►
From YouTube: Joint Governance Committee - 27 September 2022
Description
For more information, please visit:
Facebook: http://fb.me/AdurandWorthingCouncils
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/adurandworthing
Website: https://www.adur-worthing.gov.uk
A
A
The
assembly
point
is
the
car
park
here
at
the
Shoreham
Center.
Do
not
stop
to
collect
belongings,
do
not
use
the
lift.
Please
remain
at
the
assembly
point
until
advised
it
is
safe
to
return
to
the
building.
Any
persons
with
mobility
issues
must
head
to
the
nearest
stairwell
and
await
further
instructions.
A
A
A
E
A
Don't
think
we
have
so
we'll
now
move
on
to
the
minutes.
The
committee
is
asked
to
approve
the
minutes
of
the
joint
governance
committee
meeting
held
on
the
28th
of
July.
2022.,
raise
your
hand
if
you
don't
want
to
agree
and
good.
Thank
you.
They
are
agreed
and
now
public
question
time.
No
questions
have
been
received
from
the
public
in
advance
to
this
meeting.
Are
there
any
questions
from
members
of
the
public
in
the
public
gallery?
F
A
So
we
are
now
going
to
move
on
to
item
number
six
statement
of
accounts,
2020
21
for
age,
District,
Council
and
Worthing
Borough
Council,
completion
of
audit,
that's
on
pages
5
to
16,
which
I'm
just
going
to
say
this
once.
Hopefully,
this
is
a
very
long
agenda
when
any
delegates
or
any
members
are
referring
to
the
agenda.
Can
you
tell
us
the
page
number
you're
referring
to
thank
you
so
miss
goby.
G
Thank
you
chairman.
It's
with
actually
great
relief
and
pleasure
that
we
would
like
to
tell
you
that
the
audit
of
the
accounts
has
finally
concluded
within
the
report
we
lay
out
for
you.
The
final
adjustments
to
the
council.
I
will
emphasize
that
they
did
in
the
end
revolve
around
asset
valuations,
as
we
had
previously
briefed
the
committee
that
there
was
discussions
both
between
our
valuer
and
the
representative
from
from
ey,
and
they
did
finally
agree
Elsewhere
on
the
agenda.
G
G
There
is
Merit
and
I
I
think
we
don't
disagree
with
our
old
colleagues
that
there
was
additional
work
that
was
needed
to
conclude
the
audit.
However,
we
have
referred
this
to
the
PSA
as
our
contract
managers
for
review
and
adjudication.
That's
all
I
want
to
say
other
than
to
take
any
questions.
H
Thank
you
chair
on
page
seven
of
the
report.
Thank
I
understand
that
the
table
reflects
what
the
current
adjustments
are.
It's
just
one
little
point
was
would
be.
It
would
be
quite
helpful
to
know
what
the
valuations
were
before
for
each
of
those
and
and
because,
what's
I
wonder
if
you
can
talk
through
where
the
211
000
overstatement
came
from
I'd
be
probably
less
concerned
around.
Perhaps
the
plant
and
property
plant
equipment
and
more
around
some
of
the
social
housing
elements
thanks.
G
G
So
there
were
questions
about
how
they
had
arrived
at
the
fair
value,
principally
of
I,
think
York,
one
York
Road
I
have
a
feeling.
The
smaller
property
was
Eskin
court.
That
was
the
one
we
didn't
adjust
for
it
didn't
really.
It
didn't
relate
to
housing.
It
related
very
specifically
to
our
investment
properties.
A
I
G
Thank
you
councilworm.
This.
The
audit
fees
are
actually
broken
down
later
on
on
the
agenda
and
I'm
sure
our
our
colleague
from
ey
would
be
better
placed
to
comment.
J
It's
also
included
in
the
auditor's
annual
report,
so
I'm
on
page
85
of
the
agenda,
which
is
for
worthy
I,
think
I'll
need
to
find
the
page
number
for
Ada.
J
If
someone
has
a
hard
copy.
That
would
help
me
just
in
terms
of
the
number.
J
No,
it's
it's
the
auditor's
annual
report.
Sorry,
let
me
go
upwards.
J
Did
try
hard?
Yes,
no,
so
on
page
50
is
the
Ada
information.
So
if
I
focus
on
that
one,
since
it's
an
ADA
related
question,
if
I've
got
my
sides
of
the
table
right,
the
way
in
which
the
fee
proposal
has
been
put
together
is
exactly
the
same
as
we
did
in
2019
20,
we've
probably
just
be
more
clear
about
it.
J
So
if
you
look
on
page
50
for
Ada
and
there
is
an
equivalent
table
in
which
I
think
so
80
something
for
Worthing,
it
sets
out
the
psaa
scale
fee
of
thirty,
seven
thousand
and
fifty
four.
So
that's
the
fee
that
is
agreed
by
psaa
or
that
the
psaa
set
is
a
scale
fee
that,
in
all
honesty,
doesn't
bear
any
resemblance
to
the
amount
of
work.
That's
now
required
to
carry
out
an
audit
in
record
in
accordance
with
the
auditing
standards
and
or
with
the
requirements
of
our
Regulators.
J
So
the
next
line
down
in
that
table
sets
out
the
fee
sort
of
effectively
the
increase
of
the
to
the
fee.
That
we
think
then
reflects
a
fair
audit
fee
which
is
89
000
and
then
below
that
there
are
two
elements
which
relate
to
the
work
that
is
included.
That
is
additional
work
that
we
did
in
2020
2021,
which
was
largely
driven
in
relation
to
property
plants
and
equipment
and
investment
properties
where
we
had
more
work
to
do.
J
If
I
take
you
to
the
right
hand,
side
of
that
column,
you'll
see
the
final
fee
for
2019-20
for
both
Aid
around
Worthing,
that's
the
figure
that
was
determined
and
they
determine
against
both
both
numbers.
So
they
they
look
at
the
52
262
using
Ada's
numbers
and
the
28
389
and
the
8521,
and
then
they
decide
what
they
think
is
a
fair
fee
for
the
work
that
we've
done
and
they
determine
at
that
number.
J
J
So
that's
to
give
a
bit
of
a
reason
for
the
increase.
The
reason
why
it
looks
so
big
in
comparison
to
say
a
County
Council
is
that
the
fees
for
the
district
councils
are
significantly
lower
than
they
used
to
be.
If
I
go
back
to
about
2010,
your
fee
would
have
been
somewhere
in
the
order
of
100
120
000
pounds
for
a
district
council,
so
that
just
shows
how
much
they
reduced
have
reduced
over
time.
So
the
fees
have
gone
that
way.
Requirements
have
gone.
That
way.
A
L
If
everyone
wants
to
turn
to
page
28,
so
it
references
that
any
procurement
over
25
000
pounds.
It
goes
through
a
procurement
process
and
my
question
is,
and
and
I
do
not
question
the
quality
of
the
audit
or
or
or
in
it
in
that
respect.
But
I
would
ask
if,
in
terms
of
value
for
money
and
using
the
council's
using
every
tool
in
their
Arsenal
to
get
a
good
best
value
for
money
for
the
taxpayer,
was
the
procurement
strategy
applied
to
the
appointment
of
Ernst
and
Young.
G
So
that
crosses
across
two
items,
because
of
course
we're
still
on
the
item
on
the
accounts.
We
do
procure
through
a
framework.
We
participate
in
a
national
framework
that
was
approved
by
the
committee.
G
There
are
quite
rigorous
requirements
around
the
appointment
of
external
Auditors
and
that's
why
we
use
the
national
framework
to
determine
who
are
ordered
to
will
be
I
would
say
that
that
contract
now
was
let
some
time
ago
and
consequently,
probably
the
fees
that
were
originally
agreed
have
fallen
out
of
step
with
both
the
auditing
standards
and
the
work
required
to
comply
with
those
auditing
standards.
G
We
are
expecting
the
fee
to
adjust
when
a
new
contract
is,
is
let
and
we
will
have
to
accommodate
that
cost
within
our
budgets
quite
clearly,
but
we
are
expecting
the
cost
to
increase,
because
I
suspect
the
environment
in
which
wheel
parade
has
been
subject
to
far
more
rigor,
particularly
around
things
like
estimates,
which
I
think
members
should
welcome.
We
are
investing
significantly
either
via
the
pension
fund
or
of
our
own
resources
in
a
range
of
investment
opportunities,
and
they
need
proper
professional
scrutiny
and
opinion.
A
A
Oh
before
we
move
off
item
six,
can
we
duly
note
the
content?
Thank
you
lovely
right.
Let's
move
on
to
the
auditor's
annual
reports
item,
seven
on
pages
17
to
86.,
come
as
Thompson
from
erson
Young
introduced
the
reports
before
us.
Please.
J
Thank
you,
chairman
I'm,
just
trying
to
open
two
screens
that
I
can
have
wording
on
one
screen
and
Ada
on
the
other
or
two
tabs
anyway
and
apologies.
There
are
a
number
of
people
who
I
don't
think
I
have
met
before
and
I
don't
have
a
name
tag,
so
my
name
is
Helen
Thompson
I'm
the
partner
from
Ernst
young,
so
I'm
responsible
for
signing
the
opinion.
J
So
for
those
of
you
who
I've
not
met
before
good
evening,
the
the
two
reports,
the
one
for
Ada,
starts
on
page
17
and
the
one
for
Worthing
starts
on
page
52
are
broadly
similar,
so
in
terms
of
introducing
it
I'm
going
to
sort
of
talk
generically.
But
obviously,
if
there
are
questions
on
either
report,
I
will
take
those
separately.
J
The
auditor's
annual
report
is
a
new
document
or
a
new
report
for
the
2021
audit
year.
I
appreciate
we
are
now
in
September
2022,
but
this
was
as
a
consequence
of
the
change
to
the
National
Audit
office
code
of
audit
practice,
which
governs
the
work
that
we
do
so
before
that
we
would
have
presented
an
annual
audit
letter
to
both
councils
that
summarized
the
work
for
our
year.
J
The
new
code
changed
the
requirements
around
value
for
money.
Specifically
in
previous
years.
We
would
have
given
a
value
for
money
conclusion.
So
whilst
we
would
not
ever
have
concluded
whether
or
not
the
councils
provide
value
for
money,
we
we
always
looked
at
the
proper
arrangements
to
secure
value
for
money.
So
do
you
have
the
right
Arrangements
in
place
to
stand
the
best
chance
of
using
your
money
wisely
I
suppose
would
be
another
way
of
looking
at
it
and
then
in
our
reporting
we
would
either
say
it
was
fine
or
it
wasn't.
J
The
new
code
that
was
introduced
from
the
2021
audit
year
introduced
the
requirement
for
a
value
for
money
commentary,
so
in
our
reporting
to
date
for
20
20
21,
we
have
said
we
have
done
our
risk
assessment
on
value
for
money
arrangements
and
we
have
nothing
on
which
we
need
to
do
more
work.
This.
These
two
reports,
one
for
Ada
and
one
for
Worthing.
Now
summarize
the
work
that
we
have
done
and
give
you
a
feel
for
the
proper
Arrangements
that
we
looked
at.
J
But
we
are
as
yet
unable
to
issue
the
audit
certificate
to
certify
the
audit
closed
due
to
a
complication
in
the
wording
that
the
National
Audit
office
used
in
its
instructions
to
us
foreign.
We
set
out
the
fees
which
we've
already
touched
on,
so
I
wasn't
going
to
go
back
around
that
Loop,
but
I'm
happy
to
to
take
any
further
questions.
And
then
the
key
part
of
you
have
a
section
on
financial
statements:
audit
which
summarizes
our
conclusions.
J
That
we've
talked
about
in
the
first
section
and
then
section
four
includes
the
value
for
money
commentary
So
within
that
we
have
looked
at
each
of
the
three
areas
set
out
in
the
code,
so
Financial
sustainability,
governance
and
improving
economy,
efficiency
and
Effectiveness,
and
then
we've
set
out
a
commentary
about
Arrangements
which
we've
agreed
with
officers,
and
they
are
con
they.
They
are
happy
that
it
reflects
the
true
position
for
2021-22.
J
So
the
year
of
audit
that
we
are
currently
in,
we
propose
to
slightly
change
the
format
of
this,
so
that
you
don't
get
a
repetition
of
all
of
this
information
included
within
here.
We
will
try
and
pull
out
the
some.
The
key
points
that
are
different,
I
guess
for
2122
I
think.
That's
probably
all
I
wanted
to
say
in
terms
of
an
introduction
but
happy
to
take
questions.
H
Thank
you
chair
and
thank
you
for
the
summary
I've
I'm
gonna
be
greedy
because
I'm
gonna
have
a
supplementary
already
actually,
but
if
we
look
at
page
30
of
the
report
and
the
number
on
the
left
hand
side
in
the
corner,
what
I'm
trying
to
understand
is
talk
to
your
second
paragraph
about
well.
Firstly,
I,
don't
understand
what
PPE,
euv
and
IP
means
I'm
afraid
but
I'm,
looking
at
the
difference
between
the
overstated
and
the
understated,
so
still
quite
a
significant
figure
between
the
the
between
the
two.
H
So
what
I'm
trying
to
understand
is
how
does
this
tie
in
time
wise
to
the
statement
made
earlier
in
this?
The
last
report
on
page
hold
on
a
second
on
page
seven,
when
we
talked
about
there
being
211
000
overstatement.
Are
we
talking
a
significantly
different
time
period,
or
did
you
give
that
advice
halfway
through
a
year
and
then
it
was
corrected
at
the
end
of
the
year.
J
Thanks
so
to
answer
the
point
on
the
acronyms
they
were
explained
earlier
in
the
report,
so
so
PPE
stands
for
property
plant
and
Equipment.
Ip
is
investment,
property
euv
I
think
was
your
other
one
existing
use
value
and
they
are
all
set
out
in
the
earliest
sort
of
within
the
Auditors
annual
report.
J
In
the
relevance
section
so
and
in
terms
of
the
numbers,
the
numbers
we
are
looking
at,
we're
telling
you
about
the
adjust,
the
actual
adjustments
that
were
made
and
we've
just
set
it
out
slightly
differently
from
the
way
in
which
it's
set
out
in
in
in
paper.
Six
because
paper,
six
is
a
report
from
offices,
not
our
report.
J
So
what
we
are
saying
is
that
for
those
properties
in
property,
plant
and
equipment
that
are
valued
under
the
existing
used
value
methods,
they
were
overstated
by
3.1
million.
That
sounds
like
a
large
number
and
it
is
in
relation
to
our
materiality,
but
it's
quite
a
small
number,
if
you
think
about
the
total
value
of
your
property
plant
and
equipment
in
the
balance
sheet.
Investment
property
was
therefore
understated
by
1.27
million
and
we're
netting.
J
The
figures
that
I
think
are
in
included
in
the
report
at
page
six
and
then
the
211
000
comes
in
in
the
second
paragraph.
