Decision Maker: Audit and Governance Committee
Decision status: Recommendations Approved
Is Key decision?: No
Is subject to call in?: No
The committee considered the chief executive and returning officer’s report on the costs and accounting arrangements of the district and parish council elections held in May 2011. This was the first report of its kind, reporting on the accounting for the local elections.
The committee noted that the cost of running the 2011 local elections had been significantly lower than predicted at budget setting time. This was for a variety of reasons, including:
The committee questioned whether professional project planners should have been used to assist officers. In response, the officers reported that the reasons for the budget variance were difficult to predict but accepted that project planning advice could be sought to assist with financial planning for future local elections.
Councillors asked how much discount the council had received from the elections printer. The returning officer reported that this was confidential information he could not disclose. Instead, the committee asked to see the estimated cost of the 2011 local elections, had the printer fulfilled its contract and had the government not held a referendum. The committee wished to compare the original budget with the expected outcome, had these variables not occurred. This would help the council learn for the next local elections.
(a) note the information provided in the report on the costs of and accounting arrangements for the May 2011 district and parish council elections; and
(b) request the returning officer to provide the committee with an analysis of the estimated cost of the 2011 local elections, had the elections printer fulfilled its contract and had the government not held a referendum.
Report author: Margaret Reed
Publication date: 06/08/2012
Date of decision: 11/07/2012
Decided at meeting: 11/07/2012 - Audit and Governance Committee