THE SHADOW deputy leader of the Thurrock Conservative group has hit back at the ruling Labour groups criticisms of their budget amendments.
Cllr Amanda Arnold said:
“Take the name calling and spin out of the Labour cabinets performance tonight and you are left with a group who are in control of the council in name only.
One councillor complains that the “new government is all about finance” – do they still not understand the scale of the mess that the country is in?
Another complains that money stripped out from management costs and put back into “grass cutting” for council housing estates is a waste of money. If they dealt with as many complaints about poor grass cutting, broken glass, lack of bins, fly tipping and vandalised play equipment, as I do, they would not only welcome this investment, they would know exactly where to spend it!
Residents don’t want layers of management and unnecessary staff structures, and councils don’t have the luxury of heavily subsidising services that people choose not to use.
Even in the current economic environment, there is no excuse for not providing our services from improved facilities, which is why we want to move the community college into a newer building and re-invigorate leisure and culture services.
Our budget realigns council priorities with the things that matter to residents. It was democratically voted through, and rather than play politics for a headline, Labour need to remember they were elected to serve the residents and just get on with the job.
Closing College more likely
Getting on with Job spanner in works more likely.
Lets Remember last year
Under Conservative Control
Thurrock Accounts 09/10
Auditor Report
Qualified Conclusion
I have undertaken my audit in accordance with the Code of Audit Practice. In so doing, I identified the following:
•
the Council’s reserves of £2.2 million were significantly below the recommended minimum level of £7 million and the Council was still developing a medium term financial strategy to address the financial position;
•
the Council overspent against its budget for the year by £3.9 million, resulting in unplanned use of balances of this amount.
•
members of the Planning Committee did not always have a constructive working relationship with officers or adhere to the Council’s revised Constitution to demonstrate good governance;
•
the Planning Committee made a planning decision during 2009/10 that was not in line with planning law, was against officer advice and subsequently had to be rescinded; and
the Council had not developed a strategic asset management plan and did not have a complete asset register in place to enable it to manage its assets
Having regard to the criteria for principal local authorities specified by the Audit Commission and published in May 2008 and updated in October 2009, I am satisfied that, in all significant respects, Thurrock Council made proper arrangements to secure economy, efficiency and effectiveness in its use of resources for the year ending 31 March 2010, except for:
planning finances effectively to deliver its strategic priorities and secure sound financial health;
promoting and demonstrating the principles and values of good governance; and
managing assets effectively to help deliver strategic priorities and service needs.
Thurrock for All, is that a heavily edited abstract or the conclusions in full? If it’s the full version then it’s another example of doublespeak that we see so often in anything to do with Government both national and local. It basically slates the council for a string of failures then says the auditor was satisfied ‘in all significant respects’ that the council did a great job. It can’t be both!
Unfortunately double speak is in play in the Audit report – the first part slates the Council then goes on to praise change. Grounds for all political sides to take comfort.
http://www.thurrock.gov.uk/money/finance/pdf/acco_2010_annual_accounts.pdf
PAGES 4 & 5
Full Text
Opinion on the accounting statements
I have audited the Authority accounting statements and related notes of Thurrock Council for the year ended 31 March 2010 under the Audit Commission Act 1998. The accounting statements comprise the Income and Expenditure Account, the Statement of Movement on the General Fund Balance, the Balance Sheet, the Statement of Total Recognised Gains and Losses, the Cash Flow Statement, the Housing Revenue Account, the Statement of Movement on the Housing Revenue Account, the Collection Fund and the related notes. These accounting statements have been prepared under the accounting policies set out in the Statement of Accounting Policies.
This report is made solely to the members of Thurrock Council in accordance with Part II of the Audit Commission Act 1998 and for no other purpose, as set out in paragraph 49 of the Statement of Responsibilities of Auditors and of Audited Bodies published by the Audit Commission in April 2008.
Respective responsibilities of the Director of Finance and Corporate Governance and auditor
The Director of Finance and Corporate Governance’s responsibilities for preparing the accounting statements in accordance with relevant legal and regulatory requirements and the Code of Practice on Local Authority Accounting in the United Kingdom 2009: A Statement of Recommended Practice are set out in the Statement of Responsibilities for the Statement of Accounts.
My responsibility is to audit the accounting statements in accordance with relevant legal and regulatory requirements and International Standards on Auditing (UK and Ireland).
I report to you my opinion as to whether the accounting statements give a true and fair view, in accordance with relevant legal and regulatory requirements and the Code of Practice on Local Authority Accounting in the United Kingdom 2009: A Statement of Recommended Practice, of the financial position of the Authority and its income and expenditure for the year.
