There were no apologies for absence.

There were no disclosures of interest.

The minutes of the meeting held on 9 January 2007 were submitted and signed.

The Committee received a report of the Head of Legal and Democratic Services setting out the quarterly report of requests made under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, for the period 1 October to 31 December 2006.

A Member asked that confirmation was circulated to the Committee that the request that had not been responded to within the timescale had been completed.

The Committee received a report of the Corporate Safety Adviser including the Annual Report for 2005/06.

In response to a number of questions from a Member, the Deputy Head of Human Resources explained that the survey information about asbestos in council properties was available to those people who might work in that particular area and possibly disturb the asbestos. The information had also been provided to the Corporate Health and Safety Group. He stated that he was not aware that the information was restricted and could be made known on request.

The Deputy Head of Human Resources informed the Committee that the new Manslaughter Bill was still being finalised. The aim of the Act would be to enable an individual to be held to account for negligence. This legislation would reinforce the need for the Council to have systems so that problems should not arise and risk management should be assessed.

In response to a question about the Departmental profiles, the Deputy Head of Human Resources explained that all departments had risks unique to themselves. However, it was clear that some sections had greater risks, including Housing and refuse collectors. The relevant officers had been asked to provide the information and he understood the profiles had now been completed. It was planned that this report would be presented to the Committee at an earlier meeting in the next Municipal Year and steps would be taken to ensure profiles were completed.

The Chair stated that he was aware that Housing Maintenance had not been operating at 100%, but the Portfolio Holder responsible for Housing had informed him that the situation would improve.

A Member commented that this department would not be the responsibility of the Council in the future.

The Director of Finance advised that Housing Maintenance would be part of the Stock Transfer. There were incentives for the Council to ensure things were right before the transfer took place, as it could affect the negotiations. She confirmed that it was important the Committee saw the Annual Report much earlier.

The Deputy Head of Human Resources said that there was a risk to the Council as any issues remained unknown if the Service Profile was not completed.

In response to the question about the provision of free eye tests for Display Screen Equipment users, the Deputy Head of Human Resources confirmed that staff were entitled to eye tests and were granted the costs for spectacles that were attributable for the purpose of using this type of equipment. Also ergonomic checks were carried out. Recently an Occupational Health Adviser had been employed, who was able to advise managers and officers about the use of the equipment.

A Member stated that he felt management did not take this issue seriously. He felt it was important that management should be made aware that the Committee felt that the approach was not robust enough. He had noted the comment that two-thirds of staff used visual display equipment.

The Chair asked whether it was possible to see the information more regularly than once a year. He stated that there could have been steps taken to resolve any issues that the Committee was not aware of.

The Director of Finance advised that interim reports were not produced. She could confirm that the Corporate Management Board shared the Committee's concerns about the poor response. She stated that this area had been given more emphasis since the Deputy Head of Human Resources had taken over as the Chair of the Corporate Health and Safety group. It was important that departments attended the group regularly and that the level of officer needed to be correct. The officer needed to be able to make things happen in their department. She hoped that the next Annual Report would be presented to the Committee in September.

The Deputy Head of Human Resources advised that he would investigate whether it would be possible to collate the information quarterly and present it to the Committee on a regular basis.

In response to a question about the definition of ‘user', the Deputy Head of Human Resources explained that the Health and Safety Executive stated that it should refer to primarily computer users. He would find out how the number shown in the report had been calculated.

A Member referred to the statement which referred to '23 verbal abuse' incidents. He asked whether this referred to abuse from colleagues or external people.

The Deputy Head of Human Resources advised that this referred to abuse from people outside the Council.

The Director of Finance informed the Committee that a training programme was ongoing at the present time. She had previously attended a Managers' Health and Safety course and a refresher course for Senior Managers would be available shortly.

The Chair thanked the officers and stated that health and safety was a very important issue.

The Committee received a report of the Audit Manager including Internal Audit's Service Plan and the proposed work programme for the coming Financial Year.

