Issue - meetings

Members of the Committee heard from the Internal Auditor who presented the report. A progress report was presented to update Committee Members on the completion of the 2024-25 plan, the status of the 2025-26 plan, and the finalised reports since the last Committee meeting in April 2025. It was confirmed that the 2024-25 plan had been fully completed, with two final reports included in the progress report, and specific questions regarding the wider document were invited.

It was reported that all audits for the 2025-26 plan had been scheduled with the relevant teams, except for the IT audit. It was explained that their IT team was liaising with the authority to secure a booking, and the plan remained on schedule. The Auditor confirmed that key performance indicators were on track, including the timely turnaround of draft and final reports.

The Auditor drew attention to the Combined Assurance report summarised in the report but also included as a standalone item on the agenda. It was clarified that this was not a conventional Internal Audit report but a facilitated discussion with management regarding the assurance map in place. It was highlighted that no high-risk areas had identified, reductions in amber-rated risks were observed, and green-rated risks had increased, indicating an overall improvement in the authority’s risk profile.

In response to a question from the Chairman, the Auditor stated that the IT audit was solely applicable to West Lindsey, and not a joint exercise with North Kesteven. The Chairman noted that a fully green assurance rating would be concerning, as continuous improvement was the objective.

A Member of the Committee enquired about the classification of complaints procedure risks. In response, the Monitoring Officer acknowledged the volume and complexity of external complaints and outlined the ongoing review of procedures. It was confirmed that adjustments to timescales were being considered to aid efficient complaint handling whilst maintaining fairness.

The Chairman discussed expectation of response times, particularly at the parish level. It was observed that many parish councils expected unrealistically fast response times and greater communication was suggested to clarify realistic response times. The Monitoring Officer responded noting that the Chairman’s suggestion would be considered. It was highlighted that the audit had been a valuable process, and it was confirmed that adaptations to the complaints policy were being made in line with audit recommendations.

A Member of the Committee enquired about the ownership of the Saxilby footbridge. The Chief Executive responded, stating that although the Council had undertaken substantial repair and renovation work, formal ownership had not been confirmed. It was explained that responsibility for the repair had been accepted by the Council, following extensive discussions involving the Rivers and Canals Trust, Lincolnshire County Council, the local parish council, and the railway authorities. It remained the Council’s view that future stewardship of the bridge would be best placed with the Rivers and Canals Trust, though it was anticipated that further major maintenance would not be required for several decades.

In response to the Chief Executive’s comments,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6