The Chairman will advise the meeting of the evacuation procedures to follow in the event of an emergency.

The Chairman drew attention to the emergency evacuation procedure.

Councillors should not act or take decisions in order to gain financial or other material benefits for themselves or their spouse, civil partner or person with whom they are living with as a spouse or civil partner.  They must declare and resolve any interests and relationships.

The Chairman will ask Members if they have any interests to declare in respect of items on this agenda, under the following headings:

(a)          Disclosable Pecuniary Interests (DPI) under the Localism Act 2011.  The nature as well as the existence of any such interest must be declared.  After declaring a DPI, the Member must leave the meeting and not take part in the discussion or vote.  This applies even if there is provision for public speaking.

(b)          Disclosable Non Pecuniary (DNPI) under the Code of Conduct adopted by the Council in May 2012.  The nature as well as the existence of any such interest must be declared.  After declaring a DNPI interest, the Member may stay, speak and vote on the matter.

(c)          Where it is possible that a fair-minded and informed observer, having considered the facts would conclude that there was a real possibility that a Member might be predetermined or biased the Member should declare their predetermination or bias and then leave the room while that item is considered.

Advice to Members:  If any Councillor has any doubt about the existence or nature of any DPI or DNPI which he/she may have in any item on this agenda, he/she should seek advice from the Director of Corporate Services as Monitoring Officer, the Head of Legal or from other Solicitors in Legal Services as early as possible, and in advance of the Meeting.

No interests were declared.

To approve the Minutes of the Meeting held on 9 March 2016 (Minute Nos. 575 - 583) as a correct record subject to the following amendment: 

Minute No. 580 second paragraph to read:  A Member considered it important to have a formal record of the corporate risk appetite.  He made the observation that it may prove necessary to have that by department, because there may be some parts of the business in which Swale Borough Council will be by necessity highly risk averse and others in which they are prepared to accept higher risk.

The Minutes of the Meeting held on 9 March 2016 (Minute Nos. 575 - 583) were taken as read, approved and signed by the Chairman as a correct record subject to the following amendment: 

Minute No. 580 second paragraph to read:  A Member considered it important to have a formal record of the corporate risk appetite.  He made the observation that it may prove necessary to have that by department, because there may be some parts of the business in which Swale Borough Council will be by necessity highly risk averse and others in which they are prepared to accept higher risk.

The Head of Audit Partnership introduced the report which set out his annual opinion on the overall adequacy and effectiveness of the organisation’s framework of governance, risk management and control which can be used to inform the Annual Governance Statement for 2015/16.

The Head of Audit Partnership drew Members’ attention to Appendix I to the report which set out the evidence that formed the conclusion.  He explained that the table on page nine of the Appendix set out a summary of specific projects with assurance ratings of strong/sound, and stated that Swale Borough Council (SBC) were unique within the audit partners in that there were no projects with issues, which was something to be proud of.  The Head of Audit Partnership advised that full reports on all the findings were available from him on request.  He referred to page 20 of the Appendix and drew attention to the 68 actions due and completed which was a key piece of assurance.

A Member stated the report was very thorough and very readable.  She suggested that training be provided on counter fraud and corruption, as this could be beneficial to all Members in enabling them to have an input on reducing this issue.  In response, the Head of Audit Partnership reported that the Single Fraud Investigation Service had commenced this year; the Revenue and Benefits Section at SBC were looking into how this could help their department, and an update on this could be provided at the next Audit Committee.  He agreed that it would be timely to have a briefing on this topic.

Another Member congratulated the Head of Audit Partnership on the extremely well documented report, and he encouraged all Members of the Council to read it.  The Member raised some concern with the ‘sound’ controls in place over the Council’s Performance Management and considered there should be improvements to this, to make it ‘strong’.  He considered Risk Management was an issue that all Members should be aware of, as it became more prevalent.

The Director of Corporate Services, in his role as Monitoring Officer, stated that it was important to take a step back and see how good the levels of assurances outlined in the report on the Council had been this year.  He considered this to be a really good picture and thanked the Head of Audit Partnership and his Team for the revised way of working, and flexibility of the Team and responses to issues.  The Monitoring Officer considered the report to be pitched at the right level and the overall picture presented assured both him and the Head of Finance in their statutory roles.

A Member raised concern with some themes that had not been included within the report, for example, HR risks, HM Revenue and Customs, and Value Added Tax.  In response, the Head of Audit Partnership explained that the report was part of a four-year plan and not every issue was looked at each time.  He added that there would be a review of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 720.

The Head of Finance introduced the report whereby the Council was required by statute to seek the agreement of the Audit Committee to the Annual Governance Statement.  He advised that reference to the Accounts and Audit Regulations, should be dated 2015, not 2011 as noted in the report.

Resolved:

(1)      That the Annual Governance Statement be agreed.

This report is to follow.

To-follow report and appendix added 3 June 2016.

The Chairman introduced the report which outlined how the Audit Committee had effectively discharged its duties during 2015/16.  The report provided assurance to the Council that important internal control, governance and risk management issues were being monitored and addressed by the Committee, and sought to provide additional assurance to support the Annual Governance Statement.

The Director of Corporate Services explained that the purpose of the report was to explain the role of the Audit Committee and how it had discharged its duties, rather than a programme of the audit work and this needed to be clear when reporting to Council.

Resolved:

(1)      That the Audit Committee Annual Report for 2015/16 be agreed.

(2)      That the Chairman of the Audit Committee provides the report to a meeting of the Full Council to demonstrate how the Committee has discharged its duties.

Mr Trevor Greenlee (Engagement Manager, Grant Thornton), introduced the report which set out the planned audit fee for 2016/17.

Resolved:

(1)      That the report be noted.

Mr Greenlee left the Chamber during consideration of this item.

The Head of Finance introduced the report which provided an update on the latest position on the future procurement of external audit, and sought the Committee’s views on the way forward.  He explained that this was the first of a series of reports, prior to new appointments being made by 31 December 2017.

The Head of Finance highlighted the three main options for the Council, as noted on pages 49 and 50 of the report.

1.     The Council could establish its own independent Auditor Panel;

2.     The Council could join with other Councils to set up a joint independent Auditor Panel;

3.     The Council could opt into a sector-led body.

The Head of Finance raised the following observations:  there was some concern on how to resource an Audit Panel; whether ‘independent’ meant they would not know enough about the Council; and with reference to the fees charged, it was important to have quality and economies of scale.  He stated that sector-led could be a good option, but this could restrict choice.

Members discussed the three options and considered the option needed to be cost effective.  They preferred either option 2 or option 3.

The Cabinet Member for Safer Families and Communities stated that a competent auditor was required, and he spoke in favour of being part of a larger group.

Resolved:

(1)      That the Committee’s views as set out above be noted.

Mr Greenlee introduced the report which set out an overview of the planned scope and timing of the audit, as required by International Standard on Auditing.

Mr Greenlee stated that there were no risks listed which were specific and local to SBC.  He explained that in terms of financial management, SBC had a good record.  However, with changes to Government funding and local authorities becoming more self-financing, financial management would need to be looked at to understand how the Council was approaching this, to bridge the funding gaps.

Resolved:

(1)      That the report be noted.

The Chairman suggested that 20 minutes, prior to each Audit Committee, time be spent on briefing/training Members on what was being considered at that particular meeting.

Discussion ensued and the following points were raised:  was this needed?; training should be available for all 47 Members; if Members were unclear on an item, they could contact the relevant officer, prior to the meeting; and consider the meeting should start at 7pm, not 7.20pm.

Resolved:

(1)      That the report be noted.

(2)      That Audit Committee meetings continue to commence at 7pm.