The Committee considered the report of the Head of Audit Partnership setting out details of the work of the Internal Audit Team over the financial year 2011/12 and the opinion of the Head of Audit Partnership on the overall adequacy and effectiveness of the Council’s control environment, in the context of the Annual Governance Statement.

The Head of Audit Partnership advised the Committee that he wished to correct the third column of the table set out in paragraph 1.3.40 of the report relating to assurance levels as follows:-

It was noted that:-

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

·  The Accounts and Audit Regulations 2011 also required that the Council “must, at least once a year, conduct a review of the effectiveness of its internal audit”.  It was considered that the Internal Audit Annual Report provided evidence of the effectiveness of internal audit and the Committee was asked to treat consideration of the report as “the review”.

·  It was the opinion of the Head of Audit Partnership 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 Council.  There were no qualifications to that opinion.

·  The opinion on the control environment was principally formed through the results of the work of the Internal Audit Team during the financial year, but other factors had also been considered such as the results of external audit work during the year and any concerns expressed by the External Auditor; 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.

·  Thirty five audit projects were completed between April 2011 and March 2012 which represented 97% of the original audit plan.

·  The work of the Internal Audit Team had established that for the majority (76%) of the areas examined, substantial controls were in place at the time of the original audit.  Where weaknesses had been identified, the appropriate Head of Service had agreed the action to be taken to rectify those weaknesses.

·  As a result of the follow-up process, 97% of the areas reviewed were assessed to have a satisfactory level of control assurance, with one audit relating to emergency planning awaiting a follow-up assessment at the end of the financial year.  In the context of the preparation of the Annual Governance Statement, this would need to be shown as an “outstanding control weakness” as at 31 March 2012.

The Committee asked  ...  view the full minutes text for item 13