Agenda and minutes

An apology for absence was submitted on behalf of Mr D Gould with the following substitution authorised in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 4.1:

            Mr J Bannister for Mr D Gould.

To receive verbally from members any disclosures which they are required to make in accordance with the Council’s code of conduct or in pursuance of Section 106 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992.  This is in addition to the need for such disclosure to be also given when the relevant matter is reached on the Agenda.

No interests were declared at this stage.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting of the Finance Audit & Performance Committee held on 31 October 2011.

On the motion of Mr Hall, seconded by Mr Moore it was

RESOLVED – the minutes of the meeting held on 31 October 2011 be agreed and signed by the Chairman.

Members gave consideration to the draft annual audit report presented by the Council’s external auditors, Price Waterhouse Coopers LLP (PWC).  Mr Jones reported that there were no significant audit and accountancy issues that needed to be brought to the attention of Members and Mr Jones stated that in the current economic climate the Council’s financial position was positive due to effective forward planning led by Mr Kohli.

There were issues surrounding the Housing base data return that had been discussed in detail with officers and actions had already been taken to address the recommendations from the auditors and an officer group is to be set up to take this forward.  Mr Kohli added that a review of the Council’s stock condition was also required as part of the move to self financing and therefore the scope drawn up for the review and survey of Council houses will seek to satisfy both the requirements for the base data return and to support the HRA business case.

Mr Moore asked if the valuation stated on page 13 of the report had been adjusted up or down and was informed that it was down.  It was agreed that the report be amended to reflect this.

RESOLVED – the Committee endorse the report with the agreed amendment.

As requested by the Committee at its last meeting, a further audit had been undertaken of the risk management procedures.  Mr Roxburgh reported that good progress had been made on all the recommendations highlighted in the last report. 

The following question was raised on the remainder of the report:

Income and Debtors

A Member enquired as to what procedures were used to determine the write off of debts.  The Deputy Chief Executive (Corporate Direction) stated that this varied as each case was assessed individually.  It was agreed that the procedures undertaken to determine write offs would be brought to the next meeting.

RESOLVED – the Committee endorsed the report.

The Committee was provided with an update on the Council’s position on performance indicators and strategic risks. 

Members requested that as black and white copies were supplied to Members to save on cost could a word coding system be used on appendices in place of the colour coding which appeared as shading.  This was agreed.

RESOLVED – the report be noted.

Members were presented with the Capital Programme from 2011/12 to 2014/15.  It was explained that due to the constraints on capital funding the programme only included ‘rolling’ projects and that there were no additional new regeneration projects for this period.

The following points were raised in response to the report:

• At 3.3 of the report a Member asked if an audit trail could be produced to account for the monies raised from the Montgomery Road project as this receipt needed to be spent on regeneration (or housing) projects only.  It was noted that this had been through the audit process and was available for Members as requested.  Members requested that a full list of how the money has been spent be circulated to all Members of the committee.
• Members asked to be shown the breakdown of refurbishment works should this option be agreed by Council for the Leisure Centre.  Officers agreed to produce a breakdown and circulate to all Members of the committee.

RESOLVED

(i)         Members agreed that option 4.1 be put forward to Council;

(ii)        Members agreed with the bids set out in the report

(iii)       Members note the financial implications set out in section 7.

Mr Bannister left the meeting at 8pm.

The Committee were informed that all audit recommendations had been implemented. 

RESOLVED – the report be noted. 

Members were informed of the revenue and capital outturn at the end of the second quarter 2011/12.   

RESOLVED – the report be noted.

Members had no comments on the current work programme.