Audit and Risk Committee Minutes

Date:
Monday, 28th February, 2011
Time:
4.30pm
Place:
Committee room 3, Council Offices, Gernon Road, Letchworth Garden City
 
 

Attendance Details

Present:
Councillor Michael Weeks (Chairman), Councillor John Booth (Vice-Chairman), Councillor Mrs A.G. Ashley, Councillor Paul Clark, Councillor J.M. Cunningham, Councillor Bill Davidson, and Councillor Gary Grindal.
In attendance:
Norma Atlay - Strategic Director of Finance, Policy and Governance
Andy Cavanagh - Head of Finance, Performance, and Asset Management
Tim Neill - Accountancy Manager
Fiona Timms - Performance and Risk Manager
Margaret Mulkerrin - Audit Manager
Anthony Roche - Deputy Monitoring Officer
Nigel Schofield - Committee and Member Services
Also Present:
Mr Nick Caley - Grant Thornton
Mr Denis Thorpe - Grant Thornton
Item Description/Decision
PART I
36 APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
An apology for absence was received from Councillor Deepak Sangha and in accordance with the agreed procedures of North Hertfordshire District Council it was confirmed that Councillor Gary Grindal would be his substitute. Mr N. Caley proffered the apologies of Mr P. Westerman from Grant Thornton and introduced Mr D. Thorpe as the new Audit Manager to NHDC.
37 MINUTES
RESOLVED: That the Minutes of the Meeting of the Committee held on 2 December 2010 be approved as a true record of the proceedings and signed by the Chairman.
38 NOTIFICATION OF OTHER BUSINESS
There was no other item of business tabled.
39 CHAIRMAN'S ANNOUNCEMENTS
The Chairman welcomed everyone to this meeting of the Audit and Risk Committee and to Mr Denis Thorpe who would be the new Audit Manager from Grant Thornton assigned to NHDC.

The Chairman reminded Members that, in line with the Code of Conduct, any Declarations of Interest should be declared immediately prior to the item in question.
40 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
There was no public participation.
41 OVERVIEW OF THE NHDC AUDIT PLAN FOR 2010 - 2011
Mr N. Caley referred the Committee to the report prepared by Grant Thornton which provided an overview of the Audit Plan to be undertaken for 2010-2011.

Mr Caley reminded the Committee that the audit objective was to give an opinion on the financial position of the Council, adherence to the relevant legislation, accounting standards and whether the Annual Governance Statement was correctly presented. Mr Caley confirmed that the Value for Money Audit would continue with two reporting criteria (that NHDC had secured financial resilience and whether NHDC had robust financial systems to manage financial risks) and the first audit of compliance to the International Financial Reporting Standards and that Environmental Audit regulations were much tighter. The Committee noted that an audit of compliance with the National Fraud Initiative at NHDC would take place as well as certification of Grants and Returns (see Minute 42 below).

Members supported the overall audit plan as it was essential to have sound accounting practices and audit procedures but expressed concern at the audit fee of £120,143 in these straightened times for local authorities. Mr Caley noted the concern and would report back to the Engagement Lead, and advised that fees were set by the Audit Commission, that some £70K was a fixed fee and the other charges were based on work undertaken, especially grants and claims and the quality of information provided by NHDC. Mr Caley advised that there could be a rebate and The Strategic Director of Finance, Policy and Governance confirmed that there was no discretion for NHDC in 2010-2011 but there would be a negotiated reduction in fee for 2011-2012.

In response to a question on the length of time taken to do the audit plan Mr Caley advised that the plan was set to a statutory timetable and that Council had to approve the annual accounts. The audit would take place from July and end with the claims and grants audit in October and benefits audit by the end of November.

The Chairman thanked Mr Caley for the presentation and with regard to the audit fee proposed it was agreed that Members should write to their respective Member of Parliament stating that the amount of proposed audit fee was unrealistic in the current economic climate.

RESOLVED:

(1)That the content of the report on the NHDC Audit Plan be noted;
(2)That the Members of the Audit and Risk Committee be requested to write to their respective Member of Parliament (Oliver Heald MP and Rt.Hon. Peter Lilley MP) with concern about the audit fees levied by the Audit Commission bearing in mind the financial restraints imposed on local authorities by central government.

