AUDIT PANEL (Adjourned)
In Attendance:
Chairman:
Vice Chairman:
Councillors:
Councillor David Witts
Councillor David Lingard
Elizabeth Barker, Anne Dorrian, Graham Dovey, Raymond SingletonMcGuire and John Storry.
Portfolio holder:
Councillor Richard Lenton
Also present:
Councillors Richard Austin and David Owens.
John Scott (City of Lincoln Council)
Assistant Director (Resources)
Financial Services Manager
Democratic Service Officer.
10
23 June 2009
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
No apologies were received.
11
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
No declarations of interest were recorded.
12
UNAUDITED STATEMENT OF ACCOUNTS
The Committee received a report by the Assistant Director (Resources) concerning the
Unaudited Statement of Accounts.
Members were advised that approval of the accounts would be required by the 30 th June and in
line with the statutory timetable, need to be published by 30 September 2009.
The statement of accounts was a factual document recording all transactions, with the group
accounts providing data in respect of extended delivery services which incorporated BSI and
BARC.
In what had been a very difficult year financially, the Authority had started the year with a
revenue budget of £25,000. A position which had been reversed as at the end of the year a total
of £13,000 had in fact been added to the general fund balance.
The Authority had realised a capital expenditure of £2.4 million.
Members were reminded that the BSI load had been determined to be an exceptional item which
continued to impact significantly of the Authorities accounts.
Addressing the six categories of Council services, confirmation was given that the most
expensive category was that of Housing Services which during 2008 -09 has realised a gross
expenditure of £36 million against a gross income of £24 million.
The report also sought Members approval for the establishment of new reserves and provisions
to allow a reserve for Revenues and Benefits; Community Cohesion; Climate Change and
LABGI was being sought from Members to ensure
Referring to point 15.3 within the report, the Committee were reminded that the Audit
Commission had decided to undertake a special review prior to commencing their audit work.
Their decision it would appear had been based on the Authority having it accounts qualified in
2007 – 08 due to BSI not having received it audit opinion within the determined timescale.
However, the district auditor had recorded that the Authority itself done nothing wrong and could
not be responsible for BSI’s failure to produce its’ accounts.
Providing Members with a brief update in respect of the two extended delivery service within the
accounts, the Financial Services Manager advised as follows:
BARC:
The board had produced a set of accounts (annex 2 of the report) and were currently
awaiting EMDA and LCC’s letters confirming the roll forward of grant funding into
2009/10. A draft letter of representation was awaiting signature by the Chairman.
Duncan Toplis felt that an unqualified opinion, with a matter of emphasis would be
issued.
BSI:
Their final accounts were still being discussed by Trustees and once Duncan Toplis
received them they would issue their audit opinion, prior to the Full Council meeting
scheduled for 25th June 2009
General debate followed during which Members comments and questions included:






Concerns that BSI would once again, be late in submitting their unaudited accounts.
Concerns that the Authority had been subject to a pre-audit, due to BSI’s failings in 2007-08
at submitting their accounts on time.
Concern by a Member that it was not a pre requisite to include a variance figure within the
BSI accounts. 2008-09 had seen a substantial difference when the final accounts had been
confirmed. Any change in figure had an automatic knock on effect to other figures within the
group accounts which changed the final bottom line.
BSI should produce their accounts in line with the procedures and protocols of the Authority.
There was quite clearly a recurrent timing issue on submission of accounts which should not
be happening. Pressure should be applied to BSI to ensure they do produce their accounts
on time.
Concern that the valuation on land and buildings appeared to be decreasing and that the
value provided did not reflect a true valuation within the current market.
Responding the Assistant Director (Resources) and the Financial Services Manager acknowledged
Members concerns in respect of the lateness of the accounts and supported the suggestions of a
unified procedure and suggested that a new system with an agreed timetable for both BARC and BSI
could be produced, to alleviate the ‘last minute’ rushing around.
In respect of valuation Members were advised that the Authority had its own valuer as did BSI. The
two figures assumed different valuation methodologies being the historic valuation and the
depreciation replacement cost.
Resolution:
That in line with the four recommendations contained within the report the committee:
1 agree to make recommendation to Cabinet throughout to Council for the approval of the
unaudited statement of accounts as per Annex 1 within the report.
2 agree to make recommendation to Cabinet through to Council for the approval of the
establishment of the reserves outlined at paragraph 9.5 within the report.
3
Noteended
the 2008/09
accounts for Boston Area Regeneration Company within Annex 2 of the
(Meeting
a
report.
4 Members commented on the draft summary accounts within Annex 3 of the report.
and that the committee also requested that the following two recommendations be included:
5 That the Audit Commission be requested to provide details of why the Authority had been
subject to a pre-audit report and that Members of the Audit Panel be notified of the Audit
Commissions response
6 That Officers work on the 2009/10 final accounts closure timetable, in conjunction with the
Council’s deemed subsidiaries (currently being BSI and BARC) and that all risks
associated with meeting the statutory requirements are identified and actions plans
developed to mitigate those risks at its earliest opportunity and in accordance with the
Councils own timescale.