To consider and receive the Statutory Statement of Accounts (pre-audit draft) for information
Decision:
To accept and note the 2021/22
Statement of the Council’s Accounts (subject to audit).
Minutes:
Submitted - the report of the Head of Finance,
submitting the statutory Statement of Accounts (pre-audit draft) for the
2021/22 financial year. It was noted
that:-
·
The draft accounts were currently being audited,
and that the final version would be submitted following the audit, for approval
at this committee's meeting on 17 November 2022.
·
That there was no statutory requirement for elected
members to approve the draft version of the Statement of Accounts. Nevertheless, it was considered that
submitting the draft statement to this committee for information was good
practice, and was an opportunity for members to ask the financial officers
about the content and equip themselves with relevant information in order to
consider the relevant risks and other matters that will be subject to audit,
within context.
The Cabinet Member for Finance gave members an
update on their responsibilities, as well as an outline of where we had reached
along the journey. The Senior Finance
Manager then expanded upon the content of the report.
The Chair thanked the Department for the detailed
work, and invited questions and observations from members. During the discussion, the following matters
were raised:-
·
The Cabinet Member and Senior Finance Manager were
thanked for providing very clear presentations, which drew attention to a
number of very important matters in a comprehensible way.
·
Referring to the need to valuate more property as a
result of the fact that inflation was so high, it was asked whether there were
any changes in terms of valuating highway assets, and whether this was likely
to create any delay in terms of auditing the accounts. In response, it was noted that highways
appeared under 'infrastructure' in Note 15 of the Accounts (Property, Tools and
Equipment). It was explained that
highways were not being re-valuated, and that they were in on their historical
cost. If the Council did a piece of work
on any road, it went in on at cost, and was valuated in accordance with the
policy in Note 1 of the Accounts over 40 years.
It was noted further that work was afoot in England to change the system
as this 'possibly' did not reflect the value of the road, and one of the proposals
under consideration was that the net figure was only included, instead of the
detailed analysis as in Note 15. Also,
there may be other options, but this was not an easy matter since the
information held by councils about the expenditure incurred on roads was based
on historical cost alone, since a valuation had never been carried out on
them. Furthermore, it was asked whether
this would affect this year's audit of this Council's Accounts. In response, it was noted that it could have
an impact, but that the discussions were continuing.
·
It was asked whether the more detailed valuating
was going to be a pattern for the future.
In response, it was explained that the high levels of inflation had
affected this, and whilst inflation levels remained high, it was likely that
there would be greater demand for this due to these volatile prices. This matter was also being discussed as it
was an extra burden on Councils during a financially turbulent time; although
Gwynedd was more fortunate than other councils in this respect, since we had
our own internal valuer to carry out the work.
It was also noted that the matter was still being discussed at the
moment and that new guidance would be released soon, which would give a greater
explanation of the matter.
·
It was enquired whether the old road from Llanwnda
to Caernarfon, which was now in the hands of Gwynedd Council following the
opening of the new bypass, would be reflected in any way in the accounts. In response, it was explained that additional
funding was included in the settlement to reflect the fact that the road had
been downgraded from its trunk road status, and had transferred from the Trunk
Road Agency to the County Council.
·
In response to a question regarding the source of
the funding of £4.4m on the Aberdyfi Harbour Walls, it was explained that there
were a number of plans in the flooding and coastal field which had permission
borrow, with support coming through the settlement to pay for them, and that
this was already in the capital programme.
·
With reference to Table 3 of the Accounts - Summary
of Capital Expenditure and its Funding - it was asked why the Environment
expenditure was so much higher in 2021/22 than it was in 2020/21. In response, it was explained that the main
reason for that was because the Department had received £8.3m from the Local
Transport Fund in 2021/22, compared with £2m in 2020/21. It was also noted, contrary to the revenue
expenditure, that the capital spending of the departments could vary
substantially from one year to the next, subject to the projects in the
pipeline.
·
It was noted that it appeared that the Council was
being very prudent in increasing its reserves, but it was asked whether
officers were concerned about the year to come, considering the current
financial uncertainty. In response, it
was noted that when the budget had been set for the current financial year,
that it was anticipated that the inflation level of salary costs and general
levels of inflation was around 4%, which was a figure that was considered to be
prudent at the time. However, as the
inflation figure was much higher than what had been budgeted for, and if
everything else remained the same, the Council would overspend this year. It was explained that the Council had been
prudent and had made a number of difficult decisions over the years to ensure
that we had reserves, in case a financial shock hits us. In the current financial year, the Council
had reserves and general balances that would mitigate the shock of additional
energy costs and higher than anticipated costs.
However, reserves were not long-term answers, therefore, for the next
year, the Accountancy Team was already looking in detail at the base from which
we were working. As the inflation figure
was much higher this year than what was anticipated, the Council would have to
increase the base for the years to come, and when setting the budget for next
year, the Council would have to consider what was affordable and possibly cut
the cloth to fit the money that was available.
It was confirmed, however, that it was not anticipated that the Council
would be in a position of having to close schools / organisations some days of
the week, as other councils did, and the committee was given assurance that the
reserves that had already been earmarked would carry us through the hard winter
ahead.
·
In reference to Note 10.29 of the Accounts -
Council Tax Premium Account - a request was made for examples of projects under
this heading. In response, it was noted
that although some capital schemes had slipped over the years, that a detailed
analysis was included in the Housing Action Plan, which had been adopted by the
Cabinet in December 2020, of the intended use of the Council Tax Premium money.
·
It was enquired whether it would be possible to
know, when this committee would discuss the Council Tax Premium on 17 November,
what proportion of the £13m came from premium that had been paid by Gwynedd
residents. In response, it was confirmed
that this information could be provided in the report to the committee.
RESOLVED to accept and note the Council's Statement of Accounts (subject
to audit) for 2021/22.
Supporting documents: