Agenda and minutes

To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the meeting of this Committee held on 06 September 2010 and the Special Meeting held on the 14 September 2010.

The Minutes of the meeting held on 6^th September 2010 were approved as a true and correct record and signed by the Chairman subject to the inclusion of a minor amendment. Councillor David Holtby was listed as being absent at the meeting but he had sent his apologies.

The Minutes of the Special Meeting held on the 14^th September 2010 were approved as a true and correct record and signed by the Chairman.

Councillor Jeff beck noted that following the resignation of Councillor Tony Vicker’s as Vice-Chairman of the Committee a new Vice-Chairman would need to be elected.  All Members present voted in favour of electing Councillor Julian Swift-Hook as the new Vice-Chairman for the remainder of the Municipal Year.

Councillor Julian Swift-hook announced that while he was content to accept the position he supported Councillor Vicker’s resignation on a point of principle. He shared Councillor Vicker’s concern that despite agreement at Governance and Audit on the amendment to the Constitution in respect of Urgent Council Meetings this support was not followed through at Council when the amendment to the proposition was put forward.

To receive any Declarations of Interest from Members.

Councillors Keith Lock and Julian Swift-Hook declared an interest in Agenda Item 4, but reported that, as their interest was personal and not prejudicial, they determined to remain to take part in the debate and vote on the matter.

Purpose: To inform those charged with governance (The Governance and Audit Committee) of the findings from KPMG’s external audit of the financial statements.

(Councillor Keith Lock declared a personal interest in Agenda item 4 by virtue of the fact that a member of his family was employed by KPMG. As his interest was personal and not prejudicial he determined to take part in the debate and vote on the matter).

(Councillor Julian Swift-Hook declared a personal interest in Agenda item 4 by virtue of the fact that he was Chairman of West Berkshire Mencap who were in receipt of funding from West Berkshire Council. As his interest was personal and not prejudicial he determined to take part in the debate and vote on the matter).

The Committee considered a report (Agenda Item 4) concerning the findings from KPMG’s external audit of the financial statements.

Joseph Holmes noted that the draft financial statements had been considered at the Governance and Audit meeting on the 28 June 2010. KPMG had been appointed by the Audit Commission to review the Council’s financial statements and the outcome of that audit had to be reported back to the Governance and Audit Committee.

Joseph reported that the quality of the financial statements had been high and that the auditors had not found any fundamental errors in them. They had requested that a number of non-material changes had been made to the documentation and these would be reflected in the published statements. The auditors had issued an unqualified statement and had also included nine recommendations (as set out in Appendix C) which were designed to strengthen the system of internal control.

Greg McIntosh reiterated that KPMG were required by the Code of Audit Practice to issue a report to the Governance and Audit Committee which summarised the findings of the external audit of the Council’s financial statements. The external auditors had two key responsibilities. The first was to provide an opinion on the Council’s financial statements and the second was to provide a conclusion on the adequacy of the Council’s arrangements in respect of its Use of Resources i.e. was the council securing value for money in its use of resources. The auditors had also considered whether or not the Council’s Annual Governance Statement accorded with relevant legislation and whether the statement was an accurate reflection of the way the Council operated.

Greg confirmed that KPMG would be issuing an unqualified opinion. He thanked officers for the quality of the working papers which he felt had improved year on year. He reported that the Audit process had gone well and that no major adjustments had had to be made to the accounts.

The Use of Resources conclusion had been impacted on by the abolition of the Audit Committee and the Comprehensive Area Assessment (CAA) regime. Previously the Use of Resources had fed into the CAA. Due to the timing of the abolition a lot of the work on the Use of Resources had already been undertaken. Although the Council would not receive score for the year (but as the work had already been carried out) the auditors had still been  ...  view the full minutes text for item 23.

Officers noted that the next Governance and Audit meeting would be held on the 15 November 2010. It had been agreed at Council on the 23 September 2010 that the two motions relating to the Committee Systems would be referred to the Governance and Audit Committee for consideration. A small working group would be set up to consider issues (positive and negative) surrounding both systems including a thorough cost analysis of both. It had been agreed that the working group would report back to Council in May 2012 and amendments would be introduced following the introduction of the necessary legislation should they be required. The terms of reference, make up of the working group and a timescales for undertaking the review would be considered at the next Governance and Audit meeting.