Agenda and minutes

The Chairwelcomed allparties tothe meeting.The Committeenoted theemergency evacuationprocedure forthe Council Chamberif required.

There were none.

To note any declarations of interest from the Councillors.  They are asked to indicate the relevant agenda item, the nature of the interest and in particular whether it is a disclosable pecuniary interest.

Any declarations of interest made at the meeting which is not on the register of interests should be notified to the Monitoring Officer for inclusion.

Councillor Hucker declared that, in respect of item 11 and reporting on the Stepping Up Programme, he was a Non-Executive Director of Bristol Waste Company.

To agree the minutes of the previous meeting as a correct record.

Resolved – that the minutes of 1 October 2024 be approved as a correct record.

It was agreed to respond to a question via the Action Sheet regarding how much had been collected from CAZ funds from 31 Mar 24 to date.

The Chair reminded the Committee to be aware of its parameters. He welcomed robust debate but it was   not the Committee’s remit to pursue complaints against an ex Councillor.

Up to 30 minutes is allowed for this item.

Any member of the public or Councillor may participate in Public Forum.  The detailed arrangements for so doing are set out in the Public Information Sheet at the back of this agenda.  Public Forum items should be emailed to democratic.services@bristol.gov.uk and please note that the following deadlines will apply in relation to this meeting:-

Questions – A member of the public may submit a maximum of 3 questions per meeting. Written questions must be received 3 clear working days prior to the meeting.  For this meeting, this means that your question(s) must be received in this office at the latest by 5 pm on 19 November 2024.

Petitions and Statements - Petitions and statements must be received on the working day prior to the meeting.  For this meeting this means that your submission must be received in this office at the latest by 12.00 noon on 21 November 2024.

Members of the press and public who plan to attend a public meeting at City Hall are advised that you will be required to sign in when you arrive and you will be issued with a visitor pass which you will need to display at all times.

The Committee heard statements and the following supplementary questions from members of the public:-

M Oldreive –

1.      Where in the Constitution does it use the word ‘vexatious’ as a reason for rejecting a PF submission?

2.      In respect of Stepping Up – are pass through agreements not considered a risk?

To note the work programme.

TheCommittee notedthe WorkProgramme forfuture meetings.

The report was summarized for the benefit of the Committee and the following points arose from discussion:-

1.      At the last Committee the accounts had been approved by the Committee subject to 1 caveat which was the subject of a potential litigation so could not be discussed. It was confirmed there were no material changes since the last meeting;

2.      It was requested that any changes be more effectively highlighted for future reporting;

3.      The Committee was asked to approve the accounts subject to the Chair being given delegated authority to approve the additional contingent liability note and this was agreed.

Resolved – That the audited Statement of Accounts for the year ended 31 March 2024 be approved subject to the Chair being given delegated authority to approve the additional contingent liability note.

The report was summarized for the benefit of the Committee and the following points arose from discussion:-

1.      It was noted that the fees and non-audit services should be £ 644,806 and not as published;

2.      It was necessary to conclude the objection before audit certificate was issued and report it to the National Audit Office. The objection had no material impact on the ISA 260 report. The 22/23 certificate had been given now that that objection was concluded;

3.      It was noted that the format of the report had reverted back to no index and not searchable which had previously been agreed;

4.      GT assured the Committee that there were no significant issues regarding Information Technology;

5.      It was confirmed that land and buildings valuation did not include the Council’s housing stock but this was shown separately in the same note;

6.      Different valuing indices were used across the entirety of the Council’s housing stock. GT were not valuers but had data and employed their own valuation experts. The valuation was not close to the materiality threshold;

7.      It was not appropriate to give detail on the objection received in respect of the register of interests. It was not clear if the findings’ actions had been implemented yet;

Resolved – That Grant Thornton’s Audit Report for 2023/24 and the action plan agreed by management be approved.

It was agreed that consideration of the Stepping Up Programme element of the report take place after all other matters had been discussed. The report was summarized for the benefit of the  Committee and the following points arose from discussion:-

1.      The report was interim as GT had not yet given an opinion on BCC’s financial statements and covered the value for money output;

2.      An objection on Stepping Up arose in the 21/22 financial statement and a review was undertaken and GT did not find that there were no relationships that should have been disclosed that were not, only a perception was found and this did not meet the threshold for a Public Interest report;

3.      In respect of the DSG the statutory override was in place until the end of the financial year and there would be further government announcements on this. Should the statutory override be removed a report would be made on the deficit at that point;

4.      There were currently no timeframe for agreement of a new lease for the Bristol Beacon to the Bristol Music Trust. A material change in the position of the Trust’s trading activity would impact on the value of the asset but it would need to be a significant change of trading position and there would need to be a significant change in the operating model for a material difference;

5.      It was noted that there was a key recommendation in respect of procurement breaches but that it was not specific. The breaches were more likely to be of procedure rather than fraud. Management needed to determine whether the actions they had implemented were still working or whether other actions were needed;

6.      GT had worked closely with the Housing Regulator to develop an action plan as a result of BCC self-referring to the Regulator in respect of Council house repairs. Significant budgets had been identified in recent months to carry out the repairs which had not been done previously;

7.      GT was satisfied that there was sufficient reserves and no significant risk so the key recommendation in relation to Reserves had been removed;

8.      In respect of Appendix E it was noted that 40% of recommendations had not been implemented. This was not dissimilar to other LA’s and were low level recommendations which it was anticipated would be addressed in a timely manner. Bristol Energy remained outstanding as it could not yet be resolved. Recommendation in respect of WECA was hard to address when working with other organisations;

9.      Service issues in respect of DSG and planning backlogs were considered by the relevant Policy Committees on a regular basis;

10.   In respect of the judicial review on the Safety Valve Agreement the contingent liability was disclosed in the accounts. It was hard to know what a negative outcome might look like but it was expected there might be a resubmission or renegotiation.

