Counting the Cost

 At the February meeting of the PC, the Clerk/RFO presented a report on the way that the new  management and control of PC funding would take place.  A long list of questions were submitted by one councillor, none were answered, the Councillor was silenced!  

The Terms of Reference now established, would mean that everything to do with finance and auditing will be carried out by this new Committee - see below:

The Finance and Audit Committee will meet twice a year.  It will hold a budget meeting prior to the November meeting of Council to consider and make recommendations to Council on the following year’s budget and it will hold an internal controls meeting in March, to prepare for the annual Parish Council Audits.

The Finance and Audit Committee may hold extra meetings to consider policy, staffing and other financial matters which may impact the Council.

Areas of Responsibility

1·  To consider the Council budget each year and make recommendations to Parish Council on the budget and the precept level;

2·  To consider and complete the AGAR which will be presented to the Parish Council meeting in April;

3·  To consider and review the Parish Council Risk Assessment annually;

4·  To consider and review the Parish Council Asset Register annually;

5·  To look at the budget heading and actual spend and suggest any amendments for approval by Council;

6·  To ensure an adequate and effective system of internal control is in place to secure the integrity of finances and information;

7·  To review internal internal and external audits;

8·  To ensure appropriate insurances are held by the Council;

9·  To ensure that appropriate records are maintained and preserved to provide probity to Council;

10·  The membership of the Finance and Audit Committee is 4 Councillors with 3 required to be in attendance to be quorate;

11·  To consider any additional internal controls required to ensure value for money for the electorate.

 Whilst some of these terms might be more suitable for a large Council dealing with millions of pounds, it might seem heavy handed, when many of the tasks mentioned here are required to be carried out by the whole council and not just a small group of councillors.  This would refer particularly to the completing of the AGAR, by the full council which is a legal requirement.    

The Committee comprises the following councillors:  Bettley-Smith, Daly, Watkins, Karling and Berrisford.  Possibly the Clerk, although not mentioned.  At least three of the members of this Committee are signatories of PC Cheques.

Best practice goes further to suggest members of the public with a knowledge of finance/accounting should also be part of the Committee as well as a representative from the Internal Audit Forum - to which it is also recommended that every Internal Auditor should belong.  This would ensure the objectivity transparency and accountability of the Committee.

This is all very well, but does this council know the accounting system being used?  The online accounting package being used, and if it is fit for purpose?  Does the new Auditor live 10 miles away from Council and or Clerk?  Is the Auditor known to the Clerk?  Is the Auditor a member of the Internal Auditor Forum?    

The Parish Council is also to change its bank, its Internal Auditor and to move over to electronic payments.  As long as the outcome is openness, transparency, and accountability all might be well.  However, if it is about control by a small group which relegates the rest of the council to bystanders then all this might need tweaking somewhat.  Parish Councils, I am told have two paramount functions: to keep a true and accurate record of meetings via the Minutes  and keeping a true and accurate record of public spending (at least).

 

         

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Poppies and Cut-outs

  People might have noticed the poppies and the cut out metal figures placed in the village for Armistice Day in November.   It was suggested by Councillor Owen that metal figures be purchased and   placed on the Village Green. Poppies would be displayed through the parish on lamp posts etc. These were paid for from the Parish Council Funds (£350 for the cutouts plus 20 plastic poppies at £5 each).   At the November meeting I asked if there was a reason that no poppies had been placed in Wrinehill since the account had been paid from Parish Council funds.   I did not receive a satisfactory answer but I was accused of making a ‘complaint’ (the only person not to praise the display, it seems).   But it was not a ‘complaint’ only a question based on an observation. The upshot is that an email was sent to all Members of the Council   suggesting that as a result poppies and cut out figures would be purchased -3 sets of figures and 40 more poppies).  ...
Read more

Clarification

 It has been noted in the Minutes of the meeting held on 27 June 2024 Minute 5 a statement made about this blog 'by a member of the parish council'- 'that  any comments submitted to the author of the blog which questioned the factual accuracy of the contents of its reports were ignored and not published'.  This is an assumption (yet another) not a fact.   It also seems to be yet another example of attempts to undermine the integrity of the blog (and its author). The blog, it has been noted, presents another view point which often differs from the 'standard'/'official' view presented via the Minutes particularly, where statements are made and treated as if they were universal truths rather than just  'a view' of a group of people. It needs to be pointed out here, therefore, that all comments received are read and considered, even though they come from a very small pool of anonymous, in the main, individuals, some with obvious agendas and with mali...
Read more

Business as Usual?

 At the last meeting of the Parish Council in February,  the Chair directed Councillor Head to report back on the issue of the S106  agreement monies for the former Wrinehill garage site.  The contribution of £11,500 has been deposited with the Borough Council.  Residents feel that this money should be spent primarily in Wrinehill, given that the S 106 proceeds of the last two developments were not.  (£45,000 the Commuted sum for the Bluebell development went to Knutton, also a sum (not known) from the Saw Mill development  was allocated for Laudy Croft, but it is not known if that happened, we are told). It is unclear why a councillor for Betley village is reporting on this matter unless ....  It had been mooted way back that the S106 money should be spent on resurfacing the Village Hall  car park.   Needed it is true but the Village Hall could raise funds from other sources not to mention its own reserves, which are not insubstant...
Read more