Agenda item

To receive any questions from members of the public and replies thereto.

The following questions were received from members of the public:

 

Mr Barry Warren

 

My questions relate to Items 4, 8 and 9 on the agenda.

 

Agenda Item 4 records the minutes of the previous meeting of the Audit Committee.  Minute 4 records my questions but not the responses which were subsequently sent to me after that meeting and filed with the papers of the previous meeting.

 

Question 1    

 

Why were the answers to the questions not reported to this meeting as required by the MDDC Constitution although I note now that they have been added to the website today?

 

In relation to agenda items 8 and 9 I have forwarded a briefing document and appendix to each member of the committee which I had earlier forwarded to Devon Assurance Partnership (DAP) and Bishop Fleming.  Bishop Fleming extended me the courtesy of acknowledging my email but I had heard nothing from DAP until yesterday after my questions were submitted, so my question no. 2, that you will have had, is no longer relevant.

 

Question 2    

 

This question was no longer relevant.

 

Question 3    

 

Do Devon Assurance Partnership act on information from the public or do they only work to Terms of Reference given them by MDDC Officers?

 

The Devon Assurance Partnership report contains reference to Home Office guidance on the new criminal offence of “Failure to Prevent Fraud”.  My briefing document has drawn attention to the authorisation for payment of invoices, for 6 figure sums, by a Senior Officer. Freedom of Information (FOI) responses (confirmed on review on Friday) show that the Council does not hold any evidence to show that such authorisation was justified.

 

Question 4    

 

Doesn’t allowing such authorisation without records of evidence for future reference (which must be a Red Flag for Auditors and Audit Committee) increase the possibility of external fraud?

 

The External Auditors are only providing a verbal update and therefore members of the public have no opportunity to avail themselves of the information to be provided to enable them to consider whether or not to raise any issues which may benefit or clarify matters for the Council Tax Payers of Mid Devon.

 

Question 5    

 

Are the External Auditors looking into the invoices, payments and value for money in relation to dealings of the ‘partnership’ between the Council and the suppliers of the modular homes?

 

Question 6    

 

If they are looking into the issue is there any feedback as to findings or action to date? 

 

The Chair responded by saying:

 

Thank you for your questions Mr Warren.

 

I note from your own words that these questions were submitted outside of our constitutional time requirement to receive a formal response during today’s meeting.

 

On initial review of your questions I would like to make a few observations:

 

a)    Apart from your Question 1 – which I will ask the Clerk to respond to – the other questions that you have raised have no direct relevance to anything on today’s agenda – so can you ensure that future questions are clearly relevant to matters being considered at a meeting.

 

b)    The public question process gives members of the public a 3 minute slot to ask direct questions on any items being discussed at the meeting in question (except Full Council). We appear to now regularly be in receipt of some form of “briefing papers” which clearly sits outside of our proper process. If members of the public want to raise issues with outside agencies, I would encourage them to go to them directly.

 

c)    Returning to the questions from Mr Warren, as they weren’t submitted in time, I will ask my officers to provide an update after consultation with both DAP and Bishop Fleming within the standard 10 days, or alternatively I will ask the auditors to respond directly.

 

Mr Warren asked the Chairman for the curtesy of a response to what he had just said as he felt that the Chair had been given answers by the officers and they were not true. Mr Warren stated that the DAP report had been referenced with regard to fraud and his questions related to that potential.

 

The Chair reiterated that Mr Warren would receive a written response within 10 working days.

 

The Clerk responded to question number 1 asked by Mr Warren:

 

Thank you Mr Warren for your first question regarding the answers to your public questions from the previous meeting not being included as part of the agenda pack for this meeting tonight.

 

This was my error as Clerk and I offer you my apologies. For Members reassurance, the answers to the questions asked by Mr Warren’s on 24^th June 2025 were published on the website within the ten day timescale and sent to the questioner and the Committee at the same time. However, they were not included as part of the minutes in your agenda pack for this evening. This had now been corrected, as referenced by Mr Warren, so that they were now showing as part of the agenda and every effort would be made to include written answers to public questions in agenda packs for all future meetings as per the Constitution. Thank you.

 

Mr Paul Elstone

 

Question 1

 

Agenda Item 8 Devon Assurance Partnership Internal Audit Progress Report.

 

Appendix 1 Procurement - which is shown as Green and reported as FINAL says:

 

“There is a requirement for the Council to maintain and publish a contracts register. This is published on the Councils website”.  It also says, “The Operations Manager for Financial Services is confident the register is up to date.”

 

I strongly believe this to be inaccurate.

 

As examples there are only two ZED PODS contracts shown on the Contract Register. One for £2.3 million and believed to be for Shapland Place. Another for £11 million and for undefined projects. Both contracts expired in 2024.

 

There are no active ZED POD contracts shown on the Contracts Register this despite it being known that there are at least 5 projects in build at the moment and with several more in other stages of development. Projects with very substantial cost running into many many millions of pounds involved.

 

DAP once again it seems have placed full reliance on MDDC officer responses. Will DAP look again into the Contract Register position and in full detail and with particular reference to ZED PODS?

 

Question 2

 

Can it be explained if DAP’s remit was/is to examine MDDC’s full compliance with the Local Government Transparency Code 2015?

 

I ask this question as I believe there to be a catalogue of non-compliances.

 

This involving:

 

1)    Failure to publish details of the Councils Land and Building Holdings.

2)    A failure to publish details of ALL Procurement Contracts exceeding £5,000.

3)    Failures to always provide proper details of the purpose of expenditures over £500.

4)    Failure to properly report VAT recoverable status.

5)    Failure to publish an organisation chart for the top 3 levels of the organisation that is fully compliant with the transparency code requirements.

Will DAP and Bishop Fleming fully examine these public concerns?

 

Question 3

 

There is very good reason to believe that there are some quite serious issues with the billing and payment system involving the modular home projects.

 

Issues involving but not limited to:

 

1)    Double billing.

2)    Inappropriate charging of the 15% overhead and profit uplift on certain invoices.

3)    Substantial charges being made against the repairs revenue budget when they are very clearly capital cost for developments.

4)    Invoices being paid which just say for “Professional Fees” and nothing else.

I have been made aware that some of these billing issues are not isolated examples to this Council and something that I will refer to Bishop Fleming separately.

 

Will DAP and Bishop Fleming fully examine these public concerns?

 

The Chair stated that both questioners would receive written responses to their questions within 10 working days in the usual way and that these would be published alongside the minutes.