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 six month period April-September 2009.  It was noted that the principal objective of the Internal Audit Section was to examine and evaluate the adequacy of internal control within the various systems, procedures and processes operated by the Council.  Each audit review included an assurance assessment in terms of the adequacy of controls.  A total of sixteen audit assignments were undertaken during the six month period:  one project resulted in an assessment of “high”:  six projects resulted in an assessment of “substantial” and six projects were assessed as “limited”.  No areas were assessed as having a “minimal” level of assurance.  Three further audit reviews did not receive an assurance assessment as this was not considered to be appropriate within the control environment under review.  A follow up to each report was completed, usually three to six months after the date of issue of the original report and the assurance assessment for areas found to have “limited” control in place at the time of the original audit was expected to have improved to “substantial” or “high” by the time that the follow up was completed.  All follow ups conducted during the reporting period confirmed that either a “substantial” or “high” level of assurance was in place at the time of the follow up.  However, a follow up review of Section 106 arrangements conducted in October 2009 (outside the current reporting period) had resulted in an assurance assessment remaining at a “limited” level of assurance although there were mitigating circumstances for the lack of progress made against the agreed audit recommendations in that following the original review the responsibility for monitoring Section 106 agreements had transferred from the Environmental Enforcement Team to the Development Control Team and the Line Manager jointly responsible for completing the implementation plan to the Section 106 database had since left the employment of the Council.  The Development Control Manager who now had responsibility for Section 106 arrangements attended the meeting to explain the action being undertaken to provide the necessary level of assurance.  He also updated the Committee on the action being taken in response to the audit report on Development Control Enforcement.

The Committee asked a number of questions of the Development Control Manager relating to, inter alia, the working relationship with the Legal Services Section; whether staffing levels were sufficient to deal with the number of planning enforcement cases; the perceived lack of feedback; and the use of standard templates for Section 106 agreements.

The Committee also asked questions of the Officers relating to the audit review of the recruitment process; including, the initial management response to the recommendations regarding the checking and verification of qualifications particularly for senior/high profile posts and the need to obtain all relevant paperwork from recruiting managers before progressing the recruitment process; the arrangements for employing temporary staff and consultants; and the details of the contract with Comensura.

RESOLVED:

1.  That the results of the work of the Internal Audit Section over the period April-September 2009 as set out in Appendix A to the report of the Head of Internal Audit and Risk Strategy be noted.

2.  That it be noted that adequate action is being taken to improve the control environment in the areas assessed as having “limited” or “minimal” controls – as detailed within Appendix B to the report.

3.  That it be noted that an effective control environment has been identified within the scope of audits in the areas assessed as being “substantial” or “high” – as detailed within Appendix C to the report.

4.  That it be noted that adequate action is being taken to improve the control environment in the area assessed as being re-evaluated to a “limited” level of assurance during the follow up process – as detailed  within paragraph 1.6.3 of the report.

5.  That the improvement in the internal control environment, identified during the audit follow up process and detailed within Appendix D to the report, be noted.

6.  That the audit plan for the remainder of the year, October 2009-March 2010, as detailed within Appendix F to the report, be noted.

7.  That it be noted that there are no important issues arising from audit work which are outstanding and need to be brought to the attention of Members.