The Committee is asked to note any apologies for absence and substitutions received from Members.

There were no apologies for absence nor substitutions made on this occasion.

The Democratic Services Manager (Ian Ford) informed the meeting that Councillor Bray had been recently appointed as a member of the Committee in the stead of Councillor Keteca. Unfortunately, Councillor Bray had not yet been able to receive the necessary training required under Council Procedure Rule 33.3 that would have enabled Councillor Bray to sit as a member of the Audit Committee. Councillor Bray therefore sat in the public gallery for the duration of this meeting.

To confirm and sign as a correct record, the minutes of the last meeting of the Committee, held on Thursday 25 June 2026.

It was move by Councillor Sudra, seconded by Councillor Fairley and:-

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on Thursday, 25 June 2026 be approved as a correct record and be signed by the Chairman.

Members are invited to declare any Disclosable Pecuniary Interests, Other Registrable Interests or Non-Registrable Interests, and the nature of them, in relation to any item on the agenda.

There were no declarations of interest made by Councillors in relation to any item on the agenda for this meeting.

Subject to providing two working days’ notice, a Member of the Committee may ask the Chairman of the Committee a question on any matter in relation to which the Council has powers or duties which affect the Tendring District and which falls within the terms of reference of the Committee.

On this occasion no Councillor had submitted notice of a question pursuant to Council Procedure Rule 38.

To provide a periodic report on the Internal Audit function for the period June 2026 – September 2026, bi-annual update on Counter-Fraud arrangements and to provide an update on the Internal Audit Charter for approval by the Audit Committee as required by the professional standards.

The Committee considered a periodic report on the Internal Audit function for the period June to September 2026, the bi-annual update on Counter-Fraud arrangements and which provided an update on the Internal Audit Charter for approval by the Committee as required by the professional standards.

Internal Audit Progress 2026/27

It was reported that five audits had been completed since the last meeting Committee held in June 2026. All had received a satisfactory level of overall assurance of ‘Adequate Assurance’ or ‘Substantial Assurance’.

A further 10 audits from the 2026/27 Internal Audit Plan had been allocated and seven of those were currently at the fieldwork phase.

Members were made aware that Officers were currently undertaking the ‘Key Systems’ phase of the audit plan, which encompassed a review of the Council’s financial and core service systems and processes. Those established systems were fundamental to the effective delivery of the Council’s day-to-day operations. Although no significant issues were anticipated, given that those areas had historically been well managed, it remained essential to obtain regular assurance that the relevant systems and processes continued to operate effectively and were supported by appropriate controls.

It was noted that counter-fraud and compliance work was ongoing in this period along with GDPR priorities particularly relating to data sharing agreements, Freedom of Information Requests and Subject Access Requests.

Management Response to Internal Audit Findings

Members were aware that there were processes in place to track the actions taken regarding findings raised in Internal Audit reports and to seek assurance that appropriate corrective action had been taken. Where appropriate, follow up audits were arranged to revisit significant issues identified after an appropriate time.

The number of high severity issues outstanding was as follows:-

The Committee recalled that it had requested more detail on the outstanding actions within the above table and on previous significant findings as a matter of context. Appendix B to the report (A.2) contained a summary of those findings and the agreed actions as well as including the service response and an internal audit status. This would become a regular appendix of the periodic progress reports going forwards.

Internal Audit Charter

Members were reminded that a requirement of the Global Internal Audit Standards (GIAS) was for the Audit Committee to review and approve the Internal Audit Charter on an annual basis. The Charter had been last updated and approved in September 2025.

The Committee was informed that there had been no changes to the Global Internal Audit Standards since the Charter had been last approved. Consequently, there was no requirement to amend the Internal Audit Charter at this time. The Internal Audit team continued to operate in accordance with the Charter by maintaining its independence and objectivity, delivering the approved risk-based audit plan, applying the required professional standards and reporting its activities, findings and assurance outcomes to senior management and the Audit Committee.

Members were reminded that compliance  ...  view the full minutes text for item 14.

To present for consideration the External Auditor’s Interim Annual Report for the year ended 31 March 2026.

The Committee had before it a report of the Corporate Director (Finance & IT)) (A.1) which presented for its consideration the External Auditor’s Interim Annual Report for the year ended 31 March 2026.

