Accessibility settings

In order to remember your preferences as you navigate through the site, a cookie will be set.

Color preference

Text size

Agenda and minutes

Venue: Tewkesbury Borough Council Offices, Severn Room

Contact: Democratic Services Tel: 01684 272021  Email:  democraticservices@tewkesbury.gov.uk

Items
No. Item

3.

Announcements

When the continuous alarm sounds you must evacuate the building by the nearest available fire exit. Members and visitors should proceed to the visitors’ car park at the front of the building and await further instructions (during office hours staff should proceed to their usual assembly point; outside of office hours proceed to the visitors’ car park). Please do not re-enter the building unless instructed to do so.

 

In the event of a fire any person with a disability should be assisted in leaving the building.  

Minutes:

3.1             The evacuation procedure, as noted on the Agenda, was advised to those present.

3.2             The Chair indicated that, in accordance with Procedure Rule 1.2 of the Council’s Constitution, he had used his discretion to vary the order of business so Item 12 – Annual Report on Health and Safety Activities 2019/20-2020/21 - and Item 13 – Corporate Risk Register - would be taken after Item 5 – Audit and Governance Committee Work Programme.

4.

Apologies for Absence and Substitutions

To receive apologies for absence and advise of any substitutions. 

Minutes:

4.1             Apologies for absence had been received from Councillors D W Gray and H S Munro. There were no substitutions for the meeting. 

5.

Declarations of Interest

Pursuant to the adoption by the Council on 26 June 2012 of the Tewkesbury Borough Council Code of Conduct, effective from 1 July 2012, as set out in Minute No. CL.34, Members are invited to declare any interest they may have in the business set out on the Agenda to which the approved Code applies.

Minutes:

5.1             The Committee’s attention was drawn to the Tewkesbury Borough Code of Conduct which was adopted by the Council on 26 June 2012 and took effect from 1 July 2012. 

5.2             There were no declarations of interest made on this occasion.

6.

Minutes pdf icon PDF 79 KB

To approve the Minutes of the meetings held on 24 March and 4 May 2021.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

6.1             The Minutes of the meetings held on 24 March and 4 May 2021, copies of which had been circulated, were approved as correct records and signed by the Chair.

7.

Audit and Governance Committee Work Programme pdf icon PDF 79 KB

To consider the Audit and Governance Committee Work Programme.  

Minutes:

7.1             Attention was drawn to the Audit and Governance Committee Work Programme, circulated at Pages No. 7-4, which Members were asked to consider.

7.2             The Head of Corporate Services indicated that the Agenda for the meeting on 15 September 2021 was fairly significant and there would be training prior to that in respect of the Statement of Accounts which Members would be asked to approve at the meeting.  In terms of the management assurance report on the internal control environment during COVID-19, he explained that this was being brought to the Committee as the Internal Audit team had been redeployed since March 2020 so it was not possible to give independent assurance.  A Member noted that the Internal Audit Plan Monitoring Report had been removed from the Agenda for the current meeting and questioned when it would be brought to the Committee.  In response, the Head of Corporate Services confirmed it was included in the Work Programme for the meeting on 15 December 2021; if any internal audit work was completed over the next couple of months, a report would be brought to the September meeting but that was unlikely.

7.3             It was

RESOLVED          That the Audit and Governance Committee Work Programme be NOTED.

8.

Annual Report on Health and Safety Activities 2019/20-2020/21 pdf icon PDF 96 KB

To consider the adequacy of the Council’s health and safety arrangements. 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

8.1             The report of the Head of Community Services, circulated at Pages No. 102-118, provided a summary of the activities carried out to secure health and safety compliance in the financial years 2019/20 and 2020/21.  Members were asked to consider the adequacy of the Council’s health and safety arrangements.

