A few more rather interesting things.
Just when I thought the Metpro Scandal could get no murkier, Mrs Angry reports that Barnet Council have admitted that the CCTV footage of the Council meeting on 1st March, which they claim to have destroyed, was a copy.Mrs Angry also reports that the Council have admitted that they never bothered to check the SIA registrations or CRB status of the Metpro staff, even though they were clearly working with vulnerable people.
Another rather interesting fact was brought to my attention last week. Now I have no idea whether this is relevant to anything, but the head of audit, who will be responsible for overseeing the work of the Audit Committee is Maryellen Salter. It appears that Ms Salter joined Barnet Council in October. I was rather interested to be informed that she is an ex employee of Barnet Council's auditors, Grant Thornton. Does this matter? Well Grant Thornton have been responsible for auditing Barnet Council. They have presumably signed off on accounts with the payment of large invoices to Metpro Rapid Response Ltd. (Metpro Rapid Response have been a supplier of Barnet Council since 2006, working without a proper contract).
Does the fact that the person leading the enquiry for Barnet Council worked for the people who were meant to ensure that Barnet behaved in an above board manner matter? I'm sure Maryellen Salter is an exemplary auditor, I'm sure she will do the finest job possible. But I am also concerned that the whole thing may APPEAR to be a rather, shall we say, incestuous inquiry.
Local residents have been pushing for an Independent inquiry for this very reason. No one is questioning the goodwill, abilities or intentions of any of the people conducting the inquiry. We just want it to be completely free of all vested interests and all possible suggestions of any party having an "pre existing interest" in the matter. I believe that it is in everyones interests to see a credible and thorough inquiry, with no stone left unturned and full public confidence.
As the whole Metpro issue gets murkier and murkier, when will Nick Walkley wake up to the fact that the people involved in the internal inquiry are too close to the issue. What we need is a team which is independent and can either (hopefully) give Barnet Council a clean bill of health or alternatively identify the weaknesses in the processes and procedures. I'm not an expert on what auditors are meant to do, but given Grant Thornton's involvement with the Council, I'd suggest that people with no connection to the firm would be better placed to undertake the inquiry. This is not in any way because I have an issue with Grant Thornton, in fact they have done stirling work identifying major problems with the whole Future Shape/Easycouncil/Barnettrack process. I just feel that given the length of time Metpro Rapid Response Ltd had a business relationship with Barnet Council, we need an inquiry completely independent of all vested interests.
To me it completely beggars belief that the CEO of Barnet Council, Nick Walkley and the de facto leader of Barnet Council, Andrew Harper do not want an inquiry which will restore credibility. How can they possibly fail to see that a) The Audit Committe have missed all of this for years b) Other members of the team have also missed things for years c) The head of audit has an association with the company responsible for signing off the accounts. When Councillors tell me it doesn't matter because they have a marvellous team, I have to ask - if that is so, how come we got into this mess in the first place
Just when I thought the Metpro Scandal could get no murkier, Mrs Angry reports that Barnet Council have admitted that the CCTV footage of the Council meeting on 1st March, which they claim to have destroyed, was a copy.Mrs Angry also reports that the Council have admitted that they never bothered to check the SIA registrations or CRB status of the Metpro staff, even though they were clearly working with vulnerable people.
Another rather interesting fact was brought to my attention last week. Now I have no idea whether this is relevant to anything, but the head of audit, who will be responsible for overseeing the work of the Audit Committee is Maryellen Salter. It appears that Ms Salter joined Barnet Council in October. I was rather interested to be informed that she is an ex employee of Barnet Council's auditors, Grant Thornton. Does this matter? Well Grant Thornton have been responsible for auditing Barnet Council. They have presumably signed off on accounts with the payment of large invoices to Metpro Rapid Response Ltd. (Metpro Rapid Response have been a supplier of Barnet Council since 2006, working without a proper contract).
Does the fact that the person leading the enquiry for Barnet Council worked for the people who were meant to ensure that Barnet behaved in an above board manner matter? I'm sure Maryellen Salter is an exemplary auditor, I'm sure she will do the finest job possible. But I am also concerned that the whole thing may APPEAR to be a rather, shall we say, incestuous inquiry.
Local residents have been pushing for an Independent inquiry for this very reason. No one is questioning the goodwill, abilities or intentions of any of the people conducting the inquiry. We just want it to be completely free of all vested interests and all possible suggestions of any party having an "pre existing interest" in the matter. I believe that it is in everyones interests to see a credible and thorough inquiry, with no stone left unturned and full public confidence.
As the whole Metpro issue gets murkier and murkier, when will Nick Walkley wake up to the fact that the people involved in the internal inquiry are too close to the issue. What we need is a team which is independent and can either (hopefully) give Barnet Council a clean bill of health or alternatively identify the weaknesses in the processes and procedures. I'm not an expert on what auditors are meant to do, but given Grant Thornton's involvement with the Council, I'd suggest that people with no connection to the firm would be better placed to undertake the inquiry. This is not in any way because I have an issue with Grant Thornton, in fact they have done stirling work identifying major problems with the whole Future Shape/Easycouncil/Barnettrack process. I just feel that given the length of time Metpro Rapid Response Ltd had a business relationship with Barnet Council, we need an inquiry completely independent of all vested interests.
To me it completely beggars belief that the CEO of Barnet Council, Nick Walkley and the de facto leader of Barnet Council, Andrew Harper do not want an inquiry which will restore credibility. How can they possibly fail to see that a) The Audit Committe have missed all of this for years b) Other members of the team have also missed things for years c) The head of audit has an association with the company responsible for signing off the accounts. When Councillors tell me it doesn't matter because they have a marvellous team, I have to ask - if that is so, how come we got into this mess in the first place
3 comments:
There could hardly be a stronger case for taking the matter out of the hands of the Head of Audit, given her previous involvement with the auditing company that might "receive comments" regarding this matter.
We must keep the pressure up wherever appropriate to ensure that there is an independent inquiry: there are simply too many reasons for an internal investigation to be utterly inappropriate and inadequate. If our local MPs had any integrity, one might expect them to support the call for an external inquiry: hello?
Rog, the whole relationship between councils and their auditors has been too cosy for far too long. At the same time as PwC were investigating Barnet over the Underhill sale, they were also awarded consultancy contracts worth hundreds of thousands of pounds. Nobody from the council was surcharged by the auditor even though the transaction was ruled unlawful - but I am sure this was just a happy coincidence.
Mrs A: two of the three local MPs were part of the council administration which allowed Metpro to operate. Indeed, Mike Freer was Chairman of the Cabinet Resources Committee for much of the period - so he is hardly likely to call for a thorough investigation. Turkeys do not generally vote for Christmas.
Post a Comment