REASON FOR DECISION:
To receive the proposed Audit Plan and to register concern over the increased fees for the services provided by Grant Thornton.
42 CERTIFICATION WORK REPORT FOR 2009 - 2010 (CLAIMS)
Mr Caley advised the Committee that there had been three claims and returns certified by Grant Thornton for the year 2009 - 2010 of which one was without qualification, two were amended and two were qualified, and that overall the position of claims had deteriorated slightly since 2008-2009. Mr Caley referred the Committee to Appendix A which detailed the certification of the claims.

The Committee noted that the two qualified claims were: Housing and Council Tax Benefit Scheme and National Non Domestic Rates Return and in response to a question Mr Caley confirmed that claims could be qualified and or amended and that the Audit Commission required claims to be qualified even if the amounts in question were out of proportion to the actual claim e.g. £582.75, £179.34 and £758.58. The Strategic Director of Finance, Policy and Governance advised the Committee that if the issues raised by the Auditor were of a technical nature and relatively minor then NHDC would mount a challenge to the qualification.

The Committee considered that the late reporting of the errors meant that there was insufficient time to correct the errors in calculation and that the work programme should be adjusted so that any errors could be found and assessed in sufficient time to potentially mitigate a qualification.

Mr Caley referred the Committee to Appendix B which detailed the recommendations for each qualified claim and what the NHDC finance department was expected to achieve.

The Chairman thanked Mr Caley and Mr Thorpe for the report and contribution to the debate with a request that sufficient resource was made available to provide an earlier completion of each claim.

RESOLVED:

(1)That the contents of the report be noted;
(2)That the qualification of two benefit claims for Housing and Council Tax Benefit Scheme and National Non Domestic Rates Return be noted.

REASON FOR DECISION:
To allow the Audit and Risk Committee to be fully aware of qualifications on claims made by Grant Thornton.
43 POSITION AGAINST THE 2010-11 ANNUAL AUDIT PLAN AS AT 31 JANUARY 2011
The Audit Manager (AM) presented the report of the Head of Finance, Performance and Asset Management which confirmed progress against the 2010-2011 Annual Audit Plan, summaries of internal audit work programme undertaken in the period 1 November 2010 to 31 January 2011, proposed amendments to the 2010-2011 Annual Audit Plan and internal audit performance indicator monitoring for the period 1 April 2010 to 31 January 2011 as detailed at Appendices A, B and C.

The AM advised the Committee that the Terms of Reference had been received for the Partnerships Audit, that the Main Accounting System, the Council Tax audit and the Creditors audit were completed. The Committee noted that field work for the Debtors audit and Non Domestic Rate audit were underway.

The Committee reviewed the levels of assurance for each audit (Paragraphs 4.1, 4.2 and Appendix A and asked whether some levels of assurance were appropriate e.g. Inward Investment and whether there was any evidence that NHDC had ever been required to return unspent S106 monies. The AM agreed to report back on this second issues to Members outside of this meeting.

The AM advised the Committee that Value for Money of services could potentially be improved through the sharing of audit services across local authorities and that this was discussed more at Agenda Item 10 - Shared Internal Audit Services (Minute 45 below refers).

The Chairman thanked the AM for the information on the Internal Audit Plan for 2010 - 2011 and that the Committee acknowledged the hard work undertaken by the internal audit team.

RESOLVED:

(1)That the position of Audit and Consultancy Services against the agreed annual audit plan for 2010-2011 as at 31 January 2011 as presented at Appendix A be noted;
(2)That the proposed amendment to the adjusted 2010-2011 agreed annual audit plan be agreed;
(3)That the performance of Audit and Consultancy Services for the first ten months of 2010 - 2011 against the Hertfordshire Audit Partnership performance indicators as presented at Appendix C be noted.

REASON FOR DECISION:
To ensure that the Audit and Risk Committee fulfils its obligations as the Audit Committee for North Hertfordshire District Council and that there is independent assurance that the internal audit function is fulfilling its statutory obligations.
44 PROPOSED ANNUAL AUDIT PLAN FOR 2011-12
The Audit Manager (AM) presented the report of the Head of Finance, Performance and Asset Management which detailed the proposed Audit Plan for the financial year 2011 - 2012. The AM drew to the attention of the Committee the fact that the proposed plan had been prepared in the knowledge that a project was underway to implement a Shared Internal Audit Service within Hertfordshire - an estimated start date of 1 July 2011.

