Loading
The decisions as the council's minutes record them. A plain-language summary follows once it has been written.
RESOLVED that the Committee considered and commented on the Chief Internal Auditor’s Annual Report and overall opinion.
RESOLVED: that subject to the above, the Governance and Audit Committee Forward Work Programme be noted. RESOLVED: that subject to the above, the Governance and Audit Committee Forward Work Programme be noted.
Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Bobby Feeley.
The Chair, Lay Member David Stewart declared a personal interest as he was a recipient of a Clwyd Pension Fund Pension. Councillor Ellie Chard declared a personal interest as she was a recipient of a Clwyd Pension Fund Pension. She also informed the Committee, Councillor Carol Holliday and she were members of the Cefndy Working group mentioned in the papers. The Monitoring Officer said for transparency it was proper for Members to know but members were exempt from having to declare an interest. Lay Member, Nigel Rudd declared a personal interest as he was a member of the Conwy County Borough Council Governance.
There were no urgent items to raise.
The minutes of the Governance and Audit Committee held on 18 March 2026 were submitted. The Chair apologised for the delay in the publication of the minutes, advising that it had been due to unavoidable circumstances. He thanked officers for circulating the minutes in advance of the meeting. Given the delay in receiving the minutes, the Chair proposed that they be formally considered at the next meeting. He invited Members to raise any matters arising at this stage, and this approach was agreed. Matters Arising – Mr Nigel Rudd asked whether officers had received any further updates regarding the requirement for headteachers to be practising Catholics, following the previous discussion relating to Christ the Word Catholic School in Rhyl. Mr Rudd also reminded Members of the vacant Lay Member position on the Corporate Joint Committee and asked whether the Committee wished to consider making an appointment. The Chief Internal Auditor advised that Canon Law (sections 793–806) provided the Bishop with authority over Catholic schools. He further explained that sections 803–806 required Catholic doctrine and moral leadership within school leadership. The Catholic Bishops’ Conference required headteachers at Catholic schools to be practising Catholics in full communion with the Church. He confirmed that this requirement was lawful under the Equality Act 2010 as a genuine occupational requirement, supported by Department for Education guidance. The Monitoring Officer confirmed that he had contacted the lead authority of the Corporate Joint Committee (CJC), which had advised that it was initially approaching local authorities that had not yet made a nomination. Further correspondence had been issued; however, no response had been received to date. The Monitoring Officer also confirmed that he had written to the Public Services Ombudsman for Wales to express the Committee’s concerns regarding the categorisation of complaints. A response had been received acknowledging the Committee’s concerns; however, it confirmed that, in accordance with its criteria, direct correspondence would continue to be classified as complaints, even where they were premature and subsequently resolved locally. The Chair asked whether there had been any developments that would represent a significant departure from the position reported at the previous meeting. In response, the Head of Finance and Audit confirmed that officers had prioritised the completion of the 2023/24 Statement of Accounts. Work had continued collaboratively between Council accountants and Audit Wales, with a significant level of effort and commitment demonstrated by both parties to maintain progress. The Audit Wales representative supported these comments, confirming that work remained ongoing and that the level of collaboration with finance officers continued to be positive. The Chair requested an update regarding induction and training for newly appointed Lay Members. The Monitoring Officer confirmed that he would follow this up with Democratic Services and suggested that it would be more appropriate to arrange induction sessions following the appointment of the new Lay Member in May. Members NOTED the minutes and agreed to receive a copy in the June Governance and Audit Committee meeting for ratification.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED that the Committee considered and commented on the Chief Internal Auditor’s Annual Report and overall opinion.
