PSAA is well placed to lead the national scheme
As outlined earlier, the past few years have posed unprecedented challenges for the UK audit market. Alongside other stakeholders PSAA has learned a great deal as we have tried to address the difficulties and problems arising and mitigate risks. It has been a steep learning curve but nevertheless one which places us in a strong position to continue to lead the national scheme going forward. MHCLG’s Spring statement confirmed Government’s confidence in us to continue as appointing person, citing our strong technical expertise and the proactive work we have done to help to identify improvements that can be made to the process.
The company is staffed by a team with significant experience of working within the context of the regulations to appoint auditors, managing contracts with audit firms, and setting and determining audit fees. All of these roles are undertaken with a detailed, ongoing, and up-to-date understanding of the distinctive context and challenges facing both the sector and a highly regulated service and profession which is subject to dynamic pressures for change. Where appropriate we have worked with MHCLG to change our regulations where they are preventing efficiency.
We believe that the national collective, sector-led scheme stands out as the best option for all eligible bodies – especially in the current challenging market conditions. It offers excellent value for money and assures the independence of the auditor appointment.
Membership of the scheme will save time and resources for local bodies – time and resources which can be deployed to address other pressing priorities. Bodies can avoid the necessity to establish an auditor panel (required by the Local Audit & Accountability Act, 2014) and the need to manage their own auditor procurement. Assuming a high level of participation, the scheme can make a significant contribution to supporting market sustainability and encouraging realistic prices in a challenging market.
The scope of a local audit is fixed. It is determined by the Code of Audit Practice (currently published by the NAO), the format of the financial statements (specified by CIPFA/LASAAC) and the application of auditing standards regulated by the FRC. These factors apply to all local audits irrespective of whether an eligible body decides to opt into PSAA’s national scheme or chooses to make its own separate arrangements.
The scope of public audit is wider than for private sector organisations. For example, for 2020/21 onwards it involves providing a new commentary on the body’s arrangements for securing value for money, as well as dealing with electors’ enquiries and objections, and in some circumstances issuing public interest reports.
Auditors must be independent of the bodies they audit to enable them to carry out their work with objectivity and credibility, and to do so in a way that commands public confidence. We will continue to make every effort to ensure that auditors meet the relevant independence criteria at the point at which they are appointed, and to address any identified threats to independence which arise from time to time. We will also monitor any significant proposals for auditors to carry out consultancy or other non-audit work with the aim of ensuring that these do not undermine independence and public confidence.
The scheme will also endeavour to appoint the same auditor to bodies involved in formal collaboration/joint working initiatives, if the parties consider that a common auditor will enhance efficiency and value for money.
 MHCLG’s Spring statement proposes that overarching responsibility for the Code will in due course transfer to the system leader, namely ARGA, the new regulator being established to replace the FRC.Back to top