The AM reminded the Committee that an Annual Audit Plan was a requirement of the Code of Practice for Internal Audit in Local Government. The proposed plan detailed the identified planned audit work at NHDC for the coming financial year and would be undertaken by the current internal audit team until the TUPE transfer date on 1 June 2011and the proposed Shared Internal Audit Service from that date onwards. This move to a shared service would involve considerable change for the Audit Team and it was accepted that not all of the services provided at NHDC would be contained within the new SIAS agreement especially those of a responsive nature. The AM advised the Committee that it was likely that additional amendments would be made to the Audit Plan for 2011-2012 in response to changing organisational risks and that consequently such changes would be brought to this Committee for approval.

The AM referred the Committee to Appendix B which detailed the draft plan for 2011-2012 and to Paragraph 4.7 which detailed the audits not completed in the current financial year but for which time would be allocated in the 2011-2012 audit plan.

The Committee reviewed the Internal Audit Performance Indicators for 2011 - 2012 as presented at Appendix C and noted that there would be performance indicators developed for the SIAS which would be reported to the Committee in due course.

The Chairman thanked the AM for the comprehensive presentation and details of the expected transfer into the SIAS. Members expressed some concern about continuing the excellent work done by Internal Audit into 2011-2012 against the prospect of moving into a shared internal audit service with other local authorities in Hertfordshire.

RESOLVED:

(1)That the Internal Audit Strategy for 2010 - 2011 as presented at Appendix A should be used as the strategic document for Audit and Consultancy Services for the period 1 April to 30 June 2011;
(2)That the draft ‘Role of the Head of Internal Audit in Public Service Organisations’ under development by CIPFA be noted;
(3)That the proposed 2011- 2012 Annual Audit Plan as presented at Appendix B be agreed;
(4)That the Performance Targets as set out at Appendix C be noted.

REASON FOR DECISION:
To ensure that there would be an adequate and effective system of internal audit at NHDC and to ensure the effective monitoring of the performance of Audit and Consultancy Services.
45 SHARED INTERNAL AUDIT SERVICES
The Strategic Director of Finance, Policy and Governance advised the Committee of the proposals to enter into a Shared Internal Audit Service with East Herts DC, Stevenage BC, Welwyn and Hatfield DC and Hertfordshire County Council that would deliver a full professional internal audit function to meet the needs of the partnership and satisfy the requirements of CIPFA and that this was the way forward for an improved service and efficiency savings.

Although governance arrangements had yet to be finalised it was likely that the Shared Internal Audit Services (SIAS) would be governed by a Memorandum of Understanding, and that the most likely term of tenure would be five years. The SD advised that this SIAS would reduce the overall cost of internal audit for the Councils within the partnership and achieve efficiencies. Four options had been considered and Option 3 (Council hub or shared service option) with Herts CC as host to the partnership had been selected as the most appropriate way forward. The Chief Financial Officers of the five authorities had reached a decision in principle in consultation with the respective Portfolio Holders and subject to the respective Member endorsement a target start date of 1 June 2011 had been agreed. The SD advised the Committee that Hertsmere BC and Dacorum BC had also indicated a willingness to be a partner in the SIAS.

The SD described the main objectives of the SIAS and the expected key benefits and advised the Committee that staff would transfer under TUPE to HCC, followed by a single appointments process which would apply to all District and County audit staff within a new SIAS structure. The SD advised that the partners in SIAS would jointly oversee the performance of the SIAS but the adequacy of the whole system of internal audit would remain with each Council who in turn would approve their own audit plans and monitor delivery via the respective Audit Committee.

The SD advised the Committee that net savings of up to £50,000 were expected by Year 2 and requested that the Audit and Risk Committee review and support the proposal for NHDC to participate in the proposed Hertfordshire SIAS.

The Chairman thanked the SD for the description of the proposed Hertfordshire SIAS and invited comment from the Committee.

There ensued a lengthy debate on the proposals for a shared internal audit service in Hertfordshire and several Members expressed considerable concern as to the viability of the SIAS and whether the start date of 1 June 2011 could be met and doubt was raised at the anticipated savings forecast. The SD confirmed that the anticipated savings was an estimate and not a final figure and that there would be a confirmed saving before SIAS went ‘live’. The Committee acknowledged that there would be benefits but that a business case and business plan should be prepared in advance to justify the transfer to a shared SIAS. In response to an enquiry about a back up should the SIAS not prove to be a success the SD advised that the status quo of maintaining our own internal audit would remain.

