Biggleswade Town Council Accounts, 31st March 2011, Notice of objection - an update

Further to my post of 29th October 2011:

http://biggleswadeonline.blogspot.com/2011/10/biggleswade-town-council-accounts-year.html

I have now received a letter from the external Auditors dated 29th November 2011:

_______________________________________________________

Dear Mr Mason,

Thank you for your objection dated 22nd September 2011 into the accounts of Biggleswade Town Council for the years ended 31 March 2011 and 31 March 2012. We have now concluded our investigation and now write to you with our conclusions.

Your objection is that the council did not have a full and proper financial plan and feasibility study in place before it embarked on a major project. It did not wait for the full results of the consultation being undertaken as part of the Town Plan and it did not communicate its own plans. It did not consider all of the relevant facts and acted unlawfully ultra vires by applying for planning permission for the health centre.You have requested a public interest report and a Declaration under Section 17 of the Audit Commission Act that the item is contrary to law.

In undertaking our investigation, we can only investigate items of account and decisions relating to the years ended 31 March 2011 and 31 March 2012.

Year ended 31 March 2011

We have confirmed with the council that during the year to 31st March 2011 the council expensed £5,876.70 on costs relating to the plans for the Saxon Sports Village. We have reviewed the invoices relating to these costs and have concluded that all these costs are genuine cost relating to the project. We concur elements of these costs do relate to the building of a Health Centre, but none of the costs relate sole to the Health Centre. As a consequence we will be raising an issue with the audit to note this fact to the reader of the accounts. We do not believe it is appropriate to apply to the courts under Section 17 to declare the items contrary to law in this instance.

We have decided it would not be appropriate to issue a public interest report under Section 8 of the Audit Commission Act in this instance. We have considered it is not in the public interest to incur additional costs to the council in carrying out further investigations into the project as these would be likely to outweigh both the costs incurred during the year and any future public benefit which would be obtained by issuing such a report. The majority of the decisions made, as noted in the objection above, and expenditure are outside of our audit year so would not be reported on in relation to the year ended 31 March 2011.

Year ended 31 March 2012

We have confirmed with the council that up to the time of writing and during the year to 31 March 2012 the council incurred £3,213.30 on the appeal process for the planning application which was originally rejected. We have reviewed the invoice for these costs and the advice provided with regards to the decision to appeal. We have also viewed the minute confirming the decision to appeal. We are satisfied that the council have given due consideration to the reasons for the appeal, the processes and the costs. We are satisfied with the council's actions in this process. Whilst the plans submitted for appeal included the health centre, we again do not believe it appropriate in this instance to apply to the courts under Section 17 of the Audit Commission Act 1998 to declare the amounts contrary to law. The notes and recommendations being made in the opinion for the 2011 audit are deemed appropriate for purpose.

We have decided it would not be appropriate to issue a public interest report under Section 8 of the Audit Commission Act 1998 as there are no matters which need to be addressed in such a report as highlighted as part of our investigation.

We have now concluded our audit and will look to close the audit for the year ended 31 March 2011 shortly.

If you have any queries regarding the content of this letter, please do not hesitate to contact me.

______________________________________________________________

The auditors have concurred that there are costs relating to the building of a Health Centre and a note will be added to the accounts. It appears that since the costs incurred during the years in question (31 March 2011 and 31 March 2012) are relatively small and the majority of the decisions and expenditure were made in the previous year, for which the audit is closed, it is not cost effective or in the public interest to investigate further.

This project was discussed at the Public Land & Open Spaces Committee on 16th June 2009 and described as Sports, Leisure and Community Village, with no mention of a health centre. It later became know as Saxon Sports Village. I cannot find any mention of it again in any minutes prior to the Planning Application which was made in May 2010.

The bulk of the expenditure went through in year ended 31 March 2010, and I did not manage to get what I was told was a copy of the accounts, until February 2011, by which time it was too late to object to the accounts for that year.

It would appear the Auditors have had sight of "the minute confirming the decision to appeal" and they are satisfied that the council gave due consideration to the reasons for the appeal, the processes and the costs. This was discussed under Exempt Items ("pink papers") and are not available to the public.