”.
Head of Democratic Services will now be referring my proposed protocol to the Review Group for, I trust, prompt fulfilment. Likewise the Constitution’s overdue correction concerning three notified misstatements of fundamental local authority law.
Philip Gatrell. Statement submission date:12.4.22
The Chairman of the Committee reminded the Committee that there was no debate or discussion on public questions or statements but he invited any individual Members wishing to discuss issues raised by the questioner within separate correspondence circulated by the questioner to raise any issues with him directly but outside the formal meeting.