Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors S. Ammar and J. D. Stanley.

To invite Councillors to declare any Disclosable Pecuniary interests or Other Disclosable Interests they may have in items on the agenda, and to confirm the nature of those interests.

There were no declarations of interest nor of any whipping arrangements.

Councillor B. McEldowney nominated himself for the position of Vice-Chairman which was seconded by Councillor S.R. Colella.

Councillor D.J.A. Forsythe nominated Councillor B. Kumar for the position of Vice-Chairman which was seconded by Councillor D. Hopkins. 

On being put to the vote it was

RESOLVED that Councillor B. Kumar be appointed as Vice-Chairman of the Board for the remainder of the 2025/26 municipal year.

The minutes of the meeting of the Audit, Standards and Governance Committee held on 24^th November 2025 were submitted for Members’ consideration.

A typographical error was raised with Members concerning the Cyber Security Minutes which should have been recorded as recommendations to Cabinet.

The Chairman also advised that future reporting and minutes for “noting” would be replaced with references to the Committee being “assured”, with the Chairman expressing the view that “noted” did not enable Members to demonstrate that they were assured with the report content.  

RESOLVED that, subject to the amendments detailed in the preamble above, the minutes of the Audit, Standards and Governance Committee held on 24^th November 2025, be approved as a correct record.

Members considered the Committee’s Terms of Reference (TOR) as included in the agenda.  The Chairman explained that the inclusion of the TOR would be particularly helpful for Members who had recently joined the Committee.

The Chairman explained that in summary the Audit, Standards and Governance Committee functioned as an overarching Board with responsibility for gaining assurance that the reports presented were robust and satisfactory. Where Members identified any concerns, they were encouraged to raise these accordingly.

Members requested that the Whistleblowing Policy be discussed at a future meeting.  In response it was advised that this item would be considered at the next meeting of the Committeeon 16th April 2026.

RESOLVED that Members were assured in respect of the Committee’s Terms of Reference.

The Standards Regime – Monitoring Officers’ Report was presented to the Committee.

The main points highlighted in the report were as follows:

• The report included an updated list of Member complaints, including historic complaints as requested by Members of the Committee.
• All complaints reported at the previous meeting had been resolved.
• Two new public complaints and one new Member complaint had been received; the latter remained at an initial assessment stage.
• Updates were considered from the Constitution Review Working Group meeting held on 16th September 2025 and theMember Development Steering Group meeting held on 27^th January 2026.
• It was advised that the Steering Group had discussed:

After the report Members raised the following comments:

• Whether there would be any Audit, Standards and Governance refresher training made available to Members of the Committee, due to the complexities of the subject. – Officers agreed that this would be reviewed.
• Whether training for Members could reflect risks arising from Local Government Reorganisation (LGR), particularly learning from Councils that had already transitioned to a unitary status. – In response, Members noted training requirements would be explored and that it was common practice to learn from other Councils.
• Whether common themes existed in complaints that might inform training (with the Committee noting increasing issues relating to social media). – In response it was advised that social media complaints were increasing, therefore, future training would be arranged.
• Clarification on “Other Member” categories in the complaints table was requested. – It was advised that complaints related to Member to Member, Public to Member and Other included Parish Councillors.
• Live streaming considerations at the Constitution Review Working Group (CRWG) were also discussed.
• The Co-opted Member suggested that complaints concerning Parish Councillors were categorised specifically, this was agreed and referenced for future reporting.

RESOLVED that subject to Members’ comments as detailed above the Audit, Standards and Governance Committee were assured regarding the Monitoring Officer’s Report.

This report will follow in a supplementary paper

This item had been withdrawn and was not considered at this meeting.

The Assistant Director Corporate Services and Transformation introduced the corporate risk register and key developments as follows:

• All risks had been freshly reviewed and that more changes than usual were expected.
• Proposals for an independent audit of risk management governance would be included for the next audit year.
• LGR risks were being integrated through County level workstreams and tagged within the risk register.
• A new Power BI dashboard had been developed to give real time access to the Chair, Vice Chair, Risk Champion and Portfolio Holder.
• Staff and Member training on risk management would be arranged in the new municipal year.

