Agenda and draft minutes

To receive apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors James Cantwell and David Scoot.

To receive declarations of interests in respect of any item on the agenda.

No declarations of interest were made.

To sign and confirm the minutes of the last meeting.

The minutes of the meeting held on 17^th November 2025 were agreed and signed by the Chairman.

To note the actions from the previous meeting.

The action sheet from the meeting held on 17^th November 2025 had been circulated with the agenda; no outstanding actions were reported.

A clarification regarding thresholds in the Contract Procedure Rules, raised at the previous meeting, had been addressed by a written response following Full Council.

To answer any written questions received from members of the public no later than 5 p.m. two clear working days prior to the meeting – for this meeting the deadline is 5 p.m. on Wednesday 14 January 2026.

No public questions were received.

(A report by John Medler, Assistant Director – Governance & Monitoring Officer)

The Committee received the Personal Skills Audit, presented by the Scrutiny & Policy Officer, as a key component of its annual programme of governance improvement. Members were reminded that the Audit had originated from the Committee’s earlier self?assessment exercise, during which the need for a structured assessment of Members’ knowledge and competencies had been identified. The Audit was designed to support the Committee in meeting the expectations set out in the CIPFA Audit Committee Knowledge and Skills Framework, ensuring that Members collectively possessed the required level of understanding across core areas including governance, financial management, internal and external audit, risk management and treasury management.

The Committee was informed that the Skills Audit would capture a broad range of transferable skills and professional experience, recognising that Members often brought significant knowledge from outside the Council which could enhance assurance activity. The Audit would feed into the Committee’s next formal self?assessment later in 2026, helping to identify areas where further training, development or officer support might be required.

Members were advised that although paper copies were available, the Audit would primarily be provided via an online survey circulated after the meeting. The Chairman requested that Members complete the Audit following the meeting so that the Committee could focus on the scheduled agenda.

The Committee undertook a detailed and reflective discussion of the purpose, scope and value of the Skills Audit. Members acknowledged the importance of ensuring that the Committee, given its statutory and regulatory responsibilities, maintained a high level of collective competency. The Committee routinely considered extensive and technical documentation, often including audit assurance reports, treasury indicators, governance updates, and analyses of complex financial or regulatory issues. Members noted that this level of complexity made it essential for the Committee to regularly assess whether its skill base remained current and sufficiently broad to scrutinise such material effectively.

The Committee discussed the structure of the Audit, noting that it captured both core audit?related knowledge (such as governance frameworks, risk management principles, internal audit methodology and financial reporting standards) and wider skills such as communication, analytical reasoning, commercial understanding, IT literacy, negotiation and leadership. Members welcomed this holistic approach, recognising that broader competencies often strengthened the quality of questioning, challenge and oversight provided during meetings.

During discussion, Members raised concerns regarding the volume and technicality of reports routinely presented to the Committee. It was noted that many documents, particularly those originating from CIPFA-based frameworks, contained specialist terminology, acronyms and complex concepts. Members emphasised the importance of ensuring that all Committee papers used plain English wherever possible and included clear glossaries where technical language could not be avoided. This, Members felt, would support newer Members, reduce potential barriers to participation, and ensure that all Members were able to fully engage with the material. Officers confirmed that this feedback would be reflected in future report preparation.

Members observed that not all councillors felt able or confident to serve on the Audit & Governance Committee due to the perceived heavy workload and the depth of understanding  ...  view the full minutes text for item 47.

(A report by Mark Harrison, Audit Manager – Lincolnshire County Council)

The Committee received the Internal Audit Progress Report for the 2025/26 year presented, by the Audit Manager, as the second interim update. Members were reminded that internal audit activity provided independent assurance on the effectiveness of governance, risk management, internal control arrangements and key financial systems across the Council.

The Audit Manager reported that substantial audit work had been completed since the previous update, with notable reviews covering Health & Safety Actions Implementation, PSPS Contract Management, Leisure Services Procurement, Section 106, and Funds & Grants Administration. The Committee noted that, following intervention by the new Section 151 Officer, all outstanding post?audit feedback questionnaires had been submitted, achieving a 100% completion rate. This represented a significant improvement on earlier performance and ensured that the audit team received full feedback from services to support continuous improvement.

The Committee also received an update on audits still in progress, audits at draft?report stage awaiting management responses, and the status of overdue and completed management actions. Overall plan delivery remained on schedule, with all work expected to be completed within the financial year.

The Committee undertook a detailed examination of the report. Members reviewed progress against the approved Internal Audit Plan and examined the assurance ratings, noting where findings indicated areas requiring strengthened controls.

