Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Khan, Councillor Amin and Julie Parker.

Councillor  Egan and Councillor  Basu substituted  in accordance  with committee standing order 52 and 53.

The Chair will consider the admission of any late items of urgent business. Late items will be considered under the agenda items where they appear. 

New items will be dealt with at items 14&17.

There were no items of urgent  business put forward.

A member with a disclosable pecuniary interest or a prejudicial interest in a matter who attends a meeting of the authority at which the matter is considered:

(i) must disclose the interest at the start of the meeting or when the interest becomes apparent, and

(ii) may not participate in any discussion or vote on the matter and must withdraw from the meeting room.

A member who discloses at a meeting a disclosable pecuniary interest which is not registered in the Register of Members’ Interests or the subject of a pending notification must notify the Monitoring Officer of the interest within 28 days of the disclosure.

Disclosable pecuniary interests, personal interests and prejudicial interests are defined at Paragraphs 5-7 and Appendix A of the Members’ Code of Conduct.

 There were no declarations of interest put forward.

To consider any requests received in accordance with Part 4, section B, Paragraph 29 of the Council’s Constitution.

 There were no deputations, petitions or questions put forward to the meeting.

To consider and agree the minutes of the meeting held on 27^th September 2012.

RESOLVED

The minutes of the 27^th September 2012  were agreed as an accurate record of the meeting.

This report seeks approval from Committee to enter into a framework agreement for Pension Fund actuarial services.

The current actuarial service contract with Hymans Robertson was due to expire on the 28^th February 2013 and a new appointment would be required before this date. Norfolk County council had already undertaken an OJEU compliant tender process for the framework agreement for Pension Fund actuarial services and this was available for all local government Pension Fund Administering authorities to access for a fee of £2000 pounds. The use of the framework was advised by the Deputy CFO to be value for money as it would save time and resource whilst at the same time ensuring that the procurement of Pension Fund actuarial services was compliant with OJEU requirements

If approval was given by the Committee to enter into this framework agreement, a mini competition process would ensue with the independent pension advisor involved in the evaluation process and the Chair of the Committee attending presentations from the providers.  Then Corporate Committee will consider a recommendation on the appointment of an actuary at the January meeting.

 Understanding was sought on how the council can go beyond the framework agreement and make any further efficiencies on the cost of the operation of the Pension Fund by working with other boroughs as indicated by the recent London Council’s report on the ‘evaluation of options for reconfiguring the London LGPS funds’. The Deputy CFO explained that this particular framework agreement was put forward to members to agree as it was value for money. The Deputy CFO agreed to consider whether there were any further structures which could be open to potential efficiency savings.

RESOLVED

That approval is given to the Pension Fund entering into the framework agreement set up by Norfolk County Council for the use of administering authorities for Pension Fund actuarial services

To consider the proposed Treasury  Management Strategy  Statement and  draft Prudential Indicators  for 2013/14 to 2015/16  prior to them being scrutinized by  Overview and Scrutiny Committee and prior to  presentation at  full  Council where final approval will be sought.

The Committee were reminded that it was their responsibility to formulate the Treasury Management Strategy each year, for Overview and Scrutiny to scrutinise it, and full Council would be responsible for its approval.

Capital programme figures contained in the report were from the previous year, as Cabinet would agree the figures for 2012/13 at their meeting in December.  A further updated report containing the final capital programme figures and prudential indicators would be considered at the January Corporate Committee meeting. In the meantime, this did not affect the overriding principles for investing and borrowing which the Committee were considering at this meeting.  The Committee noted that very  low short term interest rates compared to medium and long term rates is  expected to would continue in 2013 meaning that there  will  be an ongoing ‘cost of carry’  if funds are borrowed in advance of capital expenditure. To minimise the cost of borrowing, the council will maintain the strategy of borrowing in the short term at low rates from other local authorities to maintain liquidity whilst also being mindful of any long term opportunities to borrow from the PWLB.

On the advice of  the council’s  treasury management advisors, Arlingclose Ltd, a  small change had been made to the  strategy, this  was  to remove the  minimum short term rating criteria for lending, as it was long term rating of  an organisation was the ultimate driver of creditworthiness.  The Committee noted that this would not change the portfolio of banks named in the lending list, but would enable the Council to start using RBS and Nat West again .

Explanation was provided on the term LIBID (London Inter Bank Interest Deposit Rate) and the Chair asked that, in future, further thought be given to the size and clarity of figures printed in report packs as it was important that they were readable.

RESOLVED

That the proposed Treasury Management Strategy Statement and draft Prudential Indicators for 2013/14 to 2015/2016 at Appendix 1 be recommended to Council for approval as part of the financial planning report , subject to updating to reflect the agreed capital programme.

The Committee to note the administrative changes resulting from the Boundary Revision proposals.

Proposals for new parliamentary boundaries had been previously considered by Corporate Committee in December 2011. However, following updated proposals announced by the Boundary Commission for England in October 2012, a further report was put forward which included information on   new proposals. The council had now moved from an unchanged position of two parliamentary constituencies to sharing arrangements with 4 boroughs and having 3 parliamentary seats. 

Apart from the additional complexity of the Elections team working with four other boroughs, there were no other issues identified by the Committee to put forward as part of a consultation response.

RESOLVED

That the administrative changes resulting from the Boundary Revision proposals be noted.

To consider Grant Thornton’s progress report  for November 2012.

