Agenda item

Councillor Nick Colbert had submitted the following questions under Procedure Rule 10:-

Given the recent revelations regarding corruption in SSDC and the accusations of a cover-up please answer the following questions:

Q1: The Auditors uncovered a “mysterious” payment of £109,000 to an unnamed officer for reasons that seem to have been kept secret, who was that officer, why was so much public money given to them and was there a confidentiality clause imposed on that officer?

Q 2: Following the uncovering of corruption in SSDC an officer in Lufton, Chris Cooper, left the employ of the Council, was a confidentiality clause imposed on this officer and if so why?

Q 3: The Auditors went on to state: “the council failed to produce a complete and accurate set of financial statements for the year ending 31 March 2021. There was insufficient urgency given to responding to audit queries with other activities being prioritised. This was compounded by a lack of finance team capacity and poor quality working papers to support the figures in the financial statements in a number of areas. Management had not implemented several recommendation made a s a result of the 19/20 audit which were aimed at addressing weaknesses in processes….”

Given that the Portfolio Holder for that brief was Councillor Peter Seib and the audit costs alone to the South Somerset ratepayer has already increased by £100,000 and rising, why has Councillor Seib been left in position as Portfolio Holder given the damning report from the Auditors?

The Chairman advised that as Councillor Colbert was not present to ask his questions then a detailed written response would be provided.

Subsequent to the meeting, the following written response was provided:-

Q 1: The Auditors uncovered a “mysterious” payment of £109,000 to an unnamed officer for reasons that seem to have been kept secret, who was that officer, why was so much public money given to them and was there a confidentiality clause imposed on that officer?

Response from Cllr Seib - The transaction is a matter of public record and is set out in the council’s Statement of Accounts. It is reported in the public report relating to the Revenue Budget Outturn for 2020/2021 which was considered by Scrutiny Committee in their meeting on 29th June 2021 and District Executive at their meeting on 1st July 2021.

Reports and minutes of these meetings are on our public website.

The transaction was in relation to a Settlement Agreement which was in the interests of efficiency of service. The employer and employee agreed that they would keep the terms of the agreement confidential, as is normal in this type of agreement.

Q 2: Following the uncovering of corruption in SSDC an officer in Lufton, Chris Cooper, left the employ of the Council, was a confidentiality clause imposed on this officer and if so why?

Response from Cllr Seib - Mr Cooper resigned his position in November 2021. There was no confidentially agreement.

Although the Council uncovered areas where there had been serious misconduct following an independent investigation, there is no evidence to support a suggestion that the Council as a whole is corrupt.

Q 3: The Auditors went on to state:

“the council failed to produce a complete and accurate set of financial statements for the year ending 31 March 2021. There was insufficient urgency given to responding to audit queries with other activities being prioritised. This was compounded by a lack of finance team capacity and poor quality working papers to support the figures in the financial statements in a number of areas. Management had not implemented several recommendation made a s a result of the 19/20 audit which were aimed at addressing weaknesses in processes….”

Given that the portfolio holder for that brief was Councillor Peter Seib and the audit costs alone to the South Somerset ratepayer, has already increased by £100,000 and rising why has Councillor Seib been left in position as portfolio holder given the damming report from the Auditors?

Response from Cllr Keitch – Whilst draft statements were produced by the statutory deadline (of July 31st, 2021), an error was found which was highlighted to the external auditors after they were published. Full draft statements were published for 2021/22 by the statutory annual deadline of end of July 2022.  

Management agreed with Grant Thornton that the latter could start the 2020/21 audit in mid-June 2021 on the basis that we would have prepared the draft statements by the end of May 2021, before the statutory deadline of end of July 2021.  

That decision at the time was a robust and valid one. The Finance Team was almost fully staffed, relatively experienced, and stable. In addition, the prior year’s deadline agreed with the external auditors had been achieved, and therefore there was no reason to suppose the deadline would not be met.

An unexpected and significant amount of change then occurred in the finance team due to resignation/retirement, internal promotions, and new members of staff. This, together with significant work required for Local Government Reorganisation, resulted in delays to the audit process.

Cllr Seib has been fully engaged throughout the audit process and has ensured all improvements required have been actioned. In addition, our response to these issues has been scrutinised in detail by the Audit Committee and both they and Cllr Seib will continue to monitor progress against Auditor’s recommendations for the remainder of the financial year.