The Audit Planning Manager introduced the report and summarised the work that had been completed against the 2023/24 Audit & Assurance Plan. He pointed members to page 41 of the report and said that the Audit team had managed to successfully fill some of the vacant posts but were currently using a contractor to help delivery of the plan. Members were made aware that pages 42 and 43 of the report showed the current and expected progress of the Audit Plan for 2023/24.

A member commented that it had always been a struggle to fill vacant posts and the audit team would regularly have resource issues but thought it was not acceptable for audit recommendations and actions to be outstanding after six months. She proposed that where a recommended action had been outstanding for more than six months after the agreed completion date for that action, the relevant officer be bought before Audit Committee. This was seconded and on being put to the vote agreed by Members.

The Chair invited Members to make comments, which included:

-        Recognised that there were staffing issues but thought the number of actual days completed in the Audit Plan up to 31 December 2023 versus the planned days was shocking;

-        thought that being short staffed was not an acceptable reason for the low number of days delivered against the Audit Plan;

-        asking who the contractor was that the Audit team were using? and

-        what was the outstanding action from 2021 and what department did it relate to?

The Audit Planning Manager responded by explaining that delivery of the audit plan did not run strictly to the same timeline as the financial year and that it could take a long time to gain momentum to start audit projects. He added that the contractor being used was Veritau and that the Audit team were using a contractor to help fill gaps from vacancies and to help deliver the plan on time.

The Audit Planning Manager referred to the outstanding action from 2021 and said it was from an audit on developer income completed within the Planning service. He said there had been lots of staff changes in the planning team, and the monitoring of nonfinancial contributions was not present in the arrangements at the time of the audit. The service had not forgotten about the action and said that a recent restructure would review the resources to address the concern.

The Chair thought that this was not an acceptable reason as to why the action had not been met since 2021. Councillor Andy Booth proposed that the Head of Planning Services be bought before the Audit Committee to explain why the action had not yet been met. This was seconded and on being put to the vote agreed.

Recommended:

(1)          That the work completed so far on the 2023/24 Audit & Assurance Plan be noted.

(2)          That any service manager who did not complete the recommended action following an audit after a period of six months following the agreed implementation date, be bought before the Audit Committee;

(3)          That the Head of Planning Services be bought before the Audit Committee at the nearest convenient date.