Grant Thornton were in the process of certifying the council’s 2011/12 grants claim. Following completion in December, a report on the findings and cost of this work would be considered by Corporate Committee at their January meeting.

The Committee noted that a report from Grant Thornton on their national study concerning financial resilience was due to be published in early December and hard copies would be provided to the council for distribution.

RESOLVED

That the progress report from Grant Thornton be noted

To receive the Annual Audit Letter for 2011/12 from the Council’s external auditors , Grant Thornton, and to note the issues raised and actions being taken.

The Committee considered the Annual Audit Letter from the Council’s external auditors Grant Thornton. This letter was part of a formal external audit process and provided an independent assessment of the Council’s position in meeting its strategic objectives. The Annual Audit Letter summarised the work completed by the external auditors over the year. The council were provided with unqualified opinions for both their value for money activities and Statement of Accounts 2011/12.  Appendix b illustrated the fee of £32k for additional work carried out on the statement of accounts for 2011/12.

RESOLVED

That the Annual Audit letter for 2011/12 and the Council’s response be noted.

The Committee to note the planned audit fee for 2012/13.

The Committee considered a letter from the external auditors Grant Thornton which set out their proposed work programme and scale of fees for 2012/13.  The scale fees for 2012/13, put forward for agreement was £272,700. This was a 40% reduction from the previous year’s fee of £454,500.  The expected fee for grant certification work was set at £52k and this would be included in the overall fee for 2012/13.  The Committee would receive a detailed report from Grant Thornton on their audit plans and audit approach at their meeting in March 2013.

RESOLVED

The external auditor’s fee of, £272,700, for the audit work to be carried out in 2012/13 was agreed.

To advise the Committee of the work undertaken during the second quarter by the internal Audit Service in completing the 2012/13 Annual Audit Plan and reports issued for outstanding 2011/12 audits, together with the responsive and housing benefit fraud investigation work, and to provide details of the work undertaken by the Council’s Human Resources Business unit in supporting disciplinary action taken across all departments by respective Council officers. There will also be an update included on the audits that received a limited guarantee in quarter one audit report.

As part of the quarterly update on internal audit activities, consideration was given to the audit report from Deloitte and Touche contained, at appendix A. (These were the final reports issued during the quarter together with detailed summaries of the findings and recommendations of those reports which received limited assurance ratings). The report further contained information on the work of the in-house fraud investigation team, housing benefit fraud investigation, and the council wide disciplinary statistics.

 A notable achievement was the recovery of 26 Haringey properties, in the year to date, following successful work with Tenancy Management Teams and housing tenancy fraud investigations. In addition there had been two right to buy abatements where the maximum discount of £75k was being fraudulently claimed by the applicants. The Internal Audit service was putting in place a new procedure to review high risk applications following the £75,000 discount now being offered.

A cross borough initiative had identified 68 cases of identity fraud. These counterfeit identities had been used to enact frauds and make false benefit claims.

Following Committee members previous concerns about the findings of the internal audit on the Mortuary services, a follow up review had been completed, the findings of which were detailed from page 123 onwards. Eight of the nine recommendations had been found to have been fully implemented. The remaining recommendation, regarding the requirement to record the property reference number on admission book receipts was partly implemented but internal audit were aware that revised stationery had been purchased and it was anticipated that this recommendation would soon be fully implemented.

There was a report back on the audits that had received a limited assurance rating in the quarter one report.  The Committee noted that a majority of the recommendations had been implemented with the exception of one which internal audit will follow up and report back in January.

The following clarifications were  provided following questions:

• Document scanning software was to be implemented in the next two months. This will be used to scan identification documents at the point of application for council services including housing, employment and benefits.

• (Page 101) The Head of Audit and Risk management would check if the information contained at the second bullet point, relating to the application and payment of licenses, was the standard practice rather than a recommendation.

• The value of a benefit fraud would aim to be recouped by the council following a staff dismissal.

• (Dismissal where improper conduct has occurred)  - It was noted that the council’s current practice was to accept the resignations of employees, if these were put forward, as it would save time and  resources spent on an investigation and/or disciplinary processes. In terms of providing references, appropriate wording would be used to indicate the circumstances that the member of staff left the authority. Where there was a case of gross misconduct of a criminal nature, regardless of resignation of the employee, the matter may also be reported to the Police by the Head of Audit and Risk  ...  view the full minutes text for item 187.

To inform the Committee of non executive delegated decisions, significant actions taken by Directors and any urgency decisions taken by the Chair.

RESOLVED

That the delegated decisions, significant actions, and urgent actions taken by directors since September 2012 be noted.

To consider any items admitted at item 2 above.

There no new items of urgent business.

The following items are likely to be subject of a motion to exclude the press and public from the meeting as they contain exempt information as defined in Section 100a of the Local Government Act 1972:paragraph 1 information relating to an individual.

The following part of the minutes were exempt as they contained information as defined in Section 100a of the Local Government Act 1972; Para 1, 2, and 4, information relating to an individual and information likely to reveal an individual and information relating to an consultations or negotiations or contemplated consultations or negotiations in connection with any Labour relations matter arising between the authority and employees.

To receive the minutes of the  Council Employee Joint Consultative  Committee held on the 07^th  June and Special Committee on 25^th September 2012 &04 October 2012.

RESOLVED

The exempt minutes of the CEJCC meeting held on 07^th June 2012 and Special Committee minutes of the 25^th September and 04^th October 2012 were received.

To consider any new items of exempt business submitted at item 2 above.

There were no new items of urgent business.