To consider the report on the Council’s overall fraud arrangements.

34.1           Attention was drawn to the report of the Borough Solicitor, as Chair of the Corporate Governance Group, which contained the findings from the review of the Council’s fraud arrangements based on an assessment against the ‘fighting fraud’ checklist.  Members were asked to consider the Council’s overall fraud arrangements.

34.2           The Borough Solicitor explained that the Corporate Governance Group had tasked Internal Audit with reviewing the Council’s arrangements for fraud, corruption, bribery and theft using the ‘fighting fraud’ checklist.  The completed checklist was attached at Appendix 1 to the report and showed whether the Council was compliant in the different areas.  On the whole Tewkesbury Borough Council’s fraud arrangements were considered to be satisfactory and were relevant and appropriate for a Council of its size, for example, there were formally approved policies in place and local, regional and national fraud networks were used including data matching investigations through the National Fraud Initiative.  Paragraph 2.3 of the Officer’s report set out the area where the Council was not fully compliant and it was noted that it was necessary to raise awareness of fraud risks with staff, Members and contractors; to look at more effective ways for reporting fraud e.g. through the Council’s website; and to review the arrangements for verification of agency workers.  Those areas would be reviewed further by the Corporate Governance Group.

34.3           Paragraph 3.0 of the Officer report provided information on the Gloucestershire Fraud Hub which was led by Audit Cotswold and had been successful in obtaining funding from the Department for Communities and Local Government for initial set-up costs.  The bid had been supported by all of the Gloucestershire districts and the county council.  Tewkesbury Borough Council had supported the bid only and had not committed any financial resource to the project but, if it was successful, it would be a fraud resource which could be used by all of the Gloucestershire authorities.  Audit Cotswold would be undertaking a counter-fraud exercise within each of the districts centred upon the housing list, housing benefits and electoral registration.  The work would shortly commence at Tewkesbury Borough Council and updates would be provided at future meetings as to how it was progressing.

34.4           A Member drew attention to Page No. 58 of the checklist and questioned whether there were any timescales in place to address the questions which had been answered negatively.  The Borough Solicitor explained that, whilst these were not areas where the Council was at significant risk, it was important to be fully compliant with the checklist.  It was anticipated that it would take approximately six to nine months to address these items as there were other more pressing matters.  The Corporate Services Group Manager advised that some of them were ‘quick wins’ such as updating the information on the Council’s website/intranet and holding an anti-fraud and corruption day.  He confirmed that timescales would be attributed to the actions when the report was brought back to the Committee in September 2016.  A Member raised concern in respect of the verification of agency workers which had been highlighted as an area that needed to be addressed and he queried what arrangements were currently in place.  He was advised that when contractors were hired through an agency to carry out work for the Council it was accepted that the agency checks were valid, however, it was important to go beyond that and ensure that the Council carried out its own independent checks.

34.5           It was

RESOLVED          That the Council’s overall fraud arrangements, as assessed against the ‘fighting fraud’ checklist, be NOTED.