Meeting Details

Meeting Summary
Governance and Audit Committee
9 Sep 2025 - 18:00 to 21:00
Occurred
  • Documents
  • Attendance
  • Visitors
  • Declarations of Interests

Documents

Agenda

Part A
1 Welcome and Announcements
The Chairman will welcome members of the public and Councillors and remind everyone to use microphones at all times when they are speaking. The Chairman will also explain action in the event of an emergency, mobile phones switched to silent, audio-recording of the meeting. Councillors who are members of the committee will introduce themselves.
2 Substitutions
Councillors will be asked to say if they are attending on behalf of a Committee member who is absent.
3 Urgent Items
The Chair will announce if there is any item not on the published agenda which will be considered because it is urgent and will explain the reason for the urgency.
4 Declarations of Interest

Councillors will be asked to say if there are any items on the agenda about which they have a disclosable pecuniary interest which would prevent them from participating in any discussion of the item or participating in any vote upon the item, or any other registerable interest or non-registerable interest.

 

5 Minutes of Previous Meeting
The Councillors will be invited to confirm that the minutes of the meetings held on 17 June and 29 July 2025 are a correct record.
515

RESOLVED that: the minutes of the meetings of 17 June 2025 and 29 July 2025 be confirmed as a correct record. 

 

 

6 Have Your Say! (Hybrid Council meetings)

Members of the public may make representations to the meeting.  This can be made either in person at the meeting or by joining the meeting remotely and addressing the Committee via Zoom. Each representation may be no longer than three minutes.  Members of the public wishing to address the Committee must register their wish to address the meeting by e-mailing democratic.services@colchester.gov.uk by 12.00 noon on the working day before the meeting date.  In addition, a written copy of the representation will need to be supplied.


7 Landlord Social Housing
The Committee will consider a report which demonstrates (in the City Council’s capacity as landlord of social housing) compliance and delivery of the Regulator of Social Housing’s Consumer and Rent Standards.
516

The Committee considered a report which provided assurance (in the City Council’s capacity as landlord of social housing) in respect of adherence to the Regulator of Social Housing’s Consumer Standards.

 

Chris Wait, Director of Assets Colchester Borough Homes (CBH), attended the meeting and addressed the Committee. The performance of CBH was noted in detail in the report, and areas where compliance was below 100% were highlighted. Currently 5 properties were without an asbestos survey, however, 3 had appointments for a survey to be carried out, 1 was due for eviction, and 1 was in the advanced stages of obtaining access. Electrical safety certificates were outstanding for 7 properties, and work was in hand to gain access to these properties. Of the 2 properties without a gas safety certificate, 1 was due to a missed appointment and the other to documentation not being provided by the contractor, however, these issues had now been successfully resolved.

 

The Committee was advised that 94.49% of repairs had been completed on time, and Quarter 1 (Q1) satisfaction levels were 94.1%. Work in progress jobs which were awaiting completion had fallen from 289 in May to 169. Turning to voids, at Q1 113 properties had been relet, with an average turnaround time of 40.67 days. During June the turnaround time had been 37.89 days, compared to 42.5 in June 2024. In terms of performance, CBH remained in the top quartile compared to its peers. A detailed update on an internal audit which had been carried out in respect of the lettings function was contained in the report.

 

Philip Sullivan, Chief Executive Colchester Borough Homes, advised the Committee that sickness absence had been considered in detail during CBH’s Corporate Management Team meeting on 24 June, and this was an item which had been raised at previous meetings of this Committee. Long term sickness absence, and the importance of manager-led intervention, had been reviewed and had been reconsidered in August. Initial feedback had been that there had been a notable improvement in 2 particular teams, with sickness absence falling during July and August.

 

An update on stock condition surveys for the City Council was set out in the report, and the Council also had a range of additional sources of assurance in respect of stock condition, with 5% of its housing stock randomly selected for independent validation.

 

The Chief Executive CBH advised the Committee that CBH was providing assurance in respect of complaint handling performance, and details relating to complaints and ombudsman cases were provided in the report. Communication had been identified as a recurring theme in complaints and ombudsman findings, and as a result of this suitable training had been delivered to relevant staff. Details of 2 internal audits which related to regulatory standards, lettings and complaints management, were provided in the report, one of which had received a substantial assurance rating.

 

The Committee heard that strategic risks which were relevant to landlord services were reviewed at every CBH Board meeting, and the Board was satisfied that risks were being appropriately reflected, and relevant steps were being taken to mitigate.

