Agenda and minutes

To confirm the minutes of 25 February 2025

The minutes of the meeting held on the 25 February 2025 were approved and signed.

To discuss the External Audit Plan for 2024/25.

Debbie Hanson from Ernst & Young, the Council’s Appointed Auditors, presented the report to the committee.

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

·         Councillor Christy referred to the two new inherent risks which Debbie Hanson had highlighted, and asked whether they had also been included within the Council’s own risk register and what steps are being taken to make sure that any errors or inefficiencies within the reporting standards on leases and the payroll system migration are captured? Stephen Beacher explained that it is not within the Corporate Risk Register, but it should be included within the Service Register for both Human Resources and Payroll and Accountancy and he agreed to confirm that this is in place.

·         Councillor Booth stated that, with regards to valuations of land and buildings, it would seem that External Audit appear to be taking a great deal of assurance from the previous work which has been undertaken, however, for clarification why does it appear to be highlighted as an inherent risk as there must be a number of inherent risks within the finances. He stated that it is pleasing to hear that External Audit recognise the fact that there is a great deal of assurance already in place as it has been discussed on numerous occasions at the committee. Councillor Booth stated that emphasis appears to have been placed on the data transfer for the new payroll system and the processes involved. He questioned how much of a deep dive is going to be undertaken with regards to how the system is being used including the competency of the staff using the system as it can often be the case where staff are not fully competent in the use of new systems when errors can occur. Debbie Hanson explained that, with regards to the point concerning property plant equipment and investment property valuation, the balances are normally by far the largest balances on the Council’s balance sheets. She explained that they are subject to different valuation methods depending on the nature of the asset and are subject to assumptions and judgements made by the Council’s valuer when providing the figures. Debbie Hanson added that if the figures are material, which they always are, then it would always be shown as a higher inherent risk in any audit plan due to the fact of the size of the values and that there is a degree of estimation within their which triggers the higher risk assessment. She made the point that it was not classified as a significant risk which is where it is assessed that there could be a higher risk of error in the figures and should that risk of error materialize then it would be material and due to the previous track record and the fact there have been no major issues with the valuations it has not been necessary to elevate it to the higher level and it has been left as a higher inherent risk. Debbie Hanson made the point  ...  view the full minutes text for item ARMC32/24

To agree proposed changes/updates to the Corporate Debt Policy. 

Sian Warren, Deputy Chief Accountant, presented the report to members.

Members asked the following questions:

·         Councillor Christy asked how the Council intends to balance the strict debt recovery actions, while giving support to vulnerable residents who struggle to make payments and how does the Council intend to track and report on the success of the updated debt recovery approach over time? Sian Warren stated that within the policy it details all of the different places that people can go if they are vulnerable but they can contact the Council first and advice and guidance will be given and then it will be passed onto the service area manager to look at the different debt to gain an understanding of what is behind it and then signpost them to the most suitable agency who can provide them help. She explained that over the last year all of the outstanding debt has been reviewed, and steps have been taken to reduce that debt down which has proved to be successful. Sian Warren added that now work is underway to ensure that those processes are in place and are regularly reviewed monthly as well as on a quarterly basis with the service areas to ensure that the monies are being collected along with all of the income as well as raising it appropriately.

·         Councillor Booth stated that he used to work in financial services, and he was provided with guidance and advice on how to deal with vulnerable customers. He added that he does have concerns with an element of the policy as it appears that the independent advice is listed right at the back of the document and it does not indicate how you would work with those organisations. Councillor Booth stated that an agency like Step Change would be an advocate for someone who is vulnerable or in a debt situation and they could be worked with to ascertain how the customer could improve their finances and repay their debts. He expressed the view that a lot of the organisations can be worked with in order to get a debt repayment plan put in place and, in his opinion, the policy is not clear enough and does not place enough emphasis on that especially when considering particular vulnerable customers. Councillor Booth added that although it is not an exhaustive list there needs to be an assurance that people do not get pigeonholed by thinking that they are only vulnerable if they match one of the categories in the policy. He expressed the opinion that the policy needs to be made clearer so that it explains that the Council will work with independent agencies to help customers when dealing with their finance issues and concerns. Sian Warren explained that she welcomes the feedback and will revisit that element of the policy.

