MJMC papers 15 Sept 2015

Transcription

15 SEPTEMBER 2015
MUGDOCK PARK JOINT
MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE
A meeting of the Mugdock Park Joint Management Committee will be held within the
Osprey Room, Mugdock Park on Tuesday, 15 September 2015 at 10.00am to consider the
undernoted business.
(Sgd) ANN DAVIE
Director of Customer Services &
Transformation
12 Strathkelvin Place
KIRKINTILLOCH
Glasgow G66 1XT
Tel: 0141 578 8026
Date: 8 September 2015
AGENDA
Item Description
No.
Page No.
1.
Sederunt and Apologies.
2.
Chair’s Remarks.
3.
Minute of Meeting of Mugdock Park Joint Management
Committee of 16 June 2015. (Copy herewith).
4.
Matters Arising.
5.
Minute of Meeting of Mugdock Development Sub-Committee
of 1 September 2015.
6.
Matters Arising.
…..
7.
General Progress Report (Period July 2015 to Sept 2015) –
Report by Director of Development & Regeneration. (Copy
herewith).
11 - 16
…..
8.
Finance Report – Capital Bids (Period July 2015 to Sept 2015)
- Report by Director of Development & Regeneration. (Copy
herewith).
17 - 18
…..
9.
Craigend Castle – Report by Director of Development &
Regeneration. (Copy herewith).
19 - 22
…..
10.
Mugdock 5 Year Strategy 2015 – 2020 – Report by Director of
Development & Regeneration. (Copy herewith).
23 - 66
…..
11.
2014/15 Final Outurn Position & 2015/16 Period 4 Revenue
Monitoring Report – Report by Director of Finance & Shared
Services. (Copy herewith).
67 - 70
…..
12.
Annual Audit Report – Report by Director of Finance &
Shared Services. (Copy herewith).
71 - 136
13.
AOCB
14.
Proposed dates of future Meetings:• Tuesday, 1 December 2015
• Tuesday, 1 March 2016
• Tuesday, 14 June 2016
…..
…..
1-6
7 - 10
Agenda Item 3
Minute of meeting of the Mugdock Park Joint Management Committee held within the
Osprey Meeting Room, Mugdock Country Park, Mugdock on Tuesday, 16 June 2015.
Representing
East Dunbartonshire
Council:
Councillors
Representing
Stirling Council:
Councillor
In Attendance: Mary Coulshed
Maggie Ferguson
Debbie Bryan
Gail MacFarlane
Colin Mackay
Gail Morrison
Elaine Boyd
Ray Buist
David Shenton
Alan Govan
Benjamin Carey
Also in
Attendance:
Julie Hutchison
Ian McAllister
RHONDDA GEEKIE, JIM GIBBONS, ERIC
GOTTS, MAUREEN HENRY, ANNE
McNAIR, VAUGHN MOODY
GRAHAM LAMBIE
Team Leader Mugdock Park
Senior Countryside Rangers Service
Committee Services Officer
Economic Development Manager
Stirling Council
Team Leader Finance
Audit Scotland
Audit Scotland
Scottish Wildlife Trust
Mugstock Festival Director
Managing Director, Dunira Strategy
Strathblane Community Council
Milngavie Community Council
Councillor Eric Gotts (Chair) presiding
CHAIR’S REMARKS
Councillor Gotts welcomed B. Carey and J. Hutchison to the meeting and informed the
Committee that J. Hutchison would now replace Mr Grave of the Strathblane
Community Council. He also stated that A. Govan, MugStock 2015 Festival Director,
was expected.
1.
MINUTE OF MEETING OF MUGDOCK PARK JOINT MANAGEMENT
COMMITTEE OF 17 MARCH 2015
There was submitted and approved Minute of meeting of Mugdock Park Joint
Management Committee of 17 March 2015, copies of which had previously been
circulated.
SEDERUNT
A. Govan joined the meeting during discussion of the previous item of business.
2.
MUGSTOCK
Page 1
MUGDOCK PARK JOINT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE,
16 JUNE 2015
A. Govan, Festival Director, provided the Committee with a Presentation on the up and
coming event, MugStock 2015, being held at Mugdock Country Park weekend
commencing Friday 7th August 2015.