 

In terms of customer engagement, the Board was satisfied that CBH was meeting the regulators expectations, including giving tenants a wide range of meaningful opportunities to influence and scrutinise strategies. CBH’s Finance and Audit Committee provided further assurance through its scrutiny of ongoing actions arising from internal audits, and the Operations and Performance Committee received detailed action status breakdowns in respect of fire risk assessment actions.

 

In response to questioning from the Committee in respect of antisocial behaviour (ASB), the Chief Executive CBH, did not consider that there was a single reason for an increase in cases of ASB. He assured the Committee that CBH had a dedicated team to tackle ASB, and robust action was taken where appropriate.

 

The Committee was pleased to note the improvements which were detailed in the report, however, the number of complaints per 1000 properties was rising, what was the reason for this? Was it anticipated that homelessness and the use of temporary accommodation would continue to rise over the forthcoming year, or was it possible that these numbers would fall?

 

Addressing the complaint levels, The Chief Executive CBH confirmed that in some respects CBH was unusual, in that it welcomed complaints and published a highly visible complaints policy on its website. It was not considered that complaint levels were disproportionately higher that peers in the sector, and it was very important that CBH learned lessons from all complaints that it received. A comprehensive service improvement log was maintained, and every complaint was analysed to seek opportunities for future improvement. In terms of homelessness, the current position was that numbers had fallen slightly over the preceding month, with use of bed and breakfast accommodation at its lowest level for over 2 years. The Committee heard that a consequence of the forthcoming Renters’ Right Bill appeared to be that landlords were choosing to take their properties back and evicting tenants, but the Chief Executive CBH hoped that this trend was now coming to an end. Although it was difficult to predict, it was anticipated that pressure on the Council’s housing stock would continue as the housing crisis persisted, and the Committee heard that there had recently been 448 bids for a single property. The second stage of the Council’s ‘Beyond the Box’ scheme was about to come into use, and this would improve the quality of the accommodation available as well as delivering cost savings to the Council.

 

A Committee member noted that rent arrears had fallen slightly which was positive, however, some tenants remained in debt and were the arrears associated with tenants who were in receipt of universal credit? Was background information available around those tenants who were getting into financial difficulty?

 

The Chief Executive CBH assured the Committee that CBH would be working with every tenant who was in arrears, and the vast majority of tenants were now in receipt of universal credit which was paid in arrears directly to tenants. The movement from housing benefit to universal credit had caused some issues as there isa 6 week delay in receiving the first payment of universal credit, which can lead to rent arrears in some cases. The Chief Executive CBH would confirm to the Committee whether or not CBH made use of attachment orders.

 

In response to questioning from the Committee, the Chief Executive CBH provided additional detail in relation to the data breaches which had occurred. In general terms, the breaches had been minor in nature, although every data breach was treated seriously. The breaches had related to misaddressed emails where 2 tenants had the same surname, for example, and had therefore been limited in the scope of the breach and the information which had been shared. CBH receives many thousands of customer contacts in a month, and only 8 of these contacts had resulted in a data breach. Steps had been taken to provide training and raise awareness of the issue with staff.

 

The Committee discussed the issue of homelessness, and the rising costs associated with this. What was driving the rise in costs, and how was CBH working with partners to keep costs under control, or to mitigate these in the future?

 

The Chief Executive CBH advised the Committee that an overspend was forecast in the current financial year, as the number of households in temporary accommodation had risen by 10% between the time the budget had been set and the start of the financial year. The Committee was assured that the Beyond the Box scheme provided significantly better value accommodation to the Council than bed and breakfast, as the cost of the accommodation was lower, and the rent it was able to generate was higher. The net cost to the Council of providing accommodation was therefore significantly better, and despite the number of households in temporary accommodation rising, the cost to the Council was falling. Additional space would be provided as part of the Beyond the Box scheme in the coming weeks, and it was hoped that this would lead to a significant reduction in the number of families being housed in bed and breakfast accommodation.

 

Richard Block, Chief Operating Officer, attended the meeting and assured the Committee that the issue of homelessness was a focus of the Council, as it had a direct impact on the revenue fund. Work was ongoing with CBH to obtain a greater understanding of the costs, and possible ways to mitigate against these.

 

In discussion, a Committee member wondered whether there was any way that the Council could improve the management of its housing stock to ensure that tenants who no longer needed a council house could be moved on to allow those who did need this accommodation to benefit from it. He considered that this was of key importance, as well as taking every step possible to stop or limit the right to buy Council housing stock. Geoff Beaoles, Strategic Housing and Assurance Manager, attended the meeting and advised the Committee that this was not possible, as once a tenancy had been granted it was for the life of the tenant. Although it was possible to give tenants incentives to downsize to a smaller dwelling, it was not possible to force them to leave. The Chief Executive CBH confirmed that it was possible for social landlords to provide introductory tenancies for a year prior to a tenant becoming an assured tenant, however, as a sector, fixed term tenancies were not offered to social housing tenants who were required to have security of tenure.