So
that's
the
on.
That
was
the
evaluation
that
was
unadjusted,
so
it
wasn't
corrected
the
the
in
the
first.
The
second
paragraph
on
page
30
are
the
items
that
were
adjusted
and
corrected
in
the
financial
statements
before
we
signed.
The
adjustments
that
are
in
this
third
paragraph
are
the
ones
that
were
not
adjusted.
H
J
A
Thank
you
any
other
questions.
L
So
just
it
was
more
of
a
supplementary
to
my
last
one
but,
as
I
said,
I
respect
your
wishes
to
park
it
for
the
moment.
So
the
point
I
was
trying
to
make
earlier
was
with
fees
that
are
obviously
on
on
the
rise
and
also
subject
to
flux,
depending
on
workloads
and
a
variety
of
other
things
and
with
other
reputable
auditors
available.
Do
we
apply
the
same
scrutiny
to
procurement,
as
this
is
over
25
000
to
our
Auditors,
as
we
would
for
any
other
project?
Yes,.
G
So
we
use
a
framework
procurement
effectively
run
by
the
LGA
that
will
be
subject
to
exactly
the
same
scrutiny
as
any
other
procurement.
We
go
through
the
LGA
because
we
believe
that
that
is
the
best
route
for
value
for
the
council
and
the
most
effective
way
for
managing
the
procurement
of
our
external
audit
contract.
But
it's
subject
to
exactly
the
same
rules
as
our
own
internal
processes,
because
it's
an
above
threshold
procurement
and
subject
to
the
National
regulations.
G
J
I'll,
try
very
hard
not
to
make
this
sound.
Like
a
justification.
Auditor
justification,
one
of
one
of
the
issues
for
councils
is
the
way
in
which
you
are
required
to
procure
external
Audits
and
completely
agree
that
the
most
cost-effective
route
for
the
very
large
majority
of
councils
and
I
believe
98
99
of
councils
use
the
framework
procurement
route.
Is
that
if
you
go
it
alone,
you
have
to
set
up
your
own
independent
auditor
panel.
J
So
you
need
to
have
a
separate
group
of
people,
not
all
of
whom
can
be
taken
as
members
I,
don't
I
believe
so
that's
additional
costs
for
the
council.
You
are
a
relatively
small
Organization
for
audit
firms
and
there
are
only
a
certain
number
of
audit
firms
that
are
allowed
to
carry
out
public
sector
audits.
So
you
have
to
be
on
the
I
want
to
say
icaew's
list.
J
G
Carry
out
the
work
and
I
was
going
to
to
add,
there
is
only
one
local
firm
on
that
list
Gardens
and
they
have
withdrawn
from
local
Authority
audit
Market,
so
yeah.
So
we
we
are
in
a
market
which
effectively
is
the
larger
audit
companies,
who
are
probably
the
only
people
who
have
the
expertise
and
the
scale
to
deliver
such
complex
audit
work
across
the
public
sector.
G
I
would
say
that
the
procurement
route
that
we've
adopted
and
we
we
wrote
a
report
to
the
committee,
set
out
the
rather
complicated
internal
Arrangements
that
we
would
need
to
adopt.
We
would
have
to
have
a
separate
audit
committee.
We
would
have
to
have
an
independent
chair
of
that
audit
committee
and
the
committee
approved
the
procurement
strategy
that
we
we
were
adopting.
A
Thank
you.
Do
we
have
any
more
questions,
councilor,
Borum.
I
Thank
you
very
much.
You
mentioned
there
was
a
an
Nao
Nao
technical
issue
in
respect
of
the
audit.
Is
it
in
respect
of
the
account
or
is
it
in
respect
of
the
audit
work
that
you
have
to
you
have
to
complete?
Thank
you.
J
So
a
good
question:
it
is
in
respect
of
the
audit
work
that
we
are
required
to
complete.
So
the
whole
of
government
accounts
for
members
not
familiar
with
the
phrase,
is
effectively
a
summarization
process.
So
it's
taking
the
financial
statements
that
you
will
have
previously
seen
putting
it
into
a
set
of
effectively
a
very
large
spreadsheet,
and
then
that
information
is
shared
up
through
the
department
and
then
eventually
becomes
part
of
this
massive.
J
You
know
balance
sheet
for
and
INE
account
for
the
public
sector,
the
National
Audit
office
or
the
group
auditor,
obviously
for
for
those
purposes
and
they
set
out
instructions.
J
They
were
very,
very
delayed
for
2021
I,
think
we
received
them,
I
want
to
say
in
July
this
year
they
altered
the
threshold.
So
Ada
and
Worthing
councils
have
always
fallen
below
the
thresholds
for
us
to
do
any
detailed
work
and
you
remained
below
the
threshold
because
it
was
set
at
something
like
2
billion
or
five
billion.
So
I
can't
remember
off
the
top
of
my
head.
A
very
large
number.
J
The
problem
was
from
the
nao's
perspective.
Is
that
so
few
audit
teams,
local
audit
teams,
such
as
ourselves,
were
doing
any
detailed
work
they
weren't
getting
sufficient
Assurance
for
their
purposes,
so
they
included
within
their
group
instructions
a
phrase
that
sort
of
said.
We
reserve
the
right
to
come
back
to
you,
local
auditor.
If
we
need
you
to
do
more
work,
and
that
means
we
can't
issue
the
certificate,
it's
effectively
a
technicality,
but
it's
quite
frustrating
because
they
have
a
very
similar
position
for
the
NHS
audits
that
we
do
for
the
NHS.
J
They
select
a
sample
of
of
councils
or
well
NHS
bodies
that
they
want
to
look
at.
They
tell
us
in
advance,
so
we
know
which
ones
we're
going
to
need
to
do.
We
know
which
ones
we
can
just
sign
off
and
I.
Don't
really
understand
if
I'm
honest,
why
that's
not
been
done
for
local
government,
because
then
we
could
certify
the
audit
closed.
We
could
all
move
on
and
think
about.
21
22,
whilst
also
thinking
about
22,
23
and
probably
23
24.
M
But
but
do
warrant
comment
and
the
first
one
is
on
page
69,
which
is
in
the
wording,
section
and
I.
Think
it's
just
worth
noting
there
in
the
bottom,
but
one
paragraph
and
I'll
I'll
read
it
so
people
don't
need
to
find
it.
I
will
read
accurately.
M
It
says
the
council
continue
to
implement
remedial
actions
that
leads
to
the
settling
of
a
balanced
budget
in
2021-22
and
an
overall
understanding
of
the
1.028
million
as
part
of
the
21
2021
budget
round
and
ensured
that
Service
delivery
was
protected
from
any
significant
cuts
and
I
think
that's
important
as
well
chairman,
because
we
often
hear
this
sort
of
rhetorical.
The
council
cutting
service.
But
let's
be
clear
here.
This
isn't
me
saying
this:
it's
not
the
council
saying
this:
it's
not
the
administration
saying
this!
M
It's
an
independent
external
auditor
saying
this,
someone
who
is
professionally
qualified,
look
at
our
accounts
and
make
comment
so
I
just
think.
That's
worth
saying,
because
I
think
there's
a
lot
of
credit
there
and
finally
and
I've
raised
this
point
before
so.
Some
of
you
will
have
heard
it,
but
on
page
82-
and
this
is
the
valuation
of
land
and
buildings,
and
it's
for
PPP
and
IP
and
I
always
find
it
for
myself
difficult
to
get
excited
about
this.
M
You
can
see
here
that
quite
a
bit
of
time's
been
spent
looking
at
the
material
differences
that
are
identified
in
the
value
of
land
and
buildings,
but
the
reality
is
in
the
PPE.
We
actually
use
those
buildings
to
deliver
our
services
and
in
the
Investment
Portfolio.
Those
buildings
are
there
to
provide
an
income
to
the
council
to
support
its
services
and
it's
I
always
find
it.
M
Amusing
and
I
may
be
the
only
one
that
there's
these
valuations
that
are
on
a
specific
day
of
the
year
and
it's
the
first
of
April
and
I
always
find
that
amusing
myself,
because
it
just
seems
so
appropriate
Because
by
the
time
the
valuations
are
settled.
Of
course,
they
will
be
very
different
potentially
to
what
they
were
on
the
1st
of
April.
M
So
I
know
it's
something
that
people
can
get
excited
about,
but
unless
the
variations
are
hugely
different,
then
I
don't
think
it's
something
for
us
to
worry
about
it's
worth
noting,
but
in
reality
it's
not
worth
worrying
about
the
only
time
it's
important
is
when
you
buy
a
property
or
a
piece
of
plant
or
when
you
sell
it
and
in
between
whether
the
price
goes
up
and
down
which
invariably
will
other
than
for
accountants
who
do
get
very
excited,
I.
M
Think
for
members,
it's
probably
not
too
much
of
an
issue,
but
can
I
think
the
the
the
Auditors
for
all
this
I
think
the
value
for
money
actually
makes
it
a
much
more
interesting
report
I
think
it's
much
more
useful
for
members
to
have
the
value
for
money.
Part
of
a
report
I
realize
there's
a
cost
to
that,
but
I
think
it's
a
cost
was
worth
paying
because
actually,
this
is,
as
I
said
earlier,
an
independent
piece
of
reporting
from
professionally
qualified
people.
So
we
can.
M
A
J
I
hear
what
councilor
wait
says
and
I've
you
know,
and
it's
a
in
terms
of
evaluations,
it's
it's
an
off
to
mention
point
because,
to
a
certain
extent,
the
way
in
which
local
Authority
accounts
are
constructed
is
that
the
valuation
of
properties,
whether
they
are
used
for
operational
purposes
in
particular,
doesn't
actually
end
up
having
much
of
an
impact
on
the
financial
position
of
the
council,
because
it's
reversed
back
out.
So
it's
a
difficult
one,
because
it
is
important.
It
is
an
estimate.
It
is
something
that
we
need
to
do.
J
The
work
on
I
think
there
are
sort
of
where
councilor
wait
was
quoting
from
on
page
82,
moving
over
into
page
83
and
and
the
equivalent
Pages
for
for
Ada.
J
There
are
some
points
that
we
have
drawn
out
in
terms
of
how
we
can
make
life
a
little
bit
simpler,
both
for
us
as
the
audit
team,
but
also
for
the
finance
team
and
Estates
team
who
are
dealing
with
all
of
the
queries
in
relation
to
valuation.
So
I
think
that's
also
an
important
point
to
make.
A
Thank
you.
Would
anybody
else
like
to
tell
us
what
they
found
amusing
in
the
cut
in
the
report?
A
Thank
you.
So
are
we
all
happy
to
note
the
contents?
A
J
J
J
These
are
the
risks
that
we
have
identified
that
we're
considering
in
the
audit
that
is
ongoing
as
we
speak,
aren't
for
2021-22
I
would
largely
say
these
are
broadly
similar
to
the
risks
that
we
identified
in
last
year's
order
in
2021
which
which
we
have
just
discussed.
There
is
a
bit
of
a
change
in
that
we
have
broken
down
the
the
work
we
do
on
valuations,
so
picking
up
really
I
suppose
on
the
conversation
that
we
had
earlier.
J
So
we've
tried
to
we've
tried
to
use
all
the
acronyms
and
and
to
to
make
sure
that
they're
clear,
but
we've
separated
out
the
risk
associated
with
property
plant
and
Equipment
that's
valued
at
a
market
value
either
existing
use,
value
or
fair
value,
the
valuation
of
investment
properties,
then
valuation
of
land
and
buildings
that
are
valued
at
depreciated
replacement
cost.
That's
because
the
first
two,
where
it's
a
fair
value
judgment,
is
a
more
challenging
judgment
and
where
we
need
the
use
of
tendency
needed
use.
Sorry
I'll.
J
J
Please
don't
be
alarmed
about
the
color
of
the
risk
associated
with
infrastructure.
The
red
is
to
reflect
it's
a
new
risk,
not
the
scale
of
the
risk.
What
I
do
want
to
say
to
the
to
both
councils
is
that
this
is
a
national
issue
and
I
know.
Some
of
you
will
be
aware
of
it
from
other
committees
on
which
you
sit.
J
It's
causing
a
challenge
to
all
all
audit
firms
and
to
quite
a
significant
number
of
councils
in
closing
out
20,
20,
21
audits,
or
earlier
than
that
we
did
the
work
for
Adrian
Worthing,
because
you
do
have
material
infrastructure
Assets
in
2021.
But
you
are
one
of
the
very
few,
the
only
Council
that
I
have
that
actually
accounts
for
it
properly,
in
accordance
with
the
Sip
for
code
and
I
thought,
it
was
worth
reflecting
that
in
this
meeting,
because
it
allowed
us
to
complete
the
audit
for
2021.,
we've
included
it
here.
J
D
Thank
you
for
that.
I
wanted
to
ask,
as
I
always
do
about
housing
and
so
on.
The
HRA
properties.
Two
questions.
If
that's
okay
chair,
they
kind
of
come
together,
HRA
properties
are
inherently
not
subject
to
material
uncertainty
arising
due
to
market
conditions.
D
D
Does
the
actual
material
condition
and
I
know
it's
not
Material
condition
in
the
same
sense,
but
does
the
fabric
of
the
building
condition
of
the
properties
affect
the
valuation?
Thank
you.
J
J
It's
called
The
Beacon
approach,
because
the
if
I,
try
and
get
this
right
and
I
mainly
had
a
may
need
some
help.
Housing
properties
are
separate
out,
separated
out
into
different
types,
and
so
there
are
many
many
different
types
of
buildings,
so
Flats
houses
number
of
bedrooms,
for
example.
J
The
valuation
approach
tends
to
be
is
to
pick
one
property
within
that
Beacon
to
value
that
and
then
to
assess
the
rest
at
the
same
level,
it's
valued
at
its
at
existing
use,
value,
which
is
a
market-based
valuation,
but
then
it's
discounted
quite
heavily
to
reflect
the
use
it's
used
for
social
housing
which
in
part
takes
into
account
I
think
the
condition
but
I
don't
know.
If
you
would
like
to
add
to
that
I.
G
Think
not
just
condition,
but
also
the
lower
rental
yield,
because
that
sits
behind
the
valuation
and
the
value
of
the
property
as
well,
and
the
value
reviews
are
I'm
going
to
call
them
property
archetypes
every
year,
so
we'll
do
Beacon
valuations
every
year.
So
it
is
a
rolling
program
evaluation,
so
matters
of
condition
should
be
taken
into
account
in
the
valuation
work
that
they
do.
K
A
You
have
you
got
any
more
supplementary
questions.
Anyone
else,
councilor
Wade.
M
Well,
I
suppose
it's
partly
a
question
in
partly
a
comment
and
it
was
around
the
the
new
red
risk
and
you
said
it's
red
because
it's
new
and
I
I
thought.
That
would
be
the
case
because
it
didn't
look
like
it
was
red
because
it's
really
something
critical.
