Agenda and minutes

Please note that this meeting may be filmed or recorded by the Council for live or subsequent broadcast via the Council’s internet site or by anyone attending the meeting using any communication method. Although we ask members of the public recording, filming or reporting on the meeting not to include the public seating areas, members of the public attending the meeting should be aware that we cannot guarantee that they will not be filmed or recorded by others attending the meeting. Members of the public participating in the meeting (e.g. making deputations, asking questions, making oral protests) should be aware that they are likely to be filmed, recorded or reported on. 

By entering the meeting room and using the public seating area, you are consenting to being filmed and to the possible use of those images and sound recordings.

The chair of the meeting has the discretion to terminate or suspend filming or recording, if in his or her opinion continuation of the filming, recording or reporting would disrupt or prejudice the proceedings, infringe the rights of any individual or may lead to the breach of a legal obligation by the Council.

The Chair referred Members present to agenda Item 1 as shown on the agenda in respect of filming at this meeting, and Members noted the information contained therein.

Apologies for absence were received Cllr Morris.

None.

None.

None.

To consider and agree the minutes of the meeting held on 3^rd February 2020.

RESOLVED

The Committee agreed the minutes of the meeting held on 3^rd February 2020 as a correct record.

The Committee considered a report which provided a summary of the audit recommendations, as well the management action taken to date in implementing the recommendations from the Internal Audit report on the Disposal of Assets, from October 2019. The report was introduced by Christine Addison, Interim Director of Capital Projects & Property and Bill Ogden, Head of Strategic Property as set out in the agenda pack at pages 11-14. Cllr Adje was also present, as the Cabinet Member for Finance and Strategic Regeneration. The following was noted in discussion of this report:

a.    The Committee sought assurance around the monitoring arrangements for the implementation of the recommendations and whether it had been discussed at the Property Management Board. In response, officers advised that the report had been discussed at Corporate Board, as this was an officer level function and that Cllr Adje, as Cabinet Member, was responsible at a political level for ensuring that the recommendations from the audit were implemented. The Chair set out that he would like all audit reports to be sent to the relevant Cabinet Member as a matter of course.

b.    In response to questions around the extent to which the Strategic Property Unit was made up of interim staff or consultants, officers acknowledged that there were a lot of interim staff in the team and that this was not the ideal situation. It was commented that a number of the permanent staff had left the organisation due to plans for this function to be absorbed into the now defunct Haringey Development Vehicle.  The Interim Director of Capital Projects & Property advised that work was continuing on recruitment of full-time permanent members of staff. The Director also assured the Committee that the staff in Strategic Property had extensive experience, irrespective of them being interim staff and that she had no concerns about their ability to perform their role competently.

c.    In response to a question around considerations of value for money when undertaking asset disposals, officers advised that there was a process in place for checking the basis for any disposal and that disposals were done on the basis of best consideration. Officers clarified that no significant disposals had taken place in the past 18 months.

d.    Members of the Committee broadly welcomed the fact there had been no significant disposal of assets in that past 18 months. The Committee sough assurance that any significant disposal would be discussed at Corporate Committee before it took place. In response, the Cabinet Member stressed that the nature of disposals could be time-sensitive and that discussing this with the Committee may not be practicable or desirable, particularly as the Committee only meets five times a year. The Cabinet Member assured the Committee that any disposal that was undertaken in future would have proper audit trail. 

e.    The Committee suggested that, in light of the sensitivity of asset disposals and concerns about what may have happened in the past, that there was a need for an extra layer of scrutiny around  ...  view the full minutes text for item 144.

The Committee considered a report which provided an update on progress to implement the recommendations of the audit of the Council House Delivery Programme, undertaken by Mazars between October and November 2019 and which received an overall audit score of limited assurance. The report was introduced by Robbie Erbmann, Assistant Director of Housing and Anna Blandford, Senior Housing Project Delivery Manager as set out in the agenda pack at pages 15-36. Cllr Ibrahim was also present, as the Cabinet Member for Housing and Estate Renewal. The following was noted in discussion of this report:

a.    The Cabinet Member assured the Committee that all of the issues identified in the audit report were being addressed.

b.    The Chair enquired as to the availability of the minutes from the Housing Delivery Board and whether all Members had access to them. In response, officers advised that the Board was not Committee or Sub-Committee of the Council and that Members would therefore have to demonstrate a ‘need to know’ to access them.