 

The Chief Executive CBH considered that the Council was providing housing support to provide accommodation to those in need, as evidenced by its recent approval of a Housing Revenue Account (HRA) business plan which contained growth. A key element to tackling the current housing crisis was obtaining more accommodation, and the only option was building or acquiring more properties. In terms of a tenants right to buy their home, the government had recently announced changes which would require a tenant to have lived in their home for 10 years before they were able to apply to buy it and the discount had already been reduced to make purchasing less attractive. It was hoped that these changes would serve to reduce the number of properties which were leaving the social housing pool. The Chief Executive CBH advised the Committee that he believed that it was possible to make a policy decision that tenants who were earning over a certain amount would be required to leave their accommodation, however, he believed that the administrative costs associated with proceeding in this way would outweigh the benefits obtained. This was, however, an area which he was happy to consider further. Councillor Pearson, Portfolio Holder for Economic Growth and Transformation, attended the meeting remotely and advised the Committee that under the Localism Act 2011, local authorities did have the power to issue fixed term tenancies, however, this would require a change of policy which would need the approval of the majority of City Councillors.

 

The Committee was pleased to note the assurance which had been provided via the Officer’s report. In response to questioning from the Committee, the Director of Assets CBH confirmed that detailed property records were kept, and advice was pro-actively offered to tenants in respect of damp and mould issues.

 

RESOLVED that:

 

- The Q1 complaints update, service improvement examples and Ombudsman cases detailed at Appendix 3 be noted, and that;

- The additional regulatory assurance being provided by CBH’s Board and Committees for Q1 be noted, and that;

- The remaining updates provided in this report be noted.

 

 

8 Core

The Committee will consider a report which sets out the financial performance of General Fund Revenue and Capital and the Housing Revenue Account (HRA) as at Q1 (30 June) 2025/26.

517

The Committee considered a report which set out the financial performance of General Fund Revenue and Capital, and the Housing Revenue Account (HRA) as at Q1 (30 June) 2025/2026.

 

Caroline Parker, Senior Finance Business Partner, attended the meeting to present the report and assist the Committee with its enquiries. The Committee heard that at Q1 there was a forecast gross service overspend on General Fund revenue of c£5.3m, and after application of reserves the forecast Council overspend for the financial year was £2.3m. The main drivers of the overspend included:

 

- An approximate £1.8m gross overspend on Corporate Landlord, partly related to various empty units on the Colchester Northern Gateway (CNG) development. CNG costs would be offset by drawdown from the CNG reserve, leaving a net forecast overspend at Q1 of £0.1m.

- An approximate £1.45m gross overspend in Corporate Services. Approximately £0.4m of reserves would be applied leaving a net forecast overspend of c£1.0m at Q1.

- An approximate £0.9m gross overspend in Place and Prosperity. After application of reserves, the net forecast underspend is c£0.1m.

- An approximate £0.5m overspend on Housing and Wellbeing. The overspend was mostly a £0.5m overspend on Homelessness due to cost increases of approximately 15%, and a small overspend on staffing.

 

Richard Block, Chief Operating Officer attended the meeting and advised the Committee that the report had been considered by the Council’s Senior Leadership Board, and it was anticipated that there would be a significant forecast underspend on capital expenditure, which would also lead to associated savings in capital financing costs which would be reflected in the next budget report the Committee received.

 

A Committee member posed a number of questions:

 

- Noting the use of the CNG Reserve, was it the case that this Reserve would shortly be depleted, meaning that money would then have to be taken from the General Fund (GF)?

- In respect of the reported capital underspend on waste, was this due to lead times or items not being ordered?

- What was the status of the Town Deal, and in particular the Heart of Greenstead project, in terms of the Capital Programme going forward?

- Were the CNG enabling works likely to be delivered in this year’s Capital Programme?

 

The Senior Finance Business Partner confirmed It is likely that the current trend would mean the CNG reserve would be utilised by the end of 25-26.

 

Anna D’Alessandro, Interim S151 Officer, attended the meeting remotely and advised the Committee that figures which had been provided in relation to the Turnstone development at CNG had come from the Corporate Landlord Function, and the Finance Team’s role was simply to report and challenge this information. In terms of the Capital Programme, significant work was underway to review this, and it was known that slippage in the Programme was a constant problem.

