The Committee considered the report of the Head of Internal Audit and Risk Strategy setting out details of the work of the Internal Audit Section over the financial year 2008/09 and the opinion of the Head of Internal Audit on the overall adequacy and effectiveness of the Council’s control environment.  It was noted that:-

·  The statutory Code of Practice for Internal Audit in Local Government in the United Kingdom required the Head of Internal Audit to submit a written report to those charged with governance, timed to support the Annual Governance Statement.

·  It was the opinion of the Head of Internal Audit and Risk Strategy that substantial reliance could be placed on the Council’s control environment in terms of the overall adequacy and effectiveness of the controls and processes that were in place to achieve the objectives of the Authority and there were no qualifications to that opinion.

·  The opinion on the control environment was formed principally through the results of Internal Audit work during the financial year, but other factors had also been considered such as the results of external audit work during the year; the effectiveness of the Council’s risk management arrangements; significant control breakdowns during the financial year, whether they were found by Internal Audit or not; the results of any other form of external inspection or assessment; and the effectiveness of senior management in resolving control weaknesses.

·  36 audit projects were completed between April 2008 and March 2009.  The work of the Internal Audit Section had established that for the majority of the areas examined, substantial controls were in place.  Where weaknesses had been identified, they had been reported to the appropriate Heads of Service who had since taken the necessary action to address those weaknesses.

·  With regard to the proposed Internal Audit Partnership between Maidstone, Ashford, Swale and Tunbridge Wells Borough Councils, the decision of Tunbridge Wells Borough Council regarding the appointment of the Head of Internal Audit Partnership in designate was awaited.

  The Committee asked a number of questions of the Officers relating to, inter alia, the payment made by Ashford Borough Council to off-set the salary costs of the Head of Internal Audit and Risk Strategy who also managed the Audit Team at Ashford; whether the Corporate Property Group should meet more frequently; the adequacy of the risk and project management arrangements in respect of Growth Point projects, including monitoring of individual schemes against the Capital Programme; the benefits arising from GSi approval certification; the risks and benefits associated with Chairmanship of the Kent Audit Group; and the designation of the Head of Internal Audit and Risk Strategy as the lead Officer for the Mid-Kent Improvement Partnership proposal to create a four-way Internal Audit Partnership and the risks and rewards associated with the proposed Partnership.

  RESOLVED:  That, having considered the replies to its questions, the Committee:-

1.  Notes the Head of Internal Audit and Risk Strategy’s opinion

  that substantial reliance can be placed on the Council’s control environment in terms of the overall adequacy and effectiveness of the controls and processes which are in place to achieve the objectives of the Authority;

2.  Notes that there are no qualifications to that opinion;

3.  Notes the results of the work of the Internal Audit Section over

  the period April 2008 to March 2009 as shown in Appendices A and B to the report of the Head of Internal Audit and Risk Strategy and that this is the prime evidence source for the opinion set out in paragraph 1 above;

4.  Agrees that the outcomes of the Internal Audit work and the

  other matters referred to in the report of the Head of Internal Audit and Risk Strategy provide evidence of a substantial level of internal control within the Authority, which supports the findings and conclusions shown in the Annual Governance Statement for 2008/09; and

5.  Notes the improvements in control that occur as a result of the

  audit process.