8.2             The Head of Community Services explained that COVID-19 meant it had not been possible to present this report to the Committee during the previous year, therefore, the current report covered a two year period.  Over the last 18 months, much of the normal health and safety work had been put on hold and the Keep Safe, Stay Healthy Group had ceased operating during the first year but was now operational once again.  A significant number of risk assessments in relation to COVID-19 had taken place over the period which were detailed at Appendix 1 to the report and included emergency rest centres and polling stations for elections.  Over the last six months, the world had begun to open up more and an increasing number of events were being held both on Council-owned and private land; whilst a light-touch approach had previously been taken to smaller events whereby Officers had discussed health and safety with the organiser, due to COVID-19 restrictions the Safety Advisory Group had been meeting on a weekly basis.  COVID-19 was certainly not going away and a risk assessment of the Council Offices had been undertaken the previous week to ensure staff and Members were safe when returning to the building.

8.3             A Member noted the references within the report to mental wellbeing and ongoing concerns about the long-term impact of COVID-19 on staff.  Staff had been seconded from their usual roles and he assumed many would have accrued leave so he was seeking reassurance that had been taken into account.  The Head of Community Services confirmed that the team worked with HR on staff welfare and a range of mental health training had been provided over the last 18 months with staff being encouraged to take leave where possible.  Staff briefings continued to take place on a monthly basis and there was a raft of information available for staff to access on the intranet.  Feedback was received via regular staff surveys suggesting that staff were coping well – that had not necessarily been the case during the early part of the pandemic but it had been picked up and addressed quickly.  Staff welfare was of paramount importance but he was confident the majority of feedback from staff had been positive.  The Head of Corporate Services advised that a lot of work had been done around mental health pre-COVID-19 and the Council had been given a Workforce Wellbeing Charter accreditation where it had been evaluated as ‘excellent’ in five of eight workstreams, one of which was mental health.  Whilst that had been a great foundation moving into the pandemic, there had certainly been more lessons learnt.  For example, Internal Audit staff had been redeployed to the business grants  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

9.

Corporate Risk Register pdf icon PDF 83 KB

To consider the risks contained within the Corporate Risk Register and assurance that the risks are being effectively managed.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

9.1             The report of the Head of Corporate Services, circulated at Pages No. 119-140, asked Members to consider the risks contained within the corporate risk register and assurance that the risks were being effectively managed.

9.2             Members were advised that the corporate risk register was a high-level tool which helped management to consider what the corporate risks were and how they were being managed and it was brought to each meeting of the Audit and Governance Committee.  The key updates arising since the register was last presented were set out in the table at Pages No. 121-122, Paragraph 3.1 of the report.  It was noted that financial stability remained a key risk and was likely to continue to be for the foreseeable future given the uncertainty moving forward.  In terms of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), good progress was being made on the new action plan including staff training, a comprehensive communications plan, and development of a draft mailbox usage policy and a report on the adequacy of the Council’s GDPR arrangements would be brought to the Audit and Governance Committee in December 2021.  The Head of Corporate Services explained that Reference 7. Waste Service, which related to the risk in respect of effectiveness of service delivery, was now fairly low risk and could potentially be removed; the Head of Community Services had a full team in place and contract monitoring had improved dramatically over the last few years.  A new risk around carbon neutrality had been added to the corporate risk register by the Head of Finance and Asset Management to acknowledge the challenge of achieving the wider county ambition.  The carbon reduction action plan had recently been presented to the Executive and Overview and Scrutiny Committees and had been well received in terms of the progress made to date.  There was a lot more work to be done than had initially been realised so a recommendation for a new Carbon Reduction Programme Officer post had been accepted by the Executive Committee and would now go forward as a recommendation to Council.  In terms of scanning the horizon for potential risks, the recent Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) consultation on the consistency of waste collections had been highlighted.  The consultation contained several proposals but the most concerning, which would potentially be effective from the 2023/24 financial year, was the requirement for local authorities to remove fees for garden waste collection – Tewkesbury Borough Council had collected £990,000 in garden waste this year so that would be a significant loss.  There were also potential changes to the way recyclate was collected with Tewkesbury Borough Council’s current comingled collections not being the favoured option put forward by DEFRA; that would have massive implications in terms of new vehicles, new containers and reconfiguring rounds.