 

Councillor Cory, Portfolio Holder for Resources, attended the meeting and explained to the Committee that the Council’s Waste Strategy had been remodelled to ensure that full advantage was taken of the forthcoming extended producer responsibility. The Chief Operating Officer further clarified that there had been a planned delay in purchasing refuse collection vehicles to ensure that the correct vehicles were purchased to enable the Council to take full advantage of government income. The lead time had extended dramatically as several councils were currently considering their waste strategies.

 

In terms of the Heart of Greenstead project, the Portfolio Holder for Resources advised the Committee that this project was currently going through the Council’s governance system to consider the costs involved and what the Council could deliver as partners in the project. The project offered significant opportunities for positive outcomes and would continue to receive the support of the Council. With regard to the Turnstone development, the Portfolio Holder for Resources was hopeful that there would be positive news in relation to the occupation of the site within the coming weeks. In terms of the CNG infrastructure in the Capital Programme, work was on going on the site to consider the various elements of the project prior to making a strategic decision on when the best time was to carry out the works, for which money was available.

 

In response to questioning from the Committee, the Portfolio Holder for Resources confirmed that the 2 residential plots which were for sale at the CNG development were restricted to the social landlord market, which had been a decision taken by Cabinet. In respect of the rising costs associated with the Turnstone development, and the overall governance of the project, the Chief Operating Officer confirmed that a detailed governance timeline of the project had already been collated, and reminded the Committee that the development had been a complex project spread across many years and changing Council administrations. Work was ongoing with the Council’s external auditors as the project was an area of interest for them, and an internal audit review would also be commissioned. Ultimately the findings of the review of the development would be reported back to this Committee.

 

A Committee member requested that the interest paid and interest received be disaggregated to clarify the interrelationship between the Housing Revenue Account (HRA) and the GF. He had seen a number of different figures relating to this interest and wished for the position to be clarified.

 

The Interim S151 Officer would provide an explanation of the relationship between interest costs between the HRA and the GF in future reports , but confirmed that all numbers provided to the Committee in respect of the total borrowing costs of the HRA would have been correct for the time period they related to. Efforts had always been made to provide transparency of costs, and an example of this was the recent provision of the gross costs of the Turnstone development, together with as much narrative as possible to aid understanding. The interest, Minimum Revenue Provision (MRP) and other corporate costs all resided within Corporate Income and Expenditure (CIE), and Officers would consider how to provide more detail in the CIE line in the future.

 

A Committee member welcomed the change in reporting style to include grossing up, which was a breath of fresh air. He referenced the changing valuations of the Turnstone development which had been provided, and requested to see the valuation report which had been commissioned. Additional information on the interest detail and the recharges between the HRA and the GF would be welcomed, illustrating how this was calculated.

 

The Committee sought to understand the impact that further delays in filling vacant units would have on the Turnstone development, and the impact of this generating additional overspend. The Interim S151 Officer assured the Committee that a significant amount of scenario planning had taken place within the Corporate Landlord function, prior to a decision being taken in conjunction with the Portfolio Holder. With regard to the valuation of the Turnstone development, this would not be reported through the management accounts, but would be analysed as part of the external audit process It was acknowledged that the valuation of the Turnstone development would be of concern to Councillors, and an update provided by the Council’s external auditors, KPMG, in due course.

 

A number of questions had been submitted by the Committee ahead of the meeting and the Chief Operating Officer provided an update relation to the Council’s Fit for the Future project, advising the Committee that the project would run for 3 years, and had started in the preceding year when it had delivered a large volume of savings. During the current financial year, only £150,000 of savings were planned in greening and street care, with greater savings planned for the next financial year. Staff number had been flat, and savings had mainly been delivered through contract changes. The Committee sought to understand the nature of the savings which were proposed for the next financial year, and the Chief Operating Officer advised the Committee that papers relating to proposed savings were being presented to the Scrutiny Panel to provide Councillors the opportunity to pre-scrutinise key strategies and service changes.

 

The Portfolio Holder for Resources advised the Committee that the first draft of the budget would be presented to the Scrutiny Panel, including details of the forecast budget gap, which was going to be significant, and budget briefings would be provided for all Councillors as part of the budgeting process. Every area of the Council’s operation would be considered for savings as part of this process, as there was a need to either make very substantial cost reductions or increases in income to balance the budget.

 

Returning to the report which had been presented to the Committee, the Senior Finance Business Partner advised the Committee that for 2025/26 the Council had a General Fund Capital Budget of approximately £59.4m, and as at Q1 the forecast was that there would be slippage of approximately 36% on the Capital Programme. The Portfolio Holder for Resources assured the Committee that the Council’s Capital Programme had been a source of focus for him and the Interim S151 Officer for some time, and the reasons for slippage were now being closely examined. It was important to note, however, that some projects in the Capital Programme were not solely Council-owned projects, and projects of this nature were more prone to slippage.