A key area of focus was the Identification and Monitoring of Savings audit. Members were reminded that during the earlier review, Internal Audit was unable to confirm sufficient control arrangements due to gaps in processes at that time. A revised set of processes had since been introduced by management, and the Committee noted that the audit was being redone from the beginning, with the new methodology now in fieldwork stage. Members agreed that completing this repeat review was essential to provide assurance over the robustness of the Council’s savings delivery framework.

The Committee also examined audits at draft?report stage, noting that responses remained overdue for the Funds & Grants Administration and Planning review, despite a closure meeting having taken place in November. It was confirmed that this remained under follow?up and would be revisited in Quarter 4. Members stressed the importance of timely management responses to ensure the audit cycle remained efficient and assurance outcomes were delivered promptly.

The Committee further discussed the findings arising from the PSPS Contract Management audit. Members noted that although governance arrangements were broadly adequate, some internal control improvements had been identified, including the need for a check on whether councillor appointments to PSPS Board roles had been properly declared in published interests. The Committee requested that this be confirmed and reported back through the management action process.

During scrutiny of the Section 106 audit, the Committee noted that although allocation and monitoring processes were largely sound, the statutory deadline for publication of the Infrastructure Funding Statement had been missed earlier in the year and would now be addressed through management actions. The Committee expressed the importance of ensuring statutory deadlines were observed, particularly where financial transparency was a legal requirement.

The Committee also considered  ...  view the full minutes text for item 48.

(A report by Russel Stone, Director of Finance (S151 Officer))

The Committee received the suite of draft Treasury Management documents for the 2026/27 financial year, comprising the Treasury Management Policy Statement, Treasury Management Strategy Statement, Minimum Revenue Provision (MRP) Policy Statement and the Annual Investment Strategy. These documents were presented, by the Treasury and Investment Manager (PSPSL), as part of the Council’s annual cycle of financial governance and pre?decision scrutiny.

It was explained that the documents had been prepared in accordance with the CIPFA Prudential Code and the CIPFA Treasury Management Code, and that they formed a key component of the Council’s overall financial framework, governing the management of borrowing, investments, cashflow, and financial risk. Members were reminded that the papers were being presented in draft form pending completion of the wider budget setting process, after which Cabinet and Full Council would consider the finalised versions.

The Committee was informed that the Treasury Management Policy Statement itself remained unchanged from the previous year. The focus of this annual review was therefore on the Strategy, which detailed how the Council planned to manage its borrowing requirements and investment activity for 2026/27, including prudential indicators, borrowing and investment limits, and the Council’s overall approach to risk.

Members noted that the Council continued to operate an under?borrowed position, meaning internal resources were being used to finance capital expenditure where feasible, thereby avoiding external borrowing at higher interest rates. The draft documents also set out proposed changes to prudential borrowing limits, reflecting the Council’s projected Capital Financing Requirement (CFR) and major capital commitments planned across the medium term. These included proposals to increase the Operational Boundary for borrowing from £15m to £35m, and the Authorised Limit from £18m to £38m.

Finally, Members noted the proposal to increase the maximum permitted investment in the Council’s main Money Market Fund from £7.5m to £10m, to provide additional short?term liquidity flexibility during periods of peak cashflow activity.

The Committee undertook an extended review of the draft Treasury Management documents, examining the prudential indicators, borrowing strategy, investment criteria and MRP policy in technical detail.

Members explored the rationale behind the significant increase in the Operational Boundary and Authorised Limit for external borrowing. It was clarified that these higher limits did not signal an intention to borrow immediately, but instead provided the statutory headroom required to meet future borrowing needs if market conditions became favourable. Members were reminded that the Council’s CFR was expected to rise due to planned capital expenditure, and that the revised limits reflected these projections.

The Committee noted that the Council had chosen, in recent years, to meet borrowing needs through internal resources, but that this position could not be maintained indefinitely as reserves diminished through use.

A detailed explanation was provided regarding the forecast borrowing requirement for 2026/27, estimated at approximately £7.7m, arising largely from capital programme commitments. Members reviewed the classification of expenditure that contributed to the CFR, including historic unfinanced expenditure, refuse fleet replacement, property fund investments, and other capital projects.

The Committee also scrutinised the Council’s under?borrowed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 49.