c.    The Committee noted concerns about the scheme being over budget, particularly as it was a £400m scheme. The Committee sought some further assurance around this considering the tight financial margins involved in successfully delivering Council homes and concerns that any significant increase in costs could blow a hole in the HRA budget.  In response, the AD for Housing advised that the biggest single change that had been made was investing in the database, which allowed officers to track every single item of spend in real time and provide an accurate reporting picture. The AD for Housing advised that in comparison to his previous role at TfL, Haringey had introduced this type of software at a much earlier stage in the programme and he set out that he was impressed with the rapid progress that the team had made in implementing the financial governance arrangements.  

d.    The AD for Housing advised that the team was now looking at having 72 sites in the programme. It was suggested that the Council was, in effect, a start-up as it hadn’t delivered any new housing for over 40 years. The AD for Housing suggested that, what was effectively a start-up, delivering a very ambitious target of 1000 homes in a short period of time, required the programme to run parallel work streams. Such as at the same time as getting planning applications submitted and feasibility assessments underway, officers were also having to set-up all of the governance systems. It was suggested that the pace of progress should not be underestimated. Officers also set out that the development procedures were set up a few months ago and that these were now being reviewed, following an initial bedding-in period, and that the governance arrangements for how projects would be dealt with at each gateway stage formed part of that evaluation process, including the monitoring of any overspends in pre-contract budgets. This was in addition to the wider budget-monitoring framework for the programme.

e.    The Committee enquired how  ...  view the full minutes text for item 145.

This report provided an update on audits in schools, following a report earlier this year (March 2020) to Corporate Committee, which set out the finance and audit training available to schools. The briefing in March also outlined that any school that had a nil-assurance outcome for two consecutive audits would trigger a call from the Assistant Director for Schools and Learning and the Head of Audit to the Head Teacher and Chair of Governors to support the school to move to a more positive outcome without delay. The report was introduced by Head of Audit and Risk Management, along with the AD for Schools and Learning, as set out in the agenda pack at pages 33-36.

Nineteen schools were audited in the financial year 2019/20 and thirteen schools were assigned either substantial or adequate assurance scores and six were assigned limited or nil assurance. Two schools received nil-assurance during 2019-20. The AD for Schools and Learning advised that for one of the schools the issue seemed to be around the loss of the business manager, and a new business manager had now been put in place. It was anticipated that when the school was re-audited in 2020/21, significant improvement would be secured.

The Committee was advised that the other school that received nil-assurance was a primary school with an OFSTED rating of “good”. The reasons for the nil assurance were related to the fact that the school has been through a period of turbulence that included falling rolls and a change in leadership, including an interim head for a period of one term from September 2020. With a new Head Teacher and a new business manager in place, a much more positive outcome was anticipated when the school was next audited.

The following was noted in discussion of this report:

1. In response to a request for further assurance from the Chair, the Head of Audit advised that he was broadly happy overall with the direction of travel but acknowledged that it was important to continue to work with schools to secure ongoing improvements. The Head of Audit commented that there were some concerns about the impact COVID-19 on schools and the impact this could have in terms of ongoing engagement on audit training etcetera.
2. The Committee sought clarification around whether the sum of money   available to schools for a local authority led SLA was separate from the finance and audit training on offer. In response, the Committee was advised that these were two separate processes. The Head of Schools and Learning confirmed to the Committee that schools were taking up the offer for audit training and that the overall response had been positive.
3. The Committee raised concerns with the example of Stamford Hill School, which had seen a rapid decline in its governance standards and had subsequently closed, following a nil-assurance audit score. The Committee enquired whether a similar set of circumstances could befall either of the two schools that had received nil-assurance in 2019/20. In response, the Head of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 146.

*Clerk’s note – The Chair agreed to take agenda item 14 on the Annual Schools Audit Report 2019/20 immediately following item 9. The minutes reflect the order in which the items were considered rather than the order on the published agenda.*

The Committee received a report which provided information on the outcomes of the 2019/20 school audit programme and of the follow-up of the 2018/19 audits carried out in 2019/20 by Mazars. The report was introduced by Minesh Jani as set out in the agenda pack at pages 147-156.

RESOLVED

That Corporate Committee noted the report.