The Lead Member for Finance introduced the previously circulated report. She explained that the report presented the Internal Audit Annual Report for 2025–2026, which provided the Chief Internal Auditor’s overall opinion on the adequacy and effectiveness of the Council’s framework of governance, risk management, and internal control during the year, informing the Annual Governance Statement. The Chief Internal Auditor’s opinion was that the Council’s governance, risk management, and internal control arrangements in the areas audited had continued to operate satisfactorily. Despite the challenges experienced throughout the year, the team had completed a higher number of reviews than in previous years. The Lead Member expressed her thanks to the Chief Internal Auditor and his team for their work during the year. The Chief Internal Auditor reiterated his appreciation for the dedication and hard work of the Internal Audit team, noting their efforts to deliver a significant programme of work during the period. He advised that the purpose of the annual report was to provide assurance to the Governance and Audit Committee and the Council that systems and controls were operating effectively and to highlight any issues identified during the financial year. Members were taken through the report, and the Chief Internal Auditor confirmed that he was able to provide an overall assurance opinion. He stated that only high and medium assurance ratings had been issued during the year. While the scope of audit work had been impacted by resource constraints and additional unplanned work, he confirmed that reasonable assurance could be provided and that no major weaknesses had been identified in the Council’s internal control systems. He congratulated the team on completing 41 reviews during the year, alongside their additional responsibilities. Members were informed that the Global Internal Audit Standards had been fully incorporated into internal audit work. A comprehensive review of documentation and processes had been undertaken to ensure compliance, and this work had now been completed. It was also reported that 76% of the planned audit work for the year had been delivered. The Chief Internal Auditor noted that the audit plan was designed to be challenging and that a number of operational pressures had impacted delivery. The issues relating to the Statement of Accounts had been referenced within the report. The Chief Internal Auditor emphasised the significant work undertaken by the Finance Team to address these complex matters. Members were assured that there had been regular communication between the Head of Finance, the Corporate Executive Team, the Governance and Audit Committee, and Internal Audit regarding progress. The Chief Internal Auditor highlighted that a vacancy equivalent to 1.18 full-time auditors had been maintained throughout the year. He noted that the team had responded positively to these pressures, with staff developing their skills and undertaking further training. Internal Audit had also continued to support services across the Council with National Fraud Initiative (NFI) work, completing approximately 75% of the planned data matching exercise for 2024/25, exceeding the original target of 50%. The remaining work was scheduled for completion in the first quarter of 2026/27. Internal Audit had continued to contribute to the Council’s counter‑fraud activity. However, it was reported that two actions raised by Audit Wales relating to counter fraud had not been completed by 31 March 2026 due to resource constraints. The Chief Internal Auditor confirmed that priority had been given to delivering the core audit plan and maintaining the assurance opinion. The Chair thanked the Chief Internal Auditor and the team for their work during the year, noting that the report was clear and comprehensive. He commented that the Internal Audit function was widely respected across the authority. The following matters were discussed in more detail: • Members congratulated the Internal Audit team on their achievements and recognised those who had successfully completed professional training and examinations. • The vacancy had remained unfilled due to budget constraints and limited capacity to support a new team member. It was reported that team development over the previous six months had improved capacity, and discussions had taken place with the Head of Finance regarding recruitment. • Members were advised that the Chief Internal Auditor and Principal Auditor would review the actions raised by Audit Wales in relation to counter fraud and associated policies. • The Principal Auditor attended a regional fraud panel where issues were discussed across authorities. While no formal shared audit service arrangements were in place, collaboration occurred through information sharing and professional discussions. • The Chair suggested that a separate report on counter‑fraud arrangements be presented to the Committee. • The Chief Internal Auditor confirmed that he had proposed allocating specific responsibility for counter‑fraud work within the Principal Auditor’s role. • It was clarified that discussions focused on the risk of fraud rather than confirmed instances of fraud within the authority. • Members requested that future reports include clearer explanations of assurance levels and alternative opinions. The Chief Internal Auditor agreed to include a key to explain assurance ratings. • Members were advised that special investigations were not solely conducted by Internal Audit and could involve other services. Provision was made within the audit plan to accommodate such work. • The Chief Internal Auditor recalled that approximately 60 audit days had been redirected in the previous year to support the rollout of the new waste service model as part of a corporate priority. • The audit plan was structured to include both planned and additional work and remained flexible to respond to emerging priorities. Regular reviews ensured appropriate coverage across all services. • Members were informed of the role of the Council’s Occupational Health Service, which provided independent advice to managers. The focus was on supporting employees’ capacity to work, and sickness entitlements were governed by NJC Green Book provisions. • Heads of Service had been informed of deferred audits, and discussions had taken place to determine whether these should be included in the following year’s audit plan. Members would review the 2026/27 audit plan at the June meeting. • The Chief Internal Auditor confirmed that the overall audit opinion would be affected if a number of low or no assurance reviews were identified during the year. The annual opinion was based on the cumulative results of all audits completed. • It was emphasised that each service within the authority had received at least one audit review during the year. • The assurance risk map incorporated both corporate and service risks. It was suggested that a training session be arranged to provide Members with further understanding of how the risk map aligned with risk registers. The Chair reiterated his thanks to the Chief Internal Auditor and his team for their work. RESOLVED that the Committee considered and commented on the Chief Internal Auditor’s Annual Report and overall opinion.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED: that subject to the above, the Governance and Audit Committee Forward Work Programme be noted. RESOLVED: that subject to the above, the Governance and Audit Committee Forward Work Programme be noted.