9.3             A Member indicated that responsibility for maintaining grass verges continued to be a huge problem due to the variety of different owners which included Tewkesbury Borough Council, Gloucestershire County Council, Parish and Town  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

10.

Informing the Audit Risk Assessment for Tewkesbury Borough Council 2020/21 pdf icon PDF 405 KB

To consider the external auditor’s report on informing the audit risk assessment for Tewkesbury Borough Council 2020/21. 

Minutes:

10.1          Attention was drawn to the external auditor’s report on informing the audit risk assessment for Tewkesbury Borough Council in 2020/21.  Members were asked to consider the report.

10.2          The representative from Grant Thornton advised that the purpose of the report was to contribute towards the effective two-way communication between the Council’s external auditors and the Audit and Governance Committee as those charged with governance.  As part of the risk assessment procedures, Grant Thornton was required to obtain an understanding of management processes and the Council’s oversight of five key areas: general enquiries of management; fraud, laws and regulations; related parties; and accounting estimates.  The report was based on a number of questions and the responses received from the Council and he was happy to answer any queries Members may have. 

10.3          With regard to the section on related parties, set out at Pages No. 37-38 of the report,  a Member raised concern that it was difficult for Members to know exactly what they should include on their Register of Interests forms and when making declarations of interest; the onus was on Members to determine what they should declare and she queried how the information was checked, for instance, did secret societies such as the Freemasons need to be declared.  In response, the representative from Grant Thornton explained there was no such thing as a secret society as far as Members were concerned and they were obliged to disclose membership.  In terms of checks in place, he was not sure if it was covered by the Council’s Internal Audit programme.  It was a trust-based system to an extent but auditors did undertake checks by exception, for instance, carrying out searches of company registers, and if any declarations had not been made that would be reported as a significant deficiency.  The Finance Manager advised that, in addition to the Register of Interests form, a declaration of related parties’ questionnaire was sent to Members annually and checks were carried out on payments to the Council’s creditors to identify any conflicts of interest.  The Council would also be aware if Tewkesbury Borough Councillors were Members of any other authorities, for instance Parish and Town Councils or Gloucestershire County Council.  The Borough Solicitor clarified that membership of the Freemasons, or other secret societies, was a declarable interest in accordance with the Council’s Code of Conduct on the grounds of being likely to influence, or set up to influence, public opinion.

10.4          It was

RESOLVED          That the external auditor’s report on informing the audit risk assessment for Tewkesbury Borough Council 2020/21 be NOTED.

11.

External Auditor's Audit Plan 2020/21 pdf icon PDF 6 MB

To consider the external auditor’s Audit Plan 2020/21.  

Minutes:

11.1          Attention was drawn to the external auditor’s audit plan for the year ending 31 March 2021, circulated at Pages No. 50-72.  Members were asked to consider the information provided.

11.2          The representative from Grant Thornton advised that the audit plan gave an assessment of the significant risks which had been very much impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic as well as the increased expectations from the regulators.  The audit was underway and was based on three significant areas of risk: valuation of land and buildings; valuation of net pension fund liability; and management override of controls.  In respect of the latter, it was noted this could not be rebutted - an assumption was made that management sought to circumvent those controls.  A key element of the regulator’s review was the level of challenge the external auditors placed on management; everything in the accounts needed to be challenged in terms of whether it was in the right place.  It was particularly important when there were significant judgements to the estimates, for instance, valuations of land and buildings and the new pension fund liability, as those liabilities would not crystallise until the future and very small changes had a material impact on the Council’s accounts.  Grant Thornton determined financial statement materiality based on a proportion of the Council’s gross expenditure for the financial year and, at the planning stage, materiality was £742,000 which equated to 2% of the forecast gross expenditure for the year.  This could not be set any higher as, in Grant Thornton’s view, the Council was already a very well run authority; it could be set lower but that would reduce the issues that would be reported.  The revised approach to the value for money work had come into effect from audit year 2020/21 and the three main changes arising from the approach were: a new set of criteria covering financial sustainability, governance and improvements in economy, efficiency and effectiveness; more extensive reporting with a requirement for Grant Thornton to produce a commentary on arrangements across all of the key criteria rather than the previous reporting by exception approach; and the replacement of the binary approach to value for money conclusions with more sophisticated judgements on performance, as well as key recommendations on any significant weaknesses in arrangements identified during the audit.  It was noted that the audit findings report would be presented at the next Audit and Governance Committee meeting. 