The Committee received a report which provided an update on the Council’s treasury management activities and performance in the year to 31st March 2020, in accordance with the CIPFA Treasury Management Code of Practice. The report was also due to be submitted to Full Council. The report was introduced by the Head of Pensions, Treasury and Chief Accountant. The following was noted in discussion of the report:

1. The Committee sought assurances around contrasting figures in the report on the rate of return on investments. In response, officers advised that the average rate of return on investments across the year was 0.7% and that other figures may refer to a snapshot at a particular period. The Committee was advised that the rate of return was lower than the cost of inflation and that this had been the case for a number of years. Officers advised that it was the same for most authorities, as well as individual investors during this period.
2. In response to a question, officers advised that any chance of developing a saving to the Council by increasing the income on investments had effectively been wiped out by decreasing interest rates. Officers advised that it was hoped that the Council would meet its income target for the year for investments, but there very little chance of exceeding it.
3. In response to a question around loans to third parties including local charities, officers advised that the balances in the report were largely historical and that any loan that was not repaid would become a cost to the General Fund.
4. In response to a question around a loan to a leisure contractor, officers advised that this was a historic loan rather than one taken out in 2019/20 and that the name of the company in question was exempt for commercial reasons. Thomas agreed to follow this up with Legal. (Action: Thomas Skeen).

RESOLVED

1. That Members noted the Treasury Management activity undertaken

during the year to 31st March 2020 and the performance achieved.

2. That Members noted that all treasury activities were undertaken in line with the approved Treasury Management Strategy.

The Committee received a report which provided and update on the Council’s Statement of Accounts 2019/20 and the plan for the audit of the Statement of Accounts for 2019/20. The report was introduced by Thomas Skeen and Kerry Barnes from the external auditor BDO, as set out in the agenda pack at pages 55-94 of the agenda pack. The following was noted in discussion of this item:

1. The audit plan was originally scheduled to come to the 18^th March Corporate Committee, which was cancelled due to COVID-19 and the audit plan was being brought back for discussion at a public meeting.
2. The timescales that the Council was working towards had been pushed back due to COVID-19. The draft and unaudited accounts were published on 29^th June and the audit process began on 29^th June. The Committee was advised that officers were working to have the final accounts ready for the 17^th September, however this was a very challenging deadline.
3. The Committee was also advised that the regulators, the FRC, randomly chose a selection of auditors to audit every year and last year BDO’s audit of Haringey was chosen. This report was included at agenda item 23 in the exempt section of the agenda pack. 
4. In response to a question, the Committee was advised that there was a six-week public inspection period from the point in which the draft accounts were published and that this gave interested parties an opportunity to inspect the accounts and make a representation.
5. BDO advised that the FRC had been issued with new guidance in light of COVID-19, and that BDO had amended the risks in the audit report in light of this additional guidance. The three key areas where amendments had been made were: A reassessment of property valuations due to RICS guidance that had been issued around market conditions; increasing risks around the impediment of the non-collection of receivables and ‘going concern’ disclosures.

RESOLVED

That the Committee noted the contents of the report and any further oral updates given at the meeting by BDO LLP, particularly in relation to the

Financial Reporting Council (FRC) report at appendix 2 of the report (Exempt).

The Committee received a report which set out the impact of coronavirus on the Council’s treasury management activities since the Council’s Treasury Management Strategy 2020/21 was approved by Full Council in February. The report was introduced by Thomas Skeen, as set out in the agenda pack at pages 95-100. The following was noted in discussion of this agenda item:

a.    In response to a question, officers assured the Committee that there was no reason to amend the Treasury Management Strategy for 2020/21 at present. However, the Council had maintained higher than usual liquid cash balances in response to ongoing uncertainty as a result of COVID-19.

b.    The Committee sought assurances around whether the Council should be looking to amend its reserves policy due to the exceptional circumstances around coronavirus and the likely impact on budget overspends. In response, officers advised that this was a political decision but acknowledged that any overspends would reduce the amount of usable reserves.

RESOLVED

That the report was noted.

The Committee received a report which informed the Corporate Committee of the statutory requirements to produce an Annual Governance Statement (AGS) and provide a draft statement relating to the 2019/20 financial year for review and approval and maintain the Local Code of Corporate Governance. The report was introduced by the Head of Audit and Risk Management, Minesh Jani as set out in the agenda pack at pages 101-142.

