Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Kabir.

Members are invited to declare at this stage of the meeting, the nature and existence of any relevant disclosable pecuniary or personal interests in the items on this agenda and to specify the item(s) to which they relate.

David Ewart (Chair) declared a personal interest as a member of CIPFA.

Councillor Long declared a personal interest in relation to Item 9 - Report on i4B Holdings Ltd and First Wave Housing Ltd given a potential property sale involving i4B.

To hear any deputations received from members of the public in accordance with Standing Order 67.

There were no deputations considered at the meeting.

It was RESOLVED that the minutes of the previous meeting held on Wednesday 23 July 2025 be approved as a correct record, subject to the following amendments:

Item 7: Treasury Management Outturn Report

(a)       1^st bullet point page 7 on agenda pack – under reference to the paragraph regarding the shareholding in CCLA (Churches, Charities and Local Authorities) it was noted that the wording should read; ‘Jupiter is the shareholder of CCLA’, rather than ‘CCLA remained as shareholders’.

(b)       In addition, under the same bullet point a typographical error was identified in the line; ‘Whilst it was the Council's policy to require an A-plus rating, the fund's rating was reported no to have changed’. It was recognised that the phrasing should read ‘…the fund's rating was reported not to have changed’.

Members noted the updates provided in relation to the Action Log of issues identified at previous meetings which it was noted would be subject to ongoing review by the Chair.  As part of this process, members felt it would be helpful for details to be provided on the expected duration or timeframe for those actions listed as ongoing.

To consider any matters arising from the minutes of the previous meeting.

None identified.

The purpose of this report is to update the Audit and Standards Advisory Committee on (a) gifts and hospitality registered by Members (b) member training, and (c) a recent complaint concerning breaches of the Member’s Code of Conduct which has been upheld against a councillor.

The Committee received a report from the Corporate Director Finance & Resources which presented the Standards Report, including the Q2 update on gifts and hospitality, for the Audit and Standards Advisory Committee.

In considering the report, members noted that in addition to the update on gifts and hospitality registered by Members, details were included on a recent standards decision made by Cornwall Council and the Government’s announcement on the Ethics and Integrity Commission, replacing the Committee on Standards in Public Life.

Biancia Robinson (Principal Lawyer, Constitution Governance and Finance) further advised the Committee of one amendment to the committee report, specifically relating to paragraph 3.10, which referred to four Members who were expected to complete their mandatory data protection training on 17 September 2025. It was confirmed that two of these members had completed their training with two still outstanding.

Having thanked Biancia Robinson for introducing the report, the Chair then moved on to invite questions and comments from the Committee in relation to the report, with the following comments and issues discussed:

• In considering the report, independent members referred to the standards decision outlined in paragraph 3.8 of the report and queried the extent to which the Council’s definition of disclosure of pecuniary interests explicitly covered situations where a councillor had not yet received an employment contract. In response, Biancia Robinson (Principal Lawyer, Constitution Governance and Finance) clarified that the Council’s declaration of interest requirements obliged Members to disclose their employment status and in the referenced case, the councillor had declared his employment but had not yet commenced the role. Nonetheless, there remained an expectation to declare the disclosable interest, as in any case, it had also constituted a personal interest in the matter.

• As a further query, independent members drew attention to paragraph 3.18 concerning the newly proposed Ethics and Integrity Commission, with it being questioned how the Council was monitoring developments, who held responsibility for this, and how the Committee would be kept informed of any implications, including potential changes to the Code of Conduct. In response, Biancia Robinson (Principal Lawyer, Constitution Governance and Finance) advised that Marsha Henry (Director of Law), in her capacity as Monitoring Officer, held responsibility for ensuring compliance with any emerging requirements. It was additionally noted that it was unlikely the Commission’s remit would extend to making amendments to the Code of Conduct, as this area had already been reviewed. It was highlighted that the Commission’s focus was expected to be on promoting good practice and facilitating information sharing among local authorities although the final extent of any regulatory impact remained unclear at this stage.

With no further comments or questions raised the Chair thanked officers for the update provided and the Committee RESOLVED to note the contents of the report.

To update the Audit & Advisory Committee of the progress made so far as a consequence of the self-referral in April to the Regulator of Social Housing.

Spencer Randolph (Director Housing Services) was invited to introduce a report from the Corporate Director Resident & Housing Services providing an update on progress following the Council’s self-referral to the Regulator of Social Housing following the previous update to the Committee in June 2025.