So
if
you
have
a
critical
risk
that
you
think
what
color
do
you
have
that
as.
J
M
A
Slightly
political
to
me
has
anybody
else
got
any
other
questions
before
we
move
on
to
any
debate
or
discussion
right.
So
anybody
want
to
say
anything
in
the
debate
any
comments,
anything
they
find
funny
right.
So
we'll
move
on
whipping
through
this
agenda.
A
A
You
so
Mr
Brewer,
director
of
digital
sustainability
and
resources.
Can
you
introduce
the
report
before
us.
N
Please
thank
you
chairman
and
thanks
for
the
opportunity
and
the
requests
for
me
to
attend
recognizing
that
had
some
Specialists
been
here
last
time,
that
would
have
been
most
helpful
to
the
committee
and
no
doubt
very
helpful
to
the
internal
audit
officer
who
did
a
valiant
did
valiantly
alongside
Sarah
goby,
to
to
provide
some
some
explanation.
N
I
thought
it
would
be
extremely
useful
to
set
out
in
a
in
a
written
report
having
having
watched
back
the
committee
process
in
July
to
set
out
some
responses,
as
is
shown,
as
is
shown
in
the
written
report
before
us,
recognizing
that
some
of
the
questions
related
across
a
range
of
of
areas,
data
protection,
Disaster,
Recovery,
cyber
security
and
cloud
computing
and
in
the
report
I
seek
to
set
out
the
latest
information
with
regard
to
each
of
those
areas.
N
In
terms
of
information
governance,
we
we
reference
that
we
have
a
full-time
information,
governance
and
data
Protection
Officer
in
post,
Michaela,
wood,
who's,
excellent
and
a
network
of
35
data
quality
and
protection
Champions
across
the
organization,
and
that's
that's
a
really
effective
network
of
people
who
are
meeting
regularly
to
understand
what
data
protection,
guidance
and
training
is
required
within
their
teams
and
I.
Think
that's
working
working
quite
well
in
relation
to
overall
policies.
N
However,
I
think
we
would
recognize
that
there
is
much
always
much
more
to
do
in
relation
to
data
protection
and
the
comments
made
at
the
committee
in
July,
around
human
behavior
and
and
and
and
so
on,
a
very
important.
The
report
sets
out
I
think
at
paragraph
4.7
an
example
of
how
we're
seeking
to
constantly
make
people
aware
of
some
of
the
risks,
for
example
with
fishing.
So
we
have
a
contract
with
a
company.
N
An
outside
company
called
boxfish
who
actually
it's
called
sort
of,
essentially
a
white
hat
or
more
friendly,
friendly
attack,
which
is
essentially
an
email
which
seeks
to
draw
people
into
clicking
a
button
or
responding
to
an
email,
and
we
do
that
monthly
to
see
how
many
people
do
the
wrong
thing
and
that's
a
really
good
recent
recent
service,
which
which
has
been
implemented
since
since
the
report
was
was,
was
written.
N
It's
really
interesting
to
see
how
many
people
get
caught
out,
including
including
you
know,
those
officers
that
should
know
better
frankly
and
and
it
is
really
difficult.
Sometimes,
these
phishing
attacks
are
very,
very
convincing,
but
in
all,
but
by
doing
it
monthly,
it's
a
very
good
constant
awareness
raising
exercise.
N
So
that's
just
one
example
of
how
we're
trying
to
improve
ongoing
awareness
and
training
because
it's
never
never
finished.
The
report
sets
out
that
all
of
our
staff
have
been
trained
online
in
in
in
data
protection
and
cyber
security.
There
is
an
issue
with
making
sure
that
people
refresh
that
training,
so
we
do
have
a
task
of
making
sure
people
get
themselves
up
to
date,
but
all
585
staff
have
been
trained
within
the
last
couple
of
years.
N
So
it's
a
constant
it's
a
constant
job
of
making
sure
people
are
aware
of
their
responsibilities.
Obviously,
one
of
the
things
that
was
raised
was
around
remote
working
and
homeworking.
The
I.T
security
policy,
and
particularly
annexe
of
that
policy
talks
in
detail
about
the
responsibilities
of
Staff
around
protecting
their
information
when
working
from
home.
N
Also
in
the
report,
we
talk
about
implementing
a
much
stricter
log
off
of
systems
at
home,
so
that's
been
implemented
now,
so
you
will
all
find
that
we're
being
kicked
out
of
Google
on
a
daily
basis
and
having
to
re-authenticate
with
two-factor
authentication,
so
that
again,
there's
always
a
balance
to
strike,
but
so
that
can
be
somewhat
disruptive
and
a
bit
of
a
pain
to
have
to
log
back
in.
N
N
So,
for
example,
our
Academy
revenues
and
benefit
system
is
hosted
by
it
on
Microsoft
azure,
which
are
very,
very
large.
Highly
secured
data
centers
and
the
the
as
as
is
referenced
in
the
report
is
compliant
with
national
policy.
National
cabinet
office
issued
policy
around
the
use
of
cloud
services
providing
greater
levels
of
security
than
can
be
provided
by
local
teams
such
as
ours.
N
Having
said
that,
when
it
comes
to
the
data
center
at
the
Town
Hall,
significant
investment
has
been
applied
over
the
last
year,
around
650
000
pounds
worth
of
new
equipment
for
the
town
hall
data
center,
that's
being
implemented
right
now.
The
new
new
secure
firewalls
were
implemented
over
the
weekend,
for
example,
which
provide
the
buffer
and
the
security
buffer
for
for
for
for
the
whole
system.
N
N
Another
Network
features
so
we're
we're
in
a
position
where
we've
just
moved
in
the
process
of
getting
towards
the
end
of
moving
from
an
old
world
of
an
older
data
center,
which
was
but
at
the
end
of
its
life
and
into
a
new
data
center,
which
is
being
as
I
say,
implemented.
Currently,
it's
important
to
recognize,
though,
that
the
number
of
applications
stored
at
the
Town
Hall
data
center
is
very
limited.
N
So
if
you
look
in
the
report
at
the
list
of
Key
Systems,
the
vast
majority
are
hosted
either
by
the
supplier,
in
something
like
Microsoft
azure
or
by
ourselves
in
Amazon
web
services
in
equally
secure
environments.
So
very
little
is
left
in
the
data
center.
There
does
need
to
be
some
printing
network,
Wi-Fi
and
so
on,
but
very
little
so
even
in
March,
when
we
did
have
an
outage,
most
of
our
services
were
available
because
they
were
hosted
in
the
cloud.
N
We
had
some
access
issues
because
of
the
nature
of
how
the
network
was
configured
at
the
time.
Those
will
be
resolved.
So,
even
if
the
town
hall
data
center
goes
down
in
the
future,
we'll
have
less
of
an
impact,
and
indeed
in
March
it
was
relatively
limited.
Even
though
some
there
was
some
disruption
for
some
time
in
terms
of
the
procedures
for
data
recovery,
there
is
work
to
do
to
make.
We
have
got
a
prioritized
list
of
those
systems
that
need
to
be
recovered.
N
We
know
what
order
they
need
to
go
in,
but
you
heard
in
July
that
those
procedures
weren't
written
down,
that
is
a
problem.
We
propose
to
write
those
procedures
down
once
the
new
network
is
in
place,
because
the
actual
technical
Arrangements
will
be
different
in
terms
of
cyber
security.
N
Obviously,
the
the
internal
audit
was
satisfactory
in
any
case,
but
we
do
have
a
new
tool
called
itsm,
which
is
basically
a
suite
of
policies
and
procedures
and
protocols
that
that
have
been
established,
which
are
National,
National,
nationally
accepted
and
we're
implementing
those
with
our
new
cyber
security
officer.
Who's
been
recruited
in
the
last
couple
of
months,
so
we
have
a
dedicated
cyber
security
officer
now
who
is
taking
through
a
an
action
plan
and
we're
halfway
through
delivering
on
that.
N
One
of
the
things
that
that
came
up
in
in
the
July
meeting
and
also
in
in
the
audit,
was
that
what
we
don't
currently
do
well
enough
is
is
closely
manage
the
contracts
by
these
Cloud
providers.
So,
whilst
the
information
given
at
4.33
is
illustrative
of
the
recovery
time
objectives
and
the
recovery
Point
objectives
of
these
systems,
in
other
words,
these
suppliers
are
contractually
obliged
to
keep
things
running
and
to
recover
them
quickly,
and
we
know
what
their
obligations
are
to
recover
in
12
hours
to
recover
in
four
hours.
N
For
example,
we
do
still
need
to
get
better
at
meeting
with
those
people
regularly
to
understand
that
those
arrangements
are
sound
and
I
would
I
would
fully
acknowledge
that
we
need
to
do
more
to
understand
all
of
our
Cloud
contracts
and
that
we're
having
the
right
conversations
with
those
people
on
a
regular
basis,
as
I
say.
Having
said
that,
they
are
contractually
obliged
to
provide
these
services,
most
of
them
promise
to
provide
availability
99.99
of
the
time,
sometimes
the
technical
detail,
of
how
they
do
that
is
not
available
to
us.
N
These
sometimes
are
very
big
Global
and
Enterprises,
and
they
don't
necessarily
want
to
tell
us
exactly
how
they're
going
to
provide
that
service
to
us.
It's
a
bit
like
imagining
that,
just
because
we
receive
electricity,
we
should
be
able
to
go
to
the
electricity
company
and
then
and
then
tell
us
in
detail
how
they're
going
to
guarantee
that
that
electricity
is
provided
to
us.
N
So
there
is
some
limits
to
what
we
can
do
and
and
I
think
we'll
leave
it
there.
Apart
from
to
say,
there
is
a
section
on
mobile
device
security
as
as
well
in
the
report.
N
There's
always
more
for
us
to
do
and
as
I
say,
there
are
some
key
things
that
I'm
very
keen
that
we
make
progress
at
PACE
on,
broadly
speaking,
I'm
hoping
that
this
provides
an
additional
level
of
assurance
to
to
to
to
what
you
the
impression
that
was
given
in
July
and
I.
Apologize
that
I
wasn't
in
attendance
to
to
help.
A
Thank
you
very
much
very
thorough,
I
I
think
the
committee
were
concerned
about
the
identified
risks
at
the
time
and
I
think
things
have
moved
to
Pace
since
then
or
since
the
production
of
that
report,
and
it's
very
reassuring
to
have
received
this
report
today.
A
So
now
have
any
of
the
committee
got
any
questions
in
relation
to
the
context
of
the
report.
Councilor
crisp.
O
Thank
you
chair.
Thank
you
very
much.
Mr
bro
that
was
very
interesting.
I've
got
two
areas
I'd
like
to
investigate.
The
first
is
about
the
staff
who
need
further
training
updates.
So
that's
on
page
190.
No,
that's
not
true
what
two
meters
here,
the
refresher
training
is
Page
190.,
you
say
152
out
of
585,
that's
quite
a
high
fraction.
How
are
you
doing
with
those
updates
and-
and
you
know,
is
there
have
you
got
some
recidivists?
N
Yes,
it
is,
is
too
larger
figure
from
my
own
point
of
view,
as
a
just
as
a
somebody
who
who's
obviously
done
the
training.
One
of
the
things
that's
an
issue
is
that
the
training,
when
you
do
it
first
time
is,
takes
quite
a
while
and
I
think
that
one
of
the
problem
is
that
we
haven't
got
the
refresher
training
designed
right,
because
people
will
will
basically
think
crikey.
I'm
I
need
to
do
all
of
that
again,
rather
than
a
Top-Up
refresh
training,
which
is
less
onerous.
N
So
at
the
moment
we're
asking
people
to
go
through
the
whole
thing
again,
which
I
think
is
a
bit
of
a
problem.
So
I
have
asked
our
data
Protection
Officer
to
design
some
lighter
touch,
refresh
training
which
will
help
us
do
the
right
things
in
terms
of
making
sure
people
have
it
more
at
the
front
of
their
minds
without
it
seeming
like
an
onerous,
unnecessary
task
in
their
minds.
O
Thank
you
very
much
go
on,
can
I
yep,
so
the
second
point
gosh.
Yes,
it
was
in
the
page
223
in
the
appendix
about
the
remote
Annex.
A
remote
working
I've
got
concerns
about
this
equipment
use.
O
Obviously
you
want
to
know
that
people
aren't
leaving
their
laptop
logged
on
with
sensitive
data
wandering
off
going
down
the
park
with
their
dog
and
having
a
coffee.
You
need
to
know
that,
but
what
if
the
Amazon
delivery
arrives
or
someone
nips
to
the
loot
or
their
child
comes
in
I,
don't
want
this
sense
of
people
being
spied
on.
So
my
my
analysis
is
that
this
is
rather
rapidly
developed
due
to
covet
due
to
working
from
home.
You
have
to
have
strict
restrictions,
but
are
you
talking
to
your
workers?
O
N
So
you
yeah
I
I,
agree
that
there's
a
real
need
to
make
sure
that
we're
operating
safely
and
a
real
need
to
be
human
and
practical.
On
the
other
hand,
my
my
advice
in
that
sort
of
scenario
is
to
snap
the
lid
shut
on
the
laptop,
which
is
quick
and
does
the
job,
so
those
sort
of
practical
tips,
I
think,
are
reasonable.
F
P
I'm,
a
bit
green
on
all
these
Cloud
stuff
things
I'll
be
honest
with
you,
but
I
just
have
just
a
question
that
perhaps
it
doesn't
need
answering
but
I'd
like
to
ask
anyway
so
I'm
I
do
feel
very
reassured
by
your
presentation
and
your
report
with
regards
to
our
security,
but
I
I
know
of
situations
where
autistic
children
have
been
able
to
break
into
the
Pentagon
systems.
N
Through
through
you,
chairman,
because
I'm
working
digitally
here,
I
can't
quite
remember
what
paragraph
we
talk
about
it,
but
one
of
the
things
that
the
cabinet
office
and
their
they
have
a
cloud
first
policy
which
has
been
in
place.
I.
N
Think
since
since
2012
I
think
what
this,
what
this
talks
about
is
that
to
be
secure
in
this
day
and
age
is
very
difficult
for
a
for
a
small
local
team
for
a
for
a
small
local
team
to
achieve
so,
there's
there's
a
lot
of
capital
investment
in
terms
of
the
equipment,
there's
an
awful
lot
of
management
and
maintenance
of
the
environment,
which
requires
a
lot
of
skill.
N
The
best
thing
to
do
is
go
to
to
go
to
Cloud
very
important
to
go
to
the
right
data
centers
when
we
say
cloud
we're
just
talking
about
large
data
centers
that
have
huge
teams
of
technical
experts
who
live
and
die
in
terms
of
their
business
model
on
it
remaining
secure.
So
when
we
give
ourselves
to
that
to
that
system,
we
we
buy
a
huge
amount
of
security
and
Technical
specialism
that
we
can't
ever
imagine
that
we
could
provide
for
ourselves.
