Agenda item

At its meeting on 25 September 2018, the Audit Committee considered undertaking a review of the way in which the decisions to approve funding to defend recent legal challenges from POW and CPRE had been presented to the Council. The Audit Committee was interested in the matter from the perspective of ensuring the Council was delivering value for money for residents.

The Scoping Document for the review is attached (to follow) for the Committee’s consideration.

Cllr Seaborne introduced the scope that had been prepared for this review. He explained that there was no structure in place for carrying out Member-led Audit Committee reviews and therefore he had followed the format used by O&S Committees.

Having considered the report, the Committee expressed concern that the scope was too specific, and should not be reviewing one single decision, but the way in which all requests for supplementary estimates were put forward to ensure that Members were properly informed. Cllr Mulliner added that while the reasons for this particular supplementary estimate may have been obvious to Members, it may not have been as clear to the public and so it was important that decisions to seek supplementary estimates were properly documented.

Members were also unsure as to whether this review fitted within the remit of the Audit Committee, and Cllr Band suggested that the topic might be more suited to the Value for Money O&S Committee.

Additionally, Cllr Knowles warned against setting a precedent for carrying out reviews based on letters from a very small minority. He added that there was no question of the authority of the Executive and Council to approve the funds, and he felt that it would not be good value for money to spend officer time on the proposed review.

Cllr Mulliner felt that the process for approving supplementary estimates was a governance matter, and therefore did fall within the remit of the Audit Committee. He added that the independence of the Audit Committee was crucial, and it was for the Committee to now decide how it wished to proceed. He therefore suggested that it might be more appropriate to carry out a very short review of process for presenting requests for supplementary estimates to the Council. Cllr Frost agreed that it would be useful for the Committee to receive a report outlining how requests for supplementary estimates were documented.

Cllr Seaborne thanked Members for their comments; he acknowledged that there had been challenges when drafting the scope, and felt that the alternative suggestions made by the Committee would achieve the same objective.

The Chairman put the original recommendation, that the Audit Committee proceed with the review and agree the scoping document. Upon being put to the vote, the recommendation was lost with no votes in favour, four against and three abstentions.

It was proposed by Cllr Frost and seconded by Cllr Band that the s.151 Officer and Head of Policy and Governance be requested to produce a paper for the next meeting of the Audit Committee setting out the process and documentation required to support all future requests for supplementary estimates. Upon being put to the vote, the alternative recommendation was carried with six votes in favour, none against and one abstention.

The Committee therefore RESOLVED that the s.151 Officer and Head of Policy and Governance be requested to produce a paper for the next meeting of the Audit Committee setting out the process and documentation required to support all future requests for supplementary estimates.