Key risk changes highlighted were as follows:

• Contract management risk closed and moved to operational level.
• Cyber Security risk increased to 16, reflecting national guidance.
• Planning placed in special measures due to the quality of applications, moved to amber due to increased overturned decisions with risk score of 8.
• Customer Interface Project closed due to LGR context.
• Food waste implementation risk increased following Wyre Forest’s withdrawal from joint procurement.
• LGR risk updated with strengthened mitigations and residual risk remained at 12.
• The Section 151 Officer risk retained until permanent recruitment had been completed.

Following the presentation the key considerations discussed were:

• Requests for clarity on inherent vs residual risk scoring for corporate risks. - In response Members were advised that inherent and residual risks had been reviewed with internal audit to ensure meaningful reductions where mitigations existed.
• Concerns about unreadable formatting of printed risk pages.  – In response Officers would explore improving formatting or providing PDF alternatives.  Some Members advised that online versions did provide clearer reporting, which included colour.
• When would Members receive access to the Power BI Dashboard? – It was advised that dashboard demonstrations would shortly be provided to the Chairman, Vice-Chairman, Risk Champion and Portfolio Holder. 
• Concerns regarding the corporate risk for Adequate Workforce Planning was raised, particularly in relation to LGR and possible difficulties faced with recruitment. – In response the Section 151 Officer expressed the view that staff were feeling insecure.  However, assurances were given that Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment (TUPE)) would safeguard staff until the new authority was established.  Members noted that most risks were related to senior officers and not all staff.
• Requests for additional planning related risks to be added to the risk register, including speculative development pending the local plan. – Officers agreed that the concerns would be taken away for review.  Officers would determine whether the issues sat at a corporate or service level risk.
• Queries were raised regarding accountability of risk owners and whether contingency plans existed for high level risks. – It was explained that risk ownership was held at Director level, with risk leads at four tiers.  However, it was explained that full ownership mapping existed in the appendices within the report.  The Section 151 Officer added that the Power BI software was a good objective instrument, providing real time data.  Members were reassured to note that there was a good oversight of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 45/25

RESOLVED that following consideration the Committee were assured in respect of the Risk Champion’s verbalupdate.

The Committee received the routine internal audit progress report from the Head of Internal Audit.

The main points considered were as follows:

• There was strong progress in delivering the audit plan, with 188 of 250 days completed by 23rd January 2026.
• Five audits were completed with four completedsince the last meeting.
• Payroll received Substantial Assurance.
• General Ledger received Limited Assurance due to delays in reconciliations relating to historic system implementation issues.
• Health and Safety received Limited Assurance with significant issues in induction training and risk assessment completion.
• Transparency Code Audit gave Reasonable Assurance.
• There was an outstanding High Risk recommendation for Member Cyber Security Training.  It was noted that only one Member remained outstanding.
• Audit Planning for 2026/27 was underway.

Following the presentation, Members’ questions and comments were as below:

• A request for definition and scope of the General Ledger was raised. – In response it was explained that the General Ledger held all financial transactions i.e. debts owed. 
• Queries of missing evidence behind journal entries was also required. – It was explained that some journal evidence may exist, but a reasonable cut-off was required during audit.
• What was the process for monitoring the audit recommendations and how werethey implemented (including high risks)? – Members were informed that new proactive monitoring of recommendations were in place to hold officers to account, with the recent implementations being reported to SLT.  Members were reassured that all high and medium risks were followed up.  It was also explained that low level risks were under review as this level of risk was sometimes sought as an easy option, with medium and high level risks often being overlooked.  Future proposals would be subject to the Committee’sapproval at the April 2026 meeting.
• What were the reasons for initiating the Health and Safety audit? – It was advised that this audit was initiated due to management concerns of deficiencies and not due to a specific incident.  However, it was agreed that assurances would be provided within the report to be presentedat the April 2026 meeting.
• The Section 151 Officer informed the Committeeof the requirement for a review of the Single Person Discount (SPD) records with validations overdue, however, annual declarations still provided some assurance.