N
P
Sorry
so
the
the
cloud
is
secure
and
I
can
visualize
a
huge
Warehouse
full
of
equipment,
there's
storing
all
this
stuff,
but
that
equipment
needs
electricity,
presumably
to
run
so
what
happens
in
a
situation?
A
disaster
situation
like
that
in
relation
to
being
able
to
get
back
to
your
stuff,
that's
been
stored
on
the
cloud.
Do
they
have?
Does
it
automatically
transfer
to
backup
equipment?
N
But
through
your
chairman,
these
are
certainly
all
questions
that
are
very
valid
and
and,
as
you
might
imagine
in
terms
of
those
businesses,
they
build
bespoke
data
centers
with
highly
resilient
electricity
supplies,
probably
four
to
five
different
ways
to
make
sure
that
power
is
maintained
in
any
event,
but
also
if
that
particular
geography
is
compromised
by
a
bomb
say,
then
the
resilience
comes
from
from
multiple
data
centers
around
the
world
and
the
backup
is
moving
everything
from
that
compromised
location
or
making
sure
that
there's
a
synchronized
version
somewhere
else
geographically.
N
So
if
that
goes
down,
everything
will
still
work
because
there's
a
there's
a
copy
running
elsewhere.
Geographically,
and
then
we
talk
about
those
those
zones
in
in
the
report.
A
Thank
you,
councilor
Borum,.
F
A
Right,
councilor,
Arnold.
H
Thank
you
chair
thanks,
so
much
for
the
call
and
there
is
really
loads
to
be
reassured
by
and
the
policies
are
really
tight,
they're
really
great.
And
if
I
remember
back
to
that
July
meeting,
there
were
some
other
concerns
about
who
the
data
protection
officers
were,
and
also
the
data
controllers
and
and
perhaps
some
of
the
the
gaps
and
that's
in
that
system.
H
In
terms
of
continuity
in
those
roles
and
when
to
go
to
those
people,
there
was
a
there
was
some
confusion
with
staff
as
to
when
they
should
flag
something
they
saw
as
an
issue
so
page.
The
the
information
you
know
from
236
onwards
is
gray
as
well
as
the
gdpr
leads
information,
but
I
guess:
I've
got
three
questions
but
they're
all
quite
tiny
so
and
it
talks
in
July,
20
2022
on
page
239
that
are
suitably
qualified
and
experiential
data,
Protection
Officer
will
be
appointed.
H
Do
we
have
one
post
that
document
I'm
sure
we
do
and
then
the
other
one
is
the
data
controller
appointed
that
talks
about
that
in
two
four
five:
do
we
have
one
under
the
staff
know
who
they
are
and
and
then
do
the
staff
have
a
sense
of
the
severity
of
when
to
go
to
the
data
controller,
for
example,
I
can't
it
might
be
in
one
of
the
policies,
but
I
couldn't
see
it
as
to
when
the
staff
go
to
the
data
controller
as
opposed
to
the
gdpr
leads,
and
you
know,
sort
of
a
flow
chart
of
who
to
go
to
depends
on
the
severity
of
the
situation
of
the
potential
breach.
N
Thank
you.
They
were
really
fundamental
questions,
I
think
so
so
in
terms
of
the
data
Protection
Officer.
Yes,
so
Michaela
would
is
our
data
protection
and
information
governance
officer
who's
been
in
post
for
some
time
now
in
terms
of
data
controller
I'm,
the
Cyro,
the
senior
information
risk
officer.
N
So
we
have
a
technology
and
information
board
which
meets
monthly,
which
I
chair
which
Michaela
attends
and
she
provides
a
report
on
data
protection
and
information
governance,
progress.
So
that's
progress
on
the
training
stats
that
we
talked
about,
but
also
on
breaches,
so
there's
a
system
of
breach
reporting.
So
we
review
all
breaches
each
month
and
talk
about
whether
they're,
one-offs
or
there's
a
pattern,
most
almost
always
they're
one-offs,
which
require
that
continual
awareness
raising
people
may
have
may
have
emailed
the
wrong
person
have
picked
up.
N
You
know
just
just
made
a
sort
of
a
clerical
error
if
you
like,
and
therefore
breached
breach
data
protection
in
terms
of
the
the
the
gdpr
leads
they're.
Those
I
think
it
was
35
people
around
the
business
who
are
there,
as
within
the
service
areas
acting
as
data
data
protection
champions,
so
they're
there
to
provide
advice
and
guidance
along
the
way,
as
I
think
there's
in
the
appendix
a
a
sort
of
a
leaflet
about
about
that.
Champion's
Network,
however
I'm
sure
I'm
sure.
N
It's
true
that
if
we
were
to
ask
a
member
of
Staff,
how
does
it
work?
We've
still
got
a
job
of
of
making
sure
that
people
are
aware
of
what
their
responsibilities
are
and
how
to
report
issues
so
I
wouldn't
deny
that
that
it
might
not
be
clear
to
everybody
and
I
will
go
back
and
reflect
on
that
with
Michaela
to
see
what
more
we
can
do
to
make
that
clearer.
H
Thank
you
chair
thanks,
so
much
that's
really
clear
and
that's
great
one
quick
question
on
the
appendix
page
246,
and
it
says
that
the
gdpr
governance
framework
is
currently
being
updated.
Is
that
because
of
some
changes
with
the
gdpr
legislation
or
and
when
would
that
expected
to
be,
you
know,
Devolution
shared
staff
thanks.
A
Thank
you,
councilor
stoneforth,.
D
Imagine
me
if
that's
okay,
Chad,
thank
you.
Firstly,
the
4.69,
the
BYOD
policy.
I
assume
that's
bringing
your
own
device
like
bring
your
own
bottle
of
something
I
want
I'd,
write,
I
I!
Think
that's
a
really
Progressive
policy,
I'm,
just
wondering
if
somebody's
personal
device
dies.
Do
you
have
some
way
of
getting
people?
Have
you
got
backups
in
stock?
Have
you
got
backup,
phones
and
tablets
in
stock
so
that
people
don't
have
any
disruption
to
their
work.
N
Through
you,
chairman,
most
people
who
well
I
think
it's
true
to
say
all
people
who
need
a
mobile
device
for
their
role
are
provided
with
one.
However,
there
are
some
people
who
don't
strictly
need
to
use
a
mobile
for
their.
K
N
Who
we
allow
to
access
their
email
on
their
own
device?
We
have
I,
think
it's
referenced
in
the
report.
A
mobile
device
device
management
software
which
allows
us
to
remote
wipe
and
to
keep
contained,
even
if
it's
on
a
personal
device
to
keep
the
work
stuff
away
from
the
personal
and
to
be
able
to
manage
that
work,
environment
and
and
deal
with
it
and
and
and
wipe
it
if
that
personal
phone
is
lost
and
so
on.
N
So
we
we
provide
mobile
devices
to
those
that
need
them
if
they
choose
to
use
their
personals,
then
in
the
case
that
that's
lost,
we
can
we
can
deal
with
the
security
issues
around
that.
N
D
N
D
D
Right.
Thank
you.
My
second
question
chair.
Thank
you
Mr
Brewer,
is
you
mentioned
about
the
boot
out
in
the
evening
to
make
sure
nothing's
left
logged
on
presumably
overnight
and
I.
Don't
see
that
happening
with
our
counselor
accounts
is
that
is
that,
because
we're
set
up
in
a
different
way,
should
there
be
this,
be
something
that
happens
with
us.
N
A
O
Yeah
I
I
don't
seem
to
have
two
facts
or
authentication.
It
just
stays
on.
A
Right
any
other
questions,
councilor
Wright,
white,
sorry,.
Q
G
I'm
sorry
yeah:
we
can
try
and
get
a
quote
for
it
for
our
normal
insurers
to
give
you
an
idea
of
the
scale
of
the
cost.
Obviously
it's
not
part
of
our
current
policy
because
we
have
more
General
computer
insurance,
but
certainly
we
can
investigate
that.
Q
G
Q
The
the
other
point,
perhaps
less
important,
just
to
mention
I
I-
saw
the
27th
of
October
mentioned
in
some
documentation
as
a
encryption
rollout
date.
So
if
people
are
encountering
that
yet,
maybe
maybe
in
four
weeks
time
the
other
question
page
198,
section
4.42,
it
just
mentions
that
the
AWS
service
are
located
in
Dublin
and
I.
Wonder.
Have
we
anticipated
any
potential
future
problems
if
we
become
out
of
step
with
European
or
gdpr
rules?
If,
if
one
Administration
changes
do
we
have
some
sort
of
cross-border
issue
at
all.
N
We
do
keep
an
eye
on
on
on
those
issues
and
there
are
none
at
present.
But
if,
if
that
were
to
be
the
case
that
we
needed
because
of
legal
changes
within
the
UK,
then
we
would
quite
quite
straightforwardly
be
able
to
move
the
geographical
location
from
Dublin
into
a
UK
base.
N
F
You
councilor
Garner.
R
Thank
you.
I
just
have
a
couple
more
questions
around
the
staff
training.
R
If
I
might
I
was
a
bit
concerned
with
the
number
of
people
who
haven't
done
refresher
training,
mainly
because
it
says
it's
mandatory
and
clearly
that
that
isn't
being
kind
of
fed
through
to
people
in
an
effective
way
and
linking
it
to
the
I
really
liked
the
kind
of
fishing
email
I
just
wondered
if
the
120
people
that
actually
did
click
on
it
is
there
any
relationship
between
that
120
people
and
the
people
who
haven't
done
their
refresher
training
and
if
you
click
on
it
and
make
the
mistake,
do
you
then
have
to
do
your
fresher
training.
N
Thank
you,
those
those
are
good
observations
and
points.
I
can
only
say
that
you
know
just
refer
you
to
what
I.
N
What
I've
said
before
about
the
the
obviously
there
is
escalation
and
lists
circulated
about
who
needs
to
who
needs
to
comply
with
the
training
it
is,
it
is
tough,
I
have
to
say,
I'm,
just
just
straightforwardly,
it's
tough
to
to
to
to
achieve
that
when
it
comes
to
our
our
manual
Workforce,
as
is
referenced
in
the
report,
we're
doing
bespoke
face-to-face
training
instead
of
online
training,
which
will
help
significantly
and
I
do
think
that,
in
all
honesty,
the
making
sure
that
the
refresh
training
is
is
is,
is
lighter
touch
and
is
refreshed
rather
than
do.
N
So
it's
not
to
let
people
off
the
hook,
but
I
I
can
say
that
I
can
imagine
people
thinking
about
doing
the
whole
thing
again
and
resisting
it,
it's
just
a
human
thing,
so
I
think
we
just
need
to
make
it
easier
to
get
people
to
do
their
refresh
training
in
a
in
a
good
way.
Thank.
N
P
So,
just
to
just
a
question
that
occurred
to
me
does
the
training
and
the
fishing
exercise
include
members.
N
A
L
Thank
you,
I
noted,
obviously,
a
lot
of
your
improvements,
if
you
like
our
infrastructure
based
and
for
the
benefit
of
some
of
the
other
members,
who've
ever
said.
L
Maybe
don't
necessarily
understand
this
to
to
to
to
the
certain
degree
I
suppose
it's
a
way
of
saying
that
we've
upgraded
and
forgive
the
analogy:
we've
upgraded
from
the
three
little
pigs
from
a
a
house
of
sticks
to
one
of
bricks,
if
you
like,
but
as
you're
probably
aware,
there's
there's
a
number
of
ways
that
the
big
bad
wolf
can
still
get
in.
L
So
so
I
noted
that
you
have
ANS
looking
after
AWS
I
won't
ask
you
for
specifics,
because
obviously
that
would
highlight
to
any
would-be
attacker
if
you
like
weaknesses
at
specific
points
at
the
council,
so
I'll
ask
in
a
general
term.
Are
there
any
areas
of
your
Cloud
migrations
or
any
other
aspects
of
the
council
that
haven't
got
third
party
experts,
making
sure
that
whilst
the
infrastructure
is
solid,
the
the
windows
and
doors
are
locked
and
other
other
risks
are
being
addressed
and
monitored?.
N
Thanks
to
the
question
so
ans
look
after
our
Amazon
web
services
infrastructure,
so
we
we,
we
use
those
as
a
third-party
specialist
to
manage
that
environment
as
you,
as
you
say,
that's
just
for
the
Amazon
web
services,
so
at
paragraph
4.4
is
where
we
list
those.
N
N
All
of
the
other
major
systems
are
provided
by
a
third-party
under
contract
and
the
the
environments
that
they
host
their
systems
are
in
very
often
in
Microsoft
azure,
so,
for
example,
revs
and
Benz
is
in
Microsoft
Azure
and
many
of
the
other
Key
Systems.
N
Now
when
it
comes
to
the
specialists
in
in
the
chain
as
it
were,
you
have,
for
example,
with
rebs
and
bends
the
capita
technicians,
and
then
you
also
have
the
Microsoft
Azure
technician
sitting
in
that
chain
of
reassurance.
So
in
that
example,
our
technicians
wouldn't
have
any
involvement
in
that
chain.
It
would
be
capital
and
it
would
be
Microsoft
Azure
so
to
the
point
are
any
to
the
question:
are
there
any
cloud
services
without
third-party
technicians
over
the
top
of
them?
The
answer
is
no.
N
A
L
So
in
terms
of
insurance
now
I
see,
obviously
you
haven't
got
it
and,
and
the
reason
was
given
to
being
prohibitively
expensive
given
the
areas
of
improvement,
would
it
be
the
case
that
we
might
be
paying
additional
Insurance
weighted
risk
due
to
those
gaps?
And
if,
at
all,
would
we
be
an
insurable
risk
at
this
point?
Because
my
opinion
would
be
that
we
probably
wouldn't
be
able
to
get
insurance,
because
there
are
a
number
of
areas
that
would
make
us
potentially
uninsurable.
N
So,
in
relation
to
cyber
security,
we
believe-
and
it
is
a
you-
you
raise
a
good-
you
raise
a
good
point
in
terms
of
something
that
we
haven't
touched
on,
which
is
the
Cyber
Essentials
recommendation
from
the
audit
report,
which
we
believe
we
we
would
meet
and
we
we
are
in
the
process
of
applying
for
for
that
certification.
So
it
may
well
be
that
an
insurance
would
require
that.
N
But,
as
it
says
in
the
report,
we
we
believe
that
cyber
Essentials
is
relatively
straightforward
and
that
we
need
to
go
to
the
iso
2007
standard
which
we'll
be
working
on
over
the
next
few
months.
To
the
question
of,
would
we
be
able
to
get
insured
I
think
the
answer
would
be
yes,
but
at
a
premium
and
I
think
most
organizations,
certainly
ones
of
our
size,
it's
prohibitively
expensive
to
achieve
that
and
I,
don't
believe
that
it's
necessarily
related
to
the
the
standards,
the
standards.
