Agenda and draft minutes

To receive and note apologies for absence.

It was confirmed that apologies had been received from Councillors Burton and Coles, as well as from the Committee’s Independent Member Mr Binney. Councillors Burton and Coles were substituted by Councillors Baxter and Moroney.

At this point in the meeting, Members and co-opted members are asked to declare any disclosable pecuniary interest, or other registerable interest, they might have in respect of business on this agenda, if they have not already done so in advance on the Register of Interests. The disclosure must include the nature of the interest.

An interest must also be disclosed in the meeting when it becomes apparent to the member during the meeting.

[Please see attached sheet for further guidance for Members].

Members were asked to declare any personal interests not included on the Register of Interests, any prejudicial interests or any disclosable pecuniary interests which they may have in respect of business on the agenda.

Cllr Merrett did not have a prejudicial interest for the meeting but made the Committee aware that he was a Chartered Engineer and a Member of the York and North Yorkshire Combined Authority Audit and Governance committee.

To consider the exclusion of the press and public from the meeting during consideration of the following:

Annex 2-9 to Agenda Item 14 on the grounds that it contains information relating to Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information). This information is classed as exempt under paragraph 3 of Schedule 12A to Section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972 (as revised by The Local Government (Access to Information) (Variation) Order 2006).

Resolved: That the press and public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of Annexes 2-9 to Agenda Item 14 on the grounds that it contains Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information). This information was classed as exempt under paragraph 3 of Schedule 12A to Section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972 (as revised by The Local Government (Access to Information) (Variation) Order 2006).

To approve and sign the minutes of the meeting held on 28 Janaury 2026.

The Committee considered the minutes from the Committee 28 January 2026 meeting. The Committee discussed the contribution under public participation from Councillor Widdowson at that meeting and agreed to amend the word stated with said to reflect that what was stated was the Councillors opinion.

The Committee also agreed to add under minute 39. Exclusion of Press and Public:

‘Councillor Rose disputed the account given in public participation by Councillor Widdowson; he said that the report showed that issues with contract management in major projects could also be dated back to previous administrations.

The Committee also requested that a future report relating to major projects and the Station Gateway give clearer timescales of events and issues in the project and where there were issues further detail of the issues identified to understand where problems occurred and how they were managed at an officer and Executive level. Officers reminded the Committee that its remit was to identify issues relating to the Council’s procedures and whether it had the right procedures in place and not specifically the operational decisions relating to a single project.’

Resolved:  That the minutes of the meeting held on 28 Janaury 2026 be approved and then signed by the Chair                                                                      as a correct record with the additonal changes outlined above.

At this point in the meeting members of the public who have registered to speak can do so. Members of the public may speak on agenda items or on matters within the remit of the Committee.

Please note that our registration deadlines are set as 2 working days before the meeting, in order to facilitate the management of public participation at our meetings.  The deadline for registering at this meeting is 5:00pm on Monday 9 March 2026.

To register to speak please visit www.york.gov.uk/AttendCouncilMeetings to fill in an online registration form.  If you have any questions about the registration form or the meeting, please contact Democratic Services.  Contact details can be found at the foot of this agenda.

Webcasting of Public Meetings

Please note that, subject to available resources, this meeting will be webcast including any registered public speakers who have given their permission. The meeting can be viewed live and on demand at www.york.gov.uk/webcasts.

It was reported that there had been one registration to speak at the meeting under the Council’s Public Participation Scheme.

Gwen Swinburn noted her shock at the Council’s £28m overspend on a single project and raised concerns that the action plan would not be sufficient to deal with governance and control issues in major projects and asked the Committee review this to take more oversight of the process. She also asked if the Council was doing enough to be prepared for any equal pay liabilities.

Report to follow.

Mark Outterside and Louise Stables from Forvis Mazars introduced the external audit completition report. The Committee discussed the Council’s Corporate Scrutiny Budget and Medium-Term Financial Strategy Task and Finish group, that would review the Council’s Medium Term Financial Strategy, to consider the savings identified within the strategy and the delivery against those savings. Members enquired as to whether the external auditors considered this a good approach to reviewing and delivering savings, the External Auditors noted that they would need to review this further before giving any statement on the approach.