Members were aware that during the year, several reports were issued by the Council’s External Auditor as part of their work associated with the Statement of Accounts and the review of the Council’s arrangements to secure value for money.

The first such report had been their Audit Plan and Strategy that had been presented to the Committee in June 2026. That report had set out the various elements of the work that the External Auditor planned on undertaking in respect of the year ending 31 March 2026 and had included their value for money risk assessment / approach that had been set against the following three key elements:

1.  Financial Sustainability;

2.  Governance; and

3.  Improving economy, efficiency and effectiveness.

The Committee was made aware that, ordinarily this would have been presented alongside the outcome of their work on the Council’s Statement of Accounts within their final annual report for the year, but due to the backstop date arrangements introduced by the Government in response to the national recovery from previous audit delays, they were required to publish their value for money commentary for 2025/26 by 30 November 2026.

It was reported that the External Auditor would continue their work associated with the wider Statement of Accounts review, with the aim of reporting their findings within a final annual report for the year by the backstop date for the publication of the audited accounts, which for 2025/26 was 31 January 2027.

To meet the 30 November 2026 deadline associated with reporting the value for money issues highlighted above, the External Auditor had issued an interim Annual Report, which set out the outcome of their work to date.

As in the previous year, the outcome had been welcomed, with no significant risks identified in relation to the Council’s value for money arrangements across the three key areas highlighted above.

The Committee was advised that the External Auditor had revisited the recommendations they had made in the previous year within the attached interim report. The Council’s on-going responses had now either been put in place or remained ongoing, which were reported separately to the Audit Committee as part of providing the necessary assurances.

Members were informed that the External Auditor had made two recommendations within their report, which also included the Council’s management responses. Updates on those would be provided to the Committee as part of their on-going work programme.

The Committee acknowledged that the External Auditor was still undertaking the necessary activities associated with the Council’s Statement of Accounts for 2025/26, with the outcomes planned to be presented to the Committee at their next scheduled meeting in January 2027. Their ongoing work could identify issues that impacted on their current value for money commentary and, if that was the case, an update would be reported within the External Auditor’s  ...  view the full minutes text for item 15.

To report to the Audit Committee improvements in the way that delegated planning decisions are made and recorded that have been implemented by the Planning Service following a thorough investigation carried out by the Council’s Monitoring Officer into a formal complaint from a resident.

The Committee considered a report of the Corporate Director (Planning and Community) (A.3) that informed them of improvements in the way that delegated planning decisions were made and recorded that had been implemented by the Planning Service following a thorough investigation carried out by the Council’s Monitoring Officer into a formal complaint from a resident.

Members were reminded that the discharge of the Town and Country Planning & Development Control functions (including the determination of planning applications) were non-executive functions which, at Tendring District Council, were delegated from Full Council to the Planning Committee and thereafter delegated to Officers on the terms set out within the constitution and an associated scheme of delegation and protocols. It was however noted that those arrangements were set to change from 31 October 2026 following the introduction of new regulations and a standard national scheme of delegation, which required changes to the Constitution that would be the subject of a report to Full Council on 13 October 2026.

It was reported that, in May and June 2026, Stage 1 and Stage 2 complaints had been made about the Council by a Tendring resident in respect of the handling of a planning enforcement case and retrospective planning application in the District. Among the issues raised, the complainant had questioned if the Council had properly and lawfully administered the decision-making process in the determination and approval of the retrospective application – questioning whether certain Officers had the delegated authority to make decisions. The complainant had also raised concerns over the circumstances in which enforcement could be resolved through the invitation of a retrospective planning application and how that decision-making was made transparent and clearer to the public. 

Although the Monitoring Officer’s thorough investigation into the resident’s complaint at Stage 2 of the process had not concluded that there had been any unlawful decision making or maladministration, it had identified administrative errors and areas where the Council could improve its processes and procedures to demonstrate greater assurance around the correct implementation of Officers’ delegated powers in the determination of planning-related applications and associated decision making. Whilst those findings and recommendations had arisen as the result of an internal investigation carried out by the Monitoring Officers as opposed to an external investigation, the latter of which required a report to the Audit Committee, Officers had considered it appropriate to bring a report to the Committee in the spirit of its terms of reference, on the basis of there being learning points and principles around the accuracy and transparency of decision making that were applicable to all services across the Council. 