A Member referred to the departmental structure that had been included in the Service Plan and queried whether it was correct, as he had understood it had recently increased due to the inclusion of the Benefit Fraud team.

The Audit Manager confirmed that the structure was correct for Internal Audit. The Service Plan only referred to this section of the team. The Benefit Fraud team also reported to him and this structure was shown in a later report on the agenda.

A Member suggested that an area that should be considered for investigation was the claiming and authorisation of expenses including travel claims. He felt this was an area that all organisations should check.

The Audit Manager confirmed this was an area of risk, but the amounts that could be claimed were quite small. Previously Members' Allowances and car allowances had been checked. It was possible to identify these payments during reviews of the Payroll section. He explained that it was not possible to review some areas every year and it was necessary to identify those areas it was felt were more important. The Audit Manager advised the Committee that he maintained a list of items that could be dealt with in a rolling programme of work.

In response to a Member's question, the Audit Manager explained that ‘actual "chargeable" days' referred to the productive time spent on audit work and not general administration.

The Chair asked whether Robson Rhodes had started as the Council's external Auditors and whether there would be a handover from the Audit Commission.

The Audit Manager informed the Committee that the Audit Commission would audit the 2006/07 accounts for the Council and Robson Rhodes would audit the following year, 2007/08. He believed the company would visit the Council and speak to the Senior Finance officers, including the Director of Finance.

The Director of Finance advised that the Council had not yet received formal notification that Robson Rhodes would take over the role of the Council's Auditor. She wanted the new external auditors to meet the Committee and this would be carried out in the new Municipal Year.

The Director of Finance stated that the new Auditors would probably carry out this role for approximately five years. Usually an Auditor would not remain at one place for more than ten years. The Council was not able to change the external Auditor.

The Chair asked the Director of Finance to inform him when the new Auditor was in place.

In response to a Member's question, the Audit Manager explained that previously the service had worked to a three or five year plan. However, it was now recognised that a five year plan was not relevant. The service now concentrated on an annual plan although he had a list of items that the team could review over a five year period.

The Committee received a report of the Audit Manager including the initial action plan that had been drawn up in response to the recommendations contained in Zurich Municipal's report on risk management arrangements within the Council. The Audit Manager stated that he hoped that at the next meeting he would be able to report back to the Committee on specific actions that had taken place.

Members felt the action plan would be extremely useful and help them to see that the Council was following through on the required action.

The Committee received a report of the Audit Manager including the Benefit Fraud Inspectorate's (BFI) 'Inspection of Security' report. It also included the 2007/2008 Fraud Investigation Team's Business Plan and Action Plan, which had been drawn up in response to the BFI report. The Audit Manager explained that much of the emphasis of the report had been placed on fraud and was fairly critical.

A Member asked if the officer could explain in more detail about the Council's inability to produce management information as referred to in his report.

The Audit Manager explained that this referred to any performance information. A new case management system had been ordered and was due to be installed at the end of the week.

The Director of Finance informed Members that the previous system had relied on part of the benefit programme and then manual input. The purpose built system would stop this in the future.

The Audit Manager advised that the system would enable automatic logging of referrals and there would be no requirement for any further manual processes. It was intended for the system to go 'live' in three weeks. He was aware of two members of staff who had previously used this particular programme and had found it to be extremely useful.

The Director of Finance informed the Committee that this particular programme was also used by the Department of Works and Pensions. The staff were looking forward to its introduction as they could see its benefits. She stated that one of the problems with manual systems was the difficulty in collating information as it could be recorded in different ways.

A Member stated he was extremely concerned about the report and that returns had not been validated. He felt this would not be beneficial when the Comprehensive Performance Assessment (CPA) was carried out. He was concerned that benefit payments and benefit fraud were now in two different departments and felt it was possible things could be missed. He believed a lot of the failings were with the operation of the benefit system. He wanted to know more details about the actions that would be taken in this area to improve.

In response to a Member's question about sharing information, the Audit Manager confirmed that information was shared through the National Fraud Initiative exercise. This covered benefit payments, rent, payroll and pensions and was being extended to include other areas such as hackney carriage licence information.