Resolved:

                         i.         Noted the matters set out in the Auditors Annual Report.

Reason:     To ensure the proper consideration of the progress of the external auditor in respect of the annual audit of accounts.

The purpose of this report is to present the Committee with an update on the key corporate risks for City of York Council.

The Head of Customer Finance Risk & Insurance and Emergency Planning Manager introduced the report which provided an update on the Council’s Key Corporate Risk (KCR) and a focused review of 11 Major Incidents. The Emergency Planning - Resilience and Contingencies Manager outlined the Council’s role in responding to major incidents, the training and lessons learnt to ensure that the Council can respond to future incidents, and the work it does with partners as part of the Local Resilience Forum.

The Committee were informed that additional flood barriers that had been installed should reduce impact on highways, households, and businesses. Officers confirmed that households and business were recommended to have a household or business plan for major incidents to ensure they can bounce back quickly. Members noted that the pandemic had meant the Council had become a lot more resilient in its ability to go digital with a lot of its meetings and services and asked whether this meant the Council needed to be more prepared for cyber threats. Officers confirmed that the Council undertook cyber training and resilience work with partners, the Council was also prepared with in person meetings to work around cyber attacks or national power outages.

Resolved:

                         i.         Noted the in-depth review of KCR 11 (Major Incidents) at Annex C;

Reason:     To provide assurance that the authority is effectively understanding and managing its key risks.

This report has been prepared to allow the committee to consider the contract management: major project delivery final audit report alongside external audit’s 2024/25 audit completion report and the Key Corporate Risks Monitor 3.

The Director of City Development introduced the report which provided a further update into major projects. This report followed on from the Committees 28 January 2026 Contract Management Major Projects Delivery Report. He confirmed that the Council were recruiting to ensure it had sufficient resources to meet challenges highlighted in the internal audit report from Veritau and was reducing its reliance on private consultants to ensure the Council had more direct control over projects.

On the Station Gateway project, Officers noted that weekly progress reports were being provided to senior officers. It was confirmed that the Council could have been more prepared ahead of entering into the Station Gateway. It was confirmed that the Council had entered a NEC contract which meant that the final cost of the project would be determined at the end of the project and that multiple unplanned issues had affected the projected overall cost.

Members queried as to whether the Council had sufficient staff training and experience in contracts and civil engineering within project management. Officers confirmed that the Council was currently recruiting and that there had been vacancies due to the challenge for Councils in recruiting within the sector. The Council was providing training opportunities and was standardising its project management procedures to ensure improvements in project management. The Committee asked whether the additional resources for the Station Gateway project would have addressed issues in reporting on the overspend sooner. Officers noted that additional resources can assist schemes, however, in the case of the Station project this was resourced but more from a consultancy side rather than specifically Council officers, something the Council was reducing its need for consultancy support.

The Committee asked about how the Council was reporting to Councillors about major projects. Officers confirmed that the risk register were released on a regular basis and that the Council would maintain transparent reporting on changes. It was confirmed that some information couldn’t be made public, but this information is reported to senior management level in the Council and monthly meetings were now being held with Executive members to ensure they were fully briefed on major projects.

The Committee enquired as to why the Council might enter a contract to deliver a project that didn’t have a fixed cost and how would the Council ensure there are not future projects that could have a £28m overspend like the Station Gateway. Officers noted that regular reporting was going to be key and that changes had been made to ensure this so that ongoing costs were better monitored. Officers confirmed that with better reporting on the Station Gateway project costs might have remained the same as they currently are, but it would have allowed the Council greater control over managing the project. In terms of entering the contract Officers noted that while it was correct that additional work pre contract agreement might have better identified the full nature of the work and potential costs, it was the case that there were numerous time constraints to secure  ...  view the full minutes text for item 57.

This report provides the Committee with the revised Joint Standards Committee Procedures to note and endorse, and to highlight required associated constitutional amendments to the committee for consideration and discussion.