 

Councillor Pearson, Portfolio Holder for Economic Growth and Transformation, attended the meeting remotely and assured the Committee that Cabinet was united in its desire to see work commence on the Heart of Greenstead project as soon as possible, and updates in relation to the Town Deal would be provided to political groups as soon as possible.

 

A Committee member considered the impact of the forthcoming local government reorganisation (LGR), which would mean that the Council would effectively cease to exist, and there was a need to be realistic when considering which projects were viable in a short timeframe, and which should be removed from the Programme. The Portfolio Holder for Resources agreed with this assessment, and confirmed that consideration was being given to the Council’s activity on large projects to ensure that appropriate action was taken before the deadline.

 

Turning to the HRA revenue, the Senior Finance Business Partner confirmed that the interest included internal borrowing. The HRA was not overcharged, and was based on brought forward debt plus estimated borrowing and expected borrowing rates for the current financial year.

 

The Interim S151 Officer referred to questions relating to the external audit which had been asked in a previous meeting, and confirmed that the Council’s external auditors, KPMG, would provide an update on the audit in November.

 

RESOLVED that: the revenue, capital and Housing Revenue Account forecasts as at Q1 2025/26 be noted. 

 

 

The Committee will consider a report which presents the Treasury Management Q1 Update for 2025/26, and which sets out the Council’s Treasury Management activity for the first three months of 2025/26.

 

518

The Committee considered a report which presented the Treasury Management Q1 Update for 2025/26, and which set out the Council’s Treasury Management activity for the first three months of 2025/26.

 

Anna D’Alessandro, Interim S151 Officer, attended the meeting remotely to present the report and assist the Committee with its enquiries. She expressed her commitment to continuing to improve the clarity of the reports which were presented to the Committee on treasury management, including more robust cashflow forecasting information and full transparency surrounding the need for borrowing. Incremental improvements in reporting were promised, although it was not possible to guarantee whether these would be fully in place in time for budget setting in February 2026. It was necessary to have a clear view of what the Council’s Capital Programme would be during the year in order to have a more robust and longer term view of the cashflow requirements, and the sources of funding for this which would link to the requirement for borrowing and the Medium Term Financial Forecast (MTFF). An explanation was provided in relation to information contained in the report before the Committee in relation to the reduction in borrowing of £5.7m which was attributed to the repayment of £5m General Fund (GF) borrowing and £0.7m of Housing Revenue Account (HRA) borrowing as the result of liquidating an investment.

 

RESOLVED that: The Treasury Management Quarter 1 Update 2025/26 (Appendix A) be noted.

 

 

The Committee will consider a report which provides details of Colchester City Council’s Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman Annual Review Letter for 2024-25.

519

The Committee considered a report which provided details of Colchester City Council’s Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman Annual Review Letter for 2024-25.

 

Andrew Weavers, Head of Governance and Monitoring Officer, attended the meeting to present the report and assist the Committee with its enquiries. The findings of the annual review letter were before the Committee, and key areas were set out in the report. There had been no findings of maladministration, however, 2 complaints had been upheld by the Ombudsman. Details of these complaints were provided in the report, and as a result of these the service area in question had improved its processes to the satisfaction of the Ombudsman. Cabinet had considered and approved the report at its meeting in July 2025.

 

RESOLVED that: The contents of the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman’s Annual Review Letter for 2024-25 be noted.

 

 

The Committee will consider a report setting out its work programme for the current municipal year. 
520

The Committee considered a report which outlined its work programme for the current municipal year.

 

The Committee requested that consideration be given to arranging a private meeting with the Council’s external auditor prior to its meeting in November 2025, and the Chair of the Committee would follow this up.

 

RESOLVED that: the contents of the report be noted. 

 

 

10 Exclusion of the Public (not Scrutiny or Executive)
In accordance with Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 to exclude the public, including the press, from the meeting so that any items containing exempt information (for example confidential personal, financial or legal advice), in Part B of this agenda (printed on yellow paper) can be decided. (Exempt information is defined in Section 100I and Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972).
Part B

Attendance

Apologies
NameReason for Sending ApologySubstituted By
Councillor Sara Naylor Councillor Thomas Rowe
Absent
NameReason for AbsenceSubstituted By
No absentee information has been recorded for the meeting.

Declarations of Interests

Member NameItem Ref.DetailsNature of DeclarationAction
No declarations of interest have been entered for this meeting.

Visitors

Visitor Information is not yet available for this meeting