WEST OXFORDSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL FINANCE AND MANAGEMENT OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE WEDNESDAY, 9 APRIL 2003
1999/2000 OBJECTION TO THE ACCOUNTS
Extract from  REPORT OF THE STRATEGIC DIRECTOR

3. BACKGROUND
3.1 This Committee at its meeting on 29 May 2002 considered the District Auditor�s report into the objection to the Council�s 1998/99 Accounts. The objection dated May 2000 related to expenditure incurred by the Council in connection with the Chipping Norton Town Centre Improvements scheme.3.2 The District Auditor found that all of the objections failed and that the Council had done nothing which was contrary to the law. There were no recommendations for the Council to consider. However, a further objection into the Council�s 1999/2000 Accounts on the same issue from principally the same objectors was received shortly after the District Auditor�s decision on the 1998/99 Accounts. 3.3 The District Auditor decided to treat this further objection as a valid objection. The matter has not yet been finalised and the outcome from the objection to the 1999/2000 Accounts is awaited. 3.4 A significant amount of work is needed to provide the District Auditor with the evidence he needs to determine the objection. In addition to the District Auditor�s own time which is charged to the Council, there is significant officer time. Furthermore, the Council has had to take legal advice on certain matters relating to the detail of the objection. The Council�s additional costs arising from both objections are detailed in the paragraphs which follow. 3.5 The District Auditor has, up to and including February 2003, spent 59.5 hours dealing with both objections. This has resulted in an additional �8,040 in District Audit fees.  3.6 The Council has needed to seek counsel opinion on certain matters relating to the objection. Some of the arguments, particularly in relation to legal powers, are on the finer points of local government law, requiring counsel opinion. Without these opinions, the Council�s defence would not have been as strong. The cost of external legal advice in respect of the two objections amounts to �3,550. 3.7 Finally, a similar amount has been incurred in officer time. Senior officers and chief officers have spent approximately 75 hours responding to questions from the District Auditor, instructing counsel and so on. At a rate of �50 per hour this would equate to �3,750. This is an opportunity cost as officers are being diverted away from potentially more productive work. 3.8 In total, for both objections, over �15,000 has been incurred in both real and opportunity costs.
READ the FULL REPORT

(Editor's Note: When I read this on the WODC website, I wanted to know what the objections actually were and see the District Auditor's report. I was told that they would be sent to me.  After 5 weeks they haven't arrived. Is this the Open Government we hear about)