The Committee sought clarification around the fact that the report set out that the target for anti-fraud work was to contribute £11m in savings. In response, officers clarified that quantifying the role of the fraud team was always difficult and the value was not always accurately reflected by money alone. The Committee was advised that that the £11m should be seen as the output rather than a target and that further elaboration of financial outcomes would be given as part of item 15.

The Committee sought clarification around the risks highlighted in the report around HfH. Officers advised that there was an initial piece of work undertaken around the arrangements for contracting out repairs work within HfH and that, as a result of that piece of work, a number of areas where management controls needed to be strengthened came to light. This led to a broader piece of work being undertaken.

The Chair commented that the use of the term ‘target’ for the anti-fraud work was confusing and reiterated that he felt this should be rephrased in future reports to the Committee.

RESOLVED

1. The Corporate Committee reviewed and approved the draft 2019/20 AGS attached at Appendix A of the report.

2. That the Corporate Committee noted the approval timescale and processes for the draft 2019/20 AGS.

3. That the Corporate Committee noted and approved the updated Local Code of Corporate Governance attached at Appendix B of the report.

The Committee received a report which set out the overall adequacy and effectiveness of the system of internal control and risk management operating throughout 2019/20 and presented a summary of the audit work undertaken to formulate the opinion, including reliance placed on work by other bodies. The report was introduced by the Head of Audit and Risk Management, Minesh Jani as set out in the agenda pack at pages 153-178. The following was noted in discussion of the report:

1. The Head of Audit and Risk Management advised that there were 64 planned internal audit assignments in 2019/20 and 68 were carried out. Of that 64, 13 new audits were added to the plan, 6 were cancelled and 3 were deferred to the following year. Some of the key areas for audit were identified as contract management and school audits. The audit team performed a crucial role in ensuring that the recommendations raised in the areas identified through the audit process were being implemented so that the risks to the organisation could be better managed.
2. The Head of Audit and Risk Management advised the Committee that of the 795 anti-fraud investigations that were carried out by the team in 2019/20 and that the majority of those related to Right-to-Buy applications, tenancy fraud and pro-active tenancy checks as these were the key areas that fraud had been identified both locally and nationally.
3. In relation to a previous question around quantifying the value of the work that the fraud team did, the Head of Audit and Risk Management advised that following the release of a CIPFA report, the team had undertaken a number of fraud investigations around single person discount for Council Tax and that this had saved the Council £46k. The Head of Audit and Risk Management assured the committee that a proportionate and reasonable approach was taken around this and that a review process had also been set up for people who thought they had been wrongly penalised and had the single person discount taken away from them.
4. The Committee sought clarification as to how many cases the £46k related to as it was suggested that this was perhaps lower than might have been anticipated. In response, the Head of Audit and Risk Management agreed to provide a written response to Members on how many people and cases the £46k related to. (Action: Minesh Jani).
5. In response to a follow-up, theHead of Audit and Risk Management acknowledged that there was further work that could be done and some lessons learnt about increasing the figure of £46k in future.

RESOLVED

That the Corporate Committee noted the content of the Head of Audit and RiskManagement’s annual audit report and assurance statement for 2019/20.

The Committee received a report which detailed the work undertaken by the in-house Audit and Fraud Resources team for the quarter ending 30 June 2020. A combined report was produced to update the Committee as during quarter one the team faced the unprecedented circumstances of all working remotely from the Council offices due to COVID-19. In addition, the resources usually working in partnership to deliver the internal audit plan were furloughed by Mazars. The report was introduced by Vanessa Bateman, Deputy Head of Audit and Risk Management as set out in agenda pack at pages 179-186.

In response to a question, officers acknowledged that some degree of prioritisation had taken place within the team in order to meet the challenges faced by COVID-19 and that extra work had been done around the grant payments received. It was noted that referrals around tenancy fraud had remained fairly constant over the period.

RESOLVED

The Corporate Committee noted the activities of the team audit and risk management team during quarter one 2020/21.

The Committee received an updated annual audit plan for 2020/21, following a number of amendments made since the last meeting. The audit plan was introduced by the Head of Audit and Risk Management Minesh Jani, as set out in the agenda pack at pages 187-200. The following was noted in discussion of the report:

a.    The Head of Audit and Risk Management advised that a lessons learnt approach was being adopted in relation to contracts and that all contracts entered into as part of the response to coronavirus would be risk assessed and the concerns raised by Cllr Berryman via email would be captured as part of this.

b.    The Committee was advised that the audit of HR had been put back in order to give the new head of HR some time to bed-in. The Committee enquired whether an interim report could be produced in the meantime. The Head of Audit and Risk Management agreed to pick this up with Cllr Gunes outside of the meeting. (Action: Minesh Jani).

