The committee considered the Internal Audit update. A council officer said it covered from the beginning of September to October and that he wanted to bring to the committee’s attention several items. At 1.5 the format and content of Internal Audit reports was under review by a working party. This included the Chief Internal Auditor, … Continue reading “Audit & Risk Management Committee (Wirral Council) 29th November 2011 Part 3 Internal Audit Update”
The committee considered the Internal Audit update. A council officer said it covered from the beginning of September to October and that he wanted to bring to the committee’s attention several items. At 1.5 the format and content of Internal Audit reports was under review by a working party. This included the Chief Internal Auditor, Deputy Chief Internal Auditor, Chair of the Audit & Risk Management Committee and Deputy Chair of the Audit and Risk Management Committee. 4.6 detailed several high-profile items, there was no specific recommendation for action but he wanted to highlight these. 4.3(b)(i) dealt with the issue of the failure to implement agreed recommendations, it needed further action to encourage officers to urgently implement the recommendations.
The officer said that 4.2.1 dealt with Internal Audit staffing as the “current staffing was in peril” due to maternity leave, sickness leave which had been exacerbated by two officers unavailable as they were seconded full-time to deal with the Anna Klonowski recommendations. A member of staff was also going on jury service. Group auditors had been seconded to the corporate governance team full-time from Monday. They had been authorised to engage appropriate staff through the corporate agency contract. Staff would be selected next week.
Cllr Ron Abbey said he had a number of questions and thanked officers for the report. He said that staffing issues were covered in item 5 but caused short-term difficulties. Referring to 4.3 (b)(i) he said it could slip off the side and never be actioned. As it was high risk and high priority, he said that the officer dealing with it was not sitting here was “ridiculous” and “scandalous”.
Mr Green answered that he was very confident. Regarding the status across all project, the project manager had signed off as had the Chief Officer. In addition so had the Director of Finance and the SCP office. He said analysts had gone through, so had accountants and it had been signed off by all parties. The only caveat was being realistic and honest. He said there will be ups and downs. For example the £200,000 PACSPE saving might be £210,000 or £240,000. There was a reason behind the cautious approach. If brought forward some projects would bring added savings which might add up to more than £10.75 million.
Cllr Phil Davies referred to appendix C (the DASS transformation programme highlighting the two largest savings which totalled £7 million. He asked for the confidence that these two Social Services savings will be met.
Mr. Green replied that it was the same as before. Projects had been signed off and they had made sure there was no double counting as a result of the EVR. One reason why the market management project could fail would be if suppliers didn’t accept the new price.
Cllr Green said from he had years of experience in being told they would do things and then were not able to. The previous track record had been quite considerable amounts of savings. The work required discipline and analysts. The Director of Finance had spoken with DASS regarding how realistic the figures are. For example there were no amounts for assistive technology. Asking questions realised benefits over and above the savings that were originally claimed. Where things change they were keeping a record as to why and what so it could be tracked back.