A. Govan was heard further on the various aspects of the organisation of MugStock
2015 as follows: fundraising, licensing, the booking of acts, bands and companies,
emergency planning strategies, stage locations, parking and luggage transfer service,
bus shuttle service from Glasgow City centre and Milngavie train station, security,
toilet facilities and marketing for the event. He was also heard in response to
Members’ questions in relation to programme availability, site logistics, advertising and
marketing of the event, first aid service, recruitment of volunteers, event starting and
finishing times, parking and traffic wardens, communication with local residents,
communication equipment for employees and volunteers, clear-up arrangements for
after the event and evaluation process of the event.
Councillor Gotts directed the Committee to Pages 35 and 37 where maps of Mugdock
Country Park were provided. Discussion took place on site logistics and where event
items would be located.
In response to a suggestion from Councillor Geekie in relation to volunteers for the
event, A. Govan undertook to approach ‘Clydesiders’. Cllr Geekie informed A. Govan
that he would be able to obtain their contact details from East Dunbartonshire’s
communications department, if required.
J. Hutchison of Strathblane Community Council informed the Committee that they
have four first responders who have access to defibrillators.
In response to a request from Councillor Gotts in relation to access roads to the site, A.
Govan undertook to check access from Stockiemuir Road.
Following discussion A. Govan agreed to provide evaluation feedback from the event
to the next meeting of the Committee.
Councillor Gotts thanked A. Govan, on behalf of the Committee, for his in-depth verbal
presentation.
3.
MINUTE OF MEETING OF MUGDOCK DEVELOPMENT SUB-COMMITTEE
OF 3 JUNE 2015
There was submitted and noted an update of Mugdock Development Sub-Committee of
3 June 2015, copies of which had had previously been circulated, providing details on
the Visitor Centre Refurbishment, Craigend Castle, the Adventure Trail, Observatory,
MugStock 2015, Renewables, Clan Graham Visit 2015 and Charlie’s Bar roof. Full
details were contained within the update and the Appendix.
4.
MATTERS ARISING
Page 2
16 JUNE 2015
With regard to Page 7, Paragraph 2, Visitor Centre Refurbishment, Councillor Gotts
advised the Committee that there would be an opportunity at the end of the meeting to
walk round the visitor centre. He confirmed that the official opening would be in the
Autumn.
With regard to Page 7, Paragraph 3, Craigend Castle, M. Coulshed advised the
Committee that the revised application for funding from ‘Investing in Ideas’ had not
been successful, as per attached letter. She agreed to contact Colin Scott from Stirling
Council’s Estates Department to look at other possible options. Councillor Gotts
suggested she also look into other Lottery distributors as stated within the Big Lottery
Fund letter.
With regard to Page 8, Paragraph 8, Clan Graham Visit 2015, M. Coulshed informed
the Committee that the invitations had been issued from Members Support, for the
event taking place on 31st July 2015, however, due to the visit taking place over the
school summer holidays, it appeared that a lot of people were away.
5.
GENERAL PROGRESS REPORT (PERIOD APRIL 2015 TO JUNE 2015)
There was submitted Report DR/057/15/MC by the Director of Development &
Regeneration, copies of which had previously been circulated, informing the
Committee of the Park’s operational progress for the period April to June 2015 relating
to: visitor statistics; volunteering and land management; education and community
groups; countryside programme; events programme and general progress and
operational issues. Full details were contained within the Report and the attached
Appendices.
M. Ferguson from the Countryside Rangers Service provided the Committee with an
update on the invasive non-native salmonberry plant and deer control. She was also
heard in response to Members’ questions in relation to, schools visiting Mugdock
Country Park, work on the walled garden, slab replacement work around the band stand
and possible road marking solutions for Craigallian Road congestion.
Councillor Gotts stated B. Carey, Managing Director of Dunira Strategy, provided a
verbal report in March 2015, however, the Committee now had this in writing. B.
Carey spoke on the various aspects of his report, the ‘Mugdock Country Park Strategy
2015-2020’.