There was considerable further comment on how the SIAS would work, had all aspects of the SAIS been carefully assessed and would there be a delay to the start date? however, the overall view of the Committee was that the proposal to enter into SAIS should be supported.

RESOLVED:

(1)That the Audit and Risk Committee supported ‘in principle’ the participation of NHDC in the Shared Internal Audit Services for Hertfordshire Local Authorities;
(2)That the work undertaken to date to commence participation in the Shared Internal Audit Services at 1 June 2011 be noted;
(3)That the Audit and Risk Committee expressed concern and doubt at the proposal to commence this scheme at 1 June 2011 and that there might be insufficient time remaining to achieve this proposed start date;
(4)That the Strategic Director of Finance, Policy and Governance be requested to ensure that the Portfolio Holder for Finance and IT was made aware of the concerns and comments made by the Committee on the proposal for Shared Internal Audit Services;
(5)That the Strategic Director of Finance, Policy and Governance be requested to take the appropriate action to provide an assurance to the Portfolio Holder for Finance and IT that a start date of 1 June 2011 can be achieved and that the comments made by this Committee had been addressed.

REASON FOR DECISION:
To ensure that all aspects of participation in the Shared Internal Audit Services are met to the satisfaction of the Portfolio Holder for Finance and IT.
46 RISK MANAGEMENT UPDATE
The Performance and Risk Manager (RM) presented the report of the Head of Finance, Performance and Asset Management which provided an update on the management of the Strategic/Corporate risks owned by the Corporate Management Team and Cabinet.

The RM advised the Committee that there were no proposed changes to the assessment of the Top Risks, but there were changes to descriptions. The RM assured the Committee that the following risks had been updated to reflect the current position: TR08 - Financial Management; TR 23 - Sustainable Development; TR 39 - Delivery of Outcomes for Museums FSR; TR44 - Office Accommodation; TR45 - Asset Management and TR 46 - Organisational Workload. The RM reminded the Committee that details of all Risks were available on Covalent.

The RM advised the Committee that the Risk Management Group had recognised concerns about risks of the Localism Bill for NHDC but considered that the need for a Top Risk was not appropriate at the moment. The Committee noted that the Operational Workload risk now reflected the impact of the Localism and Public Health Bills could have on NHDC in terms of resources to meet any additional or changed statutory duties.

The RM was pleased to advise the Committee that the Risk Management Group had proposed that the management of risks arising from Shared Services be supported by an agreed business case, realisation of benefits and a project risk log which could be viewed on Covalent.

The Chairman thanked the RM for the update and the Committee noted the changes to descriptions but again reiterated their ongoing concern about risks associated with any proposed Shared Service and the Head of Finance, Performance and Asset Management assured the Committee that the risks for SIAS were well known and every effort would be made by officers to assure that every risk was mitigated.

RESOLVED:

(1)That the amendments to the Top Risk Descriptions be noted;
(2)That the approach to risks arising from the Localism Bill as described at Paragraph 4.3 be noted;
(3)That the proposal for the Council’s project management framework, which included a risk log template and guidance, be used in the assessment of a level of risk for any proposed Shared Services as described at Paragraph 4.4 be noted.

REASON FOR DECISION:
To meet the NHDC Risk and Opportunities Management Strategy.
47 ANNUAL GOVERNANCE STATEMENT - UPDATE ON THE ACTION PLAN
The Head of Finance, Performance and Asset Management (HFS) provided an update on progress against the Action Plan arising from the 2009-2010 Annual Governance Statement.

The Committee were pleased to note that the following items on the Action Plan had been completed since the last meeting held on 2 December 2010: AGS 011; AGS 015.001; AGS 017.002 and with regard to AGS 010.003 the HFS confirmed that funds had been identified by the Head of IT for this action in 2011 - 2012

The HFS advised the Committee that there were three actions (AGS 004; AGS 010.003 and UOR 003.001 which may not be completed by 31 March 2011, mainly in part due to the protracted delays in setting the budget for 2011-2011. The HFS confirmed that AGS 017.001 Financial Regulations did not involve the move to SIAS and it was hoped to complete this action by 30 June 2011. It was hoped that the first use of the electronic e-tendering system could be for the Grounds Maintenance Contract and the award notice for the Fish Hill project in Royston by the end of March 2011 and the Committee noted that the delay was in part to the non - appointment of a procurement officer.

