Agenda and minutes

To receive any declarations of interest from Members of the Panel.

There were no declarations of interest.

The Minutes of the meeting of the Audit Panel held on 1 November 2016 to be signed by the Chair as a correct record.

The Minutes of the proceedings of the meeting of the Audit Panel on 1 November 2016 were agreed and signed as a correct record.

To consider a report of the Assistant Executive Director (Finance).

The Assistant Executive Director (Finance) submitted a report, which set out the Grant Certification Report for 2015-16.  The report gave details of one certified claim (Housing Benefit Subsidy) for the financial year 2015-16 relating to expenditure of £88.9 million.

The report summarised Grant Thornton’s overall assessment of the Council’s management arrangements in respect of the certification process.  A small number of issues had been identified during the process, which had been reviewed and amended accordingly and Grant Thornton had reported their findings to the Department for Work and Pensions.  The certification process had been positive and the small amendment that had been required on a complicated claim subsidy was testament to the hard work of the staff involved.

Details of the Certification fees were also appended to the report.  It was confirmed that the indicative fee for 2015/16 was based on the final 2013/14 certification fees that reflected the amount of work required by the auditor to certify the Housing Benefit Subsidy Claim from that year.  The indicative scale fee charged to the Council was set by Public Sector Audit Appointments Limited.

RESOLVED:

That the report be noted.

To consider a report of the Assistant Executive Director (Finance).

Consideration was given to a report of the Assistant Executive Director (Finance) and Head of Risk Management and Audit Services detailing the work undertaken by the Risk Management and Internal Audit Service between April 2016 and 3 February 2017.

The following areas of work undertaken by Risk Management and the Internal Audit Service were reported as follows.

Risk Management and Insurance – the key priorities for 2016/17 were detailed as follows:-

·           To review the risk management system and facilitate the delivery of risk workshops for managers to enable risk registers to be updated.

·           To facilitate the continued implementation of the Information Governance Framework by:-

o              Providing advice and guidance in relation to information governance;

o              Keeping the framework up to date and fit for purpose with any new

guidance issued by the Information Commissioners Office;

o              Delivering and monitoring training for general users and for staff in

high risk areas.

·           To review the Business Continuity Management system in place to streamline the process to create a management tool that was workable, with a capability to provide knowledge and information should a major incident occur.

·           To continue to support managers to assess their risks as services were redesigned to ensure that changes to systems and procedures remained robust and resilient offering cost effective mitigation and that claims for compensation could be successfully repudiated and defended should litigation occur.

Panel Members were notified that work during the period had concentrated on the insurance function.  The Information Governance Group had met twice during the period and, with the support of the Senior Management Team, an Information Champions Group would be created and facilitated by Risk/Insurance and Legal.  The aim of the group would be to help disseminate best practice within directorates and assist with preparations for the introduction of the General Data Protection Regulations 2018, which would introduce more stringent controls in relation to data protection.

With regard to Internal Audit, reference was made to the Audit Plan, which had been approved in May 2016 and covered the period April 2016 to March 2017.  The plan was reactive to the needs of the Council and additional items had been requested during the year due to changes in circumstances or new risks being identified.  An update on progress against the plan at 3 February 2017 was provided.  It was reported that 77% of the revised audit plan had been achieved so far.  It was explained that a detailed review of the audit plan had been undertaken in conjunction with senior management to ensure that the plan was still relevant and met with available resources within the team. 

During the four month period to 3 February 2017, seven final reports had been issued in relation to systems, risk and managed audits and eight draft reports had been issued for management review and responses.  Nine school audits and one draft review were completed during the period, which was an improvement on 2015/16.  In addition, 11 Post Audit Reviews had been completed taking the total for the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 22.

To consider a report of the Assistant Executive Director (Finance).

Consideration was given to a report of the Assistant Executive Director (Finance) and Head of Risk Management and Audit Services, which advised Members of the report produced by the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy Counter Fraud Centre – Fraud and Corruption Tracker 2016.

It was reported that the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy Counter Fraud Centre was launched in July 2014 and led and coordinated the fight against fraud and corruption across public services by providing a one-stop-shop for thought leadership, counter fraud tools, resources and training.  An annual survey was carried out across a host of public sector organisations, including local authorities, police and crime commissioners, transport authorities, fire and rescue authorities, waste authorities and public agencies.

The report detailed the nationwide results of the 2015/16 survey.  Details of the type of fraud along with the number of cases, values and percentage of the total were provided.  For Tameside the number of frauds dealt with was low and because of the nature of investigations and the definition of “Detected Fraud” very little was reported in the survey.  Although the survey did not capture emerging trends Procurement Fraud, Right to Buy Fraud and Business Rates Fraud was increasing.  Personal Budgets and Direct Payment frauds decreased in 2015/16 compared to 2014/15 results and respondents identified Council Tax; Housing; Procurement; Adult Social Care; and Housing Benefit as the highest risk areas for their organisations.

As a result of the survey the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy had made the following recommendations:-

·                Public sector organisations should carry out fraud assessments regularly and have access to appropriately qualified counter fraud resources to help mitigate the risks and effectively counter any fraud activity.

·                All organisations should undertake an assessment of their current counter fraud arrangements.

·                In line with the Fighting Fraud and Corruption Locally Board suggestion, local authorities should examine and devise a standard and common methodology for measuring fraud and corruption.  Once it has been agreed, local authorities should use the measure to estimate levels of fraud and corruption.

·                It is as important to prevent fraud that has no direct financial interest, such as data manipulation and recruitment, as it is high value fraud.

·                Organisations should develop joint working arrangements where they can with other counter fraud professionals and organisations.

·                Public bodies should continue to raise fraud awareness in the procurement process, not only in the tendering process but also in the contract monitoring element.

·                Authorities should ensure that anti-fraud measures within their own insurance claims processes are fit for purpose and that there is a clear route for investigations into alleged frauds to be undertaken.

Members requested a comparison to neighbouring authorities.  They were advised that a benchmarking request would be made at a future Greater Manchester Audit Group and reported back to the Panel.  Panel Members asked how much of the fraud could be recovered.  They were advised that £300,000 Council Tax fraud would be recovered via adjustments to the billing process, £102,000 relating to procurement  ...  view the full minutes text for item 23.

To consider any additional items the Chair is of the opinion shall be dealt with as a matter of urgency.

There were no urgent items.