The Director of Governance introduced the report and informed the Committee that the proposed constitution changes to change the quoracy of meetings to 3 for all non-specified committee. It was confirmed that the proposed changes had been through the Constitution Working Group and was recommended by the group for approval. The Committee discussed whether the move from often 4 to 3 members for quoracy was appropriate. Officers confirmed that 3 members would see most committee’s setting quoracy to a quarter of members on the Committee that was both legal and consistent with other local authorities.

The Committee considered the proposed changes and enquired whether in cases where the Monitoring Officer had a conflict of interest in a standards case and the deputies couldn’t stand in was it appropriate for the chair and vice chair of the Committee to take up the Monitoring Officers role. Officers confirmed that this was appropriate procedure and reassured the Committee that the event of the Monitoring Officer and both their deputies being unable to perform the role of the Monitoring Officer would be incredibly rare. It was agreed for additional clarity that it would be amended to state that support would be provided by a Deputy Monitoring Officer to the Chair and Vice Chair in cases where the Monitoring Officer was unable to support the Joint Standards Committee.

Resolved:

                      i.         Noted the amended revised Joint Standards Committee Procedures with additional reference to support for the Chair and Vice Chair being provided by a Deputy Monitoring Officer in the event the Monitoring Officer is a complainant or has a conflict of interest;

                    ii.         Endorsed the proposed associated constitutional amendments;

                   iii.         Remit the changes above to the next ordinary meeting of Full Council for approval.

Reason:    To allow Council to determine the proposed Constitutional changes.

This report sets out counter fraud work planned for 2026/27. It contains an updated fraud risk assessment, an assessment of counter fraud work at the council against national counter fraud good practice, and an annual counter fraud development plan and work plan.

This item was deferred to the Committee’s next meeting on 6 May 2026.

This report provides an update on counter fraud work undertaken so far in 2025/26.

This item was deferred to the Committee’s next meeting on 6 May 2026.

This report seeks the committee’s approval for the indicative programme of internal audit work to be undertaken in 2026/27.

The Head of Internal Audit from Veritau introduced the report, which outlined how Veritau would deploy its resources in 2026/27. He confirmed that Veritau had agreed a 10% reduction in service with the Council which would be split 50/50 with counter fraud work and noted that he remained confident that the reduction would still allow sufficient time for audit and counter fraud work.

The Committee considered the audit work plan, and it was confirmed to the committee that as usual Veritau over programme for the year, some audits would be larger than others and if new priorities are identified it was confirmed the order of the programme could be adjusted. Members also asked whether it was possible to see Veritau performance data on other Council’s to help benchmark how the Council was performing.

Resolved:

                         i.         Approved the 2026/27 internal audit work programme.

                        ii.         Veritau to consider whether performance data from other Council’s it provides audit work for could be shared with the Committee to benchmark York’s performance.

Reason:     In accordance with the committee’s responsibility for overseeing the work of internal audit service.

To consider the committee’s work plan.

The Committee considered its work plan and confirmed that the counter fruad reports from Veritau would be postponed to the Committee’s 6 May 2026 meeting.

Resolved:

                         i.         Noted the Committee work plan with the addition of Veritau’s counter fraud reports to be added to the Committee’s 6 May 2026 meeitng.

Resolved:  To ensure the Committee maintain a programme of work.

This report provides an update on the delivery of the internal audit work programme for 2025/26, and plans for delivery over the remainder of the year.

The Head of Internal Audit from Veritau introduced the report. The Committee enquired about the Contract Management: Major Project Delivery audit and whether the findings of the audit would be different pre and post May 2023. The Head of Internal Audit noted that it would be difficult to determine from the audit undertaken, he confirmed that the audit didn’t look specifically at the different packages of the project and that the audit considered contract management and identified issues in the delivery of major projects.

The remained of this item was considered in private in accordance with the decision taken in minute 52.

Resolved:

                      i.         Noted the progress made in delivering the 2025/26 internal audit work programme, and plans for delivery over the remainder of the year;

                    ii.         To postpone multiple audit progress reports to the Committee’s 6 May 2026 meeting.

Reason:    To enable members to consider the implications of internal audit findings, and to review planned activity for the remainder of 2025/26.