In response to a question on Action AGS 010.003 - Electronic Storage of Documents the Performance and Risk Manager agreed to pursue an update with officers as soon as possible.

The Chairman thanked the HFS for the update on the actions regarding the Annual Governance Statement for 2010-2011 and on behalf of the Committee urged officers to complete outstanding actions as soon as possible.

RESOLVED:

(1)That the progress against the actions arising from the 2009-2010 Annual Governance Statement be noted;
(2)That the actions described at Paragraphs 5.1 and 5.2 to the report would probably be carried forward to the 2010-2011 Action Plan be noted;
(3)That the Performance and Risk Manager be requested to take the appropriate action with officers to ensure that Action AGS 010.003 reflects the outstanding implementation of an electronic solution to the deletion of electronic records.

REASON FOR DECISION:
To ensure that the delivery of the Action Plan met best practice.
48 RESTATED 2009 - 2010 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
The Accountancy Manager (AM) presented the report of the Head of Finance, Performance and Asset Management which was an update on the work underway for restating the Council’s 2009-2010 accounts to be compliant with the new Local Authority accounting code or practice. The AM advised that this was a significant project, however, there had been a delay in achieving this objective due to the extensive time and resources given over to the preparations for the 2011 - 2012 budget.

The AM advised the Committee that the move to IFRS would bring a number of accounting changes not least the need to implement the new standard for 2010 - 2011 and that the first IFRS - based statement of accounts should include comparative information for 2009-2010. Also, the opening balance sheet figures at 1 April 2009 had to be restated and work was underway to complete this task as soon as possible.

The AM reminded the Committee of the key technical changes required under IFRS and advised that there were two main reasons why the restated accounts were not completed by the target date of 31 December 2010 viz. Capacity in the Accountancy Team with much resource given over to the preparation of the budget papers for 2010 - 2011 and the late publication of the guidance from CIPFA on the new code of practice in December 2010. The AM next described the progress on key technical issues as detailed at Table 1 and the key outstanding tasks as presented at Table 2 and confirmed that it was intended that all work would be undertaken in house - saving on costs and keeping expertise in-house.

The Committee were pleased to note that now the budget papers were complete it was hoped to have the full restatement of the accounts for 2009-2010 no later than 31 March 2011 as preparation of the 2010 - 2011 accounts will start in early April 2011 for completion by the end of June 2011.

Following the presentation there was discussion on the approval of restated accounts once the outstanding actions were completed and the Committee agreed to either hold a special meeting of the Audit and Risk Committee or delegate authority to the Chairman and Vice - Chairman for approval of the restated accounts for 2009-2010.

RESOLVED:

(1)That the reasons for the delays to meet the original timetable for the restatement of the 2009-2010 accounts to the IFRS be noted;
(2)That the Accountancy Manager be requested to ensure that the remaining tasks as listed at Table 2 to the report are completed within the revised timetable;
(3)That the Head of Finance, Performance and Asset Management and the Accountancy Manager be requested to ensure that resources to complete the outstanding tasks should be given the utmost priority in the next few weeks;
(4)That the Chairman and Vice - Chairman be authorised by the Audit and Risk Committee in consultation with the Head of Finance, Performance and Asset Management to review progress on completion of the outstanding tasks and decide whether a special meeting should be convened to consider the final version of the restated 2009-2010 accounts and the adopted accounting policies;
(5)That if all the tasks were completed and that a special meeting was not required then the Chairman and Vice- Chairman should be requested to approve the restated accounts for 2009-2010.

REASON FOR DECISION:
To ensure the completion of the statement of accounts and compliance with the IFRS based code of accounting practice.
49 CONFLICTS OF INTEREST POLICY REVIEW
The Deputy Monitoring Officer (DMO) presented this report which requested the Committee to consider amendments to the Conflicts of Interest Policy which was made up of two parts; A. External Conflicts of Interest and B. Internal Conflicts of Interest. The DMO reminded the Committee that this Policy was last amended in April 2007 and described several examples of potential Conflicts of Interest within the Council. The DMO advised the Committee that the internal conflicts of interest were not currently subject to any formal Council Policy and at the moment there were no known issues identified to date. The DMO confirmed that it was recognised that many Councillors were in gainful employment and that this possible conflict was outside the scope of the Policy.

