Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Miss F E E Ransome.

Councillor S Tweedale requested that it be noted that in his capacity as Executive Support Councillor for Libraries, Heritage, Culture, Registration and Coroners Service he had not been part of the decision making process for the libraries consultation.

RESOLVED

            That the minutes of the meeting held on 24 November 2014 be signed by the Chairman as a correct record subject to it being noted that Tony Crawley and Mike Norman from KPMG were both in attendance.

(To receive a report which provides the Committee with independent insight on the facts surrounding the decision making process associated with the Libraries Project and identifies suggested areas for improvement)

Consideration was given to a report which provided the Committee with independent insight on the facts surrounding the decision making process associated with the Libraries Project and identified suggested areas for improvement.

Members were advised that the report provided a chronology of events and a comprehensive examination of the decision making process throughout the Libraries Project, leading up to the Executive decision in December 2013.  It was reported that the review of the Library Service involved a complex range of political, economic and social objectives and that the decision around the future delivery of libraries was sensitive, difficult and multi-faceted and the proposed changes were significant.

Initially it was queried whether it was appropriate to discuss this matter in light of the considerations of the proposals for the library service by the Community and Public Safety Scrutiny Committee the following day, and whether the deliberations at this meeting would have an effect on that meeting?  Members were advised that this report would not have an effect as it related to what had already happened, and the Audit Committee was not being asked to determine policies around the library service.  It was about the processes that led to the Judicial Review, and to ensure that decision making in the future took account of what had happened.  There was a need to examine how the authority could learn from this experience and so make better decisions in the future.

The Chairman stated that the Audit Committee would not be revisiting the decisions which had been made, that was the role of the scrutiny committee.  This was a regulatory committee, and needed to be apolitical.  The Chairman stated that non-members of the Committee would not be allowed to speak.

Members were advised that the role of internal audit had been to look at the critical systems and processes, not to question the policy or the decisions that were made.  This report was based on good governance principles and the recommendations were seeking how governance might be improved following the Library Service review.  The lessons learned had been detailed in the report, and it recognises that there was a lot of work done and that there were key improvements for management to consider.

The Executive Director for Environment and Economy was in attendance to address the Committee and respond to questions in relation to this report.  It was suggested that instead of Members considering what went wrong in the process and the Judicial Review, it was better to question why the outcome that was anticipated was not achieved.  However, the Executive Director welcomed the report.  It was noted that the focus for this report was on the process, advice, governance and decision making.  It was acknowledged that the authority always expected to be challenged, but this was not something to be afraid of.

The Executive and officers were required to save £1.97m from the libraries budget whilst maintaining an effective and comprehensive library service.  However, it was important to note that there was no  ...  view the full minutes text for item 38.

(To receive a report which provides the Audit Committee with an insight on the assurances across all the Council's critical services, key risks and projects)

Consideration was given to a report which provided the Audit Committee with an insight on the assurances across all the Council's critical services, key risks and projects.

The Executive Directors were in attendance to present their Combined Assurance report and answer any questions from members of the Committee.

Public Health

The Executive Director Community Wellbeing and Public Health presented the Combined Assurance report for Public Health to the Committee.  The Committee was informed that the areas the Executive Director was responsible had changed quite considerably following the senior management review and now included libraries.

It was reported that the risk had not changed from last year, but there were some particularly risky areas under the core statutory business of public health, such as outbreaks, education etc.  However, there was a lot of expertise which could be used to mitigate these risks. There were now some areas which were not related to core public health business such as libraries.

Members were provided with the opportunity to ask questions to the officers present in relation to the information contained within the report and some of the points raised during discussion included the following:

·         It was noted that these reports were a 'snapshot' of the assurances in place which looked at both critical systems and strategic risks, as well as emerging risks;

·         It was acknowledged that one of the highest risks at this time was that a number of services would be re-procured in the near future;

·         The Coroners Officers were paid for by the Police Force, and there was very little impact the authority could have on this service;

·         It was noted that in relation to the Coroners Service, it had been reduced from four districts to two three years ago.  The system was currently working as well as it could, but both coroners were due to retire in two years.  There would be a need to look at what the Coroners Service would look like in the future;

·         Nationally, there was a preference for one coroner per county, but Lincolnshire had pushed to have two;

·         It was queried, in relation to mental health issues, how certain the authority was that it could offer services that could prevent people from becoming acute cases.  Members were advised that a lot of work was taking place around mental health prevention.  This was a joint approach and work was underway on preventing mental health problems from getting worse or developing and the authority was working with a whole range of organisations in order to better support people.  There were a variety of schemes in place including a number of schemes that supported people and the community to give people mental health resilience;

·         It was noted that the Integration with Health and Social Care was a newly recorded risk, and there would be large numbers of organisations involved in this process.  There was not yet a completed plan on how this process would happen.  It was expected that this plan would be ready by the summer.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 39.

(To receive a report which provides an update on progress made against the Audit Plan 2014/15 and provides summaries of all audits completed within the period September to December 2014)

Consideration was given to a report which provided the Committee with an update on progress made against the Audit Plan 2014/15 and provided summaries of all audits completed within the period September to December 2014.

A progress update on the Agresso implementation was also provided by the Chief Information and Commissioning Officer as the project was moving so dynamically, and it was felt that this was an appropriate time to update the committee.

 Members were advised that the project had now entered a very intense stage, as the project was in the second round of integration and system testing.  This stage involved officers ensuring that the system did do what it was expected to do.  It was noted that problems had been encountered in terms of resources, as it had been difficult to secure sufficiently experienced payroll staff to carry out the very high number of payroll tests which were necessary.  Getting the payroll aspect right was a key activity.  The first end to end test of the full payroll was due to be carried on the coming weeks, which would give a very good indication of whether the system was working correctly.

