New Anglia Audit and Risk Committee Minutes (Unconfirmed)

28^th June 2018

Present:

Nick Banks (NB)

Scrutton Bland

Andrew Proctor (AP)

Norfolk County Council

Niko Savvas (NS)

West Suffolk College (By Phone)

In Attendance:

Paul Briddon (PB)

Lovewell Blake (For Item 5)

Steven Scarlett (SS)

Lovewell Blake (For Item 5)

Holly Field

Suffolk County Council (Deputising for Accountable Body

S151 Officer)

Marie Finbow (MF)

New Anglia LEP (For Item 6)

Keith Spanton (KS)

New Anglia LEP

Helen Wilton (HW)

New Anglia LEP

Rosanne Wijnberg (RW)

New Anglia LEP

Actions from the Meeting

Investigate whether NAC should be independently audited

NAC to include a discussion on dealing with any surplus made from investments on their

next agenda

The Strategic Report to be updated according to comments and the draft returned to

Lovewell Blake.

Details of the running costs of NAC to be confirmed as detailed in earlier LEP Board

papers.

Investigate the process for obtaining Cyber Essentials accreditation

To start the process for tendering for new auditors

Proposed dates for the next committee meeting to be circulated to committee members

Welcome from the Chair

Nick Banks (NB) welcomed everyone to the first Audit and Risk Committee Meeting.

Apologies

None

Declarations of Interest

Full declarations of interest can be found at http://www.newanglia.co.uk/about-us/the-board/ .

None.

It was agreed that these only needed to be declared if relevant to an item on the agenda.

Terms of Reference

The committee confirmed the Terms of Reference previously agreed by the LEP Board.

Holly Field (HF) requested clarification on whether she was able to deputise for Louise Ainsley. It was

confirmed that this was acceptable as she represented the Accountable Body and not a Local

Authority.

The Committee agreed:

• To confirm the Terms of Reference

Financial Statements - Confidential

Corporate Risk

Marie Finbow (MF) joined the meeting.

MF reviewed the LEP’s approach to managing risk and advised the meeting that the LEP

manages risk at a corporate, operational and project level. The LEP has minimal influence

over risks at a project level, as these are managed by the projects themselves. For these

risks, the LEP operates a Red Amber Green rating to help identify difficulties, risk and issues

which can or will have an effect on delivery, cost or expenditure and intended outputs.

Operational risks are LEP programme level risks and there is a risk register for each of the

different LEP programmes which deliver the economic strategy. Operational Risks and project

risks are reported to the Management Committee.

Corporate risks are reported to the Audit and Risk Committee. These are risks which could

have a significant impact on delivery of the LEP’s ambitions.

The meeting was advised that each risk is allocated a risk owner and risk owners are

responsible for reviewing and updating their risks on a monthly basis. MF reviewed the

current risk register highlighting current keys risks.

MF reviewed the risk footprint which is a more visual way of highlighting the changes made to

the register during that month.

It was noted that Project underspend was a key risk and Rosanne Wijnberg (RW) reviewed

the actions in place to mitigate that risk and the risk raised by the changes to the GDPR

regulations.

Attendees were advised that a GDPR Action group had been set up to ensure compliance

and that all staff had undergone training.

NB suggested the LEP gain accreditation the Cyber Essentials accreditation. KS confirmed

that this had already been investigated and that he would progress this further.

NB expressed his thanks for the work that has been carried out so far and clarity of the

The Committee approved the Risk Management Process and the register

AP queried the process for updating the committee on risks.

NB proposed that committee members be advised when the risk moved to a score of 9 or

above.

This was agreed by the meeting. In addition the risk register would be reviewed at each bi-

annual meeting.

MF left the meeting.

The Committee agreed:

• To approve the Risk Management Process and the risk register

• To receive details of new or existing risks should their score reach 9 or above

• To review the full risk register at each meeting.

Review of Auditors

The meeting discussed the proposed tender for auditors.

AP queried the process for going out to tender.

NB proposed that suitable companies be identified and invited to tender.

Those firms identified would be invited to tender to the committee before a recommendation

was to the LEP Board.

The Committee agreed:

• To start the process of inviting companies to tender for the role as auditor

Meeting Schedule and Dates

It was agreed that Helen Wilton (HW) would circulate potential dates for the next meeting in

late August / early September along with the draft committee minutes.

Any Other Business

None

Next meeting:

TBC