There was a brief discussion as to whether the Chair was conflicted in respect of chairing of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 11.

The report was summarized for the benefit of the Committee and the following points arose from discussion:-

1.      It was noted that the report had previously been considered at the Strategy & Resources Policy Committee;

1.      It was observed that the £50m borrowed last year with a maturity of 1 year should probably have been shown in the short term borrowing table for last year. It was confirmed that the policy for borrowing was to keep loan durations short and refinance over longer periods during the MTFS when rates were expected to be lower, aligned with the target borrowing rates. 

Resolved - That the Mid-Year Treasury Management report for 2024/25 be noted.

The report was summarized for the benefit of the Committee and the following points arose from discussion:-

1.      It was confirmed that Goram Homes was not part of the portfolio as it was scrutinised by the Shareholder;

2.      KPI’s were currently being finalised;

3.      A PMO would require expertise and capability as it made substantial decisions and challenged timescales. Officers confirmed that best practice would be used for reviews in order to support relevant services. Independent reviews would be commissioned if the expertise was not available in-house;

4.      It was confirmed that the costs would be fully recharged.

Resolved – That the following be noted:-

1.      The progress made in establishing the Capital Portfolio Management Office (PMO);

2.      The findings from the ‘lessons learnt’ report from the Bristol Beacon project being

incorporated within the creation of the new Capital PMO.

At this point Simon Cookson left the meeting.

The report was summarized for the benefit of the Committee and the following points arose from discussion:-

1.      It was noted that the report found at Appendix 3 would now be considered at January’s Audit Committee;

2.      The Chief Internal Auditor reported that the delivery of planned audit priorities was behind schedule due to the challenges faced in recruiting agency staff as well as the increased difficulties in completing audits on time due to competing priorities for management in tackling the current financial problems facing the organisation;

3.      The follow up to the Refugee Resettlements limited assurance report would come to the January Committee. The DSG service would come before the Committee should it become limited unless the Committee requested a report;

4.      The declining rate of the implementation of agreed management actions had been raised at CLB and surgeries were taking place to support Managers;

5.      Work was still taking place on grants payable.

Appendix 2 – Children’s Social Care Direct Payments.

1.      An important change had been agreed with the Heads of Service for Permanency & Specialist Services and Inclusion since the audit took place which meant that SEN colleagues could see from records when a change in social care assessments had taken place;

2.      Parents/carers received pre-paid cards for a child’s needs which could not be overspend or used for other purposes.

Resolved – That the following be noted:-

1.      The work of the Internal Audit Service during the first half of the 2024/25 financial year and assurances on actions being taken to complete the agreed priorities for the rest of the year;

2.      The Children’s Direct Payments internal audit summary reports and assurances from management regarding the issues highlighted in the report.

At this point Adebola Adebayo & Councillor Blenkinsop left the meeting.

The report was summarized for the benefit of the Committee and the following points arose from discussion:-

1.      In respect of employees paid both as agency and BCC employees simultaneously this had been a result of miscommunication and the money was recovered. There was no intent to commit fraud. Controls were in place to prevent this;

2.      In respect of a BCC supplier being a victim of crime this related to an external individual purporting to be a BCC employee in order to obtain goods. The importance of advertising the legitimacy of BCC when procuring goods and services was highlighted;

3.      With respect to procurement fraud the focus was on ensuring that controls were adequate and effective.

The report was summarized for the benefit of the Committee and the following points arose from discussion:-

1.      The Chair welcomed the good work on this. It was noted that KPI’s had not been included but Appendix 1 indicated the areas of focus. The annual report should provide assurance that KPIs are being delivered.

Resolved  - That the following documents be approved:-

(i) the Internal Audit Quality Assurance and Improvement Programme (QAIP) – Appendix 1;

(ii) the Internal Audit Charter – Appendix 2; and

(iii) the Internal Audit Strategy – Appendix 3.

The report was summarized for the benefit of the Committee and the following points arose from discussion:-

1.      It was confirmed that procurement would be audited in Q3 as well as the 15 days in Q4;

2.      FOI service would be audited in Q3;

3.      In Appendix 2 – Bank Reconciliation related to a review of financial systems which was done periodically;

4.      It was noted in respect of Imprest Account Management listed in Appendix 1 that it had no assurance not limited assurance as shown. This would be corrected.

Resolved – That the proposed Quarter (Q) 4 priorities for 2024/25 be approved.

The Chair took the opportunity to inform the Committee that this would be his last meeting as Chair and Councillor Logan would assume the role subsequent to it being confirmed by Full Council on 10 December 2024. He wished Councillor Logan well in his future role.

5.      Date of next meeting.

Thenext meetingis scheduledto beheld on 28 January 2025.

The meeting ended at 5.20pm.

CHAIR