N
You
know
some
sort
of
achieving
certain
standards,
but
as
I
say,
we
will
look
into
that
in
terms
of
insurance,
but
I
think
we
all
know
that
and
and
central
government
have
recognized
it
as
an
issue.
N
Given
the
the
additional
monies
that
they've
put
to
allow
councils
like
ours
to
invest
in
cyber
security,
the
hundred
thousand
pounds
that
has
allowed
us
to
get
a
dedicated
officer
to
improve
things,
there's
a
recognition
that
there
are
vulnerabilities,
not
just
in
local
government
but
elsewhere
and
frankly,
you
know
the
insurance
premiums
are
high
because
even
large,
so
it
can
happen
and
and
nothing
nothing
of
what
I've
said
tonight
means
that
there's
a
guarantee
that
it
won't
happen
because
Google
can
get
hacked.
N
N
Hackney
Council
was
a
great
example
of
a
very
large
digital
team
that
got
hacked
18
months
ago
and
their
reps
and
Ben
system
was
down
for
six
months
as
a
result,
we're
very
large
digital
team
with
some
really
good
people
that
I
know
and
and
they
did
get
hacked
so
that
it
is
a
risk.
It
is
real.
We
we
believe
that
our
strategy
to
move
everything
to
the
cloud
is
the
right
one.
Because
of
that,
but
of
course
there
remain
risks.
P
Can
I
just
this
may
help
others
I,
don't
know
they
may
already
know,
but
can
I
just
understand
how
a
system
gets
hacked?
Is
it
generally
through
things
like
email.
N
Well
there
there
are
a
number
of
a
number
of
ways.
Obviously
one
of
the
things
one
of
the
games,
if
you
like,
is
that
hackers
try
to
be
one
step
ahead
of
those
that
are
protecting
systems
and
it's
a
it's
a
bit
of
a
game
of
of
of
sort
of
poacher
Game
Keeper.
N
So
there
are
always
very
technical
risks
of
people,
as
you
say,
sort
of
tunneling
through
in
very
technical
ways,
but
I
think
one
of
we.
We,
the
reason
that
we
go
to
cloud
is
to
leave
those
teams
of
of
game
Keepers,
who
are
best
placed
to
to
spot
and
address
those
risks.
N
I
think
one
of
the
things
as
councilor
Morgan
I,
think
touched
on
in
July,
is
that
we
need
to
be
very
careful
about
is
human
is,
is
the
human
behavior
side,
which
is
why
the
fishing,
the
monthly
fishing
tests
are
so
key,
because
what
we
don't
want
to
do
is
people
to
give
away
information
which
allows
systems
to
be
compromised
by
part.
You
know
people
giving
away
passwords
or
personal
information
which
would
allow
them
to
after
several
attempts
get
information
poses.
N
P
So
go
ahead
so
so
for
for
me
to
play
my
part
in
keep
myself
in
the
organization
safe,
Do,
I
Look
to
incoming
emails
as
the
way
are,
the
fish
is
getting
in.
N
If
I'm
interested
as
a
top
tip
check,
who
who
the
sender
is
so
click
over
the
sender
and
see
whether
that
email
address
looks
sensible,
that's
the
one
of
the
best
ways
of
checking
whether
it's
a
phishing
attack
or
not,
because
the
email
address
will
look
a
bit
weird
and
if
it
does
don't
go
anywhere
near
it.
D
Thank
you,
chair
I,
wanted
to
ask
you
what
happens
if
revs
and
Benz
goes
down.
I
know:
okay,
we've
got
these
systems,
hopefully
it's
all
in
the
cloud.
Hopefully
they'll
get
it
back
up
in
no
time
at
all,
but
what,
if
it
doesn't
have
we
got
some
contingency
if
we
can't
rely
on
the
paint
copies
yeah?
What
other
contingency
do
we
have
other
than
relying
on
the
company
to
sort
that
out
for
us.
N
So
you're
so
so
there
might
be
a
number
of
reasons
for
not
being
able
to
access
the
information.
So
you
know
there
could
be
problems
with
the
equipment
or
the
network
RN.
There
could
be
some
sort
of
disruption
to
the
fiber
line
between
us
somewhere
and
and
that
data
center,
and,
as
you
say,
there
could
be
a
compromise
that
that
data
center
sort
of
depends.
N
The
recovery
Point
objective
is
the
guarantee
around
how
recently
they've
taken
the
copy.
So
if
the
RPO
is
12
hours,
it
means
that
they
guarantee
that
you
will
only
lose
12
hours
worth
of
data
because
we
will
have
copied
it
and
backed
it
up
then.
So
this
is.
This
is
what
comes
in
terms
of
the
third
party
contract
in
terms
of
those
guarantees
that
they've
got
a
copy,
potentially
multiple,
copies
elsewhere,
go
ahead.
D
Thank
you
and
then
do
staff
then
have
procedures
to
re-input
12
hours
worth
of
work.
Is
it
you
know,
set
up
seamlessly
with
Steph
as
well.
N
Yes,
yes,
they'll
they'll
be
able
to
they'll
be
able
to
replicate
that
work.
We
in
that
particular
case.
There
are
documents
that
are
held
elsewhere,
which
are
used
in
order
to
do
the
updates
in
the
database,
so
the
information
still
exists
to
be
able
to
catch
up
and
and
replicate
the
work.
That's
been
done.
Yeah
thank.
A
You
all
right,
councilor,
Morgan,.
L
So
you
mentioned
that
you
are
looking
at
ISO
27001
I
am
a
ISO,
27001,
lead
auditor
and
look
at
policies
and
a
variety
of
things
on
a
daily
basis.
L
I
noted
that
in
the
policies
which
are
good
to
an
extent,
there's
a
few
elements
that
are
missing
and
those
elements
have
consequences.
So
one
of
them
is
that
there
is
no
consequences
listed
for
staff
that,
for
example,
don't
comply
with
them
to
the
to
the
extent
that
I
would
expect
and
for
example,
and
that's
reflected
potentially
in
the
lack
of
adoption
of
the
training.
L
L
A
So
councilor
Morgan
I
think
there
probably
was
a
question
in
there.
Is
there
any
testing.
N
Thank
you
thanks,
just
just
on
the
on
the
first
element,
in
terms
of
consequences
that
I'd
like
to
I'd
like
to
go
away
and
think
about
that,
just
in
terms
of
a
cultural
piece
around
around
what
we.
What
we
want
to
do
is
to
not
make
people
fearful,
but
obviously
to
make
make
encourage
people
to
comply.
N
Clearly
in
terms
of
Performance,
Management
and
capability,
we
have
General
procedures
such
that
if
any
policy
is
broken
or
breached,
you
know
we
do
have
recourse
to
to
capability
and
Performance
Management.
So
whether
or
not
we,
whether
whether
or
not
we
apply
a
particular
phrase
in
this
policy,
I'm
certainly
really
happy
to
think
about
that.
I.
N
Just
don't
want
to
I
need
to
think
that,
through
in
terms
of
testing,
absolutely
I
think
in
terms
of
the
Town
Hall
data
center,
once
the
new
network
is
in
place,
one
of
the
things
I've
requested
is
that
we
do
have
a
regular
testing
regime
re-established
to
do
Disaster
Recovery
scenarios.
We
have
had
them
in
the
past.
We
haven't
had
them
for
the
last
three
years
or
so.
N
We
need
to
do
more
regularly
with
the
suppliers,
in
other
words,
I,
think
it's
more
the
case
that
we
need
to
seek
reassurance
from
them
that
they
are
testing
their
environments
in
the
right
way
and
that
they
can
provide
reassurance
about
their
recovery
arrangements,
so
I
think
with
Cloud
providers.
It's
slightly
different
to
having
control
over
all
of
the
testing
like
with
the
analogy
of
the
electricity
and
the
electricity
company.
N
K
L
Gone
and
lastly,
this
is
lastly
I
noted
throughout
the
report:
there's
lots
of
things
that
are
happening
and
that's
Obviously
good,
but
again
with
an
ISO.
L
There
has
to
be
a
firm
date
against
them,
even
if
you
missed
that
date
so
be
it
there's
a
reason
for
it,
but
it
would
be
really
helpful
and
I
think
a
good
idea
if
there
was
some
firm
dates
again
I
put
when
when,
when
there's
loads
of
instances
through
here,
that
it's
that's
it's
happening,
but
no
actual
indication
of
of
when
exactly
it
could
literally,
it
could
be
a
long
time
in
the
future.
Occasionally
it
says,
Autumn
and
and
there's
a
few
firm
dates
here
and
there
of
things
that
have
been
achieved.
L
I
think
it
would
be
fair
to
put
Hard
dates
again.
You
know
analyze
and
determine
a
date
and
put
it
in
there
and
I
said
if
it.
If
it's
missed
again,
there
might
there's.
You
know,
there's
probably
a
good
reason
for
that,
but
it
would
help
measure
if
well,
as
I,
said
you're
achieving
what
you
hope
to
achieve.
N
Thank
you
just
briefly,
FMH
I
think.
That's
that's
very
fair
comment.
The
there
are
plans
sitting
underneath
this
report,
so
we
do
have
a
risk
Mighty
risk
register.
We
also
have
the
cyber
security
Improvement
plan,
which
I
think
is
referenced.
I
think
I
can't
see
my
screen
right
now,
but
I
think
we
say
that
we've
done
12
out
of
23
or
something
points
on
that
that
does
have
dates
and
so
on
in
it
as
an
action
plan,
but
there's
not
reflected
in
the
report
but
you're
right.
A
Thank
you
well,
I
think,
that's
probably
the
last
of
the
questions,
so
we
now
can
open
this
up
to
debate.
So
if
anybody
would
like
to
debate
it.
A
C
F
A
A
A
Right
so
this
brings
us
on
to
item
number
10.,
which
I
must
say:
Mr
Wilde
has
done
a
fantastic
job,
refereeing
these
this,
these
many
working
group
meetings.
So
if
he
could
introduce
the
report
before
us,
please.
S
Thank
you
chair.
First
of
all,
I'd
like
to
pay
tribute
to
the
members
of
the
working
group,
and
they
were.
There
are
six
of
them
around
this
table
this
evening,
who
all
played
an
incredible
part
in
undertaking
a
review
of
what
our
lengthy,
complex,
detailed
and
sometimes
impenetrable
documents
that
haven't
been
reviewed
thoroughly
for
a
number
of
years
have
been
incremental
changes
over
the
years
as
we
know,
but
to
do
a
thorough
review
like
this
is
a
really
healthy
exercise,
but
a
very
detailed
one.
S
So
without
the
help
of
members
of
the
working
group
we
wouldn't
be
in
this
position
now
and
I.
Think
the
the
product
of
that
work
is
is
has
been
achieved
through
a
lot
of
consensus,
a
lot
of
compromise
and
a
lot
of
really
robust
exchanges
of
views
and
I.
Think
the
quality
of
the
work
that
the
group
have
produced
is
is
Testament
to
the
the
tension
and
detail
that
all
members
took
over
this
and
the
care
they
took
in
in
working
with
the
group.
So
I'd
like
to
pay
tribute
to
them.
S
The
report
itself,
hopefully,
is
fairly
self-explanatory.
As
I
said,
the
working
group
managed
to
achieve
consensus
in
a
very
wide
range
of
areas,
but
there
was
one
particular
element
that
it
decided.
It
would
be
best
to
refer
to
this
committee
for
a
decision,
because
there
simply
wasn't
agreement
on
on
the
way
forward
and
that's
referenced.
In
section
five
of
the
report
and
in
addition,
there
have
been
a
couple
of
other
subsequent
matters
which
require
the
committee's
specific
attention
also
referred
to
in
section
five.
S
The
other
additional
item
for
consideration
by
members
this
evening
are
the
comments
made
by
The
Joint
overview
and
scrutiny
committee
at
its
meeting
last
Thursday.
Unfortunately,
it's
been
very
late
arriving,
but
if
that's
necessitated
because
of
the
delay
to
the
Joint
overview
and
scrutiny
committee
caused
by
the
period
of
mourning,
so
the
meeting
only
took
place
last
Thursday
and
the
comments
from
that
committee
have
hopefully
all
been
circulated
and
brought
to
your
attention.
They
are
relatively
few
you'll
see
a
lot
of
similarity
in
the
first
point
that
they
make
with
the
issue
a
paragraph
5.2.
S
So
maybe
it's
possible
to
deal
with
those
together,
but
also
asks
for
consideration
of
a
couple
of
other
items,
one
relating
to
the
support
of
a
scrutiny
officer
to
assist
members
who
wish
to
make
a
Minority
Report
as
a
result
of
a
scrutiny
committee
meeting
and
the
other
one
is
the
inclusion
of
a
statement
regarding
the
non-political
nature
of
scrutiny
at
the
section
dealing
with
the
party
whip.
So
this
is
all
set
out
in
this.
S
Hopefully,
this
document,
which
has
been
circulated
to
you
in
advance
of
this
meeting
jet
I
I,
I'm
very
happy
to
take
any
questions
either
on
the
content
of
the
report
or
the
appendix
which
details
the
consultation
responses
that
members
provided
very
helpfully,
or
indeed
the
Constitutions
themselves.
S
The
two
Constitutions
are
almost
identical,
they're
very,
very
similar
to
each
other,
but
each
Authority
is
Sovereign
and
each
Authority
has
the
right
to
determine
its
own
Constitution.
So,
whilst
there's
a
lot
of
benefit
to
be
gained
from
having
a
Synergy
and
a
similarity
between
the
Constitutions
and
allowing
them
to
work
with
a
single
officer
structure
underneath
it
is
open
to
each
authority
to
decide
what
its
own
Constitution
should
contain.
So
I
just
make
that
point.
In
conclusion,
Jim.
A
And
Well
Done,
so
I.
One
of
the
things
we
need
to
consider
tonight
is
whether
for
each
item
as
we
consider
it,
whether
we're
going
to
have
that
included
in
both
constitutions
or
whether
there's
going
to
be
a
Divergence
between
the
two
Worthing
in
Ada,
and
so
we
may
have
to
have
separate
votes
so
can't
sustainforth.
D
Thank
you,
chair
on
this
I
appreciate.
Not
all
members
will
have
read
the
whole
Constitution.
Can
we
be
clear
on
this
document
which
Pages
they
refer
to,
because
because
of
course,
3.2
and
3.3
for
example?
Of
course,
we're
talking
about
membership
for
just
within
this
book,
3.203.3
in
themselves
run
all
the
way
through
this
document
in
the
various
different
subsections.
So
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
everybody's
on
the
same
page
as
it
were
so
membership
of
josk
is
I.
Think
it's
page
four,
four
one
two
forward.
A
A
So
right:
well,
let's,
as
we've
got
to
that
bit,
let's
consider
this.