B. Carey explained the scope of the project was to provide a five year business plan for
Mugdock Country Park and the main objective was to continue to operate a successful
park whilst reducing costs and increasing income. He stated this could potentially be
achieved through operational efficiencies, more effective partnerships and enhanced
marketing, with opportunities for transformation. He informed the Committee that the
immediate objective for EDC was to reduce its contribution by a third and there was a
desire that ultimately Mugdock Country Park should pay for itself. B. Carey explained
that he was recommending three approaches, all which could run parallel to each other.
The three recommendations were as follows:
Page 3
16 JUNE 2015
1)
2)
3)
Equilibrium through equalisation of contributions from the two local authorities;
Savings through operational changes; and
Transformation through investment.
B. Carey stated that Mugdock Country Park is a fantastic asset that could be advertised
on a national level. He explained there were funds available to local authorities to
support outdoor education, however, to access these Mugdock’s priorities would need
to be more in line with the Scottish Government’s national priorities.
B. Carey was heard in further explanation of his report and in response to Members’
questions in relation to Mugdock overspend, Mugdock staffing structure, Mugdock
Enterprise Forum, Mugdock Trust, Mugdock Castle, community allotments and
gardens and marketing opportunities.
J. Hutchison raised the subject of additional parking for events and the possible use of a
loyalty card scheme, which would include a minimal parking fee.
I. McAllister of Milngavie Community Council informed the Committee that they had
conducted a survey in the Milngavie area and some of the feedback included possible
proposals for Mugdock Country Park. He stated that the feedback would become public
later in the summer and he undertook to bring the feedback to the next meeting of the
Committee in September 2015.
Discussion took place around children and young people being able to benefit from
what Mugdock Country Park has to offer. There was discussion around possible
funding streams to allow East Dunbartonshire and Stirling schools to visit Mugdock
Country Park.
In response to a question from J. Hutchison in relation to the Rangers Service charging
for their services, M. Ferguson informed the Committee that the Rangers Service now
charges for their services.
Councillor Geekie undertook to ensure the suggested Marketing Officer post would be
contained within the Mugdock Park Service Review report going to Council in late
June 2015.
Councillor Gotts informed the Committee that Benjamin Carey would be attending the
next meeting of the Committee in September 2015.
Following consideration, the Committee agreed as follows:-
6.
a)
to note the content of the Report; and
b)
agreed to new events as part of the 2015 Events Calendar – Beer Festival and
Christmas Fayre.
FINANCE REPORTS
Page 4
16 JUNE 2015
There was submitted Report DR/058/15/MC by the Director of Development &
Regeneration, copies of which had previously been circulated, updating the Committee
on the Financial Outturn Report to Period 12 of 2014-15 as detailed in Appendix 1 and
Appendix 2 provided feedback on the Mugdock Statement of Accounts for 2014-2015.
Members noted that the financial outturn report showed that the Park finances were
overall within budget with some variance between the budget headings. Income is
lower than anticipated for the shop which had not been trading due to its relocation.
The Statement of Accounts for 2014-2015 provided a detailed examination of Mugdock
Country Park finances. Financial control measures had been implemented this year
which had allowed the Park to complete the year within budget.
G. Morrison and Mary Coulshed were heard in explanation of the Report and in
response to Members’ questions on the following matters: new booking system,
sustainable energy sources and possible funding opportunities, year-end accounts,
identified overspends, financial summary, minimising car crime and recent vandalism
at Mugdock Castle.
In response to a question from Councillor Gotts in relation to why Mugdock had
changed to a more expensive electricity supplier, G. Morrison undertook to approach
procurement to find out why this had occurred.
In response to a request from Councillor Geekie in relation to Page 44 and the incorrect
spelling of her name, G. Morrison undertook to correct the spelling of Councillor
Geekie’s name.
Following consideration, the Committee agreed as follows:-
7.
a)
to note the content of the Financial Outturn Report; and
b)
to note the content of the Statement of Accounts for 2014/2015.
