Agenda item

Members considered a report which provided an update of progress, by the Audit partner, as at 30 September 2022, against the 2022/2023 annual programme, which had been agreed by the Audit Committee in April 2022. During the period, six assurance audits had been completed and four audits were currently in progress.

The completed audits being:-

Value For Money - High Assurance

Flood Management - High Assurance

Key Control and ERP - Substantial Assurance

ICT Disaster Recovery - Substantial Assurance

ICT Helpdesk follow up - Substantial Assurance

ICT Cloud Services - Substantial Assurance

Audits in progress/draft stage were -

Contract Management- draft report

Staff Resilience – fieldwork

Levelling Up Fund part 1 (part 2 due to commence in Q4) – fieldwork

Housing Subsidy - draft report

Information on each was included within the body of the report.

Other work undertaken during the period was highlighted to the Committee, including work on the Combined Assurance Process due to be presented to Committee in March 2023 and grant work related to Covid Funding.  Again, further information on each was set out in the report.

Members noted there were 12 actions due for completion by the 31st August 2022; 1 High Priority action and 11 Medium Priority actions.  The High Priority action had now been completed and 5 of the 11 Medium Priority actions had been completed (45%).  Appendix 3 provided details of those actions and indicated where extended implementation dates had been agreed.

The Full Audit Plan was set out within the report and the matters of interest included within the report were also highlighted to the Committee.

Finally, Members were advised of staffing changes at Lincolnshire Audit seeing both Emma Bee, Audit Team Leader, and the Head of Internal Audit, Lucy Pledge leaving their positions. Assurance was offered that a successful recruitment drive had been undertaken along with a “grow your own” mentality.

The Chairman, echoed by Members of the Committee expressed sorrow at the departure of the two Officers, thanking them for their work over the years, but wished them well for their future endeavours.

Debate ensued and in respect of the Flood Management Audit, Members were pleased to see the positive result, however reference was made to the link between partners, which had previously been of concern, and sought indication as to whether this had been within the scope of the Audit.

The Audit Team Leader confirmed that inter-partnership working and communication between agencies was not within the scope of the audit.  However similar audits had been planned across all Lincolnshire Councils to coincide with each other, so that all aspects of flood management and response could be audited.  District Council Audits had been completed however the County Council had postponed their Audit.  The Committee were encouraged to continue to influence and raise the message with the County Council. 

Having heard the response from the Auditor, it was suggested that the Chairman of the Committee write to the Chairman of Lincolnshire County Council’s Audit Committee stressing the need for the Flood Management Audit to be undertaken. With general consensus from Members the Chairman undertook to write as requested.

In seeking a general understanding and to avoid the risk of complacency, with this being her final meeting, the Auditor was asked what was the greatest area of concern or risk for West Lindsey.  Absolute assurance was provided, given the quality of the relationship with West Lindsey, which had previously been praised, and due to senior leaders of the organisation, being very open, very transparent and very collaborative there was nothing of concern.

In the context of the planned audit, in respect of staff resilience, Members sought indication as to whether “quiet quitting” was affecting the organisation, something which was very topical in media outlets.   In responding, Members were advised that the Audit would provide assurance around such matters and until such time it was difficult to assess.  However, through the combined assurance work, referred to earlier, time was spent assessing such factors as succession planning, recruitment, and retention.  These were key risks for all for all councils, and all organisations, acknowledging that the current recruitment industry was challenging.   The planned Audit and the Combined Assurance Report would provide a full picture in due course. 

Referring back to the Flood Management Audit, and in response to a Member questioning how a high assurance rating could be given, when the Authority had no control nor responsibility over flooding, Officers again clarified the scope of the audit.  Whilst acknowledging WLDC was not the flooding authority it did have its own emergency response actions, communications, clean up and recovery responsibilities etc.  The Audit scope had been limited to what was in West Lindsey’s control and that’s what had received high assurance.   The Audit did not give assurance on the county's arrangements for flooding or how West Lindsey works with the county for flooding.

With Members having generally discussed their experiences both historic and present it was suggested that it would be useful to include information, in a future Members’ Newsletter, regarding what were WLDC’s responsibilities in respect of flooding and what support can be expected from West Lindsey, regardless of whether the situation was classified as an emergency by the County Council.

RESOLVED that having considered the content of the report, further actions as identified during the debate and detailed above be undertaken; namely

(a)    Chairman to write to the Chairman of Lincolnshire County Council’s Audit Committee regarding the need for the Flood Management Audit to be completed; and

(b)    Information be included in a future Members’ Newsletter regarding West Lindsey’s role, responsibilities and direct support offered in respect of Flooding.

Note :          Officers from Lincolnshire Audit left the meeting at this point