In presenting the update, Spencer Randolph (Director Housing Services) provided details on the ongoing engagement with the Regulator of Social Housing and the progress of the housing service improvement programme. The Committee were informed that monthly meetings with the Regulator had been taking place, with the most recent meeting held the day prior to the Committee meeting. It was reported that whilst the Regulator had expressed satisfaction with the pace and scope of change being implemented, the need for caution had been noted given the improvement process was not expected to yield immediate results, and it estimated that it would take between 18 months and 2 years before the regulatory judgment could be lifted. Nonetheless, the Regulator had commended the Council’s multi-faceted approach to service recovery and contrasted Brent’s strategy with that of other local authorities, noting that many had adopted a binary process involving initial internal resolution attempts, followed by consultancy engagement to assess the problem and subsequent contractor involvement to resolve the issue.

In contrast, members were advised Brent had already engaged consultants and contractors and had commenced risk mitigation activities from the outset. It was conveyed that an external audit had been conducted, focusing particularly on compliance within the housing service with confirmation provided that a root cause analysis was also underway to ensure that lessons were learned and that similar issues would not recur and with a recovery plan developed based on the audit findings.

As part of the recovery plan, additional staff had been appointed to focus specifically on compliance and complaints. The structure of the compliance team was outlined, which included team leaders responsible for gas safety, electrical safety, fire safety, and environmental health matters such as legionella, air quality, water systems and lift maintenance. Members heard that significant work was also being undertaken to remediate and improve the systems. In relation to the concerns identified in relation to data, the rebuild of True Compliance and the NEC asset register was underway and due to be complete by April 2026 with additional governance implemented around the management of data, in particular restricting property creation access which would provide a more controlled approach to new properties being added to the system and feeding into compliance workstreams accurately.  It was further reported that additional contractors had been engaged to address identified issues, particularly those relating to fire safety.

The Committee received assurance that all high-risk actions associated with high-rise buildings had either been resolved or were subject to further work to action with the service now having also begun to address high-risk actions in medium-rise buildings.

In terms of resident engagement, it was confirmed that communication efforts were ongoing. A digital newsletter, ‘The Notice Board’ had been circulated to over 6,000 tenants, with  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

This report provides the Committee with an update on the Council’s Strategic Risks as of September 2025.

Darren Armstrong (Deputy Director, Organisational Assurance and Resilience) was then invited to introduce a report from the Corporate Director Finance & Resources which provided an update on the Council’s strategic risks as of September 2025.

In introducing the report, members noted that it summarised those risks which senior management had assessed as having a significant impact and/or likelihood of materialising, with the potential to adversely affect the achievement of the Council’s objectives. It was further noted that the format of the report remained broadly consistent with previous iterations, although minor presentational improvements had been made. It was additionally stated that the Council’s overall risk profile continued to reflect the heightened risk environment in which it operated.

Of the 13 strategic risks, 12 remained outside their target risk scores, and none were showing a downward trend. However, 11 risks were reporting stable trends, with scores unchanged since the previous update in March 2025. A key change in the report was highlighted in terms of the increase in the risk score for noncompliance with statutory housing duties. This score had risen from 10 to the maximum of 25, indicating that the risk had materialised. This escalation was attributed to issues surrounding the Council’s self-referral to the Regulator of Social Housing. No new risks had been added to the register, and no existing risks had been closed or de-escalated.

Having thanked Darren Armstrong for introducing the report, the Chair then moved on to invite questions and comments from the Committee, with the following comments and issues discussed:

• Members queried the lack of detail in the report regarding Risk E: Climate and Ecological Emergency Mitigation and questioned how progress against the action plan would be monitored and reported.  Details were also sought regarding management of the risk identified in relation to financial resilience and sustainability, particularly in the context of the upcoming local elections. In response, Darren Armstrong advised that progress on Risk E should be tracked across subsequent iterations of the report. It was explained that two previously separate climate-related risks had been merged into a single entry, although the risk details in the content remained unchanged. The current risk score was aligned with its target score, indicating that officers believed the risk could not be further reduced at present with ongoing monitoring of the impact of mitigating actions to be included as part of the ongoing updates to Committee on which member’s feedback would be relayed to the relevant risk owners, with a view to providing more specific updates on progress and outcomes. Minesh Patel (Corporate Director, Finance and Resources) addressed the second query, clarifying that political pledges made during election campaigns were not representative of the Council’s formal position. Should such pledges be adopted by a newly appointed administration, the Council would assess their affordability and determine whether they could be implemented within existing financial constraints.

As a point of clarification, the Chair confirmed that Darren Armstrong (as Deputy Director, Organisational Assurance and Resilience) was responsible for drawing together the Strategic Risk  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

This report provides the Audit and Standards Advisory Committee with an update on the work of the Housing Companies, i4B Holdings Ltd (i4B) and First Wave Housing (FWH) to deliver against their business plans for 2024-25, which were agreed by the Council as Shareholder of i4B and Guarantor of FWH.

