That brings us to group 4. This group of amendments relates to the auditor general laying the certified accounts. The lead and only amendment in this group is amendment 49, and I call on Mark Isherwood to move and speak to the lead amendment. Mark Isherwood.

Amendment 49 (Mark Isherwood) moved.

Diolch, Llywydd. I move amendment 49, which relates to the four-month flexibility period the Wales Audit Office is able to grant for the public services ombudsman's accounts, which was inserted at Stage 2. While the Auditor General for Wales asked for this change at Stage 1, there are some questions as to how this would apply to other public bodies outside of the Bill's scope. Clearly, the constraints, the reasons and justification for the change, apply to most, if not all, public bodies, and the issue here is clarification where a body with oversight of those other public bodies may be granted something not available to those other public bodies. 

It was clear from the auditor general's written evidence that flexibility was needed due to the fact that problems arising from such a deadline had happened with the annual accounts for Natural Resources Wales in 2016-17. We agree that such an approach is needed. However, because of the nature of the Bill, this will only apply to the ombudsman and not other bodies. 

During Stage 1, the Equalities, Local Government and Communities Committee stated that they had asked the Member in charge whether he would consider amending the Bill in relation to the four-month deadline. The Member in charge said it was good practice to have audited accounts within four months, but admitted that the missing tool was the ability to vary it in particular circumstances. However, he was not sure if it would be appropriate to change it with regard to one body when the auditor general audits a range of bodies across Wales. As such, although it is clear there is worthwhile intent behind the lifting of the fourth-month deadline, the Minister must provide some information on the precedent this will set for other publicly managed bodies. So, I'd be grateful if the Minister could tell us whether she intends that this clause should set a precedent for the lifting of the four-month deadline to apply to other public bodies, and, if not, what is the reasoning behind the Minister's intention to only include the ombudsman in this exemption—not only within this legislation, but as we move forward? 

Minister.

Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. Amendment 49 would counteract an amendment agreed by the Equality, Local Government and Communities Committee during Stage 2 scrutiny. That amendment was agreed following the committee’s own Stage 1 recommendation, based on evidence from the Auditor General for Wales that he needed greater flexibility in relation to the accounts deadline. Reinstating a firm four-month deadline, with no flexibility, would risk placing conflicting obligations on the auditor general. The auditor general could be required to both lay the certified accounts by a rigid deadline and to be satisfied that the ombudsman’s expenditure has been incurred lawfully, and their resources have been used economically, efficiently and effectively. Furthermore, the Public Audit (Wales) Act 2013 requires the auditor general to abide by the code of audit practice and give opportunity to third parties and audited bodies to comment on audit findings. This means that, in practice, the auditor general is not wholly in control of the four-month deadline, and it is reasonable to allow him the flexibility to explain why it can't be met.

To ensure that the auditor general and National Assembly have the right information available to properly scrutinise the ombudsman’s use of public funds, I cannot support this amendment.

As we've heard at Stage 2, the Equalities, Local Government and Communities Committee agreed to an amendment that provides the auditor general with flexibility to submit certified accounts and report after the default four-month deadline. Now, this amendment seeks to remove that flexibility, of course. Now, the mechanism was included to address, as we've heard, conflicting statutory duties placed on the auditor general: firstly, to lay a copy of the certified accounts and report no later than four months after they're submitted, but also to meet the requirements of the Public Audit (Wales) Act 2013 to abide by the auditor general’s own code of audit practice, which requires that the opportunity is given to third parties and audited bodies to comment on audit findings. Now that could take it, of course, beyond the four-month deadline. The Bill requires that, if the auditor general relies on this flexibility, then the auditor general must explain to the Assembly why a copy of the certified accounts and report will not be laid before the four-month deadline, and must then proceed to lay a copy as soon as reasonably practicable.

Now, this issue, of course, came to light with the accounts of Natural Resources Wales, when the auditor general needed more than four months to ensure the financial issues with NRW’s accounts were fully investigated. When auditing Welsh public bodies, there is no provision within legislation for the auditor general to request an extension to the statutory four-month deadline—as there is, by the way, for UK resource accounts under the Government Resources and Accounts Act 2000. Now, ideally, we would have a similar provision here in Wales, and I accept that this mechanism only addresses the conflicting obligations placed on the auditor general in relation to certifying the ombudsman’s accounts and reports. Clearly, this Bill isn't an appropriate mechanism to deal with this conflict in relation to the audited accounts of other public bodies. However, I would hope this issue is something that the Welsh Government will consider, going forward. Additionally, there is an opportunity, of course, to consider the issue as part of the Finance Committee’s upcoming inquiry into the Public Audit (Wales) Act 2013. So, with those comments, I would ask Members to resist amendment 49.

Mark Isherwood to respond. 

Diolch. This was intended as a probing amendment. As I stated, we do see worthwhile intent behind the lifting of the four-month deadline within this Bill. I regret that, in her response, the Minister, however, didn't respond to my specific questions, which were the purpose of the probing amendment, which is difficult. Following on from the Member in charge's response, however, I hope that this will lead to the Welsh Government considering and sharing with the Assembly its wider intentions over whether this might begin to set a precedent for other public bodies, and, again, if the Finance Committee inquiry that the Member in charge refers to could also address that, it would clearly be to mutual benefit; it might tease out some of the threats and opportunities involved with this. We weren't intending to object; we were seeking the clarity that, unfortunately, we've not received in the Minister's response, but I think the Member in charge's contribution was very helpful, and we will support.

The question is that amendment 49 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Therefore, we will have an electronic vote on amendment 49. Open the vote. Close the vote. None in favour, no abstentions and 47 against. Therefore, amendment 49 is not agreed. 

Amendment 49: For: 0, Against: 47, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been rejected

Amendment 37, Llyr Gruffydd. 

Amendment 37 (Llyr Gruffydd) moved.

I move.

The question is that amendment 37 be agreed to. Does any Member object? Amendment 37 is agreed to. 

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.