The Governance and Audit Committee’s Forward Work Programme (previously circulated) was presented for consideration. The Chair reminded members along with the Vice Chair, he met with the Chief Internal Auditor to manage the workload. At the June meeting the election of the Chair and Vice Chair would need to be included. Two key reports for the June meeting to be included where the Statement of Accounts update and the Internal Audit plan for 2026/27. The Chair reminded Members that the June committee meeting was looking heavy and advised Members to bring refreshments. He suggested that the Annual Governance and Audit Committee report be deferred to the July meeting. Members agreed to defer that report. Members were reminded that response to an Audit Wales thematic review on building blocks and capital planning in authorities in Wales. Members were awaiting officers’ response to that piece of work. The Chair suggested that be added to the FWP for July as an information item. The Chair asked if the meeting schedule of the Corporate Joint Committee dates could be added to the FWP to avoid any clashes of meetings. Members were guided through the future items. Lay Member Nigel Rudd stated that recently the Democratic Services Committee received the Boundary Commission report on the allowances payable to Councillors and Lay Members. It had been raised before the benefit of involvement of Lay Members in addition to Councillors as part of the consultation process. This last year he felt that involvement had not taken place. He asked if officers could ensure going forward Lay Members are included in the consultation process. The Monitoring Officer confirmed that he would pick up the comments with Democratic Servies how best those issues could be resolved. It was often due to the scheduling of meetings not marrying up. The Chair confirmed the proposed training areas Members requested. The Chair on behalf of the Committee offered his thanks to the Internal Audit Team for the session on the Global Internal Audit Standards. It was informative and beneficial for Members. The Chair reminded Members the Self-Assessment session had been scheduled for the upcoming Friday morning and urged Members to attend. He stressed the importance of the session. Following the separate meeting with Audit Wales last year the Chair reminded Members an action for a session on the role and function of Audit Wales was suggested. The Audit Wales representative confirmed he would take that away and speak to colleagues to hold a session following the induction of new Members. In addition, the Chair reminded Members of the scheduled meeting with the Chief Internal Auditor and Audit Wales on July 1st 2026. The meeting allowed Members to ask questions outside of the meeting on any subject matter. The Chief Internal Auditor informed Members the scheduled meeting to discuss Corporate Projects may have to be deferred as the audits of the projects was still ongoing. He felt it would be best to review the projects following the conclusion of the reviews. Lay Member Nigel Rudd informed the Committee that along with Lay Member Christine Weston he had attended a very beneficial Cyber resilience training session. He felt a training session in cyber resilience would be beneficial to all Members. The Monitoring officer confirmed CET received a quarterly report on cyber resilience across the authority. He confirmed he would discuss with the relevant officers how best to offer deliver a session. The Chair asked if the Monitoring Officer along with the Chief Internal Auditor could discuss who and how best to proceed with arranging a session on Cyber resilience for all Members. The Monitoring Officer confirmed he was happy for a report to be requested and suggested that session be held in private due to the nature of the discussion. RESOLVED: that subject to the above, the Governance and Audit Committee Forward Work Programme be noted. RESOLVED: that subject to the above, the Governance and Audit Committee Forward Work Programme be noted.
The Chair introduced for information the Treasury Management Update report 2025/26 quarter 4. Lay Member Nigel Rudd felt when looking at the Arlingclose context, he felt there needed to be a pickup on the Mark Carney speech, which in his opinion he felt was helpful. He reminded Members Internal Audit was due to conduct a review of Treasury Management, he stated he was content with the level of reporting of this subject and suggested it be deferred to alleviate some pressure on Internal Audit. The Chief Internal Auditor confirmed that if Treasury Management was reviewed this year, it would be a light touch review conducted over one day. The Chair stated he was happy with that arrangement. In response to Members comments the Head of Finance and Audit confirmed borrowing when it becomes payable was embedded in the authority. within the more reflective reports further information was provided to Members on the level of borrowing and the timing of repayments. The Chair suggested in a future Arlingclose session particular emphasis on prudential indicators and the reasons for them be shared with Members, offering some background to why they are in place. Members heard that money market funds for investment had not been used to date. The Head of Finance and Audit confirmed the set up took some time, officers were working through the necessary paperwork. The Capital Vision work had been included in the Service plan for 2026/27. Capacity issues due to the Statement of Accounts issues had delayed work in this area. The Head of Finance confirmed the vulnerability of the stock market had no direct impact on the authority. Any impact would be seen around the economic context around areas such as interest rates which would have an impact. Members NOTED the Treasury Management information report.