11.3           Members were advised that the public were entitled to ask questions of the external auditors and could request a number of actions if they believed they were appropriate, one of which was a public interest report; these had previously been very rare, with the last one over 12 years ago, but over the last 18 months a whole slew had been received.  One other area of change was around the going concern and a practice note had been updated to allow auditors to apply a continued provision of service approach to audit going concerns, where appropriate.  A  ...  view the full minutes text for item 11.

12.

Fee Scale for the Audit 2021/22 pdf icon PDF 70 KB

To consider the fee scale for the 2021/22 audit. 

Minutes:

12.1          Attention was drawn to the report of the Head of Finance and Asset Management, circulated at Pages No. 73-75, which set out the fee scale for the 2021/22 audit of accounts.  Members were asked to consider the fee scale of £37,589 for the 2021/22 audit.

12.2          The Finance Manager advised that, since the Audit Commission had been disbanded, Public Sector Audit Appointments (PSAA) had appointed external auditors on behalf of Tewkesbury Borough Council.  PSAA was required to set the scale fees for audits by the start of the financial year and the fee scale set for 2021/22 was £37,589.  This was a £3,000 increase against the fee set for 2019/20 which reflected the additional work in relation to the pension valuation and the property plant and equipment valuation in the accounts.  This was the base fee the Council would pay as other factors may come into play, for instance, changes to the audit standards, the value for money work was now more onerous and if there were errors in the accounts then additional work may be required.

12.3          It was

RESOLVED          That the fee scale of £37,589 for the 2021/22 audit be NOTED.

13.

Counter Fraud Unit Report pdf icon PDF 82 KB

To consider the annual update on the work of the Counter Fraud team.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

13.1          Attention was drawn to the report of the Counter Fraud Unit Manager, circulated at Pages No. 76-82, which provided assurance over the counter fraud activities of the Council.  Members were asked to consider the annual update from the Counter Fraud Unit.

13.2          The Counter Fraud Manager advised that this was a biannual report which summarised the work the Counter Fraud Unit had been undertaking on behalf of Tewkesbury Borough Council and included an update on surveillance activity, set out at Page No. 79, Paragraph 3.0 of the report, which was required to be reported annually.  The Counter Fraud Unit had been working closely with all partner councils on business grants.  This had been a considerable amount of work as it was an enormous project and a lot of the robust post-payment assurance work was being carried out now.  All local authorities participated in the National Fraud Initiative data matching exercise to prevent and detect fraud which was usually carried out in relation to a number of areas, but significantly Council Tax and the Council Tax Reduction Scheme; however, this had also been carried out for business grants.  The first matches related to the initial round of payments made in summer 2020 and it was assumed this would continue for all of the grant schemes that had been offered since.  This meant that the Counter Fraud Unit would be working on business grants for some time; however, it was very important for assurance purposes to check that the money had been paid to the right people.  Animal welfare concerns and the increased number of unlicensed breeders had been a particular problem during the pandemic and the Counter Fraud Unit had been working closely with the RSPCA on better working relationships with the district councils, for instance, new data sharing arrangements.  The Counter Fraud Unit had also completed a review of the housing list which would now be carried out every 18 months rather than annually.  Normal work had continued in terms of the Council Tax Reduction Scheme and interviews under caution were taking place in person once again with additional protective measures in place after reverting to written statements under caution during the early stages of the pandemic.

