Agenda item

To consider the report of the External Auditor (Grant Thornton).

The Director External Audit (Grant Thornton) referred to the approach to assess the Council’s arrangements for the value for money assessment which changed in 2021 introduced by the National Audit Office to a much broader scope of work using the three pillars of :-

• Financial sustainability
• Governance
• Arrangements for improving economy, efficiency and effectiveness.

She advised that, rather than report by exception, they now had to offer a more detailed narrative statement giving positive assurances as well as those areas which required attention and scope for improvement about how a Council was operating. She was pleased to report that was not the case at Exeter City Council. There were three classifications and recommendations that could arise from their work as part of the assessment including:- improvement, key recommendations and a statutory recommendation.

On that basis, she drew Members’ attention to the Executive summary of the report and confirmed that they had not identified any significant weaknesses, but had in recognition of ongoing financial challenges for the Council identified a number of recommendations with scope for further improvement of the existing arrangements for the financial years of 2021/22 and 2022/23.

This included one key recommendation relating to Exeter City Living.

They had identified one further key recommendation and a broad assessment in the governance arrangements of the  Council working with External Parties such as Exeter City Futures,  Exeter Science Park, Exeter Business Centre and Exeter Canal and Quay Trust..

The Council should have defined and specific objectives so the performance of the specific arrangements could be effectively monitored and there was not enough reporting on the performance objectives and financial impacts. The Council had agreed with that recommendation and there were assurances from the Chief Executive already in the measures that were in place to respond to the recommendations.

The next recommendations related to the economy and effectiveness and they had raised another key recommendation because they felt there was a significant weakness in relation to performance management, they looked at performance reporting of the council in 2021 and to the end of 22/23 and there was not sufficient reporting of how the council was performing against strategic priorities. She was pleased to note that there had been some discussion on this internally and from Members of the Executive and officers within service areas. They were not saying that performance management was non-existent but in terms of transparency and reporting how the council was performing and achieving the objectives needed to be more formally set out.

There were a number of other recommendations in the report across the areas.

The Democratic Services Officer would follow up an enquiry about the Scrutiny proposals proposed and including those in the Scrutiny Bulletin. The notes of the Scrutiny Programme Board were already included in the Scrutiny Bulletin.

The Director Finance responded to the following Members’ comments –

·     there had been limited public consultation on the budget due to the scale and pace and changes to the budget. He agreed with the recommendations and will review as part of a wider consultation approach to understand the governance priorities. They already intended to start engaging with Members much earlier in the budget process, commencing in the summer.

The Director External Audit responded to the following Members’ comments:–

·     in respect of the significant weakness in relation to Exeter City Living and if we should be concerned. The table broke down the different components of the recommendation and it was the principle of how the Council managed its Companies and Exeter City Living was the biggest, and whilst the principle would be superseded by the winding down of the company, the principle did hold.

·     as a result of a different approach having been taken in relation to advertising Chief Officers’ post, this was an improving recommendation and the financial context of restricting was noted but was a recommendation in respect of the interests of public transparency.

The Audit and Governance Committee noted the report.