The Committee was informed that notable learning points from the investigation included the need for the Council to be clear in its reports and documentation that the notice of a planning decision was separate from the decision itself and that the ‘decision-maker’ in respect of planning applications and other planning decisions, when not the Planning Committee, was the Officer checking and signing off the relevant delegated report. There had  ...  view the full minutes text for item 16.

To report on the recent Building Safety Regulator’s (BSR) audit of the Council’s Building Control function and to give an update following Members’ questions and resolution from the meeting of the Audit Committee held on 26 March 2026.

Further to minute 31 (26.3.26), the Committee received an update on the recent Building Safety Regulator (BSR) audit of the Council’s Building Control function.

It was reported that the first ever BSR review had been completed, and that this Council had no outstanding matters to address following changes and updates already carried out during that audit. 

It was confirmed that almost a year on that all control arrangements were fully operational and embedded without any issues occurring.  The service continued to grow and develop accounting for all policy and legalisation requirements/changes. The Building Safety Levy was the latest requirement that started in October.

The service now regularly completed required returns for the Building Safety Regulator and LABC (Local Authority Building Control).

No further BSR audit had been proposed by the Building Safety Regulator, and it was unlikely for a few years given their workload and number of authorities to cover. However, audit requirements from central government and membership of LABC were being complied with and completed regularly. 

The following learning could be shared with other Council department managers:-

Key Learning Points for Other Council Departmental Managers

1. Document what you do, not just what you know

-   Effective practices and processes must be formally documented, even where they were well understood by staff.

-   Auditors would assess documented evidence, not assumptions or established custom and practice.

-   Ensure policies, procedures, decision-making criteria, escalation routes and quality assurance arrangements were clearly recorded and accessible.

2. Regulatory expectations evolve

-   Compliance requirements might not always be fully clear until tested through audit or inspection.  This had been proven in Building Control’s need to define for itself the definition of closure of files.

-   Regulators might apply interpretations that went beyond an authority's understanding of statutory requirements.

-   Services should regularly review guidance and engage with sector peers to identify emerging expectations. This Council’s close working relationship with a number of neighbouring authorities had proven useful and helpful for this purpose.

3. Governance matters as much as operational performance

-   A service could be delivering good outcomes and still receive negative findings if governance arrangements were not sufficiently evidenced.

-   Audit scrutiny often focused on assurance, oversight and record-keeping rather than service outcomes alone.

4. Outsourcing does not outsource accountability

-   The Council remained responsible for compliance when work was undertaken by partners, consultants or other authorities.  Whilst this point had been known for the Building Control Audit the extent evidence from the outsourced body to prove compliance had been higher than expected despite being correct.

-   Formal oversight, quality checks and assurance arrangements should be in place for all outsourced services.

-   Expectations and responsibilities should be clearly documented, and this included the need for an expectations document specifically to capture a wide range of those issues being created to ensure it was evidenced and defined.

-   Do not assume that because another public body or specialist provider was undertaking work, that all regulatory requirements were automatically being met.

-   Verification and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 17.

(REPORT IS “TO FOLLOW”)

To present for consideration and approval, a revised approach to the Corporate Assurance and Risk Management Framework (that incorporates a corporate assurance and risk register).

The Audit Committee considered a report (A.5) that presented for its consideration and approval, a revised approach to the Corporate Assurance and Risk Management Framework (that incorporated a Corporate Assurance and Risk Register).

It was reported that over the last 18 months, a range of activities had been undertaken to strengthen the Council’s Corporate Assurance and Risk Management Framework, including externally facilitated training, workshops that had been led / attended by Audit Committee Members and Senior Officers, and a separate review by the Council’s Management Team.

Timely updates had been provided to the Audit Committee over the above mentioned period, which had included commentary of the existing risk framework and register as necessary.

The Committee was informed that the outcome from the various activities highlighted above was a new Corporate Assurance and Risk Management Framework, incorporating a Corporate Assurance and Risk Register.