13.3           A Member drew attention to Page No. 78, Paragraph 2.4 of the report, and asked for more detail about the type of cases involving serious offences against animals.  The Counter Fraud Unit Manager explained that regular referrals were being made in respect of puppy farms, mainly within the Forest of Dean District but that was widening, so the Counter Fraud Unit was working with the RSPCA and the Licensing teams on this.  It was subsequently

RESOLVED          That the annual update on the work of the Counter Fraud Unit be NOTED.

14.

Proceeds of Crime and Anti-Money Laundering Policy pdf icon PDF 60 KB

To consider the Proceeds of Crime and Anti-Money Laundering Policy and recommend to the Executive Committee that it be approved and that authority be delegated to the Head of Finance and Asset Management, in consultation with the Counter Fraud Unit Manager, One Legal and the Lead Member for Corporate Governance, to approve future minor amendments to the policy.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

14.1          The report of the Counter Fraud Unit Manager, circulated at Pages No. 83-93, attached an updated Proceeds of Crime and Anti-Money Laundering Policy.  Members were asked to recommend to the Executive Committee that the Proceeds of Crime and Anti-Money Laundering Policy be approved and that authority be delegated to the Head of Finance and Asset Management, in consultation with the Counter Fraud Unit Manager, One Legal and the Lead Member for Corporate Governance, to approve further minor amendments to the policy.

14.2          Members were advised that the policy had been refreshed to ensure that staff and Members were carrying out due diligence and reporting suspicious activity in the right way.  The nominated Money Laundering Reporting Officer was the Section 151 Officer which, in Tewkesbury Borough Council, was the Head of Finance and Asset Management.  The policy was supported by a working document available to staff which outlined how and when to report suspicious activity, when to refuse cash payments and the requirements relating to customer due diligence.

14.3          It was

RESOLVED          That it be RECOMMENDED TO THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE that:

1.    The Proceeds of Crime and Anti-Money Laundering Policy, as attached as Appendix 1, be APPROVED.

2.    Authority be delegated to the Head of Finance and Asset Management, in consultation with the Counter Fraud Manager, One Legal and the Lead Member for Corporate Governance, to approve further minor amendments to the policy.

15.

Use of the Internet and Social Media in Investigations and Enforcement Policy pdf icon PDF 60 KB

To consider the Use of the Internet and Social Media in Investigations and Enforcement Policy and recommend to the Executive Committee that it be approved and that authority be delegated to the Borough Solicitor, in consultation with the Counter Fraud Unit Manager and the Lead Member for Corporate Governance, to approve future minor amendments to the policy.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

15.1          The report of the Counter Fraud Unit Manager, circulated at Pages No. 94-101, attached an updated Use of the Internet and Social Media in Investigations and Enforcement Policy.  Members were asked to recommend to the Executive Committee that the policy be approved and that authority be delegated to the Borough Solicitor, in consultation with the Counter Fraud Unit Manager and the Lead Member for Corporate Governance, to approve further minor amendments to the policy.

15.2           The Counter Fraud Unit Manager advised that the Investigatory Powers Commissioner’s Office (IPCO) recommended that, where intelligence gathering was undertaken – particularly through use of the internet and social media – evidence should demonstrate that this was being carried out in a careful and considerate way so as not to stray into covert surveillance.  As such, existing arrangements had been reviewed and the policy for ensuring compliance had been revised and was attached at Appendix 1 to the report.  The policy was supported by a procedural document which was available for staff involved in investigation work who were authorised to undertake research and investigation using open source internet applications or other civil or criminal enforcement and recovery work.

15.3           It was

RESOLVED          That it be RECOMMENDED TO THE EXECUTIVE                                     COMMITTEE that:

1.    The Use of the Internet and Social Media in Investigations and Enforcement Policy, as attached at Appendix 1 to the report, be APPROVED.

