Why I'll miss the Audit Commission
Anybody in search of a cheap laugh at the expense of Cornwall Council could do worse than read the Audit Commission's Interim Maybe it's just me, but is there not joy to be found in seeing a group of powerful people (the most senior officials who lead departments,) who each earn more than £100,000 a year, humbled by their call to the headmaster's study?
The Commissioner's report starts with the words "I am disappointed..." and goes downhill from there. Here are some extracts:
"The financial statements adopted by the Council on 30 June 2010 were incomplete..." "I have identified a significant number of errors and omissions in the Council's financial statements..." "This, together with the considerable number of errors, identified in the Council's accounts, means that I am not in a position to issue my opinion at this time."The report issues a stern warning to councillors that they (and not the officers) are responsible for the probity of the council's financial affairs: "It is important that you consider my findings before you adopt the financial statements..."
When you look at the detail you can see why the Commissioner feels a bit fed up - even journalists know the difference between taxable expenses and non-taxable expenses (sometimes it's the only thing we're sure of.) Accepting that there were major difficulties reconciling information from the former district councils, the commissioner reports a long list of discrepancies. In a £1.2 billion organsation, a very small percentage discrepancy is still a lot of money.
A couple more extracts:
"The Council's data quality arrangements were weak during 2009/10 and performance management and reporting systems were not fully in place across the whole of the organisation."
"The Council did not have fully embedded risk management arrangements in place throughout the year and anti-fraud and corruption arrangements needed to be strengthened."
The bottom line, though, is that as far as we can tell (er...) the council does provide value for money in five out of nine "key lines of inquiry." Somehow, we're just about doing OK - even though we don't really know what's going on.
The government announced in the summer it was abolishing the Audit Commission.
I'm ´óÏó´«Ã½ Radio Devon’s Graham Smith, blogging on news, views and some fresh insights into West Country life, particularly the way government works locally and nationally.
Comment number 1.
At 24th Sep 2010, backofanenvelope wrote:And why is the government abolishing this commission? Because it has engaged in an orgy of empire building. And spent taxpayer's money on campaigning against the elected government. Audits will still be required, but will be carried out by commercial companies as and when. We won't have to pay labour placemen over 200k a year for that service.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 1)
Comment number 2.
At 24th Sep 2010, Peter Tregantle wrote:177 Quangos to be scrapped under coalition plans
The more the better. I am really starting to like the ConDems and coalitions
Complain about this comment (Comment number 2)
Comment number 3.
At 24th Sep 2010, Andrew Jacks wrote:the council does provide value for money in five out of nine "key lines of inquiry".
Wow just over 50% should we really be jumping for joy, somehow I think not.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 3)
Comment number 4.
At 24th Sep 2010, Peter Tregantle wrote:It's going up to 180 and a further 124 to be merged
/news/uk-politics-11405096
Complain about this comment (Comment number 4)
Comment number 5.
At 24th Sep 2010, John Macloud wrote:Local Authority accounts (which run from 1 April to 31 March) should be audited and approved by 30 September each year. If a publicly quoted company received an auditor's report shortly before its annual meeting to approve the accounts which said auditors had been unable to complete the audit of accounts in time because of significant outstanding issues what would happen? The share price would drop sharply and shareholders and bankers would be after scalps. The auditors qualification of the value for money tests is serious. In 4 out of 9 areas the Council is not meeting minimum requirements to demonstrate value for money.
Four other counties became unitaries at the same time as Cornwall.These were Wiltshire, Shropshire, Northumberland and Durham. All four will meet the 30 September deadline for auditing and approval of accounts and all four have passed the nine value for money tests without qualification. Councillors should demand to know why Cornwall is so different.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 5)
Comment number 6.
At 25th Sep 2010, Saltashgaz wrote:John Macloud you are certainly a wise man. Let’s not ignore the elephant in the room the poorest English county is failing to find value, surprise surpise
Complain about this comment (Comment number 6)
Comment number 7.
At 25th Sep 2010, P_Trembath wrote:So, its happening in England as well then?
Terrible, just terrible.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 7)
Comment number 8.
At 27th Sep 2010, Peter Tregantle wrote:As a great french man once said
Common sense is not so common.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 8)