Agenda item

9.1

The Committee received a report of the Director of Finance and Commercial Services which presented the Internal Audit assessment of Fargate Containers, highlighting the ‘no assurance’ audit opinion following the independent internal audit review.

9.2

The Chair thanked Helen Molteno and Samina Mahmood for their work undertaken on this internal audit review.

9.3

The Director of Finance and Commercial Services (Phillip Gregory) explained that the purpose of this audit was to provide an independent opinion as to whether or not the operational risks associated with the construction of the Fargate Containers was managed effectively, and whether the objectives were likely to be achieved and to then to identify lessons learnt for similar projects for the future. 

9.4

The audit report contained 17 recommendations which were all agreed by Senior Management Officers. All of those recommendations had responsible action owners identified. They were 14 critical rated recommendations and 3 high priority recommendations.

9.5

It was mentioned that a follow up Audit had begun week commencing 20 November 2023 that would highlight any outstanding actions with revised implementation dates (if appropriate), and that a report would be brough back to this Committee at its February Committee meeting.

9.6

Members of the Committee asked questions and made comments and the key points to note were: -

9.7

A Member of the Committee stated that the report lacked context relating to politics/politicians at the time. They stated that the decision-making processes was not recorded and asked if that was by choice. They also raised concern around the references to the turnover of staff and did not believe this was an excuse. They asked how could Members be satisfied that this would not happen again.

The General Counsel explained that the political aspect mentioned by the Member was not picked up as part of the report and did not believe it was something for officers to comment on. He also stated that it was not appropriate at this meeting to look into the actions of individual officers.

9.8

A Member of the Committee stated that it was clear there were a lack of recording, therefore it was good to see many recommendations relating to implementing an audit trail for future projects.  They asked what evidence could Members expect to see for future projects, ensuring that appropriate process were followed.

The General Counsel explained that further information could be provided to the Finance Committee when presenting the Capital Projects.

9.9

The Director of Finance and Commercial Services believed the Council does have a robust risk management process in place and believed something like this would be flagged in the future. He also stated that each report presented to Members has an implications section therefore officers needed to look at this and what information was being presented when making recommendations so Members can see clear positive and negative impacts that those decisions have.

9.10

A Member of the Committee asked if there were a list of construction projects that the Council was involved with.

The Director of Regeneration and Development (Sean Mcclean) explained there was an overall capital programme that was monitored and presented to the Finance Committee. He mentioned that that the majority of construction projects go through capital delivery service.  He stated that he was aware that some reports were presented in blocks to the Finance Committee therefore he stated that officers could look at improving the visibility of that reporting across the capital programme.  

9.11

A Member of the Committee asked how Members who were not Members of particular Policy Committees, could request items onto a work programme.

The General Counsel explained that Members could pick this up with their group representatives for that Policy Committee, so those issues fed into their work programme and that the role of scrutiny was picked up as part of the decision-making within those Committees.

9.12

A Member of the Committee mentioned that it could be useful to hold workshops with Members if officers were going to review what information was presented to Members in reports.

9.13

The Independent Co-opted Member asked if anything could be done to extend to scope of the Audit in order to respond to the concerns raised by Members of this Committee.

The Chief Operating Officer (Claire Taylor) explained that a deep dive into the broader scope of Audit had been requested and was currently under way. She stated that she was happy to brief Members of the Audit & Standards Committee once that report was available over the coming weeks.

9.14

The Director of Finance and Commercial Services explained there was a finance training session open to all Members in December and that it would be recorded and available to view by Members at a later stage.

A Member of the Committee also recommended the LGA risk management training.

9.15

A Member of the Committee stated how it was important to look at the bigger picture now and take away lessons learnt from this Audit.

9.16

The Chair proposed that this report be brought back to a future Committee meeting with further scope to raise their concerns.

9.17

A Member of the Committee queried why the Audit report slightly differed from that reported to Members in a Capital Approvals paper at Finance Sub-Committee on the 7 June 2022 in relation to the explanation for increased costs on the construction of the Fargate Containers. 

The Senior Finance Manager, Internal Audit (Linda Hunter) agreed to circulate information to the Committee on this, following the meeting.

9.18

Members of the Committee raised concerns on agreeing the report’s recommendations.

The Chief Operating Officer mentioned that she could brief Members of the Committee once the deep dive on the scope was available.

9.19

A Member of the Committee raised concerns relating to the role of Audit & Standards and explained how he was frustrated that the Committee was consistently asked to just note reports.

The General Counsel explained that the Committees remit was about looking at processes rather than engaging in scrutiny.

The Member stated there was not much evidence of scrutiny taking place within the Committee System. Therefore, suggested that a recommendation to the Governance Committee on how the role of scrutiny was picked up as part of the Committee System.

A Member of the Committee mentioned that this could be picked up as part of the Governance Committees work programme.

9.20

The General Counsel proposed that a further report be brough back to this Committee, once the deep dive scope review was completed, to look at the lessons learnt from this Audit review. 

9.21

RESOLVED: That a further report be brough back to this Committee, once the deep dive scope review was completed, to look at the lessons learnt from this Audit review.