Lifting the Lid Part 4 - Asset Registers and Risk Assessments

 

Betley Parish Council Asset Register

Each year local Councils are expected to update their Asset Register.  The Asset Register is part of the end of year accounting process so this needs to be addressed.  Parish Councils are not excluded from this exercise.

An asset has several contexts:  it can be financial, business or personal.  In  a governance scenario all three appear to be enshrined in the term Asset and this would include any item with a long-term existence, purchased with public funds, which needs to be accounted for – whether it is cash/property- land/ equipment/ investments, Xmas lights/Xmas animals/SIDs and poles/statues/poppies/war memorials/benches/picnic tables/notice boards/display boards/ loudhailers/laptops /apps and other peripheral hard and software.

For accounting purposes assets are listed on a company’s/Council’s balance sheet as either current assets (cash etc) or non-current assets (buildings, machinery and other tangibles) and forms part of the completion of the AGAR submission.

There are, however, grey areas which have become apparent: these are the gates which have been purchased with public funds and items such as historic/antique milestones of which the Parish had 3 (1 in Wrinehill and 2 in Balterly).

Re the milestones:   In 2006 (October) the Clerk obtained a quote for them to be repainted, which was accepted although no figure for the work was recorded in the Minutes at that time.  It appeared that the PC had an arrangement with the SCC to manage them.   Having been examined in 2007 (January) by a member of the Milestone Society, they were judged to be of a rare pattern/design attributed to pre-1893.   In February 2007 an invoice of £403.56 was paid to Rhodes Cooper for that work.  These milestones appear to have now disappeared from current PC records.     

Re the Gates:  since May 2024 it has been difficult to ascertain from Working Party reports and the PC Minutes how many gates have been purchased, how much PC funding has been spent/how many have been installed, as part of the Right of Way Improvement project begun in 2023.  It is also difficult to know how much private money has been gifted to the PC/working party and how many gates have been purchased with it and where these gates have been installed.  The SCC has also installed some gates, and here again it is unclear how many and where.   The grey area is which local council claims them on their asset register since public money has been used?   Is it the PC or SCC?  It has been impossible even using a FOI request to examine the invoices/receipts to obtain this information from either of the two PC Clerks, the Minutes and the Working Party Reports.  This information has been outstanding since 2023!  Does this mean that the  FOI legislation appears not to apply to this PC?   The parish council now pays £47 per annum to the Information Commissioner’ Office (ICO).  It would be useful to know what this is for, given this failure to comply with Freedom of Information requests.

This also leads to questions re the accuracy of the PC Asset Register and the reliability of the PC Minutes.  It is imaginable that residents would hope that the recording of assets would be as precise as the recording of public expenditure and the PC income, since public funds have been vested in these assets.  Any doubt casts aspersions on the Registers, the accounts and the Minutes, all of which appear to have been approved without comment by the Betley Parish Council.

Until 2023 the Asset register did not appear to have been updated.   There appears to be no evidence, either, of risk assessments for any work being done involving these assets in the past- eg installations, testing, safety checks etc..           

With regard to structures, both their value and the cost of the installation need to be included as part of their value.  Has this occurred with regard to the notice and information boards, the SIDS and poles and their installation?   The cost of each item should be noted (as can be seen the cost of SIDs varies as does the cost of gates and noticeboards depending on type/size). 

Have the picnic tables with seats been included on the asset Register, also the information boards (eg at Sandy Croft /formerly Laudy Croft), and signs especially purchased on some newly installed gates?

Whilst the Xmas lights have been listed three new strands were purchased after May 2022, costing more than £300.

The metal statues have also become a grey area in that one pair was  purchased initially by Councillor Owen.  Later three more pairs were purchased/appeared.  Although private funding was mentioned the amount was not revealed in the Minutes or the provenance/ownership clarified.  If they were gifted to the PC then should they appear on the Asset Register?  And each time they are displayed since the edges are sharp, and since they appear on public land, do they need a risk assessment?  Are they stable or in the way of pedestrians etc.?

Similarly the plastic poppies which cost £5.00 each (and which appear to be more robust than the Xmas lights).  Would these also need to be accounted for in terms of number and cost?

All installations need to be risk assessed at the time of installation (before and after installation) to ensure that they do not constitute a hazard for the public.  Any electrical installation has to be installed and annually checked by SETS/SATS competent individuals.  Routine and regular checks are also advisable for high use areas.  These checks and inspections (Electrical Installation Condition Reports (EICRs) should also stand as records and kept, also accounts of repairs and any incidents, to prove due diligence – which is also required.

It would appear, then, that the Asset Register and the Risk Assessment operate together.  The Risk Assessment must ensure that any asset listed on the Asset Register is safe by design, regularly maintained is legally compliant and that all this is clearly communicated.  Failure to comply should result in fines, legal action and/or removal of the asset.

It is also surprising that this has not been picked up by the internal and external auditors.