Minesh Patel (Corporate Director, Finance and Resources) was invited to introduce a report which provided an updated on the governance and oversight arrangements the Council had in place as Shareholder of i4B Holdings Ltd (i4B) and Guarantor of First Wave Housing Ltd (FWH). Members were advised that the report (in line with previous versions) also outlined the mechanisms through which the Council monitored performance, risk and compliance, and highlighted key governance developments from the most recent Shareholder / Guarantor meeting held in September 2025.

In presenting the report, Minesh Patel informed the Committee that the most recent shareholder and guarantor meetings had included a review of capacity within the Board of Directors, including the non-executive directors, to engage in a forward-looking discussion regarding the strategic direction of both i4B and FWH involving a constructive dialogue concerning future priorities. The Board had acknowledged challenges around the economic climate and capacity of the Board and its impact on property acquisition. Nevertheless, there remained a commitment to explore alternative methods of securing affordable housing within the Borough, in support of the Council’s broader objectives.

Having thanked Minesh Patel for introducing the report, the Chair then moved on to invite questions and comments from the Committee in relation to the update report, with the following comments and issues discussed:

• As an initial query, independent members cited paragraph 4.6.4 of the committee report, which stated that i4B was in the process of arranging a Phase 3 loan with the Council, comprising a £32 million loan and £8 million in equity. Clarification was sought regarding the nature of the equity component. In response, Amanda Healy (Deputy Director Investment and Infrastructure) clarified that the equity element represented an investment made by the Council into the company. This investment did not attract interest repayments and was a capital contribution intended to financially support the organisation.

• Independent members additionally referred to paragraph 4.5 of the committee report, which addressed the composition of the Boards and capacity. Recent changes in Council-appointed directors were noted and it was queried whether these changes posed any risks to continuity of experience from the Council’s perspective. In response, Minesh Patel advised that the changes reflected a number of changes at senior officer level across the Council following the retirement of individual officers, which had necessitated discussions with Andrew Hudson (Chair of i4B and FWH), as well as with Kim Wright (Chief Executive) and Councillor Mili Patel (Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance & Resources), to assess the future composition of the Board. It was confirmed that Andrew Hudson had articulated clear ambitions for the Board’s future direction, and that discussions regarding Board composition had commenced in the previous year. In continuing the response, Andrew Hudson (Chair of i4B and FWH) elaborated that due to their nature, it had not been possible to plan the timing of the changes in the usual manner. However, the situation had presented an opportunity to introduce new perspectives and ideas to the Board and encourage new members to share  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

To receive the interim Auditor Annual Report for the year ended 31 March 25.

Sophia Brown (Grant Thornton – External Auditor) was invited to introduce the London Borough of Brent Interim Auditor’s Annual Report 2025 in relation to value for money work for the financial year 2024-25.

In presenting the report, it was confirmed that the report remained in draft form and could not be finalised until the audit opinion on the financial statements for the same period had been issued. The Committee were advised that the majority of the work had been completed. Upon finalisation, the report would include specific commentary on the accounts audit and the outcome of a separate piece of work currently underway on procurement. Should the findings of that work be available in time, they would be incorporated into the final version.

The Committee was then directed to the executive summary within the committee report. Members were reminded that the findings related specifically to the 2024-25 financial year. It was noted that in the previous year, one significant weakness had been identified in relation to financial sustainability, particularly concerning the use of reserves and the financial challenges faced by the Council. For the current year, that recommendation had been updated to reflect the latest position. A new significant weakness had also been raised in the same area, with the Key Recommendation focusing on the savings required over the medium term. It was emphasised that while the two issues were intrinsically linked, they had been separated to ensure clarity of focus and distinct actions for each. A further significant weakness had been identified in relation to the Council’s self-referral to the Regulator of Social Housing, which had been previously identified.

Attention was drawn to the progress made on last year’s improvement recommendations, as detailed in Appendix C of the committee report. Seven recommendations had been closed, including one relating to savings, which had been incorporated into Key Recommendation 2. One recommendation concerning procurement arrangements remained outstanding. Members heard that 3 new improvement recommendations had been raised for 2024-25. These related to the use of the Property Strategy to review the Council’s asset base, maintaining a strong focus on the cumulative deficit of the Dedicated Schools Grant, and strengthening financial planning within the Housing Revenue Account (HRA). An additional recommendation had been made regarding arrangements for producing the year-end financial statements.