A
O
404
I
thought
was
the
right
page
was
ask
and
actually
councilor
Stanford
is
right.
It's
four
one.
Two
for
josk.
A
O
D
D
So
we
need
the
reference
numbers
for
both
and
to
be
really
really
clear
that
everybody's
on
this
on
the
right
bit
for
each
for.
R
P
Chair
we're
having
trouble
already
trying
to
do
two
councils
at
the
same
time,
and
you
know
we're
talking
about
a
few
hundred
Pages
for
for
each
and
is
it
perhaps
sensible
if
there
are
going
to
be
two
constitutions,
that
there
are
that
they're
seen
by
their
relative
councils
individually.
A
Thank
you,
councilor
says:
let's
do
that
if
we
find
that
we
diverge
at
the
moment,
the
two
Constitutions
are
the
same
and
if,
if
the
Worthing
counselors
say
they
want
something
different
from
what
the
Ada
councilors
want,
then
of
course
I
think
then
that's
the
time
for
it
to
go
to
the
two
separate
councils.
But
at
the
moment
we
have
the
same
in
this
section.
S
A
A
No,
no,
not
that
the
F
the
issues
so
five
on
page
two,
five,
two,
the
issues
that
we
are
considering
and
the
first
one
is
so
at
5.1.
It
says
the
working
group
was
able
to
achieve
consensus
on
the
vast
majority
of
amendments,
but
there
was
one
area
where
they
agreed
to
defer
to
the
Joint
governance
committee
for
determination.
This
concerns
the
proposal
to
offer
the
chair
of
overview
and
scrutiny
to
an
opposite
opposition
member.
A
So
this
is
what
we're
considering
now
and
what
we
need
to
do
is
first
of
all
consider
so
councilor
stainforth.
You
were
first.
D
Sorry
I
thought
councilor
wait
was
just
before
me,
then
I'll
defer,
oh.
M
Thank
you,
chairman
well,
of
course,
on
page
818
that
refers
to
the
Joint
overview
and
scrutiny
committee.
But
if
you
look
on
page
810
for
Worthing,
you
will
see
the
membership
of
the
overview
in
scrutiny
committee
where
these
paragraphs
are
repeated.
So
is
it
the
intention
to
have
a
different
selection
procedure
for
the
joint
overview
and
scrutiny
committee
to
the
overview
and
scrutiny
committee.
A
I,
don't
think
it
is
so
we
don't
usually
meet
as
a
separate
overview
and
scrutiny
committee.
So
we
are
at
the
moment
we
are
only
considering
the
joint
overview
and
scrutiny
committee.
A
Councilor
crisp.
Sorry.
M
And
of
course,
if
a
council
agrees
this,
then
if
it
agrees
what's
in
page
1
810,
then
it
will
be
agreeing
those
two
paragraphs
which
are
being
excluded
and
replaced
for
the
joint
overview
in
scrutiny
committee.
So
de
facto
there
will
be
a
different
selection
procedure
for
the
overview
in
scrutiny
committee
compared
to
the
Joint
overview
and
scrutiny
committee.
A
I
would
say
that
it
should
be
changed
in
that
section
too,
for
the
for
the
overview
and
scrutiny
committee.
Is
that
how
you
see.
S
A
So
we
are
talking
about
both
sections
and
keeping
them
both
the
same
and
at
the
moment
we're
talking
about
whether
both
counts.
Both
councils
will
have
the
same
words
in
both
those
sections
for
joint
overview
and
scrutiny
and
overview
and
scrutiny.
A
D
You're
quite
right,
Chad
osc,
has
has
never
met,
and
with
that
in
mind,
I
think
that's
why
it's
really
important
important
that
we
come
to
a
joint
agreement
for
a
joint
process
on
this
I
wanted
to
talk
to
you
a
little
about
what
happened
at
josk,
because
this
came
from
this
came
from
just
and
I
wanted
just
to
speak
to
this
I
was
actually
councilor,
Heather
Mercer,
who
made
this
recommendation
initially,
and
it
was
fully
backed
by
well.
D
What
what
she
was
saying
really
is
this
3.2
consideration
should
be
given
to
a
members,
experience,
expertise,
interests,
ability
to
act
impartially,
blah
blah
blah
in
her
long
experience.
That
should
happen
anyway,
that
it
that
that's
who
we
are
as
counselors.
We
shouldn't
seek
to
justify
somebody's
expertise,
interests
ability
to
act
impartially.
If
we
can't
do
all
of
those
things,
we
shouldn't
be
counselors
and
she
she
thought
it
quite
irrelevant
really
and
I.
D
Think
I
pointed
out
that
the
similarity
between
that
and
and
the
and
the
very
similar
section
on
on
around
sharing.
D
So
so
we
felt
with
that
with
that,
so
we
recommended
and
unanimously
agreed
that
that
was
struck
out,
and
then
we
spoke
to
everybody
spoke
to
the
the
good
practice,
the
algae
practice,
how
it
looks
to
the
public
if
we
chair
ourselves
and
and
what
that
might
do
to
our
reputation-
and
we
unanimously
just
about
unanimously,
agreed
to
change
this
section
so
such
that
this
these
words
here
replace
3.2
3.3,
so
I
just
wanted
to
be
really
clear.
That
was
the
process.
D
We
had
a
really
good,
thorough
discussion
about
it.
It's
available
to
watch
if
you
wanted
to-
and
it
was
very
much
led
by
councilor
Mercer
who's-
got
much
much
more
experience
on
this
than
me.
Thank
you.
Thank.
O
I
remember
the
boiling
hot
day
when
we
discussed
this
on
the
hard
to
believe
on
the
working
group,
and
there
was
a
robust
debate
and
I
think
it
was
very
useful
debate,
but
it
really
comes
down
to
whether
we
are
if,
if
we're
going
to
scrutinize
the
workings
of
the
councils,
it's
essential
that
it's
not
just
that
it
should
be
impartial.
But
it
should
be
seen
to
be
fair.
So
it's
very,
very
important.
O
However,
brilliant
an
elected
member
from
a
the
Worthing
labor
group
might
be
will
be
inappropriate
for
them
to
be
scrutinizing
the
workings
of
their
own
Authority
and,
however
marvelous
a
an
aidatory
might
be.
They
shouldn't
be
scrutinizing
the
work
of
the
council,
because
the
public
won't
think
that's
fair,
so
I
know
we've
historically
and
Ada
managed
to
have
independent
counselors
and
things
like
that
to
totally
recently
yeah,
which
has
been
a
recent
development,
but
I
I
think
it's
essential.
A
I
would
just
like
to
say
that
we
are
not
a
school
and
we
are
not
doing
homework,
handing
it
in
and
then
marking
it
ourselves.
So
can
we
stick
to
the
relevant
facts
that
we
are
talking
about
the
joint
overview
and
scrutiny
committee,
not
a
school?
Thank
you
very
much
so.
O
I'm
going
to
return
to
that
then
councilor
McGregor
I
was
using
a
phrase
that
is
well
accepted
in
public
and
it's
been
used
about
our
own
government
as
well.
So
I
wasn't
trying
to
reduce
our
work
because
I
think
we
do
a
very
good
job
here.
O
I
quiz
cascodiet,
custodias
I,
think
is
the
Roman
we're
looking
for
the
last
thing
that
we're
looking
for
here.
Isn't
it
who's
scrutinizes
the
scrutineers
and
it
should
be
seen
to
be
impartial.
H
Thank
you,
yeah
I
would
Echo
councilor,
Chris
and
and
stands
for
thoughts
here
and
when
I
look
at
the
suggestions
in
terms
of
what
who
should
be
considered
when
forming
that
chair,
it's
it
talks
about
requisite
expectabies
commitment
and
the
ability
to
act
impartially.
H
Well,
actually
ability
to
act
impartially
is
right
at
the
end
of
that,
and
actually
for
me,
that
is
the
major
overriding
issue
and
the
importance
that
we
should
be
trying
to
achieve
and-
and
that
is
the
far
biggest
Benchmark
that
we
should
be
looking
at
here
and
when
we
sat
on
the
working
group.
There
was
a
very
interesting
and
very
strong
debate
on
it,
but
actually
majority
in
the
room
agreed
that
it
should
be
an
impartial
chair
and,
as
I
look
at
when
it
went
to
it's
gone
to
josk.
Now
they
all
agreed.
H
They
all
agreed
bar
I.
Think
two
who
abstained
at
that
vote
so
always
think
that
some
really
if
we
are
to
not
go
with
this
suggestion
of
of
in
this
some
separate
piece
here,
we're
almost
sort
of
discrediting
the
work.
That's
gone
through
the
working
group
through
the
josk
and
through
our
previous
colleagues,
and
you
know,
hours
and
hours
and
hours
of
time
has
been
spent
on
this.
So
we
have
to
be
mindful
of
that
as
well.
Thanks
councilor.
A
I
Thank
you
very
much
chairman
I'm,
just
thinking
about
the
political
makeup
of
the
of
the
two
councils
and
what
could
possibly
happen
so
it
could
be,
for
example,
for
Worthing
that
the
if
we
protect
the
alternative
words
that
a
a
conservative
counselor
will
be
chair
and
for
Ada,
a
labor
counselor.
The
chair,
which
therefore
means
that,
for
six
months
of
the
year
in
josk,
a
conservative
wording
chair
will
be
marking
the
homework
of
the
conservative
Administration
in
Ada,
and
vice
versa,
which
I,
don't
think
is,
is
the
intention.
I
If,
if
people
are
that
concerned
about
politics,
the
only
way
that
you
could
do
that
is
is
the
is
the
poor
live,
Dem
counselor
be
appointed
for
Worthing
and
either
a
green
or
a
or
a
Sean
Beach
resident
for
for
Ada,
which
I,
don't
think,
is
the
intention,
but
going
with
these
words,
that
is
what
would
effectively
happen
politically.
Thank
you.
T
Thank
you
chair.
Maybe
if
you
came
at
it
from
another
angle,
and
someone
gives
a
reason
why
we
shouldn't
have
an
impartial
chair
or
our
chair
from
another
party,
you
know
what
a
good
reason
for
what.
Why
would
it?
Why
would
it
be
wrong?
You
know
well.
A
You
a
good
reason
whether
somebody
comes
from
one
party
or
another
is
no
measure
of
their
partiality,
and
if
we
were
to
have
someone
from
the
opposing
party
and
make
that
prescriptive,
then
that
could
just
as
easily
be
seen
as
politically
motivated
and
not
independent
or
impartial.
D
Double
negative
negative
thing:
that's
not
even
a
word
you're
using
double
negatives
and
wrapping
yourself
in
in
with
rings.
Not
that's
the
word.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
Councilor
Morgan,
I.
Just
think
we
are
what
are
we
so
afraid
of
having
having
decent
security?
Why
do
we
not
want
to
follow
local
government
Association
guidance?
Why
do
we
not
want
to
follow
our
monitoring
officers
guidance?
Why
do
we
not
want
to
follow
our
just
recommendation?
What
are
we
so
afraid
of?
D
We
are
using
our
own
subjective
opinion
and
bias
and
motivations
here
over
the
well-informed,
well-regarded
and
politically
neutral
structures
around
us
that
have
all
recommended
that
we
have
a
chair
from
the
majority
opposition
and
they
do
that
for
good
reason.
What
why
are
we
arguing
about
this
Worthing
of
agreed
it
if
we
don't
have
it
as
a
in
our
joint
protocols?
It's
going
to
look
weird.
It's
it's
not
going
to
look
good.
It's
not
a
good
look.
S
The
statutory
guidance
you
referred
to
chair
is
you're
correct.
It
says
that
and
I've
repeated
that
paragraph.
What
is
erroneously
numbered
5.3
on
page
253?
It
should
be
5.4,
I
apologies,
so
chair
should
guard
the
committee's
independence,
but
avoid
the
committee
being
and
being
viewed
as
a
de
facto
opposition
to
the
executive,
but
I
said
on
the.
S
On
the
other
hand,
there
is
the
alternative
view
expressed
by
the
center
for
governance
and
scrutiny,
which
is
not
statutory
guidance
but
is
nonetheless
persuasive
that
the
practice
of
reserving
all
positions
of
responsibility
to
the
majority
party
can
harm
perception
of
scrutiny's
credibility
and
impartiality.
So
it
is
a
finely
balanced
argument.
You
can
have
it
either
way
it
neither
way
is
wrong.
Per
se,
I
think
50
percent,
roughly
of
the
authorities
in
the
country,
choose
to
have
an
opposition
chair
of
their
scrutiny,
function,
which
means
50
of
the
councils
in
the
country.
S
Do
not
so
there's
no
right
answer.
It
really
is
a
matter
of
local
Choice
here
and
I.
Think
this
that's
why
it's
not
been
prescribed
in
statute
as
one
way
or
the
other.
A
Thank
you,
councilor
Wade,.
M
Thank
you
chairman.
This
is
actually
quite
a
pointless
argument
and
I'll
explain
why,
because
councilor
borum's
already
explained,
but
clearly
the
ramifications
haven't
sunk
in.
If
we
stick
to
the
Convention
of
the
administration,
appointing
the
chairman,
then
Worthing
labor
group
would
appoint
a
labor
member
and
Aid.
A
conservative
group
would
appoint
a
conservative,
so
the
two
joint
chairman
would
be
from
the
conservative
party
and
the
labor
party,
and
they
would
each
chair
for
six
months
of
a
year.
M
If
we
now
accept
this,
this
new
approach
that's
being
put
forward
as
being
the
one
that
our
members
of
our
public
would
like.
Then
the
wording
labor
group
would
appoint
a
conservative
chairman
and
the
Ada
conservative
group
would
appoint
a
labor
chairman
and
there
would
then
be
two
chairmen
The
Joint
chairman
one
of
the
labor
group
and
one
of
a
conservative
group,
each
of
whom
would
chair
for
six
months
of
a
year.
Now
you
might
notice
that
the
two
outcomes
are
identical.
A
I
think
we
had
a
hand
raised
over
here.
Didn't
we
councilor
White.
Q
Thanks
chair
I'm,
not
going
to
address
that
last
Point
merely
to
say
we're
in
5.2
here
we've
got
two
sets
of
proposals.
I
find
the
second
one,
the
most
persuasive.
Q
We
did
in
fact
attempt
to
give
the
conservative
opposition
the
ability
to
come
up
with
the
chair
for
joint
overview
and
scrutiny
back
in
may.
They
didn't
take
up
the
opportunity,
but
we
put
our
money
where
our
mouth
is
and
we
gave
them
the
opportunity.
Q
It
seems
to
be
it
with
dancing
on
the
head
of
a
pen.
We
did
that
for
many
hours
during
the
meetings
in
the
summer,
half
of
us
in
the
room
were
at
that
meeting
and
I'm
afraid
others
weren't
at
those
meetings,
so
they
won't.