I review whether the governance statement reflects compliance with ‘Delivering Good Governance in Local Government: A Framework’ published by CIPFA/SOLACE in June 2007. I report if it does not comply with proper practices specified by CIPFA/SOLACE or if the statement is misleading or inconsistent with other information I am aware of from my audit of the accounting statements. I am not required to consider, nor have I considered, whether the governance statement covers all risks and controls. Neither am I required to form an opinion on the effectiveness of the Authority’s corporate governance procedures or its risk and control procedures.
I read other information published with the accounting statements, and consider whether it is consistent with the audited accounting statements. This other information comprises the Explanatory Foreword. I consider the implications for my report if I become aware of any apparent misstatements or material inconsistencies with the accounting statements. My responsibilities do not extend to any other information.
Basis of audit opinion
I conducted my audit in accordance with the Audit Commission Act 1998, the Code of Audit Practice issued by the Audit Commission and International Standards on Auditing (UK and Ireland) issued by the Auditing Practices Board. An audit includes examination, on a test basis, of evidence relevant to the amounts and disclosures in the accounting statements and related notes. It also includes an assessment of the significant estimates and judgments made by the Authority in the preparation of the accounting statements and related notes, and of whether the accounting policies are appropriate to the Authority’s circumstances, consistently applied and adequately disclosed.
Page 4
I planned and performed my audit so as to obtain all the information and explanations which I considered necessary in order to provide me with sufficient evidence to give reasonable assurance that the accounting statements and related notes are free from material misstatement, whether caused by fraud or other irregularity or error. In forming my opinion I also evaluated the overall adequacy of the presentation of information in the accounting statements and related notes.
Opinion
In my opinion the Authority accounting statements give a true and fair view, in accordance with relevant legal and regulatory requirements and the Code of Practice on Local Authority Accounting in the United Kingdom 2009: A Statement of Recommended Practice, of the financial position of the Authority as at 31 March 2010 and its income and expenditure for the year then ended.
Conclusion on arrangements for securing economy, efficiency and effectiveness in the use of resources
Authority’s Responsibilities
The Authority is responsible for putting in place proper arrangements to secure economy, efficiency and effectiveness in its use of resources, to ensure proper stewardship and governance and regularly to review the adequacy and effectiveness of these arrangements.
Auditor’s Responsibilities
I am required by the Audit Commission Act 1998 to be satisfied that proper arrangements have been made by the Authority for securing economy, efficiency and effectiveness in its use of resources. The Code of Audit Practice issued by the Audit Commission requires me to report to you my conclusion in relation to proper arrangements, having regard to relevant criteria for principal local authorities specified by the Audit Commission and published in May 2008 and updated in October 2009. I report if significant matters have come to my attention which prevent me from concluding that the Authority has made such proper arrangements. I am not required to consider, nor have I considered, whether all aspects of the Authority’s arrangements for securing economy, efficiency and effectiveness in its use of resources are operating effectively.
Qualified Conclusion
I have undertaken my audit in accordance with the Code of Audit Practice. In so doing, I identified the following:
•
the Council’s reserves of £2.2 million were significantly below the recommended minimum level of £7 million and the Council was still developing a medium term financial strategy to address the financial position;
•
the Council overspent against its budget for the year by £3.9 million, resulting in unplanned use of balances of this amount.
•
members of the Planning Committee did not always have a constructive working relationship with officers or adhere to the Council’s revised Constitution to demonstrate good governance;
•
the Planning Committee made a planning decision during 2009/10 that was not in line with planning law, was against officer advice and subsequently had to be rescinded; and
•
the Council had not developed a strategic asset management plan and did not have a complete asset register in place to enable it to manage its assets effectively to help deliver strategic priorities.
Page 5
Having regard to the criteria for principal local authorities specified by the Audit Commission and published in May 2008 and updated in October 2009, I am satisfied that, in all significant respects, Thurrock Council made proper arrangements to secure economy, efficiency and effectiveness in its use of resources for the year ending 31 March 2010, except for:
•
planning finances effectively to deliver its strategic priorities and secure sound financial health;
•
promoting and demonstrating the principles and values of good governance; and
•
managing assets effectively to help deliver strategic priorities and service needs.
Page 6
Certificate
I certify that I have completed the audit of the accounts in accordance with the requirements of the Audit Commission Act 1998 and the Code of Audit Practice issued by the Audit Commission.
Debbie Hanson
Officer of the Audit Commission
Audit Commission
Atlantic Business Centres
Lyttleton House
64 Broomfield Rd
Chelmsford
Essex
CM1 1SW
It’s hopeless isn’t it? And politicians wonder why us voters increasingly refuse to believe anything they say or trust anything they do. That entire report is so ambiguous as to make it invalid. Surely we deserve better than that?
Where’s Garry? That is the big question.
Lost in action with Cllr Danny Nicklen.