Issue - meetings

Annual Audit and Inspection Letter 2007/08

Meeting: 02/07/2009 - Cabinet (Item 13)

13 External Audit and Inspection Letter 2007/08 pdf icon PDF 259 KB

Cabinet is requested to note the contents of the attached document 

Decision:

Cabinet RECEIVED the Annual Audit and Inspection Letter 2007/08.

Minutes:

The Finance and Staffing Portfolio Holder presented the audit letter, which had been received by the Corporate Governance Committee and which came to Cabinet at the request of the Audit Commission, which asked that it receive a wide circulation.  The Council’s performance continued to improve and the authority would now face more difficult tests to maintain or improve its current score of 3 out of 4.

 

Cabinet RECEIVED the Annual Audit and Inspection Letter 2007/08.


Meeting: 29/04/2009 - Audit and Corporate Governance Committee (Item 5)

5 External Audit: Audit and Inspection Letter 2007/08 & Direction of Travel pdf icon PDF 259 KB

Minutes:

Nigel Smith of the Audit Commission presented this report which detailed External Audit’s annual audit and inspection letter for 2007/08. He highlighted the progress that the Council had made in its Use of Resources arrangements, but warned that the assessment would be tougher in future years, which meant that improvements would have to be made to maintain the current level of performance. In practice, he explained, most councils scoring a 3 in the previous scheme would score a 2 under the new assessment. It was noted that the time period between the publishing of the criteria for the use of resources assessment and the actual assessment was truncated, leaving little time for the Council to alter its policies.

 

Minor corrections

It was suggested that the sentence relating to littering in paragraph 3 should be reworded for the sake of clarity and paragraph 16 should be amended as it implied that the Council was responsible for climate change. It was unclear that the “district average” in paragraph 20 referred to the national average of all district councils.

 

Comprehensive Performance Assessment (CPA) replaced by Comprehensive Area Assessment (CAA)

It was understood that the Council’s “fair” rating related to the CPA inspection carried out in 2004 and that there would be no re-inspection, as the CAA had replaced the CPA scheme. It was noted that external factors such as the economic downturn would influence performance.

 

Value for money

Nigel Smith explained that the Council had scored 2 out of 4 on value for money because of a lack of proof that resources were being targeted on residents’ concerns. The Interim Executive Director – Corporate Services explained that an attempt to improve its value for money score might not be best use of the Council’s resources.

 

Scrutiny

Councillor JD Batchelor expressed concern at the criticism in the report of the Scrutiny and Overview Committee that Committee, which he chaired. He stated that had he been consulted he could have informed the report writer that the two meeting in 2008 were not cancelled due to a lack of business, but because external factors made a discussion on the items scheduled premature. The Policy and Performance Review Manager acknowledged this but added, as there were no other items to replace the scheduled items on the agenda the statement in the report was factually correct.

 

The Committee NOTED the report.