Having thanked Sophia Brown for introducing the report, the Chair then moved on to invite questions and comments from the Committee, with the following comments and issues discussed:

• As an initial query, the Chair requested clarification on the distinction between Key Recommendations, Improvement Recommendations and Statutory Recommendations. In response, Sophia Brown (Grant Thornton – External Auditor) explained that Improvement Recommendations were previously used to highlight areas of good or best practice. The approach had since evolved such that failure to address an Improvement Recommendation within the following year could result in the identification of a significant weakness. Where a significant weakness was identified, a Key Recommendation would be raised. These were formally reported to the Committee within the Auditor’s Annual  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

This report provides the Committee with progress update from Grant Thornton on the delivery and responsibilities they are conducting as the Council’s external auditors. The report also provides sector updates and further details on matters relating to audit progress.

(Agenda republished to include this item on 24 September 2025)

Sheena Phillips (Grant Thornton – External Auditor) was invited to introduce the London Borough of Brent and Pension Fund Audit Progress Report and Sector Update, which provided a progress update on the audit process as of September 2025. Since receipt of the draft statement of accounts, substantial progress had been made, and the accounts were generally in good order. However, issues remained in relation to Property, Plant and Equipment (PPE). Specifically, the reconciliation between the valuation report and the fixed asset register had not yet been resolved. This issue had also been identified during the previous year’s audit. It was confirmed that discussions were ongoing with the finance team, who were preparing a working paper to demonstrate that no material misstatement existed between the valuation report and the fixed asset register. Due to the unresolved reconciliation, the audit of Property, Plant and Equipment (PPE) had not yet commenced, as the valuation report was a prerequisite for this work. A dedicated resource was due to begin in early October 2025, and it was hoped that the necessary working papers would be provided by management to enable commencement.

In terms of issues identified, these included the need to complete the valuation of assets totalling £15m with any subsequent adjustment to be reflected in the Annual Financial Report.  Additionally, a misclassification of assets held for sale had been noted and would be corrected. It was stated that the recommendation made in the previous year regarding reconciliation had not yet been fully addressed, as the valuation report remained outstanding. Updates were also provided on other significant risk areas. Work on pension liability was nearing completion, pending finalisation of the Pension Fund Report. In relation to management override of controls, journal transactions had been selected and forwarded to the finance team for review. Progress had also been made on the implementation of IFRS 16, which was of particular importance given that 2024-25 was the first year of adoption. Two completeness tests had been completed alongside balance testing, although evidence was still awaited for certain items.  Management had been informed that all outstanding evidence, excluding that related to Property, Plant and Equipment (PPE), would be required to facilitate completion of the audit. In concluding the presentation, Sheena Phillips reported that good progress had been made under the circumstances.

Having thanked Sheena Phillips for introducing the report, the Chair then moved on to invite questions and comments from the Committee, with the following comments and issues discussed:

• The Chair enquired about the likelihood of completion of the Audit Findings Report in time for the Committee’s meeting on 3 December 2025. In response, Sophia Brown (Grant Thornton – External Auditor) confirmed that progress on the majority of audit work was satisfactory. Provided that the outstanding information was received when the team concluded its current phase, most testing would be completed. It was noted that resources were available to address any remaining areas, including a dedicated resource for Property, Plant and Equipment (PPE). Subject to receipt of the required  ...  view the full minutes text for item 11.

To consider and note the Committee’s Work Programme for the 2025-26 Municipal Year.

The Committee received an update on the Forward Plan. It was noted that several substantive items were scheduled for consideration at the December meeting. In contrast, the February meeting was currently light in content, while the March meeting contained a significant number of items. It was confirmed that efforts would be made to review and potentially reallocate items across the meetings to ensure a more balanced agenda. This exercise would be undertaken in consultation with Harry Ellis (Governance Officer).

At this stage, the opportunity was taken by an independent member to propose that the Committee consider incorporating deep dive sessions into its annual work programme to allow for focused examination of specific areas of interest to provide enhanced assurance. It was suggested that the Committee identify potential topics for deep dives throughout the year and referred to the impact of artificial intelligence (AI) on the organisation as a possible subject for future exploration.

In response, the Chair acknowledged that the Committee had previously undertaken deep dive sessions, although recent attempts had been hindered by competing priorities. It was suggested that the February meeting, given its lighter agenda, would present a suitable opportunity to schedule a deep dive. The Chair proposed that the Committee agree on a topic at the 3 December 2025 meeting with members encouraged to submit any suggestions for deep dive topics to Harry Ellis (Governance Officer) ahead of that meeting.

On this basis, it was therefore RESOLVED to note the Committee’s Forward Plan and Work Programme for the 2025-26 Municipal Year with the dates for further meetings noted as:

• Wednesday 3 December 2025
• Tuesday 3 February 2026
• Tuesday 24 March 2026

Notice of items to be raised under this heading must be given in writing to the Deputy Director Democratic & Corporate Governance or their representative before the meeting in accordance with Standing Order 60.

No items of urgent business were identified.