·         Councillor Booth referred to the section of the policy which relates to removing goods and shows a limit of £1,350 for tools, questioning where that figure has come from? He made  ...  view the full minutes text for item ARMC33/24

To approve the Internal Audit Plan and resources for the forthcoming year.

Deborah Moss, Head of Internal Audit, presented the report.

Members asked the following questions:

·         Councillor Booth referred to the issue of resourcing, and he asked whether the recruitment exercise has commenced in order to fulfil the role of the full-time auditor who had decided to leave the authority. He asked whether consideration had been given to the use of agency personnel to fill the position as it is a specialised area and trying to fill that role, in his view, can be challenging. Deborah Moss explained that approval has been given to proceed with filling the post and initially it is hoped to find a permanent replacement by going out to market with an advert. She added that she is mindful that it may be a tall order to find a suitable candidate but to find a contractor is very costly and one of the Council’s objectives is to keep costs down. Deborah Moss added that there are also a couple of other internal options which may be considered. She explained that the job description is also being re written to make it more appealing to prospective candidates. Councillor Booth asked whether specialist recruitment agencies are being contacted who deal with risk and audit type roles as there are a number in existence that he has used himself previously both for recruitment and also to get contractors in to fill roles.

·         Councillor Christy stated that the new audit item which appears in the plan is with regards to the new Fenland Inspire projects and he asked what plans are in place to support the major project governance that is required on those projects where one has an excess of £40 million pound spend. Deborah Moss responded there will be a task to specifically review the internal controls and governance around those projects, with the Transformation Team having a project, deemed to be more of a checklist approach, designed in order that people follow the correct procurement in the first instance. She added that her service area is looking at the projects from a governance perspective with regards to the finance and ensuring that all stages are signed off correctly before that amount of money is spent.

·         Councillor Booth referred to the follow up process which is resource related, and asked, once there is notification received that an action has been delivered, what steps are taken from an audit perspective to satisfy that element of the audit has been completed and is any testing undertaken. Deborah Moss explained that the process in the past has been largely monitoring and asking officers what they have done but this time there will be follow ups where the report is listed as having limited assurance and the actions in there warrant a piece of follow up work. She added that the team will pick up the actions themselves which are coloured red, and they will be followed up as they are high priority or high risk. Deborah Moss explained that all of the actions  ...  view the full minutes text for item ARMC34/24

To provide an update to the Committee on the latest Risk Management Policy and Strategy.

Stephen Beacher, Head of ICT, Digital and Resilience, presented the report.

Members asked the following questions:

·         Councillor Christy stated that he understands that there are no changes to the policy strategy and asked for clarification as to how he can ensure that all departments consistently apply risk management principles across all the different service areas. He added that given the fact that there were no amendments made this year, how is it assessed as to whether adjustments will be needed in the future reviews. Stephen Beacher stated that he knows that the services comply because they include their risks in their service management plans each year, which are monitored and anything included in the corporate register if it is felt necessary. He added that with regards to identifying whether any adjustments are required then it will just go through the review process as part of the normal risk management group and then wait to see if anybody highlights any changes.

·         Councillor Booth stated that this is the over arching policy and what members are more interested in is probably the operation of the risk management process and assurances that there are robust processes in place.

Members AGREED the Risk Management Policy and Strategy.

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

Stephen Beacher, Head of ICT, Digital and Resilience, presented the report.

