MINUTES
HMIE Audit and Risk Committee
Wednesday 22 December 2010 at 10am
Boardroom, Denholm House, Livingston
Present:
Sir Andrew Cubie (AC), Chair of Audit and Risk Committee
Charles Lovatt (CL) Non-Executive member
Bill Maxwell (WSM), HMIE
Gill Robinson (GNR), HMIE
Stuart Robinson (SAR), HMIE
Phil Denning (PD), HMIE
Gillian Howells (GH), HMIE
Laura Burman (LB), HMIE
Pearl Marshall (PM), SG Internal Audit
Douglas Falconer (DF), SG Internal Audit
Ruth Brown (RB), Audit Scotland
Geoff Lees (GL), Audit Scotland
Mark Roberts (MR), Audit Scotland
Eileen Quigley, HMIE (minutes)
Apologies for absence:
David Morrison (DM), Non-Executive
Shirley Young (SY), Non-Executive
Welcome and Introductions
AC welcomed everyone to the meeting, in particular welcoming Charles
Lovatt to his first Audit and Risk Committee meeting and Mark Roberts from
Audit Scotland. Apologies were made for David Morrison and Shirley Young.
1.0
Minutes of the meeting held on 15 September 2010
1.1
The minutes of the meeting were accepted as being accurate.
2.0
Matters arising and Action Log
2.1
All action points have been completed. SAR highlighted the paper on
updated corporate level risks. The paper show the new corporate level risks
and refers back to the previous corporate level risks to show direction of
travel. This was followed by an explanation of HMIE’s risk management and
corporate level risks to CL.
Action 2.1 SAR to include the spectrum report in CL’s induction.
1
3.0
The role of Boards
3.1
Mark Roberts gave the Committee an overview of The Audit Scotland
report on the role of Management Boards. As part of the research for the
report Audit Scotland consulted and reviewed 106 public bodies and covered
a broad spectrum of Boards. AC thanked MR for his presentation, noting that
it was a helpful contribution and suggested that we should assess how HMIE
performs as an organisation in relation to this report, perhaps by specifically
addressing the questions posed at appendix 3. This was followed by a
general discussion about the key points of the report including strategic
discussions, non-executive training, keeping non-executives informed, the
membership of the Board and the Board’s role in challenging HMIE.
Action 3.1 Audit and Risk committee and Management Board should
consider the questions posed at appendix 3 of the Audit Scotland report.
4.
Budget scenario planning
4.1
SAR gave a brief overview of the paper initially used at the 4 October
SMG meeting which allowed SMG to make the strategic decisions on how
savings could be made. SAR highlighted key points of the paper including
staff retirals, unfunded work, Associate Assessors, fixed term contracts and
appendix 1 and 2 which details work that HMIE could curtail. This was
followed by discussion on the implications and the cash savings as a result.
SAR assured the Committee that detailed work has gone into assuring that
we will achieve the cost savings. Discussion centred on the points highlighted
above and the additional costs involved in the creation of SEQIA.
5.
SEQIA – risk review and contingency planning
5.1
WSM highlighted that staff levels remain stable and business planning
is continuing. A first draft of the vision, remit and functions of SEQIA,
designed to act as catalyst for a process of internal and external engagement,
is due to be signed off by the Cabinet Secretary; this will allow more detailed
work on structures etc. The SEQIA programme board is meeting weekly and
final appointments are being made to the project teams that will implement the
transition process. SG, LTS and HMIE all have personnel on each project
team. It is expected that details of the project structure, teams, remit, scope
and functions will go to staff in early January, after the trade unions have had
an opportunity to comment. It is as yet unclear which areas of SG could
potentially join SEQIA. A small assurance and challenge group will be set up
to sit above the programme board, this will be chaired by Colin McLean and it
is understood that AC will be invited to join the group along with the Chair of
LTS.
AC raised the question of what enhanced levels of risk there will be in the
interim period. Should the programme board consider creating a shadow
audit and risk function? A future risk profile needs to be undertaken,
contingency planning should be made in case the formation of the new body
2
stalls. WSM agreed that these suggestions would be raised at the
programme board.
6.
Any other business
6.1
No other business was discussed.
Next meeting: 23 February 2011
3