RESOLVED that following consideration of the report,the Committee were assured of the Internal Audit update.

The Committee received an update from the Finance Manager on progress made for the Financial Compliance Report. 

The key points being summarised below:

• Value Added Tax (VAT) returns were being restored following extensive work with tax advisors.
• Whole of Government Accounts (WOGA) required remapping, with work scheduled for 2026–27.
• A cash receipting reinstatement project was underway.
• Significant progress had beenachieved since the Section 24 Notice.
• Audit of the 2024/25 was expected to be completed by the statutory backstop date.

After the presentation Members discussed the following:

Extensive discussions were held regarding the £125m misallocated income over the period from 2020/21 to 2023/24 accounts.

The following questions were raised:

• Clarity of the situation for the misallocation of income? - In response Members were informed that themisallocated income had been banked correctly but coded incorrectly. 
• Whether income had been incorrectly passed between Bromsgrove and Redditch Councils. – In response the Finance Manager informed the Committeethat the majority of the monies did go to the correct individual Councils, however, theywere not allocated to the correct code.
• Concerns of past issues with the Tech One system were raised which had caused delays with manual checks having to be carried out.  Members queried if the £125m misallocated income related to suspense accounts.  – It was explained that the Council were hopeful that with the reinstallation of a cash receipting system, that similar issues wouldn’t happen again and that the Council should see improvements going forwards.

• What were the impacts onthe Medium-Term Financial Plan (MTFP) at the time and what about future mitigations? – The Committee were informed that the MTFP had not been destabilised because income had been received, just mis-coded. With the reinstatement of a new cash receipting system, this should help with picking up errors for future reconciliations.
• Timelines for cash receipting system reinstatement?  - Officers were unable to provide a specific timeline but Members were assured to note that suspense account balances had reduced from 424,000 entries to 46 entries, totalling misallocated monies to date of £538,000, which was a major improvement.
• How would the Council beassured that the issues would not happen again? - A parallel run of the new cash receipting system would occur before full go live, which was hoped would be in place by the next meeting in April 2026.

Other questions raised by Members were as follows:

• How was the Council ensuring accuracy given the staff turnover issues and how was the Council coping with the transitions of the new external auditors Ernst and Young (EY)?  - The Section 151 Officer reassured Members that EY were highly regarded external auditors and were seeking high levels of assurance from the Council which was significant and would cause considerable work to the Finance Team, but the Committee could be assured that all risks would be thoroughly considered.  The Section 151 Officer also assured Members that with EY on board, she was happy with the progress of the suspense account irregularities, with staff working  ...  view the full minutes text for item 48/25

A high level overview of capital expenditure, borrowing levels, prudential indicators and treasury risk management was provided by the Finance Manager.

After the overview, Members raised the following questions:

• Clarification regarding governance for new liabilities exceeding £0.5m which were reported to full Council for approval/notification.  It was asked whether this was a culmination of liabilities or specific individual? – In response the Committee were advised that this related to individual items.  In response Members queried how culminated liabilities were reported? – It was advised that Officers would seek the specific details and report back to Members.
• The portfolio holder queried if any monies owned by His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (HMRC) would be paid with interest? – In response the Section 151 Officer advised that interest started from the date a matter was brought to their attention.  Members noted that one matter was outstanding with HMRC.

RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL that

1)    The Capital Strategy be approved as an appropriate overarching strategy for the Council;

2)    The Treasury Management Strategy for 2026/27 and the associated Minium Revenue Provision (MRP) policy be approved; and

3)    The Investment Strategy be approved.

The Finance Manager updated Members on the accounting policies and advised that no changes were required withthe accounting policies for 2025/26.

The Section 151 Officer assured Members that the policies continued to comply with the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy (CIPFA) code and International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS).

RESOLVED that the Committee were assured in respect of the 2025/26 accounting policies.

No areas of concern were raised.

The Audit, Standards and Governance Committee Work Programme was considered. 

Members noted that the Whistleblowing Policy update would be consideredat the next meeting in April 2026.

RESOLVED that Members were assured in respect of the contents of the Committee’s work programme, as reported.