No apologies were received.

There were no disclosures of interests.

The minutes of the meeting held on 21st September 2006 were submitted and signed.

The Committee received a report on the number of Freedom of Information Act requests received in the period July to September 2006. Members said they would be interested in finding out how Watford compared with other authorities in terms of the number of FOI requests received.

The Committee received an update on the Corporate Anti Fraud and Corruption Strategy, including the Whistle-blowing Policy.

The Anti Fraud and Corruption Strategy was last approved by this Committee in March 2006. Neither document had been significantly altered since last year although the Strategy had been amended to reflect the change in reporting lines for the Benefits Fraud Investigation Team from the Head of Revenues and Benefits to the Audit Manager.

It was considered best practice that both documents be reviewed and approved by Members on an annual basis.

The Council's Whistle-blowing Policy was publicised in its own right on the Intranet and was readily available to all staff.

In response to a Member question about the change in lines of responsibility relating to Benefits Fraud Investigation Team, the Audit Manager explained that the reason had been to bring the two areas of investigation together. There had always been close liaison between the two teams and a sharing of experience so combining them into one team made sense.

It was noted that the policies were advertised in About Watford and a Member asked whether this was enough to ensure that hard to reach groups could access the information. The Audit Manager responded that About Watford went to every household in the borough but agreed to look at whether other publications should also be used.

The Member referred to the section on Formal Cautions (Benefit Fraud) and asked in what circumstances a second or third caution might be issued. The Audit Manager responded that this was a very rare occurrence but there may be situations when the Council would prefer not to prosecute e.g. a significant health impact.

The Chair asked whether reporters under the Whistle-blowing Policy tended to be elected members, staff or public. The Audit Manager responded that, whilst they did receive information, it was very rarely through this policy. The policy existed primarily for those who could not openly express their concerns. The Portfolio Holder added that a lot of information was obtained as a result of staff vigilance.

Zurich Municipal, the Council's insurers, had been requested to carry out an independent review of the Council's risk management arrangements. The Committee considered the final report.

As the report was to be discussed in detail at the next meeting of the Risk
Management Group, the Committee was asked to note its contents for now and agree to consider the Risk Management Group's action plan to address the report's recommendations at its next meeting. Progress in implementing the plan would be reported to future meetings. The Director of Finance commented that most of the recommendations were quite straightforward and would be dealt with ahead of the action plan.

A Member asked that regular updates on all the recommendations be presented to the committee in the form of a spreadsheet so that progress could be monitored.

A Member referred to Recommendation 15 relating to the integration of Business Continuity Management into work processes and where the Council was with this. He asked whether the Council was looking at off-site facilities for computer systems which could be activated in the event of primary site failure.

The Director of Finance said that the Council had not progressed as much as they would have liked in this area but lessons had been learned from the recent flooding incident at the Town Hall. The Council now had access to an emergency planning officer from Herts County Council - shared with Three Rivers DC - who had visited Services to talk about business continuity and help develop workshops. In response to the Member's specific question about an alternative site for the computer system, she added that this issue was being considered especially as the Leisure Centres were no longer available. It was hoped that something would be decided prior to the CPA inspection.

The Director of Finance also explained that risks such as a possible 'flu pandemic were being dealt with as part of the Emergency Plan but would feed into business continuity plans. A report had been prepared and the recommendations were that, in the event of a major outbreak, the emphasis would be on maintaining front line services only.

The Committee was also asked to consider the nomination of a Member to act as risk management champion to ensure ownership, sponsorship and commitment to risk management at the highest level in the Council - recommendation 18 of Zurich Municipal's report.

The Committee received a report providing information on the work undertaken by Internal Audit during the period August to mid- December 2006 and giving an update on benefit fraud related issues.

A Member asked whether there was a separation between the team which dealt with administrative overpayments and the team which dealt with fraud. The Audit Manager explained that there was a separate Investigation Team and an officer who dealt specifically with overpayments.

A Member asked about the Aptos Audit and the apparent understating of the debtors figure for overpayment of benefits (and therefore the provision for bad debts also) in the 2005/06 final accounts which were being explored at the time
of preparation of the report. The Audit Manager responded that there was nothing further to report at this stage.