Another Member stated he was concerned about the report. He felt that it was possible that a Data Administrator needed to be employed who would be responsible for looking at data and checking for matches.

The Chair advised that the Portfolio Holder responsible for Financial Services and Revenues and Benefits was in another meeting. The Committee agreed to adjourn the meeting so that the Portfolio Holder could be invited to respond to the Members' concerns.

The Chair asked the Portfolio Holder if he could explain to the Committee what he intended to do about the comments in the report and the actions that would be taken.

The Portfolio Holder stated that he had regularly discussed the issues at the Head of Service's quarterly reviews. He informed Members that the report was a snapshot of the service at a particular time. A number of changes had taken place following the Inspector's findings, even whilst on site. The Benefit Fraud service had been transferred to Internal Audit in order to separate it from the Benefit section. He felt the Council and the department had responded to the Inspector's criticisms.

The Chair stated that it was important the new system was right and asked how this report would look to the CPA Inspectors.

The Director of Finance informed the Committee that at the time of the inspection the service had been without a manager. If the manager had been in place at the time of the visit, it was possible some of the Inspector's concerns would not have arisen. If an Inspector was not confident in a service, they would often look into things much deeper. However, it had revealed that there had been too much reliance put on the head of the team. As far as senior officers were aware the service had been performing correctly and statistics had been provided when requested. She commented that the report did not emphasise good aspects of the service. When the Inspector had spoken to officers they had advised that there were good parts, but these had not been included in the written report as its focus was on areas for improvement.

With regard to the CPA inspection, the Director of Finance informed Members that it was important to show that the authority had stopped being defensive and acknowledged any issues and developed action plans to resolve them. A number of actions had taken place prior to the Council receiving the BFI written report. This showed that the Council dealt with criticism and responded promptly to any issues. She felt it was important that the benefit assessment and payment role was separate from the fraud team. The Council's role was to ensure that those people entitled to benefit received it.

A Member stated his main concern was the lack of management control. He asked the Portfolio Holder whether he felt there was the quality within management to turn the service around.

The Portfolio Holder said that he recognised the criticism in the report. It was possible to see in the action plan that the recommendations had been acted on straight away. It was important not to draw conclusions about one part of the service based on a review about a different part of it. He informed Members that that the Benefit Service's key performance indicators had taken a massive leap forward. Previously the service had been a poor performer, but it was now in the top 50% of authorities and near the top quartile in relation to 'change of circumstances'. The Council had demonstrated changes and improvement. With regard to fraud investigations, a few years ago there had been very few prosecutions, but prosecutions had now become more frequent. The report had criticised the management of cases and that likely prosecutions were not targeted. They took too long to complete and there were too many investigations in progress at one time.

The Member suggested that some of the fraud performance indicators could not be validated and were performing very poorly.

The Portfolio Holder advised that performance indicators were audited by the District Auditor to ensure they were correct. The external auditor had not qualified the indicators referred to.

The Director of Finance advised that the BFI report covered more than the Best Value performance indicators and not all of the information would have been audited.

The Portfolio Holder said it was important not to have a 'blame culture'. He stated that things had improved and procedures needed to be carried out. The problems should not be excused but addressed.

A Member stated the report had caused serious concerns and it was necessary to accept there had been significant flaws. He asked the Portfolio Holder to report the Committee's concerns to the manager.

The Portfolio Holder advised that actions had been carried out not just in response to the written report, but to the initial feedback as well. He explained that the Audit Committee would be able to check the recommendations had been carried out. He did not feel the authority was belittling the report or playing down the importance of addressing the conclusions.

The Director of Finance informed the Committee that the current Interim Manager was very experienced and was proactively putting the actions into practice. The department needed to find the equivalent qualities in a permanent manager.

The Audit Manager informed the Committee that the team would seek to prioritise cases that were referred to them. They would concentrate on those cases that were a high priority. The new system would help with this and would be more effective, using a matrix setting out the criteria to be used in prioritising cases for investigation.