Members asked the following questions:

·         Councillor Booth referred to the risk identified concerning Local Government Reorganisation and that there a couple of comments and actions listed which, in his view, are part of the risk as opposed to actions. He added that the reduced contract limits could increase costs and, in his view, that is part of the risk and he feels that an action is required to make sure that the costs do not materialise. Councillor Booth referred to the fact that it makes reference about the need to negotiate novation clauses in contracts, but it is not very specific, and he asked whether there is a piece of work which needs to be undertaken to determine which contracts need that first? Stephen Beacher stated that they are listed in both sides of the report and explained that procurement challenges have been mentioned, but he agreed that work is currently ongoing to look at all of the contracts which are currently in place as well as all of the new contracts which will come forward.

·         Councillor Booth asked whether it is still too early to know what the legislation is going to do in relation to the contracts or is it a case of having to wait and see what the legislation stipulates as it may assist the Council or cause additional issues for the Council depending on what the legislation states on how contracts should be dealt with. Stephen Beacher explained that there is still a great deal of information concerning the subject to be provided.

·         Councillor Christy asked for confirmation that officers are content that the risk register reflects the recent attempted cyber incidents when considering the threats which are facing local government institutions and whether there is any additional resilience measures planned to mitigate further attacks? Stephen Becher stated that the risk register is quite a broad document when it comes to cyber security and, therefore, the Council does not give away too much detail. He added that this is being reviewed constantly and there is an internal plan as well as having dedicated staff just to deal with cyber security. Stephen Beacher added that whilst it may not be detailed in the risk register, there is a great deal of work being undertaken behind the scenes.

·         Councillor Booth asked whether officers are included in all of the appropriate forums to gain an understanding of where all the new risks are emerging and how to deal with them and whether officers have specialists that they can call upon if the need arises? Stephen Beacher explained that his team keep abreast of any issues highlighted in the press and they are linked into NCSC as well as being part of an early warning. He added that the Council is also linked into the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Local Resilience Forum and are accredited to all the necessary schemes.

Members AGREED the latest version of the Corporate Risk  ...  view the full minutes text for item ARMC36/24

To provide the Committee with an annual update on the Council’s use of the Regulation of Investigatory Power Act 2000 (RIPA).

Deborah Moss, Head of Internal Audit, presented the report to members.

Members asked the following questions:

·         Councillor Booth stated that it is good that the Council are not over using the powers but it is disappointing that it is not using the RIPA legislation to deal with the ongoing issue of fly tipping which is a blight on the area and the officer’s report demonstrates that the Council has not used the powers again. He expressed the view that he is sure that there could have been instances where the Council could have used surveillance equipment at fly tipping hotspots and he knows other councils are using RIPA. Councillor Booth expressed the view that as he understands Peterborough is probably the worst place in the East of England for fly tipping and they do use the RIPA powers and as Fenland is a neighbouring authority then there is the potential for some of the rubbish to end up in Fenland. He expressed the opinion that whilst the Council should not be overusing the RIPA legislation there are instances when it could be used to improve the local environment.

·         Councillor Christy asked for clarification as to how the Council ensures that officers remain trained and prepared for future use of the RIPA powers? Deborah Moss responded that there is a requirement to keep officers trained and advised of any changes to the legislation. She stated that she would check to ascertain whether the training suite contains RIPA training but there are only limited services who are likely to use the RIPA powers.

·         Councillor Booth stated that he has spoken to Councillor Murphy with regards to the use of cameras out on site who advised him that cameras have been stolen in the past. He added that is not necessarily a reason not to use cameras going forward and with the improvement in technology, there maybe equipment which is available which can provide a live feed which can be fed back to officers in real time.

·         Councillor Mrs French stated that as a member of the Planning Committee she is aware that the Enforcement Team are dealing with hundreds of enforcement cases, but she has no recollection of any RIPA powers being used. She expressed the view that she agrees with Councillor Booth with regards to fly tipping as the problem appears to be escalating and, in her view, officers need to be more proactive in dealing with the issue.

Members noted the annual report on the Council’s use of RIPA.

For information purposes.

Members noted the workplan.

There were no items of topical interest.