Protecting the public purse – lets see

The request was partially successful.

Dear Sir or Madam,
Protecting the public purse – lets see

I request all and any information that you hold in relation to your study this year entitled protecting the public purse.

See http://www.crazycouncil.co.uk/?p=568

I have had some info from you and I need to clear up some facts.

1.Cost of the study from the audit commission side
What was the cost in finance or time for conducting this survey form your prospective.
2.Exact accounting period that the figures were verified by the section 151 officers in relation to the figures presented to the press and on your website.
3.Any and all communications between the audit commission and outside agency's in relation to gaining,verifying, inspecting the figures presented. ( including the communication with the monitoring officer and 151 officer )
4.What department in the audit commission carried this out and who is the head of that department
5.What guidance does the audit commission follow to ensure figures presented to them, are correct when they have been challenged
6.What action would the audit commission take if some of these figures are not verified for the accounting period.
7.What consideration in relation to protecting the public from maladministration caused by this excersise.
8.What consideration has been given to the cost of sorting out maladministration cause by inaccurate record keeping. By this I meen the cost borne by each council for re-claims of the 25% discount.
9.As a basic question, who does the audit commission work for and or represent , the council or the public.

Yours faithfully,

George Cant

Shaun Kavanagh,

Dear Mr Cant
Thank you for your request for information dated 30 November 2009.
Requesting:

" 1.Cost of the study from the audit commission side What was the cost
in finance or time for conducting this survey
form your prospective.
2.Exact accounting period that the figures were verified by the
section 151 officers in relation to the figures presented to the

press and on your website.
3.Any and all communications between the audit commission and
outside agency's in relation to gaining,verifying, inspecting the

figures presented. ( including the communication with the
monitoring officer and 151 officer )
4.What department in the audit commission carried this out and
whois the head of that department
5.What guidance does the audit commission follow to ensure figures
presented to them, are correct when they have been challenged

6.What action would the audit commission take if some of
thesefigures are not verified for the accounting period.
7.What consideration in relation to protecting the public from
maladministration caused by this excersise.
8.What consideration has been given to the cost of sorting out
maladministration cause by inaccurate record keeping. By this I

meen the cost borne by each council for re-claims of the 25%
discount.
9.As a basic question, who does the audit commission work for and
or represent , the council or the public."

Your request has been allocated reference RFI 1204, please include this
reference on any future correspondence. Your request was received by the
Audit Commission on 30 November 2009. The statutory deadline for our
response is 30 December 2009.

The Audit Commission is committed to the principles of the Freedom of
Information Act (FoIA) and will wherever possible provide all the
information requested unless constrained by another statute or by an
exemption within the FoIA.

We will contact you if we need to clarify any part of your request.

Yours sincerely

Shaun Kavanagh
Public Enquiries Officer
part of the Chief Executive's Office

? Audit Commission
Westward House
Lime Kiln Close
Stoke Gifford
Bristol
BS34 8SR

( 0844 798 7961
E 07967 565735
? [1][email address]

i For Freedom of Information (FOI) requests please email
[2][Audit Commission request email]

show quoted sections

Freedom of Information,

1 Attachment

Dear Mr Cant, please find the Commission's response to your request
attached.
I'm sorry for the short delay in sending this to you.

<<20091230 ac S Kavanagh letter to G Cant.doc>>

Yours sincerely

Robert Mauler
Robert Mauler
Public Enquiries Team Manager
part of the Chief Executive's Office

i For Freedom of Information (FOI) requests please email
[1][Audit Commission request email]

show quoted sections

Dear Freedom of Information,

Please review with immediate affect

You state "The Commission believes that your request lacks any serious purpose or value and is designed to cause disruption to the Commission by imposing a significant burden to respond. The Commission believes this to be the case following a number of offers that you would retract FoIA requests and appeals if the Commission agrees to act in a particular way. "

I state

You have refused this simply because the figures are incorrect and there may be a conciqunce to the audit commission for not verifying these before it p[published a document claiming savings and success in relation to these.

I also state.

Its the same reason stated above why the district auditor refused to confirm what figures made-up the susefull collection rate.

I state, : I suggest that my questions asking you about solace and cipfa members in the audit commission has lead to this

please take this as a request for internal review.

Yours sincerely,

George Cant

Rob Mauler,

This is part of a wider response to the requestor, and has been
split down to its relevant sections for posting on
whatdotheyknow.com

Robert Mauler,

[Subject only] RE: Internal review of Freedom of Information request - Protecting the public purse - lets see

show quoted sections

Robert Mauler,

1 Attachment

Dear Mr Cant, further to our discussions yesterday, please find attached
an extract from my letter of 1 Feb which relates to this request.

Yours sincerely

Rob Mauler
Public Enquiries Manager

show quoted sections