Agenda and minutes

To confirm and sign the minutes of 5 November 2019.

The minutes of the meeting of 5 November 2019 were confirmed and signed.

To receive the independent external auditors, Ernst &Young (EY), Annual Audit Letter for 2018/19.

Members considered the Annual Audit Letter 2018/19 report presented by Mark Hodgson from Ernst & Young (EY).

Members asked questions, made comments and received responses as follows;

1.    Councillor Booth asked for assurance that the delay experienced in this year’s audit will not occur again. Mark Hodgson confirmed that there is no audit deadline contained within UK regulations. The only requirements are that local authorities must publish a draft set of accounts by 31 May and the final accounts by 31 July. If the audit report is not completed by 31 July, this must be stated. He confirmed that the Council had met these requirements and no further action was required. He added that Audit Regulators had informed EY that audits are to be carried out when resources are in place to deliver a quality audit and they have gained sufficient assurance to deliver an informed opinion. He confirmed that EY are liaising with their clients to agree a suitable date, when resources are available, to complete audits from May onwards.

2.    Mark Hodgson informed members that the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) are considering deferring the 31 July deadline this year.

3.    Peter Catchpole stated that it is anticipated that the Council’s audit will be completed by September 2020. Mark Hodgson confirmed this and stated that on the basis of there being no deadline; EY will be conducting their audits over a longer period to ensure adequate resource to all of their clients.

4.    Councillor Booth highlighted that whilst there may be no deadline, presumably accounts cannot be signed off years after being published. Mark Hodgson agreed and confirmed that the accounts are signed off as soon as EY have assurance. If EY cannot perform this during their allocated timescale, then he agreed that this should be raised as a concern.

5.    Mark Hodgson assured members that EY’s focus is on completing audits with the resource allocated in the timescale agreed.

6.    Councillor Wicks asked what mitigation is in place if the audit is not completed by September. Mark Hodgson reiterated that there is no legislative requirement for audits to be completed within a certain timescale.

7.    Councillor J Clark agreed but highlighted that officers are impacted by audit delays and asked that every effort is made to keep to the agreed timescale. Mark Hodgson agreed and added that delays impact not only the Council but staff at EY too.

8.    Mark Hodgson confirmed that EY will be confirming audit dates with all of their clients by 14 February 2020. He informed members that EY will be holding a forum later this month and extended an invitation to all members of the committee.

9.    Councillor Booth asked if Mark Hodgson had been briefed of the Council’s new Commercial Investment Strategy (CIS) and asked what impact this would have on future audits. Mark Hodgson confirmed that he had been briefed on this and whilst it would not effect this year’s audit, it will impact future audits

Councillor J  ...  view the full minutes text for item CGC24/19

The purpose of this report is to provide Members with information on the proposed Treasury Management Strategy Statement, Capital Strategy, Minimum Revenue Provision (MRP) Policy Statement and Annual Investment Strategy for 2020/21.

Members considered the Treasury Management Strategy Statement, Capital Strategy, Minimum Revenue Provision Policy Statement and Annual Investment Strategy 2020/21 report presented by Mark Saunders.

Mark Saunders explained that any amendments to this report will be reported to Cabinet and Council on 20 February 2020.

Members asked questions, made comments and received responses as follows;

1.    Councillor J Clark asked how much overview the Corporate Governance Committee will have in relation to the boards associated with the Commercial Investment Strategy (CIS). Mark Saunders explained that there will be separate governance arrangements in place for the investment board and decisions will be taken in accordance with the associated framework.

2.    Councillor J Clark asked for further information on the local authority trading company (LATCO) which is associated with the CIS. Peter Catchpole explained that the LATCO will report directly to the investment board and follow their direction and policy. The investment board will decide how investments are spent based on very detailed business cases and specification.

3.    Councillor Booth asked for assurance on the governance arrangements as neither of these entities will be required to report directly to the Corporate Governance Committee or a separate Audit Committee. He expressed concern in relation to the audit arrangements and asked if there were adequate skills and qualifications within the Council’s internal audit team to undertake this work.

4.    Councillor J Clark asked if the LATCO will be liable for tax and VAT and asked for assurance in relation to the decision making processes of both of these entities. Mark Hodgson explained that whilst there will be no officer involvement the Section 151 officer, Peter Catchpole, will have an overall responsibility for the governance and independence of the decision making process. He added that the LATCO will be subject to a separate audit of its financial statements and the terms of reference for the Corporate Governance Committee may need to be amended to reflect this.

5.    Councillor J Clark stated that the membership of the investment board proposes a quorate of only two members with one being the Leader of the Council. He added that decisions could therefore be made using the provision of the Chairman’s ‘casting vote’ with little member involvement or agreement. Mark Saunders confirmed this but reminded members that the investment board will need to ensure that detailed criteria has been satisfied prior to transacting any investments. There are many stages that must be completed prior to this and all decisions must be signed off by the Section 151 officer and be subject to audit.