Training for staff would be in a number of different formats, and a lot of it could be carried out online, for example time sheets, annual leave and placing orders.  There would more detailed face to face training for staff using it in relation to HR and finance.

Members were provided with the opportunity to ask questions to the officers present in relation to the information presented and some of the issues raised during discussion included the following:

·         It was explained that the User Acceptance Training (UAT) which was due to take place was an opportunity for the future users of the system to go through a set of tests and see whether the system works.  If the system did not work as it should then that issue would be documented and addressed;

·         The final sign off of the system would be at the end of June 2015;

·         It was acknowledged that there were still risks with payroll, however, the absolute worst case scenario was that the March payroll would need to be re-run, meaning that people would be paid the same amount in April as they were in March.  Any corrections would then be made as necessary by Serco;

·         Members were assured by the Serco Partnership Director that Serco understood their responsibilities in relation to this contract;

·         It was reported that all invoices in the old system would be paid by 31 March;

·         Risks in terms of data protection  were being well managed during this process;

·         Very detailed plans were being developed for the transportation of the physical files.  The Information Governance Team was closely involved in this process;

·         It was requested that a further update on the Agresso and Mosaic implementation be brought to the March meeting of the Committee.

It was reported that 11 audits had been completed between September and December 2014, and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 40.

(To receive a report which provides the Committee with the opportunity to consider the role of Overview and Scrutiny at Lincolnshire County Council and how the Audit Committee and the Overview and Scrutiny function might work together in the future)

Consideration was given to a report which provided the Committee with the opportunity to consider the role of Overview and Scrutiny at Lincolnshire County Council and how the Audit Committee and Overview and Scrutiny function might work together in the future.  Members were advised that it was felt that there could be some value in working more closely together, but whilst still respecting the boundaries of the committees.

Members were provided with an opportunity to ask questions to the officers present in relation to the information contained within the report and some of the points raised during discussion included the following:

·         Members were cautious about rushing into anything and it was queried whether there was a possibility of an overlap of the business of Audit and scrutiny;

·         The independent added member of the committee commented that they were not sure if there was any overlap, but thought it would be useful to see the Terms of Reference for both the scrutiny committees and the Audit Committee, and it would need to be known whether there was any overlap;

·         It was noted that there was a separation between governance and assurance and quality and performance, and it was important that members were able to explore all issues;

·         Members of Scrutiny Committees were kept informed of the discussions of the Audit Committee through the visibility of the work programme, the minutes of the meetings and officers;

·         There was a need to build an understanding of each others roles and the conversations taking place;

·         One issue to be addressed was how could the audit committee get assurance that the scrutiny function was working effectively?

·         Suggestions on how assurance arrangements could be improved could be included within the Annual Governance Statement;

·         It was not appropriate for Audit Committee to set recommendations for other bodies;

·         It was good practice to bring officers to the audit committee when limited assurance was reported;

·         It was important to make best use of resources;

·         It was important that appropriate information was provided to members when they were making decisions or recommendations;

·         There was a need for caution in that the Audit Committee did not become involved in the governance process, for example examining recommendations;

·         It was suggested that Democratic Services examine the Terms of Reference for the three committees which were most likely to overlap – the Audit Committee, Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee and Value for Money Scrutiny Committee;

·         There was a need for a further discussion regarding the number of scrutiny committees and their roles and whether there was a need for this to change;

·         It was important that the informal governance processes worked properly;

·         The questions for the Audit Committee were whether the risks were being managed and what boundaries were being worked within, and were the systems and processes supporting the governance framework.

It was suggested that further informal discussions on this issue take place during the Committee's training session which was scheduled for 30 March 2015.

RESOLVED

1.    That the role of Overview and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 41.

(To receive a report from KPMG, the County Council's External Auditors, which provides the Committee with an update on the 2014/15 Audit deliverables)

Consideration was given to a report from the Council's External Auditors, KPMG, which provided the Committee with an update on the 2014/15 deliverables.

The Members of the Committee were guided through the report, and the following points were highlighted:

·         KPMG's detailed audit plan would be presented to the Committee in March 2015, and would highlight the key risks to their audit at the planning stage.  A significant area of focus would continue to be the work required to give the audit opinion on the accounts for the Authority and Pension Fund;

·         The proposed audit fee remained the same as that notified to the authority in April 2014, which was £143,100 for the Council's audit and £24,350 for the Pension Fund.  The amount of this fee would be confirmed in the Audit Plan presented at the March meeting;

·         The Independent Accountant's 'Reasonableness Assurance Report' in relation to the Teachers' Pensions 2013/14 return was issues in December 2014.  This work was agreed as a separate audit as the return no longer falls within the Audit Commission's Grant Certification Regime.  The fee for this work was £3,000;

Queries were raised regarding the new Pension Boards which were to be set up and it was noted that they would report to the Pensions Committee.  It was commented that when carrying out audit work there was a need to have regard for the work of the Pensions Committee.

RESOLVED

            That the content of the progress report be noted.

(To receive a report which provides the Committee with information relevant to the core assurance activities currently scheduled for the 2014/15 work plan)

Consideration was given to a report which provided the Committee with information relevant to the core assurance activities scheduled for the 2014/15 work plan.

It was agreed that the following be added to the work plan:

·         Wider assurance around the organisational learning action plan in relation to the Libraries Review;

·         Further assurance regarding the Agresso and Mosaic IT systems;