2.    Authority be delegated to the Borough Solicitor, in consultation with the Counter Fraud Manager and the Lead Member for Corporate Governance, to approve future minor amendments to the policy.

16.

Internal Audit Annual Report 2020/21 pdf icon PDF 94 KB

To consider the limitation of scope regarding independent assurance from internal audit on the adequacy of the Council’s governance, risk management and control environment for 2020/21; and to consider the proposed recovery of the internal audit function during 2021/22.

Minutes:

16.1          Attention was drawn to the report of the Head of Corporate Services, circulated at Pages No. 141-147, which provided Members with a summary of the internal audit work undertaken in 2020/21.  Members were asked to consider the limitation of scope regarding independent assurance from internal audit on the adequacy of the Council’s governance, risk management and control environment for 2020/21 and the proposed recovery of the internal audit function during 2021/22.

16.2          The Head of Corporate Services explained that, as Members were aware, the Internal Audit team had been redeployed to the business cell to support the administration and payment of business grants with effect from April 2020.  Page No. 143, Paragraphs 2.1-2.3 of the report, set out the impact of COVID-19 on the ambitions of internal audit.  Nevertheless, internal audit should still demonstrate compliance with Public Sector Internal Audit Standards (PSIAS) and, as there had been no internal audit activity, this was not possible.  Page No. 144, Paragraph 3.0 of the report, outlined why the Internal Audit team had been identified for redeployment to the business cell and the nature of the role they had undertaken.  Members were advised that, due to the significant risk of the grant schemes being abused and fraudulent claims made, a robust internal process was required to ensure the public purse was being protected and internal audit was best placed to design, deliver and monitor that process.  It was noted that over £30m grants had been paid out with over 6,000 individual payments made.  Taking calls with the business community had been rewarding but also challenging for the staff who had to learn to adapt.  Consideration had been given to removing the Internal Audit team from the business cell but there had been concern this would negatively impact the businesses that were benefiting from the scheme; therefore, a decision had been made to retain the team for the full financial year. One Member of the team remained in the business cell. 

16.3           As there had been no internal audit work, it was not possible to provide the Committee with any independent assurance as to whether the Council’s governance and risk management controls were effective.  Page No. 145, Paragraph 4.4 of the report, set out the consequences of the redeployment of the team and Members were advised that the Council would need to highlight the limitation of scope in its Annual Governance Statement which would be taken to the Committee in September.  In addition, there was a reputational impact on the Council and the authority did not comply with PSIAS as things currently stood.  Notwithstanding this, the Head of Corporate Services felt that the support which had been given to the business cell and the business community outweighed the fact there had been no internal audit function during the year.  Pages No. 145-146, Paragraph 5.0 of the report, gave a high level overview of the plan for internal audit recovery which was reflected in the Council’s Corporate Recovery Plan; the actions within the recovery  ...  view the full minutes text for item 16.

17.

Audit and Governance Committee Annual Report 2020/21 pdf icon PDF 72 KB

To approve the Audit and Governance Committee Annual Report 2020/21.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

17.1          Attention was drawn to the report of the Head of Corporate Services, circulated separately, which attached, at Appendix 1, the Audit Committee Annual Report for approval.

17.2          The Head of Corporate Services explained that the Council’s Constitution required the Audit and Governance Committee to produce an annual report.  The report for 2020/21, attached at Appendix 1 of the papers, included reference to the redeployment of the Internal Audit team to support the business cell; financial reporting; Annual Governance Statement; an overview of the work of the Gloucestershire Counter Fraud Unit and the external auditors; safeguarding arrangements, the outcomes of a Food Standards Agency audit; and the serious and organised crime framework.  The report would be presented to Council by the Chair of the Audit and Governance Committee following approval.

17.3          It was

RESOLVED          That the Audit and Governance Committee Annual Report 2020/21 be APPROVED.