The Corporate Director
Resources and Financial Services Manager introduced the report to
Audit Committee Members on the Audit of Statement of Accounts
(SoA), which was in line with the
regular pattern of reporting on the Council’s financial
position. The Corporate Director
Resources also advised Audit Committee Members that there had been
a difference of opinion held between Peterborough City Council
(PCC) and external auditors PwC in respect of the Council’s
valuation and accounting treatment for schools. Members of the Audit Committee also received an
amendment to the statement of accounts report, which had been
circulated prior to the meeting and attached at appendix one of
these minutes.
Julian Rickett from (PWC), also highlighted a number of
key points for Members attention in relation to the Audit of
Statement of accounts report.
Key points highlighted
included:
- Report to those
charged with governance;
- The majority of
outstanding matters had been satisfactorily resolved and ahead of
deadlines, however, there were some outstanding issues in relation
to bank loans and two minor queries in relation to employees
salary;
- There had been some
changes made in relation to risk assessments for ISAs for property,
plant and equipment. This was a
national approach by PwC;
- Significant risks
audit and accounting matters such as valuation of property, plant
and equipment. It was appreciated by
PwC that different valuers applied a
different approach;
- Land valuations were
within an acceptable range;
- School valuation
treatment;
- Pension liability and
the actuary valuation;
- Corrected and
uncorrected misstatements in the accounts, which PwC had credited
the PCC Finance Team for;
- Appropriate treatment
of school title deeds;
- Value for money of
service for the work undertaken by PwC;
- Risk of fraud;
and
- PwC fees and expected
outturn.
The Corporate Director
Resources and Financial Services Manager and Julian Rickett (PwC), responded to comments and questions
raised by Members. A summary of responses included:
- The £6,669 fee
for assessing the accounting treatment of schools had related to the additional work undertaken by
PwC which followed CIPFA rulings and did not cover the audit of
individual schools;
- Each school asset in
relation to the different types of schools such as Local Authority
(LA) or foundation required a different audit
treatment;
- The pension liability
amount would always be audited regardless of the size of the figure
and PwC’s responsibility would be to ensure that it was
outlined correctly within the statement of accounts;
- PwC would comment on
the property, plant and equipment outlined within the statement of
accounts as it was such a large figure within PCC’s financial
accounts;
- PwC would comment on
the budget gap in terms of a conclusion for the delivery of value
for money in relation to securing financial resilience;
- The higher PCC
increased payments into pension funds to remove the gap, the wider
the budget deficit would be within the current financial
year;
- PCC relied on the
tri-annual valuation of the pension fund set by the actuary to
determine PCCs financial commitments for pensions;
- There had been a pot
of money, assets and investments to help meet the future pension
liabilities gap, however, the funds were not enough to cover the
full obligation;
- The Local Authority
pension scheme had been nationally defined by the Government and
was not something that could be changed at a local
level;
- The LA pension scheme
had been changed by the Government over the years in terms of when
staff could retire and the level of contributions they may wish to
pay in;
- It was anticipated
that there would be further changes to the LA pension scheme made
by the Government in future;
- The next pension
valuation from the actuary was due in 2017/2018, which would feed
into the Medium Term Financial Plan process;
- Councillor Seaton the
Cabinet Member for Resources commented that the pension deficit was
shared between PCC and the County Council and that the deficit was
a fairly a common issue across all Councils;
- The pension liability amount of £75.3m which was outlined
within the SoA report on page
30, had demonstrated that the figure
was beneficial due to the gain of £19m from the previous
year’s actuary valuation;
- The methods used to work out the pension figure were met by
taking into account mortality rate and investments, which were
variable and would drive the deficit figure to escalate;
and
- The change in range of discounting the pension scheme
liabilities had impacted the Local Authority from 4.3% in previous
year to 3.2% when predicting the pension amount payable in the
future.
The
Committee:
- Received and approved the “Report to those charged with
governance (ISA260) 2014/15 Audit” from
PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC), the Council’s external
auditors; and
- Received and approved the audited Statement of Accounts
2014/15.