6.    Councillor J Clark asked for further information on the shareholders of the LATCO and the arrangements surrounding this company. Peter Catchpole explained that the company will be wholly owned by the Council and subject to all legislation relating to Limited Companies. He reiterated that the investment board will appoint its own auditors for the LATCO and if this is not EY, both auditors will have to work closely with one another to consolidate both the Council  ...  view the full minutes text for item CGC25/19

To provide the Corporate Governance Committee with a revised Data Protection Policy, the changes to which have arisen from a recent internal audit regarding the organisations compliance with General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).       

Members considered the Data Protection Policy Update presented by Anna Goodall.

Anna Goodall explained that following an internal audit, there had been a number of enhancements to the policy.

Members asked questions, made comments and received responses as follows;

1.    Councillor J Clark recommended that the updated policy is communicated effectively to both staff and members to ensure they are aware of their individual responsibilities in relation to Data Protection.

2.    Councillor Booth asked for confirmation that members are still responsible for their individual registration as data controllers. Anna Goodall confirmed that members are now encompassed under the Council’s own registration as data controllers.

3.    Councillor Booth recommended that the report is amended to provide further information on the roles of specific officers and contact details for these officers. Anna Goodall agreed to consider this.

4.    Councillor Booth recommended that a schedule of training is included in 6.9 of the report.

5.    Councillor Booth asked how regularly the Data Protection Policy will be reviewed. Anna Goodall stated that the internal audit had recommended that the Council develop a ‘policy on policy’ which will collate all of the Council’s policies to ensure they are being updated and reviewed accordingly.

The Corporate Governance Committee AGREED the revised Data Protection Policy.

To provide an update to the Corporate Governance Committee on the Council’s Corporate Risk Register.

Members considered the Corporate Risk Register quarterly review report presented by Sam Anthony.

Sam Anthony drew member’s attention to the amendments shown in the report.

Members asked questions, made comments and received responses as follows;

1.    Councillor Booth asked if the Council have officers on standby in case of a natural disaster (page 106 of the agenda pack). Sam Anthony confirmed that there will be a rota of emergency on-call officers that cover throughout the year. This rota also ensures that officers are within a commutable distance to the district at all times. 

2.    Councillor Wicks asked if there was a minimum response time for these officers. Sam Anthony explained that officers are required to mobilise immediately in the instance of a natural disaster, subject to their commute.

3.    Councillor J Clark highlighted that the register does not include information about the work the Council undertakes with other partners in relation to natural disasters. Sam Anthony explained that ‘blue light services’ tend to lead on the immediate emergency response however local authorities are responsible for community recovery. Peter Catchpole added that the Council is a member of the Local Resilience Forum which includes all external organisations.

4.    Councillor Booth highlighted the reduction to risk 17 (page 109 of the agenda pack) and suggested this may need to be reassessed as a majority ruling party in Government may implement legislative changes which could impact the Council.

5.    Councillor Booth suggested that risk 3 (page 110 of the agenda pack) is amended to show the reduction in the likelihood of the current risk as the inherent risk has not changed. Sam Anthony agreed.

6.    Councillor Wicks asked how the Council mitigate in relation to IT and cyber security issues within partner organisations, such as Anglia Revenues Partnership (ARP). Sam Anthony confirmed that these are considered and partners have their own processes that feed into the Council’s recovery plans and risk management assessments.

7.    Councillor Booth recommended that the Council’s process for organisational change is not clearly articulated in the report (page 111 of the agenda pack). Sam Anthony agreed to incorporate this.

8.    Councillor Booth referenced risk 2 – Brexit (page 114 of the agenda pack) and stated that the wording needs to be amended in relation to the withdrawal agreement and a ‘no deal’ Brexit. Sam Anthony agreed to review this.

9.    Councillor Booth referenced risk 20 (page 121 of the agenda pack) in relation to the Council’s CIS. He stated that further information needs to be included in relation to the management of this risk and the governance arrangements. Sam Anthony agreed to review this.

10.Councillor J Clark referenced risk 7 (page 124 of the agenda pack) and asked if the Council have had any issues with unauthorised access into Council premises. Sam Anthony confirmed that procedures in place to mitigate this risk following the relocation of the March One Stop Shop to Fenland Hall.

11.Councillor J Clark asked that this is added and reflected in the appropriate  ...  view the full minutes text for item CGC27/19

1.    Councillor Booth asked for further information in relation to a data breach which had recently been reported in the local press. Anna Goodall explained that the breach related to information that had been sent out to members of the public regarding the Local Plan review. Inadvertently, as a result of human error, the email addresses were included enabling all recipients to see all other consultee’s email addresses. She confirmed that no other personal data had been compromised and therefore the personal risk to the individuals affected was minimal. She assured members that she had carried out a full risk assessment under her responsibility as Data Protection Officer and as a result, an apology had been issued to those individuals and further guidance had been provided to officers.