Agenda item

To consider and approve the statement so that it can be signed by the Council Leader and the Chief Executive

DECISION:

·       To accept an adjustment to an increase in the probability score (from 3 to 4) in the Engagement risk.

·       To accept the (draft) Annual Governance Statement.

·       To approve the Statement and recommend that the Council Leader and Chief Executive sign it.

 

Note:

·       Include in the work programme that the Chair of the Governance and Audit Committee be invited to attend the Governance Arrangements Assessment Group where relevant.

·       Consider re-scoring the Lawfulness area following a recent court case. A need to add a clause on the Article 4 case in the statement

·       Consider dividing the Finance area risks into two separate categories, 'Overspending due to underfunding or lack of financial control' to 'a) Overspending due to underfunding b) lack of financial control'

·       Reference to an internal review to improve Council Tax collection arrangements – a request was made for an update to the Committee.

·       Apprenticeship Scheme – a request for a report that would include information on the success of the scheme. Assurance is needed that the scheme contributes to future workforce plans.

·       Request for the Monitoring Officer to attend the meetings.

 

The Statement was presented by the Head of Finance. He explained that the statement, although not part of the accounts, was a statutory document which needed to be published with the accounts. In accordance with the Accounts and Audit (Wales) Regulations and the CIPFA Code of Practice, all Local Authorities must ensure that a statement of internal management was in place and that the management system was reviewed at least once a year. ⁠It was reported that the Chief Executive and the Council Leader were required to sign the statement, although the Audit and Governance Committee's approval was needed.

 

Some background was given to the statement which was based on the CIPFA / SOLACE Framework published in 2016 and identified 7 core principles for good governance which were then further broken down into sub-principles. It was highlighted that the Governance Arrangement Assessment Group, led by the Chief Executive, had considered these principles and sub-principles and had created a Governance Risk Register, which formed part of the Council's Corporate Risk Register. Risks had been identified in 24 different areas of governance, identifying the controls that the Council had in place to mitigate these risks.

 

It was reported that there were four types of risks and that each risk had departmental ownership; the Group had concluded that there were 0 areas of very high risk, 7 high risk areas, 8 areas of medium risk and 9 low risk areas. Despite recognising that the current risk score remained higher than the Council was willing to accept, further actions had been identified to minimise these risks.

 

In terms of adjustments, it was expressed that the Engagement risk likelihood score had increased from 3 to 4 as the preparation and conduct of consultations and engagement exercises remained very challenging.

 

The members expressed their thanks for the report.

 

During the ensuing discussion the following observations and responses were noted:

 

·         That the Committee accepted the statement late in the process. Should the Chair attend the Governance Arrangements Assessment Group?

 

The Head of Finance noted that there was room to improve the process and for the Committee to be updated during the year. He added that work was being done to strengthen the risk arrangements and that he accepted the observation to invite the Chair of the Committee to the Governance Arrangements Assessment Group when relevant.

 

·          A suggestion that the lawfulness score should be reassessed due to the risk of 'ignoring the rule of law, which made the Council vulnerable to challenges from the courts' in light of a recent court case, namely the Article 4 Direction. Also, a request to refer to the Article 4 Direction in the statement.

·          That the order of the decision which led to the loss of money in the case of the Article 4 Direction needed to be traced. Suggestion of institutional discrepancy in the willingness to take legal proceedings, e.g., officers highlighting to the Planning Committee the risk of going to an appeal and incurring costs if a decision was contrary to policy.

·          Request for the Monitoring Officer to attend the meetings.

 

The Head of Finance noted that the risk was set based on whether the Council was deliberately ignoring the law and in the case of the Article 4 Direction the Council had no intention of being intentionally misleading. Accepted the observation to add a clause in the statement.

 

·          Suggestion that the Workforce Planning score should be reassessed in future due to the risk to the care sector given the constraints of recruiting care workers from overseas.

 

The Head of Finance noted that the Council had a long-term project in place for future workforce planning and while accepting that recruiting and retaining care staff was a significant challenge, the score applied to the Council as a whole.

 

·          Finance - suggestion to consider breaking down the risks of the Finance area into two separate categories, 'Overspending due to underfunding or lack of financial control' to: a) Overspending due to under-funding b) lack of financial control'.

 

The Head of Finance noted that he accepted the observation that there were two different categories here and that a discussion had taken place with the Cabinet about where to draw the line – that increasing pressures on services were leading to overspending.

 

·          Agreed that the engagement likelihood risk needed to be increased with a suggestion to gather public opinion on Council tax increases in future.

 

·          Reference to an internal review to improve Council Tax collection arrangements - although a report had been received in response to Cyngor Gwynedd's ranking at the bottom of the Welsh table on Council tax collection rates, an update on performance was needed.

 

The Head of Finance noted that although there was an improvement to the arrangements, Gwynedd had not moved up in the performance table. He added that Audit Wales was also looking into this.

 

·         While noting that the Apprenticeship Scheme had given 90 apprentices an opportunity since 2019 this was less than 1% of the workforce. Did the Council have any plans to improve this? - it could boost future employments. Needed information about the success of the scheme; Were apprentices being employed after their traineeship? Assurance was needed that the scheme contributed to future workforce plans.

 

The Head of Finance noted that the scheme was dependent on how it was funded and maximising the Apprenticeship Levy. He added that he was happy with the Future Planning risk score but accepted that it was a matter for the Committee to review in terms of good governance.

 

RESOLVED:

·        To accept an adjustment to an increase in the likelihood score (from 3 to 4) in the Engagement risk.

·        To accept the (draft) Annual Governance Statement.

·        To approve the Statement and recommend that it be signed by the Council Leader and Chief Executive.

 

Note:

·        Include in the work programme that the Chair of the Governance and Audit Committee be invited to attend the Governance Arrangements Assessment Group where relevant.

·        Consider re-scoring the Lawfulness area following a recent court case. A need to add a clause to the Article 4 Direction case in the statement.

·        To consider breaking down the risks of the Finance area into two separate categories, 'Overspending due to underfunding or lack of financial control' to: a) Overspending due to under-funding b) lack of financial control'.

·        Reference to an internal review to improve Council Tax collection arrangements – a request for the Committee to be updated.

·        Apprenticeship Scheme - a request for a report that would include information on the success of the scheme. Assurance was needed that the scheme contributed to future workforce plans.

·        Request for the Monitoring Officer to attend the meetings.