Agenda item

D Smith delivered a report to provide Members with an overview presentation of the Integration Programme and governance process in place to deliver this priority. 

Katie Thompson, Jonathan House and James Pemble from PwC had joined the meeting remotely to assist in answering any specific questions from Members. 

Members noted that PwC had been advising the MCA on the governance arrangements being implemented with regards to the Integration Programme and providing assurance that the processes the MCA are following are robust and complete. 

In summary, the report set out the programme plan along with the risk management arrangements for the programme. The report also set out how the MCA was establishing and pursuing a timetable to complete integration through a series of workstreams, which were being led and managed through identified officers and support teams.

The MCA were continuing to engage with staff on the proposed integration plans.  A positive response had been received from staff around the proposal for integration.  Some concerns had been raised by staff around how the integration would affect them in terms of roles and responsibilities, which would need to be addressed.  Whilst acknowledging the concerns raised, the principle of the change, the rationale and desire to change had been broadly supported by staff. 

D Smith said that he was pleased with the good start that had been made towards the integration process.  Assurances were provided to Members that the MCA had the correct framework to complete the integration process. 

Furthermore, the report drew to Members’ attention that, one element not in the direct control of the MCA, was around the Parliamentary time required to formally, legally dissolve the PTE.  Discussions were taking place with MHCLG on the timetable for agreeing the Parliamentary Order. 

Members noted that, whilst notwithstanding the formal dissolution of the PTE, work would continue to take place on the integration process.  It was confirmed that 95% of the integration process could be achieved without the need for formal dissolution of the PTE. 

Appendix A to the report provided Members’ with a copy of a MCA Governance report of 7^th June 2020, which set out a range of governance changes, in advance of the Parliamentary Order, to enable the MCA to fully integrate the management and decision making arrangements to achieve those stages of integration. 

As part of those changes, the MCA had agreed to form one single Audit and Standards Committee, rather than one Committee for the PTE, and one for the MCA.

Members felt that a single Audit and Standards Committee could become overstretched.  It was suggested that it may be appropriate for Sub-Committees of the Audit and Standards Committee to be established to undertake deepdives and to provide the necessary coverage. 

The MCA Governance report also set out a number of options how the Committee could monitor integration specifically. 

D Smith said that, his advice to the Committee about the preferred option, was for the Committee to agree to form an Advisory Committee that would specifically concentrate on the integration process to engage with Members as integration progresses. 

Members asked for assurances that there were sufficient resources, finance and capacity available within the MCA and PTE to manage the proposed changes.  Members also asked if the MCA had considered good/best practices from other organisations across the country and queried what a ‘good’ organisation may look like. 

In response, D Smith confirmed that, in relation to resourcing of the integration process, a considerable amount of time had been taken to evaluate the resources required.  Unfortunately, there were still a number of issues which he could not be predict.  D Smith added that, he was confident that there would be the right resources available to carry out integration effectively. 

G Sutton reported that a group-wide business planning process had been undertaken this year to examine resources available and pressures within both SYPTE and the MCA.  An organisational commitment had been made to recruit extra staff in the finance team, procurement team and performance and programmes team. 

In relation to best practices, D Smith said that discussions were on-going with colleagues in other Combined Authorities to understand the approaches taken and the journeys they had been on. 

It was also important for the MCA to take on-board other areas of best practice, beyond Combined Authorities, to which, resources had been deployed on obtaining external advice from PwC and others who were providing technical and specialist advice to the MCA.  Investment would continue in these areas. 

R Jarvis asked if the Committee would have an oversight of transport needs, health and safety, and risk, once integration had taken place risk.  

In response, S Davenport said it was proposed that, the Advisory Panel would have an oversight of operational transport, public transport and integration. 

Members noted that the draft Terms of Reference for the Advisory Panel had been circulated. 

R Jarvis requested that, Health and Safety, and risk be added to the Advisory Panel’s Terms of Reference.  ACTION: S Davenport

R Jarvis said he was of the opinion that, there needed to be a further separate workstream around risk management.  He asked if a full risk review had been undertaken with regard to the integration process.  Furthermore, he said he would welcome sight of the Risk Review which had been undertaken. 

Colleagues from PwC confirmed that a full risk evaluation had been undertaken across all of the workstreams taking into account the mitigations and risks in the future and how these are mitigated in a two tier governance structure, in order that they are identified quickly and mitigated as a whole.  It was added that, risk did run through every workstream, but the integrated risk management approach did sit within the Governance, Legal and Compliance workstream. 

Members considered the options presented within the report and agreed that Option 1 be progressed to establish an Audit and Standards Advisory Panel to focus on integration.  The Panel would have a standardised agenda including workstream overview, progress and risks.

The Committee nominated and agreed that the two Independent Members of the Audit and Standards Committee (A Marshall and R Jarvis) would sit on the Audit and Standards Advisory Panel. 

Nominations from elected Members of the Audit and Standards Committee would also be invited to sit on the Advisory Panel.  ACTION: C James to write to Members to obtain nominations. 

In relation to the Internal Audit Plan for 2021/22, Members asked that integration featured as a review. 

G Sutton replied that there was a recommendation within the Internal Audit Plan for 2021/22, that the MCA would assign a number of days for Internal Audit to review integration activity.

It was agreed that officers would develop proposals and a specification for the integration audit report, prior to it being finalised with Internal Audit colleagues.  It was agreed that the audit specification would be shared with Members of the Audit and Standards Committee.  ACTION: G Sutton

RESOLVED – That the Audit and Standards Committee:-

1.       Considered the programme planning undertaken as set out in Appendix A. 

2.       Considered the risk management arrangements and risks as set out in Appendix B.  

3.       Considered the options set out for their assurance activity and agreed their preferred approach as Option 1 to establish an Audit and Standards Committee Advisory Panel to focus on integration. 

4.       Outlined the requirements they would wish to see built into the Internal Audit programme.