(A report by Christian Allen, Assistant Director – Regulatory)

The Committee received the report on the Audit of the Council’s Building Control Service, presented by the Assistant Director – Regulatory with support from the Group Manager Building Control and Councillor John Baxter, Portfolio Holder for Housing, undertaken by the Building Safety Regulator (BSR), the national body established following the Grenfell Tower Inquiry to oversee and enforce improved building safety standards. The Committee was advised that Boston Borough Council had been selected as one of the first authorities in the country to undergo the new regulatory audit, reflecting the national roll?out of strengthened audit and assurance processes across local authority building control services.

The report provided an overview of the regulatory framework introduced post?Grenfell and outlined the scope of the BSR audit, which examined the Council’s performance against a new set of Operational Standards Rules. The Committee was informed that the audit process was extensive, covering a nine?month period, involving the examination of records, internal processes, case tracking arrangements, system usage, and the overall governance of the Building Control function. Officers confirmed that the audit outcome had identified three areas for improvement, with two relating to the management and monitoring of legacy inspections and one relating to the implementation of an ICT improvement project designed to meet the regulator’s enhanced reporting requirements.

Members were advised that deadlines had been set by the regulator for the submission of updated compliance information, the two inspection?related actions by the end of January, and the ICT?related action by the end of May. Work was already underway to complete the necessary evidence submissions, with correspondence in preparation to provide progress updates to the BSR.

The Committee undertook an in?depth discussion of the audit findings and wider operational context. Members welcomed the overall positive narrative of the report and expressed appreciation for the scale of effort required to prepare for and undergo the first full BSR audit under the new nationwide regime.

The Committee noted that the two inspection?related improvement areas concerned the management of legacy cases, many of which originated from historic building projects that had not reached a formal completion point. Members were informed that some applications had been submitted with no subsequent action by applicants, some had remained dormant for years, and some required risk?based follow?up to determine whether any further regulatory intervention was needed. Officers explained that the audit had therefore emphasised the importance of applying a structured, risk?led process to closing or progressing these cases, ensuring that all outstanding applications were systematically reviewed and managed in line with the new regulatory standards.

The Committee also considered the third improvement action, relating to the development and updating of an ICT system capable of meeting the BSR’s new reporting and evidencing requirements. Officers advised that the ICT project would support improved accuracy and consistency in data capture and strengthen communication with the regulator. It was noted that the level of detail required by the BSR represented a significant uplift from previous standards, and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 50.

(A report by John Medler, Assistant Director – Governance & Monitoring Officer)

The Committee received the Audit & Governance Committee Annual Report for 2024/25 which was introduced, by the Democratic Services Team Leader, as the formal summary of the Committee’s activity during the previous municipal year. Members were reminded that the report served an important governance function, providing assurance to Full Council that the Audit & Governance Committee had effectively discharged its responsibilities in accordance with the Council’s Constitution, the CIPFA Position Statement on Audit Committees, and wider regulatory expectations.

The Annual Report outlined the Committee’s work across key areas including internal and external audit oversight, financial reporting, risk management, treasury management, information governance and the Annual Governance Statement. Members noted that the report encapsulated a year of intensified audit and governance activity and demonstrated the Committee’s role in providing robust, evidence?based challenge and oversight across the organisation.

The Committee was advised that, subject to approval, the Annual Report would be submitted to Full Council, ensuring transparency and enabling all Members to understand the Committee’s assurance work over the year.

The Committee expressed appreciation for the officers involved in supporting its work throughout the year, and no amendments were proposed to the draft Annual Report.

The recommendations were proposed by Councillor Anton Dani and seconded by Councillor Jonathan Noble.

Resolved:

That the Annual Report be approved for submission to Full Council.

(For Members to consider the Committee’s work programme.)

The Committee received the updated Work Programme, presented as part of its routine forward?planning responsibilities. The Work Programme set out the schedule of reports, assurance updates and decision items expected to come before the Committee over the remainder of the municipal year. It provided Members with clear visibility of forthcoming business and ensured that the Committee could fulfil its statutory and regulatory responsibilities relating to audit, governance, risk, financial reporting and treasury management.

Members discussed the overall volume and cadence of reports scheduled for the forthcoming meetings and it was noted that Audit & Governance agendas were often substantial due to the breadth and complexity of the Committee’s remit.

The Committee also reflected on the importance of embedding Member training and development sessions within the forward plan. Members noted earlier discussions under the Personal Skills Audit item and recognised that training requirements identified through that process should be incorporated into future iterations of the Work Programme. Officers confirmed that training opportunities would continue to be annotated into the Work Programme where appropriate.

The Committee confirmed that it was content with the Work Programme as presented.

Resolved:

That the Work Programme be noted.