As previously discussed and agreed, the approach retained elements of a more traditional risk register style approach, but within a wider assurance and governance framework, that also sought to provide clearer links to other relevant Council activities etc.

The revised approach aimed to provide the Committee with high-level assurance across key associated elements and to assist the Committee in obtaining a clearer picture in one place, that in turn would be supported by regular updates during the year.

The new framework also contained an embedded action plan capturing matters identified during the review highlighted earlier. Further appendices within the attached framework covered the ‘scoring methodology’ and the continuation of a draft format for Departmental and Operational Risk Registers.

Although the framework represented the position to date, further development opportunities would be explored through its practical implementation and embedding within the Council.

As highlighted within the report’s recommendations, the Committee was asked to consider and approve the proposed framework, along with requesting Officers to continue progressing activities and actions set out in the report and attachments. Further updates would therefore be provided to the Committee as part of its regular six-monthly review ‘cycle’.

The Committee’s Independent Person (Sue Gallone) put forward the following comments and suggestions to be taken forward within the next scheduled six-monthly Assurance and Risk Framework review:-

·      bit surprised to see the risk register as part of the risk management framework as the risk register is more dynamic and the framework is there as a guide going forward but that’s something that can be easily split out later on if it does not work for the Council;

·      the Corporate Assurance / Risk Register Summary within the framework is helpful as the risk register itself is very detailed and long but wondered if it might be worthwhile adding to that summary a very short narrative paragraph to describe the risk and explain where the Council is going in terms of managing that risk without going into too much detail;

·      risk register itself is very detailed, going forward it might be worth seeing how that could be condensed to make it more readable and usable;

·      could add to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 18.

To present to the Committee the progress on outstanding actions identified by the Committee along with general updates on other issues that fall within the responsibilities of the Committee.

Members considered a report (A.6) which updated them on the progress on outstanding actions identified by the Committee along with general updates on other issues that fell within the responsibilities of the Committee.

It was reported that the Table of Outstanding Issues had been reviewed and updated since it had been last considered by the Committee in June 2026. There were three main ongoing elements to this report as follows:

1) Updates against general items raised by the Committee – Appendix A

2) Updates against the 2025/26 Annual Governance Statement Action Plan – Appendix B

3) Updates against recommendations made by the External Auditor –

In terms of items 1 and 3 above, there were no significant issues to raise, with actions remaining in progress or further details set out below.

In respect of the 2025/26 Annual Governance Statement Action Plan, although this remained subject to the Committee’s final approval later in the year once the work of the External Auditor had been completed, for timely and practical reasons the version currently published at the end of June 2026 alongside the Unaudited Statement of Accounts presented the most up to date position for the Committee’s consideration.  Similarly to last year, this approach enabled the actions and associated updates to be considered as early as possible within the Committee’s annual work programme.  Appendix B therefore included outstanding items from last year’s Annual Governance Statement alongside new items for the year.  There were no significant issues to highlight at the present time and actions and activities remained on-going.

In terms of progressing and monitoring recommendations emerging from the work of the External Auditor, several items had been presented as part of the overall outcome from their work on the Council’s 2025/26 Statement of Accounts that had been considered by the Committee on 19 February 2026.  The items identified were broadly a continuation of previous recommendations which remained subject to on-going activities to fully address any outstanding issues. The External Auditor’s most recent report had been considered earlier on in the meeting, which had largely superseded / complemented the existing outstanding items, which would therefore form part of future reports to the Committee.

Review of the Effectiveness of the Audit Committee

It was reported that, following ongoing reviews, including a recent facilitated session with Members, outcomes and conclusions remained subject to being drawn together for presenting to the Committee. As previously highlighted, this had provided a timely opportunity to continue to maximise the input from various stakeholders including Members of the Committee, ahead of reporting the outcomes to the January 2027 meeting of the Committee.

Risk Management Review

Following the update presented to the June 2026 meeting of the Committee, a separate detailed report had been considered earlier on in the meeting.

Local Audit Reform

Members were made aware that following publication of the Government’s response to the consultation in April 2025, the Government had subsequently published “Implementing the New Local Audit System: A Transition Plan” in November 2025.  The plan had provided  ...  view the full minutes text for item 19.