Gosport Borough Council Standards & Audit Sub Board Meeting

There were none

There were none

RESOLVED: That the mnutes of the meeting held on the 14 November 2024 were signed as a true and correct record.

There were none

There were none

Consideration was given to a report by the Data Protection Officer (DPO)informing the Sub Board of any Data Security Breaches and actions agreed/taken since the last meeting.

The DPO introduced his report by pointing out that the number of breaches were almost the same as last time and all fairly minor with none to be reported to the ICO.

Members were understanding of how easy it is to make such mistakes when busy and were pleased to hear that CMT had discussed the issue and were to produce tips to help minimise errors.

Members were advised that all breaches of data, either of an individual or organisation, would be contained within the report.

RESOLVED: That the Sub Board noted a report including the breaches that have arisen and the action determined by the Information Governance Group (IGG)

Consideration was given to a report by the Chief Internal Auditor (CIA) updating the Sub Board on the progress of the Audit Plan 2024/25.

The CIA introduced his report by advising members that although a couple of audits had been delayed due to sickness in the audit team, there were currently no concerns that the audit plan will not be completed to enable an audit opinion to be given in July 2025.

Members were advised that there are concerns in relation to the results of the IT audits contained in the report. This includes 1 full audit and 4 follow up audits where limited assurances opinions remain. No substantive testing could take place due to no information being provided by the service. In answer to a Member’s question regarding when those marked as High become Critical, the CIA advised focusing on completing the follow ups rather than the current colour.

The Head of IT advised members that the work had been progressed, but that the outcomes had not been updated on the audit tracker system.

Members were advised that the current situation, the resilience of the existing team and plans to strengthen in the future, have been discussed with the CEX and recruitment has begun to address the concerns voiced by the Sub Board at the last meeting.

The Chairman requested that the Head of IT brings a report to the next Sub Board meeting with an update and evidence that the follow ups requested have been completed. This will not be verified by internal audit, however, further follow ups on these areas will be scheduled for quarter 1 of the 2025/26 audit plan. If the issues are not resolved, the CIA noted that the risks could be raised to critical.

Members were advised that Hayley McKay had been appointed as Acting Head of Housing and recruitment of an Interim Asset Manager had been agreed. Further consideration of all roles within the service will be carried out to inform job descriptions.

RESOLVED: That the Standards and Audit Sub Board noted the progress of the Audit Plan 2024/25 from 1^st April to 13^th December 2024 as set out in appendix A.

Consideration was given to a report by the Chief Internal Auditor (CIA) presenting the strategic risk register for noting as at December 2024 in line with the Risk Management Policy.

The CIA introduced his report by reminding members that the register is brought to the Sub Board twice a year, and following comments at the last meeting had included additional columns for financial information and showing the trend in movement up and down the register. He explained that it is often difficult to identify single officers asresponsible, and often there is no end date for the risk so no clear timeline is appropriate.

In answer to a Member’s question, the CIA agreed to include the matrix within the report in future.

Officers advised that many options for a replacement depot had been considered, and the requirements have had to be reconsidered in light of the changes in waste collection. Work is ongoing and the Head of Waste will be bringing a report to Board. One Public Estate funding has not been withdrawn.

Members discussed the Criterion and officers advised that there was no change to the residual risk, due to gateway points being included in the contract and heads of terms and safeguards in place.

The CIA advised that the People’s Park does not need to be included as it not posing an imminent risk, but the devolution/local government risk will always need to be high. Certain aspects of this risk are the responsibility of the Borough Solicitor and Monitoring Officer.

RESOLVED: That the members noted the strategic risk register as set out in Appendix A