We've
had
the
benefit
of
hearing
these
arguments
gone
over
and
over
again,
what
I
would
say
is
that,
if,
if
Worthing,
of
which
I'm
a
member
votes
in
this
version,
I
would
naturally
recommend
it
to
Ada,
we
are
engaged
in
a
non-political
process
here.
Q
H
But
thank
you
chair.
It's
not
mutepoint
and
the
six
months
to
six
months,
because
the
Constitution
is
a
long-standing
document
that,
for
example,
isn't
gone
through
a
major
change
again
and
in
about
sort
of
10
years
is
actually
going
to
be
in
statute
for
a
long
time.
So
the
current
situation-
yes,
it
is,
there
would
be
its
mute
point
for
the
current
situation,
but
of
course
there
could
be
a
change
of
political
control
and
the
executive.
H
So
this
document
has
to
be
binding
to
that
that
economic,
political
change
now
I
think
in
some
ways,
if
I
could
come
back
to
your
Pine,
councilor
McGregor
is
I.
Think
maybe
you
know,
whilst
the
chair
is
a
very
important
role,
of
course,
it
is
only
one
tiny
element
of
the
opposition.
H
You
know
there
are
many
of
us
around
this
room
that
are
the
opposition,
so
perhaps
you'll
probably
you
know
the
chair
acts
as
a
really
impartial
stance,
making
sure
that
everybody's
views
are
heard
and
if
they
act
as
the
opposition
in
that
entirety,
then
they
are
very
much
overplaying
their
playing
their
role,
so
I
think
you're.
Giving
that
role
too
much
credit
in
this
situation.
A
T
B
I
would
just
respond
very
briefly
to
that
point.
As
someone
who
works
in
the
houses
of
Parliament
that
isn't
entirely
correct.
There
are
I
think
some
were
in
the
region
of
15
select
committees
in
Parliament
and
they
are
basically
divided
according
to
the
political
makeup
of
the
House
of
Commons,
so
there
are
probably
nine
conservative
chairs
five
labor
chairs
and
then
a
couple
of
others.
So
it's
not
all
opposition
members
control
scrutiny.
Committees
is
mixed
up.
C
A
D
You
so
much
chair
you
like
this
one,
if
you're
listening
you
with
me,
yes,
so
at
the
moment,
we'd
have
one
labor
and
one
conservative
chair
I,
get
that
I
hear
that.
But
when
we
take
the
council
in
two
years
time
at
least
to
no
overall
control,
there
will
be
two
conservative
chairs
of
Joss.
So
be
careful.
What
you
vote
for
really
be
careful.
What
you
vote
against.
O
Well,
thank
you
very
much.
My
first
point
is
that
the
phrase
in
the
wording
is
the
chair
will
first
be
offered
to
a
member
of
the
political
group
that
does
not
form
part
of
the
admin.
So
that's
an
important
point.
Isn't
it
so
they're
asked
us
to
suggest
somebody
that
the
biggest
group
that
isn't
the
executive,
what
we
call
now
cabinet
or
executing
it
cabinet?
Sorry
the
other
point
to
make.
O
Is
that
say
the
there's,
a
majority
party
forming
the
cabinet
and
then
there
may
be
three
other
members
of
that
party
who
were
not
in
the
cabinet.
O
A
C
Yeah
with
danger
of
being
called
peasant,
I,
don't
think
we're
actually
looking
at
saying
it
has
to
be
a
member
of
the
opposition
which
just
offered
to
a
member
of
the
opposition
rather
than
it's
not
not
prescribing
it
to
be
a
member
of
the
opposition.
So
if,
if
the
opposition
decide
amongst
themselves
that
they
don't
want
to
put
candidate
forward,
that's
fine,
which
is
what
happened
in
Worthing
in
May,
whereas
I
I
would
be
in
favor
of
prescribing
it
personally
but
I.
Don't
that's
not
what
we're
saying
here!
We're
not
prescribing
we're.
A
Thank
you,
I
mean
we're,
prescribing
the
offer.
Aren't
we
councilor
Borum.
I
Thank
you
very
much
chairman.
First
of
all,
the
House
of
Commons
is
not
a
a
joint
situation.
I
think
there
is
one
Administration,
it's
a
long
time
since
I've
read
the
guidance.
Note,
did
the
guidance
notes,
consider
joint
overviews
and
security
committees,
or
do
they
consider
a
council
in
its
singular?
I
P
Thank
you,
chair,
obviously,
I
haven't
been
involved
in
the
committee.
That's
been
looking
at
the
Constitution
I
haven't
read
every
page
of
the
Constitution
I
haven't
had
time
since
it
was
delivered
to
me
and
having
not
seen
it
before,
but
it
does
look
like
a
lot
of
work
was
done
and
it
I
would
like
to
copy
Mr
Wilde's
comment
of
what
a
fantastic
job
has
been
done
by
the
people
that
were
on
that
committee.
P
Obviously,
we
have
a
couple
of
little
sticking
points,
and
this
is
one
of
them
it.
There
are
probably
lots
of
different
roads
to
Rome
and
I'm,
not
sure
that
the
existing
road
is
part
of
its
sell
by
date
and
I'm,
not
sure
why
we
need
to
fix
something.
That's
been
working
for
so
long.
P
It
does
seem
fair
that
the
chair
is
shared
between
the
two
majority
parties,
if
you
like
that
are
all
taking
part-
and
it
just
happens
at
the
moment
that
one
of
the
councils
is
a
labor
majority
Council
and
the
other
one
is
a
conservative
one,
and
it's
been
pointed
out
that
this
could
change
in
the
future.
It
could
both
be
conservative
majority
councils,
who
knows
what's
going
to
happen
in
the
future.
P
The
reason
that
it's
six
months
here
and
six
months
there
is
because
there
are
two
councils,
not
who's
actually
chairing
it,
I
believe
so.
P
My
my
question
really
is:
why
do
we
need
to
change
what
we're
currently
doing
as
long
as
the
people
who
are
appointed
to
be
in
the
chair,
show
and
remain
to
be
impartial?
Minutes
are
taken
at
these
meetings
for
anybody
who
might
be
concerned
about
what
happens
and
so
I.
Don't
think
that
we
need
to
be
fearful
about
what
the
public
are
thinking.
They
can
look
at
the
minutes.
Presumably
thank.
R
Thank
you
very
much.
Chair
I
mean
I
was
part
of
the
working
group
and
listening
to
everybody
now
I
think
we
could
go
on
for
many
hours
trying
to
debate
whether
individuals
are
impartial
and
how
impartial
they
are.
I
mean
impartiality
is
an
absolute.
You
can't
have
a
degrees
of
impartiality.
The
thing
that
persuades
me
most
is
actually
the
sentence
here.
The
practice
of
reserving
all
positions
of
responsibility
to
the
majority
party
can
harm
perceptions
of
scrutiny's
credibility
and
impartiality.
R
A
F
Else,
oh,
we've
got
a
whole
load
more
councilor,
funnel.
E
Thank
you,
chairman
I
will
not
to
relate
back
to
my
experience.
I
was
scrutiny
chairman
for
five
years,
I'm
going
to
show
you.
The
first
thing
you
do
is
to
make
sure
that
you're,
impartial.
The
importance
of
the
role
is,
you
know,
comes
really
really
comes
to
the
foot
to
a
four.
If
you
were
politically
biased,
you
would
soon
lose
trust.
E
E
The
main
thing
is
is
ensuring
you
get
older
members
involved
and
to
show
they
all
got
in
there's
a
part
of
the
setup.
That's
an
important
thing.
A
Thank
you,
I
I
can't
tell
you
which
one
of
you
three
put
the
hand
up.
First,
let's
go
for
cancer
Arnold.
H
It's
almost
like
we
work
as
a
collective
and
I
wanted
to
point
to,
and
this
goes
back
to,
councilor
Garner's
actually
is
about
perception
and
I
want
to
take
this
out
of
this
room
actually
and
back
to
the
public
perception.
And
if
we
look
at
page
262
with
the
questionnaire
that
went
to
to
members
is,
is
that
under
under
the
the
number
10?
Do
you
have
any
comments
or
suggesting
as
to
how
the
Constitution
should
be
approved?
H
H
I
was
I.
There
was
one
occasion
I'm
not
going
to
say
which
chair
where
I
was
on
a
working
group
party
working
report
group,
and
there
are
series
of
recommendations
all
agreed
by
the
group
and
then
what
happened
was
there
was
some
pre-whipping
done
behind
the
scenes
and
the
chair
was
working
with
that
pre-whipping
pre-whipping
behind
the
scenes
work.
So
I
think
this
is
a
point.
That's
really
really
important
and
I
think
that
perception
is
out
there
and
I
think
that's
that
goes
back
to
miss
to
councilor,
Garner's
points
and
I.
D
Foreign
I'd
like
to
come
back
to
councilor
funnel's
Point
I'm,
absolutely
confident
that
councilor
funnel
will
have
acted
with
integrity
and
as
much
as
he
could,
with
impartiality
in
scrutinizing
his
fellow
conservatives,
but
to
the
outside
and
looking
at
all
the
advice.
It's
not
a
good
look,
however,
I'd
like
to
say
to
you
chair.
D
If
you
want
to
go
for
it
and
have
conservatives
scrutinizing
other
conservatives,
or
at
least
the
option
of
conservatives
scrutinizing
other
conservatives
on
Ada
District
Council,
please
do
go
for
it
because
it'll
be
a
gift
to
us.
Thank
you
very
much.
M
Jim
I'd
like
to
just
propose
that
we
accept
the
wording,
is
put
To
Us
by
Jos,
because
actually
it
doesn't,
as
I
said
earlier,
it
doesn't
actually
make
any
difference,
we'll
end
up
with
one
conservative
and
one
labor
or
one
labor,
and
one
conservative
as
the
joint
chairman.
So
we're
actually
talking
about
a
process
where
the
outcome
is
the
same
either
way
and
frankly,
we
might
as
well
just
put
this
forward
now
and
agree
it.
So
I
would
propose
that
we
agree
the
wording
as
put
To
Us
by
josk.
A
See
now
I
my
problem
with
that
is
that
the
wording
also
transfers
to
the
osk,
which
would
be
for
that
particular
Council
and
in
the
statutory
guidance
it
says,
the
method
of
selecting
a
chair
is
for
each
authority
to
decide
for
itself
and
to
have
that
decision
made
for
the
ask
I
think
is,
is
wrong
and
I
think.
Maybe
we
should
have
the
situation
where
it
looks
like
we're
not
going
to
get
this
to
be
the
same
between
each
Council
and
I.
A
K
M
Council,
which
Full
Council
can
accept
or
overturn
I'm
simply
trying
to
trans
well
to
reduce
the
time
that
we
spend,
making
a
decision
that
full
counts
will
actually
decide.
This
will
simply
be
a
recommendation
to
full
Council
of
both
wording
and
Ada
and
actually
at
those
four
Council
meetings
where
you
can
actually
make
different
decisions
on
the
Constitution
which.
K
D
No,
absolutely
in
support
of
what
councilor
wait
said
and
were
he
to
propose
that
I
would
second,
it
I'm
second
doing
it,
but
what
I
want
to
say
chair?
Is
you
can't
prejudge
the
fact
that
we're
going
to
make
different
decisions
we're
here
to
make
a
recommendation
given
all
the
facts?
You
can't
prejudge
that
and
say:
oh
well,
we're
going
to
make
a
different
decision
for
him.
Ask
then
just
ideally,
we
won't
ideally
we'll
all
have
a
similar
mind
on
this
and
make
it
a
lot
easier
for
Democratic
services.
I
P
A
Yeah
very
good
point
well
made
anyone
else:
councilor
Morgan.
L
So
I'm
trying
to
phrase
this,
so
it
does
join
part
of
that
as
I
said,
because
I
did
put
my
hand
up
before
the
proposal
in
a
second,
but
anyway,
like
counselor,
coxil
I
tend
to
deal
in
fact,
rather
than
as
I
said,
just
opinions
and
and
and
what
we're
going
to
do,
or
or
hypothesizing
in
every
which
way
we
can.
L
L
Secondly,
in
terms
of
our
impartiality
as
individuals,
it's
very
easy
to
see
from
our
individual
voting
records
in
committees
that
there
isn't
true
impartiality
there.
So,
no
matter
what
you
say:
you're,
not
I'm,
driving
I'm,
just
saying
that
that
it's
very
easy
to
evidence
that
there
isn't
true
impartiality
there.
L
If
I'm,
writing
saying
that
the
the
the
working
schedule
is
voted
through
by
the
members,
so,
regardless
of
the
Chairman's
political
persuasion
and
influence,
it's
voted
by
the
members,
so
whichever
political
party
is
in
dominance,
will
vote
through
the
working
program.
L
That
probably
benefits
then,
and
lastly,
individual
members
in
in
this
group
and
I'll
go
back
to
the
meeting
I
think
it's
two
before
where
we
agreed
to
form
the
working
party
that
I
raised
the
this
point
and
it
is
on
record
and
one
of
the
benefits
of
of
this
being
on
video
and
out
there
for
the
public
is.
Is
you
know
we
are
as
I
think
somebody
else
said
already
we
are
open
to
be.
L
L
A
Anybody
else
got
anything
to
say
in
the
debate
before
any
amendments.
Anybody
wants
to
put
before
I
put
it
to
the
vote.
Councilor
White.
Q
Thank
you,
chair,
I,
believe
somebody
was
proposed.
Something
was
seconded
I'm
surprised.
We
didn't
go
to
a
vote
immediately.
Maybe
I
missed
something.
F
A
M
I
thought
I
made
it
clear
Chapman,
but
I
will
repeat
for
clarity.
What
I
proposed
was
the
recommendation
from
Joss,
which
is
to
remove
paragraphs
3.2
and
3.3
and
replace
these
with
the
alternative
supplied
as
part
of
the
joint
governance
committee
papers,
which
says
the
chair
of
the
overview
and
scrutiny
committee.
Stroke
joint
overview
and
scrutiny
committee
shall
not
be
appointed
by
the
council.
The
chair
will
first
be
offered
to
a
member
of
a
political
group.
A
Can
I
just
speak,
I
I
think
councilor
Waite
said
that
he
proposed
it
was
the
wording
as
supplied
by
jask,
and
if
you
read
it
out
wrongly
then
I
think
we
know
where
we
stand.
Councilor
Garner,
you
had
your
hand
up.
Yes,.
A
See
I
my
own
opinion
is
that
we
we
should
keep
it
the
same
as
it's
currently
proposed,
but
also
I
really
can
see.
No
reason
why
we
should
remove
3.2.
A
D
A
I
So
I
think
3.2
is
still
still
relevant,
because
if,
if
the
position
is
offered
to
a
member
of
the
political
group
that
does
not
form
party
Administration,
they
could
appoint
somebody
who
does
not
comply
with
3.2.