The Chair introduced the annual information report on the Terms of Reference for the Governance and Audit Committee. The Chair stated following the session on the Global Internal Audit Standards (GIAS) session, Member felt a review of the Terms of Reference against the GIAS to ascertain if any changes were required would be beneficial. The Chief Internal Auditor stated he had updated the Internal Audit elements but a review to ensure all elements followed the standards would be completed. He confirmed a report would be presented to the committee in September notifying of any change and updates. Lay Member Nigel Rudd asked if a consistent approach to version control on documents was ensured to reach a standard of excellence. Members NOTED the Terms of Reference for the Governance and Audit Committee information report.
The Chair introduced the information report on Denbighshire Council Performance Management Framework. The report provided an update on the framework and set out the responsibilities of the Governance and Audit Committee. The Chair felt the document was very useful and sought Members feedback on a separate session on the framework to discuss and ask questions to officers. There was no objection to a session on the Performance Management Framework being arranged. The Chair stressed the need for Members to fully understand the role and responsibility of Governance and Audit in relation to this framework. Members NOTED the Denbighshire Council Performance Management Framework information report and requested a separate meeting be scheduled to discuss the context in greater detail.
The Chair introduced for information the Corporate Risk Register paper. Councillor Gwyneth Ellis noted the risk appetite statement had not been reviewed for some time and given the volatile environment currently if that should be reviewed more often. She also asked if Members should be made more aware of how that risk appetite statement was applied to decisions made by officers and the authority. In response the Monitoring Officer confirmed the Risk appetite statement was presented and discussed along with the risk register to CET, SLT, Cabinet Briefing etc. He could not confirm the risk appetite statement was considered when every decision was being made but would take on board Councillor Ellis’ comments and feedback to officers. The Monitoring Officer confirmed there was a section on risks on the standard report template, guidance to report authors on what needs to be included in that section of the report could be circulated. Councillor Ellis raised the concern as a potential area of discussion for the committee on how risk appetite was applied to business of governance of the Council. The Monitoring Officer confirmed the next report on the Risk Register was due in November 2026, he suggested a section of the report could be included to address Councillor Ellis’ comments. Councillor James Elson informed Members that the Risk Register was scheduled for discussion at the next Performance Scrutiny Committee meeting. The Monitoring Officer confirmed projects such as the North Wales Hospital project would have its own risk register attached to the project, monitored by the board running that project. The Chair noted the report stated the Senior Leadership Team would attend a full day risk management workshop, supported with best practice guidance from our corporate insurance provider. He understood that Members and Lay Members would be invited to observe those workshops, which he thanked officers for extending the invitation. Members heard it had been agreed to conduct two in depth reviews of the Risk Register annually appose to numerous light touch reviews to allow for a full formal review. At any time, there was a need for the Risk Register to be amended or reviewed, officers could pick up any suggested changes. The Chair was pleased to note the reinstatement of the recruitment and retention risk raised by the Governance and Audit Committee. He added the risk may need to include the risk of resources for services in the future. The Monitoring Officer confirmed that risk had been reinstated following a recommendation by the committee, when the next the name may be amended slightly to include a broader description of the risk including resource. The Head of Finance stated the risks around setting a balanced budget needed a full and in-depth review in the new format. Risks 51 and 52 were good examples of where a new format would be beneficial to the reader. She felt currently too much information was being included and areas such as what is the risk, impact and mitigation of the individual risks was not being highlighted. Members stressed the need to get the level of information right. Members NOTED the Corporate Risk Register information report.
Councillors must say when they have a personal link to something being discussed, such as a job, a property or a family member. A prejudicial interest is one strong enough that the councillor usually leaves the room and takes no part.
Declarations are read from the minutes once they are published.
The council hasn't recorded attendance for this meeting.
Lists the council's current councillors only. Co-opted members, officers and former councillors aren't shown.