RESOLVED

That the Corporate Committee reviewed and approved the updated Annual

Internal Audit Plan for 2020/21 (Appendix B of the report) and the proposed changes to the plan (Appendix A of the report).

The Committee received a report which provided an update on Risk Based Verification (RBV) for Housing Benefit and Council Tax reduction claims. The report was introduced by Amelia Hadjimichael, Head of Benefits, as set out. It was noted that RBV related to the level of checks that were undertaken on a claim before benefit was awarded. Its primary purpose was to target resources to where fraud and error were more likely to occur and thus help minimise fraud and error.

Ordinarily, there was a requirement for an annual review of the RBV policy to take place. However, given the impact of COVID-19, the Government issued advice which suspended the need for a review to take place. The report provided a briefing note on changes to the need for a review in 2020/21, in light of COVID-19.

In response to a question, officers advised that the scheme was meeting its targets and that since the introduction of the policy in November 2019, the Council had sent out around 6000 fewer letters to claimants which created less delays and allowed the team to focus on more serious cases of fraud and error. Officers advised that so far RBV was considered to be a success. 

RESOLVED

That Corporate Committee:

1. Noted and agreed that the Council’s RBV policy should continue;

2. Noted and agreed the officer view that there was no need to review the RBV policy for the year 2020/21;

3. That the Committee recommended to Cabinet for it to the above recommendations.

The Committee received a report which provided an update to the Corporate Committee on the impact that Covid-19 has had on health and safety functions. The report was introduced by Alexis Correa, Deputy Head of Service for Health and Safety as set out at pages 205-210 of the agenda pack. 

*Clerks Note at 21:50 hours: The Committee agreed to suspend Committee Standing Orders in order to continue past ten o’clock. There were eight members present at this point and so the Committee met the stipulation that at least half of its members be present in order to do this.*

** Additional Clerk’s note: The Chair of the meeting had some problems with his IT equipment and left the meeting at this point to restart his laptop. The Deputy Chair of the Committee, Cllr Hakata chaired the reminder of the meeting**.

RESOLVED

That the Committee noted the report.

The Committee received a report which set out the Council’s proposed approach to the potential renaming of Black Boy Lane. The report sought to inform the Committee of the process and the timetable involved. The report was introduced by Rob Krzyszowski, Head of Policy, Transport & Infrastructure Planning and Jonathan Unger, Local Land Charges & Property Gazetteer Manager as set out at pages 211-222 of the agenda pack. The following was noted in discussion of the report:

1. The Committee sought clarification around the level of potential costs involved in this scheme, in response officers advised that no decision had yet been taken in relation to costs but that the administration did feel that it was appropriate to make a voluntary payment to residents to cover the costs of having to change their address.
2. The Committee welcomed the proposal to change the street name and suggested that this sent a strong message about what type of borough this was and what type of borough the authority wanted to create. In response to some ongoing discussion within the community about the exact meaning of the name, the Committee suggested that what was important was what that name meant today and the racist connotations therein.
3. The Committee also felt that in light of the Black Lives Matter movement, it was an auspicious moment to change the name and that a similar moment was unlikely to come around again. The Committee emphasized the fact that symbolism was important and that the borough’s street names had to represent of the views of its residents.
4. The Deputy Chair of the Committee also endorsed the proposal but cautioned that what was needed was lasting structural change, to tackle the inequalities faced by many of the borough’s residents and that it was important that the Council worked to tackle this structural inequality, as well as making largely symbolic changes to the names of streets. 

RESOLVED

That the Committee noted and endorsed the proposed approach to the renaming of Black Boy Lane.

To consider any items of urgent business as identified at item 3

N/A

Items 23 onwards are likely to be subject to a motion to exclude the press and public be from the meeting as they contain exempt information as defined in Section 100a of the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended by Section 12A of the Local Government Act 1985); paragraph 3.

RESOLVED

That the press and public be excluded from the reminder of the meeting as the rest of the agenda items contain exempt information, as defined in Section 100a of the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended); Paragraph 3.

As per Item 149.

As per item 155.

To consider any items of exempt urgent business as identified at item 3

N/A

There were no items of other business.

17^th September

17^th September 2020