O
O
D
Sure
they're
not
the
same
there's
some
argument
for
for
16.1
3.2
as
we've
discussed,
contradicts
what
we're
proposing
and
is
pretty
irrelevant.
Let
me
just
find
that
wording
again.
Sorry,
so
we
I'll
say
it
again.
I
said
it
earlier:
When
selecting
members
to
serve
on
discretion
committee.
Consideration
should
be
given
to
experience
expertise,
interests,
ability
to
actually
partially
ability
to
work
as
a
group
capacity
to
serve
we've
got
to
have
all
of
that
to
be
a
counselor.
P
M
A
P
A
That's
the
motion
that
we
currently
have
before
us
councilor
stand
forth.
D
I'm
happy
to
go
with
that.
If
that's
what
the
majority
of
you
is
I,
don't
think
it's
relevant.
We
don't
just
get
elected
councilor
Bell
assist.
We
have
to
comply
with
the
Nolan
principles.
D
First
and
foremost,
you
know,
and
there
are
many
ways
of
dealing
with
counselors
who
don't.
But
that
said,
if
this
is
going
to
move
us
on
quicker
and
we
could
agree
to
keep
3.2
in
and
and
make
that
change,
so
we're
sort
of
taking
most
of
just
recommendations,
but
not
all
of
them,
but
we're
taking
the
the
substantive
recommendation,
which
is
the
around
proper
scrutiny.
Then
I'd
be
happy
with
that,
and.
A
A
H
Okay,
right
I
just
want
to
I'm
going
to
be
really
success
so
when
it
says
When
selecting
members
to
serve
on
scrutiny
committees
and
it
talks
about
the
experience
right.
Okay,
well,
first
of
all,
you're
discounting
a
whole
load
of
new
councilors
that
could
serve
on
scrutiny,
committees
and
that
might
be
perfectly
experienced
outside
of
the
council
chamber,
but
in
scrutiny.
Matters
but
may
not
have
been
so
as
a
counselor.
H
And
if
you
are
selecting
members
to
serve,
then
you
are
discounting
people
who
could
become
the
chair,
so
I
want
this
struck
out
personally
and
I
am
personally
going
for.
Council
awaits
original
suggestion,
and
that's
I
feel
very
strongly
about
that.
Thank
you.
I
Thank
you
very
much
when
it's
talking
about
a
member's
experience
it
it
does
not
define
that
it
is,
it
is
only
Council
experience.
The
council
would
really
obtain
experience
from
many
different
sources,
their
professional
lives,
their
working
lives,
family
lives
and
things,
so
it
is
not
limited
to
council.
Thank
you.
Q
Thank
you,
chair
could
I,
could
I
just
speak
and
say
that
I'm,
very
supportive
of
what
council
is
staying
forth,
Just
proposed
to
reply
to
cancer
Arnold
that
section
she
wants
struck
out
says
consideration
should
be
given
it
there's,
no
definition
of
what
consideration
is
or
what
place
you
reach
after
having
considered,
and
it
also
says
that
as
a
group,
it
possesses
the
requisite
expertise.
Q
A
M
It's
interesting
chairman
because
there
seems
to
be
a
number
of
variations
of
the
definition
of
how
these
members
are
going
to
be
selected,
because
when
we've
just
talked
about
a
member's
experience,
we've
talked
about
a
whole
range
of
things
where
life
experience
their
political
experience.
But
that's
only
the
first.
When
there's
expertise,
we
need
to
consider
their
expertise
and
their
interests,
their
ability
to
act
impartially.
I
I,
just
wonder
who's
going
to
make
the
decision
on
whether
a
member
is
able
to
act
impartially.
M
M
M
Do
so
that's
why
I
was
supporting
its
exclusion.
I
think
Heather
Mercer
was
writing
that
and
obviously
I
believe
I'm
right,
because
I
normally
am,
but
but
from
experience
chairman
I
can
tell
you
that
this.
If
we
put
this
in
this,
is
going
to
be
really
difficult
for.
For
us
to
try
and
justify
how
we
select
members
for
the
excruciating
committee-
and
it
adds
nothing,
you
know,
I
think
we
should
go
ahead
with
with
my
proposal.
I
accept
that
very
different
views,
but
the
reality
is
put
this
in
and
and
you're
going
to
make.
A
Now,
I'm
just
going
to
read
to
you
the
statutory
guidance
on
selecting
committee
members
for
overview
and
scrutiny,
27
When,
selecting
individual
members
to
serve
on
scrutiny,
committees,
an
authority,
so
that's
who
considers
it
an
authority
should
consider
a
member's
experience,
expertise,
interests,
ability
to
act
impartially,
ability
to
work
as
part
of
a
group
and
capacity
to
serve
28.
A
A
So
it's
not
an
association.
That's
made
this
recommendation.
It's
Her,
Majesty's
gov
or
his
emergency
is
government.
Sorry
about
the
slip.
So
it's
up
to
the
authority
to
make
that
decision.
O
R
A
D
A
A
You
should
read
the
Constitution,
no
I'm
only
kidding
the
so
if,
if
a
motion
has
debated-
and
it
seems
like
it's
going
around
in
circles,
any
member
of
the
committee
can
propose
that
there
is
no
further
debate
and
that
we
go
to
a
vote,
but
we
have
to
have
a
vote
on
that.
A
So
I'm
proposing
the
question
is
put
I.
Think
I
saw
councilor
borum's
hand
raised
to
Second
it.
So
without
any
more
debate,
we
are
now
going
to
vote
on
whether
we
should
vote.
A
Unanimous
thank
you.
Now
we
are
going
to
vote
on
the
motion
originally
put
forward
by
councilor
Waite,
which
is
that
we
adopt
the
recommendation
given
to
us
by
the
membership
of
josk,
which
removes
3.2
and
3.3,
and
replaces
it
with
the
phrase
that
I'm
going
to
read
out
good
luck.
The
chair
of
the
overview
and
scrutiny
committee
joint
overview
and
scrutiny
committee
shall
be
appointed
by
the
council.
A
V
A
A
I
Five
working
days
is
considerably
longer
when
you
consider
the
the
Christmas
bank
holidays
all
right,
so
you
could
have
only
one
working
day
to
do
a
week's
work.
So
five
working
days
is
five
working
days,
no
matter
where
the
bank
holidays
sit
and
I
think
a
legal
advice
on
the
calendar
has
been
given,
on
my
left
hand,.
A
U
A
D
A
Does
anyone
want
to
propose
that
we
change
it
to
say
one
week
right,
I'll
cross
that
one
off
my
list,
paragraph
12.8
after
Democratic
Services,
add
support
will
be
provided
by
the
scrutiny
officer.
A
That
is
where
there
is
a
Minority
Report
on
josk
and
I.
Think
my
own
opinion
is
that
they
should
get
the
support
of
the
scrutiny
officer
to
produce
that
Minority
Report,
so
I'll
propose
that
motion.
Are
you
seconding
it?
Thank
you
councilor
staying
forth.
A
All
right
party
whip-
this
is
don't
forget.
This
is
a
Minority
Report
I'll
read
it
out.
The
description
committee
wanted
you
to
acknowledge
that
the
role
of
scrutiny
was
non-political
objectively,
holding
decisions
makers
to
account
prior
to
the
paragraphs
relating
to
the
party
with
and
insert
a
new
paragraph.
16.1
scrutiny
is
seen
as
impartial
and
stays
separate
from
Party
politics.
Scrutiny
councilors
should
use
their
political
skills
and
understanding
of
the
needs
of
local
people
to
shape
the
discussions,
whilst
not
adding
any
party
political
manner
or
using
discussions
to
further
party
political
objectives.
Councilor
stoneforth.
P
N
P
A
A
P
P
U
P
I
I
think
the
original
16.1
actually
defines
what
whipping
is
right,
so
I.
So
given
that
is
the
case
and
16.2
says
that
if
you
are
in
that
position,
you
have
to
declare
it
in
scrutiny.
What
I
think
is
wrong
with
Josh
is
that
they
want
a
new
para
in
certain
new
power.
I
16.2,
I,
I,
think
this
is
a
generality
that
Josh
is
is,
is
proposing.
I
think
it
is
incorrect
to
put
it
in
in
the
party
whip
bit
because
I
think
frankly,
the
the
bit
that
that
Josh
says
that
we
should
be
including
whether
it's
in
party
Whip
or
somewhere
else
is,
is
something
that
we
will
be
doing
as
part
of
our
role
within
Josh.
As
a
generality.
We
do
think
about
communities.
We
do
think
of
all
those
sort
of
things.
I
A
D
Just
as
clarification
you're,
quite
right,
councilor
Borum-
this
is
actually
mislabeled
here.
This
shouldn't
be
in
certainly
power
16.1.
This
should
be
16.3
or
16.2
in
the
other
one
16.3,
it's
an
additional.
It's
an
insertion
so
and
and
also
agree
with
you
16.1
very
much
the
definition.
So
there's
no
contradiction
here:
we're
defining
what
it
is.
We're
saying
why
it's
important
and
then
we're
saying
how
we
apply
that
I
think
the
three
work
quite
well.
U
Or,
or
harping
back
to
a
previous
suggestion,
chip
is
that
we
make
it
a
paragraph
new
paragraph
3.2,
as
it
kind
of
relates
to
the
membership
of
the
committee.
U
D
M
Thank
you,
chairman
I
I
do
support
this
I
mean
I.
Myself
are
not
party
to
being
a
whipped,
so
to
speak
and
have
never
been,
but
I.
Think
those
members
who
are
Winter
by
their
party
should
declare
it
if
they're,
actually
turning
up
to
an
overview
and
scrutiny
committee
and
acting
impartially
under
a
party
whip.
Although
I
will
never
do
that,
because
my
party
knows
that
it
would
be
pointless.
Trying
to
make
me
say
something:
I
didn't
want
to
say.
R
Thank
you
chair
if
I
could
ask
for
some
advice.
Is
this?
Is
this
covered
elsewhere
in
actually
the
detail
of
what
scrutiny
committee
is
because
for
me
this
feels
like
saying
more
what
the
scrutiny
committee
is
and
I
suspect
it's
covered
somewhere
earlier
in
the
Constitution,
but
I'm
not
quick
enough
to
look
for
it.
A
A
O
A
Council
was
staying
forth,
so
to
counselor,
white
has
haven't
been
proposed
and
seconded.
We
now
can
go
to
the
debate
and
it
looks
like
nobody
wants
to
debate
it.
So
we'll
go
castleborum.
I
could
tell
you
sorry.
I
I
I
do
think
this
is
in
the
wrong
place.
I
think
just
16.1
should
be
16.3
because
16
point
the
the
existing
16.1
defines
what
whipping
is
and
16.2
says.
If
you
are
whipped
up
to
that
that
definition
in
the
previous
paragraph,
you
must
declare
it
I
think.
What's
what
the
josk
16.1
does
is
gives
a
generality
of
how
you
should
behave
so
I'd
much
prefer
just
16.1
to
be
16.3.
Thank
you.
A
A
Anybody
else
want
to
say
anything.
Fine,
all
those
in
favor.
F
A
I
A
A
A
So
would
this
was
just
a
proposal
that
was
received
very
late
in
the
day.
Would
anybody
like
to
propose
this
change.
B
It
if
I
could
ask
a
quick
question
are:
are
we
going
straight
to
a
vote
on
this,
or
is
that.
A
D
A
K
B
Ahead,
I
could
consider
proposing
an
amendment
to
this.
Perhaps
the
considerations
of
debutations
that
know
more
than
one
similar
deputation
can
be
made
within
a
six-month
period
or
something
along
those
lines.
A
S
It
may
be
relevant
Clause
at
11.3,
a
9.
It's
the
last
of
those
Roman
numerals
before
B.
A
A
V
A
It's
going
to
JSC
and
then
it's
going
to
go
to
both
councils.
So
that's
the
recommendation
and
we
need
someone
to
propose
that
I
think
don't
we
we
do
yes.
So
who,
like
councilor
Borum,
has
proposed
a
motion:
do
I
have
a
seconder,
councilor
Wilkinson
having
been
proposed
and
seconded?
A
I
W
A
A
A
Here
we
go
so
can
Mr
Terry
Democratic
Services
lead,
introduce
the
report
before
us.
Please.
V
Thank
you,
chairman
I'm,
going
to
keep
it
really
brief.
The
we
were
asked
to
put
together
a
protocol
for
the
conferment
of
honorary
Alderman
and
all
the
women
for
Aida
District
Council.
A
protocol
is
set
out
in
appendix
a
to
the
report,
with
the
corresponding
criteria.
V
I
can
confirm
that
we've
consulted
with
all
group
leads
about
this
and
and
all
positive
responses.
I
believe
as
part
of
that
process
should
members
be
happy
to
agree
the
protocol,
then
we've
also
got
some
nominations
that
are
included
in
the
paper
and
set
out.
They
are
for
councilors
past
counselors
Lisa
McKinney,
Debbie,
Kennard,
Brian,
bogus
and
Jeff
howip,
so
it's
kind
of
a
two-stage
bit
chairman
if
you're
happy
to
look
at
the
protocol,
if
you're
in
agreement
with
that
then
deal
with
the
nominations.
V
D
Thank
you,
chair
can
actually
ask
I've
absolutely
supportive
of
this,
and
supportive
of
all
of
the
people
that
have
been
proposed
to
be
put
forward.
Can
I
just
ask
though
one
of
these
members
doesn't
live
in
the
country
anymore
or
is
moving
out
of
the
country.
Is
that
is
that?
Okay?
Is
that
suitable?
Is
that
something
that
we're
all
right
with.
D
K
V
A
A
Right,
anyway,
the
item
is
now
open
to
debate.
I
know:
we've
had
any
questions.
I
Councilor
Borum
chairman
I'm
I'm,
happy
to
to
propose
the
recommendations
in
in
section
two
and
I
think
we
can
confirm
that
we,
we
are
not
going
to
pay
travel
expenses
for
ageless.
K
I
To
appear
before
this
committee
I'm
also
mindful
of
a
court
of
sustainability
in
zero
carbon
policy
as
well
so
chairman
I,
am
happy
to
propose.
A
O
I
just
want
to
say,
I
think
it's
a
really
good
idea.
It's
really
nice
to
end
the
meeting
on
a
very
positive
note
where
we
celebrate
people
who've
done
great
things
for
our
area
and
I
was
particularly
pleased
that,
through
discussion,
it
was
possible
to
include
a
slightly
wider
range
of
proposed
older
persons
and
I'm
very
pleased
about
that.
Thank
you,
great
I.
A
Think
we're
going
to
call
them
older
man
or
older
women,
but
I
expect
they'll.
No,
it's
not
in
the
it's,
not
in
the
motion
that
you
seconded
so
yeah.
Thank
you,
so
I
haven't
been
devoted
to
the
second
did.
I
said
this
meeting
would
finish
at
9,
31
and
I've
got
it
wrong.