Issue - meetings

That the report be accepted.

The Internal Audit Manager presented the update report on progress of the Internal Audit department.

On the finalised reports, he explained that the ‘red’ review was a corporate review on how Section 106 monies were spent, with the current value around £4m.  It was stressed that this had been a corporate review due to the community benefits and that improvements had already been made since the review.  As recommended by Internal Audit, a cross-directorate working group had been set up to address the issues identified.

As Chair of the working group, the Chief Officer (Planning & Environment) was in attendance to give further clarification.  He explained that the Planning section was able to procure S106 monies but was unable to spend them.  The working group would seek to release this capital and with the support of the Planning Strategy Group and Cabinet, had reviewed the Supplementary Planning Guidance to adopt a more flexible approach to spend.

The Chief Officer was able to report progress to Councillor Ian Dunbar on a matter relating to S106 spend in his ward.

On Appendix E, the Internal Audit Manager referred to the results of the Control and Risk Self-Assessment questionnaire completed by schools, explaining that the responses reflected the way in which the questions were phrased.

An update on Action Tracking indicated that out of a total of 106, only two remained overdue on Contract Procedure Rules (Governance portfolio) and Direct Payments (Social Services).  In line with the request previously made, details were given on the management of those risks.  A late response received on Direct Payments reported that some progress had been made although this was limited due to the volume of payments.

On Direct Payments, Mr. Paul Williams questioned whether there were sufficient resources to address the issue and any risk.  The Internal Audit Manager gave assurance that the question of resources would be part of the full response to the Action Tracking.

On investigations, Mr. Williams pointed out that cases 3.1 and 3.3 had not been followed up by the Police and asked if this was due to the control weaknesses in those respective areas, as referred to in the report.  The Internal Audit Manager felt that this could be due to the amounts of money involved.

RESOLVED:

That the report be accepted.