Agenda item

Purpose: To allow the committee to review the Annual Governance Statement before it is signed by the Leader and Chief Executive.

The Committee considered a report (Agenda Item 9) which set out the Annual Governance Statement (AGS) for the Council for 2016-17.

Ian Priestley introduced the report. The AGS formed part of the Council’s Financial Statements and was designed to provide stakeholders of the Council with assurances that the Council had operated within the law and that the Council had met the requirements of the Accounts and Audit Regulations. This formed part of the requirement for the Council to review, at least once in a year, the effectiveness of its systems of internal control.

In addition to the reports on this agenda, this assurance was achieved via the consideration and monitoring of service risk registers and by considering reports from external regulators, i.e. Ofsted and KPMG (the Council’s external auditors). Changes required by KPMG had been or were in the process of being implemented.

Ian Priestley explained that there were a couple of errors in the covering report, i.e. a reference to the Governance and Audit Committee, and reference to a review of the AGS by the Risk Management Group that had in fact not taken place.

Ian Priestley then referred to the significant governance issues identified in the report for 2015/16 and 2016/17. For those issues identified in 2015/16, the report detailed the action taken to manage these issues during 2016/17. Work to mitigate 2016/17 issues would continue throughout the coming year as would work to review the Council’s governance arrangements to ensure they were fit for purpose in the increasingly complex and challenging environment that the Council was working within.

Councillor Quentin Webb was pleased to note that all Heads of Service had returned their Assurance Statements.

Councillor Jeff Beck queried whether there should be an expectation of Portfolio Holders to attend this meeting. Councillor Anthony Pick felt that Portfolio Holders should attend to address particular issues when required. Councillor James Cole agreed Portfolio Holders should attend in these cases, but questioned whether routine attendance was necessary when Officers were already present. Councillor Paul Bryant queried whether there was sufficient time available between receiving reports and alerting Portfolio Holders to attend when necessary. Ian Priestley suggested that Portfolio Holder attendance could be discussed at and arranged if needed following the Chairman’s briefing meeting. Councillor Cole gave his agreement to that approach. He would expect Officers to flag up the need for Portfolio Holder attendance.

Councillor Webb reiterated that he was content with this report on the basis that Assurance Statements had been received from all Heads of Service. If this had not been provided then he might have sought the involvement of Portfolio Holders.

Sarah Clarke highlighted the need to recognise those functions which fell in the remit of Council and those which were the responsibility of the Executive. This needed to influence this debate as a Portfolio Holder would introduce an item at Council meetings.

Ian Pennington advised that it was not his experience from equivalent meetings at other local authorities that Portfolio Holders were in attendance as a matter of routine.

Councillor Graham Bridgman voiced his concern at the layout and formatting of the AGS. He requested that the document be tidied prior to its publication. Andy Walker agreed to do so.

Councillor Cole referred back to the significant governance issues identified for 2016/17 which related to property investment and the Council’s transformation programme. He queried whether these would result in changes to governance arrangements.

Andy Walker explained that following Council approval of the Property Investment Strategy, a Property Investment Board had been established which included Member representation. The transformation programme was an area for ongoing review but would not necessarily result in governance changes. The review of governance arrangements in 2017/18, referred to in paragraph 6.2 of the report, would form a large part of the work of the Finance and Governance Group over the coming year.

Councillor Cole proposed acceptance of the report and the actions it contained to mitigate risks to the Council’s governance arrangements. This was seconded by Councillor Webb.

RESOLVED that the report and the actions it contained to mitigate risks to the Council’s governance arrangements be approved, subject to a final proof read and tidy of the document.