With the above in mind the DMO proposed and it was agreed by the Committee that Part B to this report should be removed to allow further work and editing to be undertaken in refining the scope of this part of the policy. The DMO advised that individual departments at NHDC had specific needs and that ‘one size’ of form did not fit all.

The Committee reviewed Part A of the Policy - External Conflicts of Interest and the three forms (no proposed amendments) which had only minor amendments and the DMO advised that there were no known issues affecting the operation of the current policy. It was agreed that Part A would be published as the Policy until Part B had been re-worked.

The Chairman thanked the DMO for the update on the Conflicts of Interests Policy and invited Members to pass any additional comments on Part B of the Policy as soon as possible outside of this meeting.

RESOLVED:

(1)That the contents of Part A - External Conflicts of Interest be noted;
(2)That the proposal by the Deputy Monitoring Officer to undertake additional work on Part B - Internal Conflicts of Interest and remove from the Conflicts of Interest Policy be agreed;
(3)That the recommendation to append all conflicts of interest forms within the Council to the Policy be agreed;
(4)That the recommendation to update the Conflicts of Interest Policy and published as Part A only be agreed;
(5)That the Deputy Monitoring Officer be requested to undertake further work on Part B of the Policy to meet the requirements of reportage of Internal Conflicts of Interest;
(6)That Members be requested to review Part B - Internal Conflicts of Interest outside of this meeting and pass any comments or suggestions to the Deputy Monitoring Officer as soon as possible.

REASON FOR DECISION:
To ensure that the Council has an effective policy to manage declarations of External and Internal Conflicts of Interest.
50 CONFIDENTIAL REPORTING CODE (WHISTLEBLOWING POLICY)
The Deputy Monitoring Officer(DMO) presented this report which contained further amendments to the Confidential Reporting Code (Whistleblowing) Policy and referred the Committee to Appendix A - The Confidential Reporting Code for Employees and to Appendix B - Handling Whistleblowing: Practical Tips for Managers and advised the Committee that this policy fell within the jurisdiction of the NHDC Standards Committee and Human Resources Department.

The DMO confirmed that the Policy was last reviewed in 2008 but as yet remained to be implemented and consequently the Policy currently in use was the 2007 version. Changes had been made to the 2008 document and this was presented at Appendix A for consideration by the Committee. The DMO advised that Appendix B was a new document which would assist NHDC Managers in any whistleblowing cases brought to their notice and had been proposed as an amendment during the Policy Review.

The DMO referred the Committee to the list of amendments/comments to the 2008 Policy as listed at Paragraph 4.10:
1. At the request of the Head of Community and Cultural Services a reference had
been added to the Council’s duty to participate in the Safeguarding of Children and
Vulnerable Adults and the relevant policy which deals with this;
2. The tone of the policy was felt to be slightly defensive/negative and therefore an
additional line was added to the end of the introduction recognising the importance
of whistleblowing to good governance;
3.The first three paragraphs of the “Who do I speak to section” were re-ordered to
make it clearer that officers could still approach the Monitoring Officer directly
(rather than their line manager) where appropriate;
4.The various contact details had been updated;
5.Various changes to the wording for clarity.

The DMO advised the Committee that there remained some outstanding work that required an input from the Audit Manager for the preparation of protocols for the investigation and review process, and that this action was under review due to the potential changes in the Audit function at NHDC. The Committee noted that should these protocols be required they would ultimately be presented to the Standards Committee

The Chairman thanked the DMO for the presentation and the Committee congratulated the DMO on a clear and concise Policy and agreed that both Policy documents should be implemented in due course.

RESOLVED:

(1)That the outcomes of the policy review of the Confidential Reporting Code be noted;
(2)That the Confidential Reporting Code for employees as presented at Appendix A be agreed;
(3)That the proposed protocol and guidance for line managers as presented at Appendix B be agreed.

REASON FOR DECISION:
To ensure that the Council has an effective policy to tackle fraud cases.

On conclusion of business the Chairman wished to place on record the thanks of this Committee to all Members and Officers for their support in 2010 - 2011 and in particular the contribution made by Councillor J. Cunningham to the Audit and Risk Committee.
Published on Thursday, 7th April, 2011
6.52 p.m.