AOCB
Councillor Gotts wished to reiterate that in relation to Agenda Item 12 ‘Visitor Centre
viewing’, Mary Coulshed would be providing a walk round of the centre at the end of
the meeting.
8.
DATE OF FUTURE MEETINGS
Councillor Gotts informed the Committee that future meeting dates for the Mugdock
Park Joint Management Committee were as follows:
•
•
15th September 2015 at 10.00am within Mugdock Park; and
1st December 2015 at 10.00am within Mugdock Park.
Page 5
16 JUNE 2015
J. Hutchison submitted her apologies for the 15th September 2015 meeting, however,
she stated that she would send a substitute.
Councillor Gotts wished all members of the Committee a happy summer.
Page 6
Agenda Item 5
Mugdock Development Sub-committee
Tuesday 1 September 2015, 10am
Minutes
Present:
Councillor Lambie (chair)
Stirling Council
Councillor Gotts
East Dunbartonshire Council
Councillor Moody
Councillor Gibbons
In attendance: Mary Coulshed (minutes)
Team Leader Mugdock Park
1. Welcome
Councillor Lambie welcomed everyone to the meeting. The update from the meeting of 3
June 15 were circulated for information having been approved at the previous Joint
Management Committee on 16 June 2015.
2. MugStock – Alan Govan, Kat Borrowdale
Alan and Kat provided feedback to the Development Sub Committee about the MugStock
Music Festival held on 7-9 August, 2015. It had lived up to their expectations and feedback
had been very positive:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
49% of ticket holders attended with children
25% of ticket holders had never been to Mugdock before
1300 people were on-site over the weekend and 600 tickets were sold
2,500 followers of the festival on facebook
Parking was well organised and no issues occurred
Campsite worked well and ground underfoot was good
IT worked well thanks to EDC’s ICT department
Security was well handled by G4S
Mugdock’s Estates team was very helpful
9 minute feature on STV 10 o’clock news
Lessons learnt included:
•
•
Longer time required for set up and take down than anticipated
Expected more walk in sales. More marketing to local people would have helped
Page 7
•
Learned from audience that the sums of money spent on headline bands did not
necessarily pay off
Alan and Kat said that the first year of the festival, whilst being a successfully run event, h ad
incurred a budget deficit. However, within a 3 year development plan, the income would
increase with better ticket sales and this would come from word of mouth and increased
marketing.
The company, which is not for profit with the directors taking no payment for running the
event, was aiming to achieve charitable status and Alan was hopeful this would be in place
soon.
Councillor Gotts thanked Alan and Kat for their feedback. He saw benefits to the park in
expanding the visitor experience and reaching new audiences. It linked in with the proposed
5 year strategy for the park and he had received some very positive feedback.
Committee members agreed that they would recommend that the event should continue
next year.
3. Clan Graham visit
The Clan Graham Society of North America visited Mugdock Country Park on 31 July as part
of a wider tour of Scotland. The Clan seat is Mugdock Castle and over many years the Clan
has contributed to the upkeep and refurbishment of the Castle.
The day included a visit to Mugdock Castle, led by a piper, viewing the Castle and grounds,
archery and clarsach recital. The evening was at the Winnock Hotel in Drymen with Scottish
traditional music, silent auction, and a play performed by Fizzgig theatre company with
music and dancing.
The Clan Graham Society donated £5,000 to Mugdock Trust for the purpose of maintaining
and developing Mugdock Castle. Discussion took place on suitable uses for the money.
4. Visitor Centre refurbishment
Following the approval of the new staffing structure on 25 June 2015 the staffing of the new
Visitor Centre is being progressed. It is intended that the Visitor Centre will be open later
this year.
5. Adventure Trail
The ground work required for the installation of the new Adventure Trail is currently
underway with the equipment being installed over the next few weeks.
6. Observatory update
A draft ground lease was sent to the Astronomical Society of Glasgow by EDC Estates
department for comment. The society had informed M Coulshed that a second dome with
Page 8
equipment had been donated to them by an enthusiast who had spent many years studying
the stars. It is a boost to their project and will allow additional public viewing opportunity.
7. Craigend Castle
M Coulshed informed the Committee that a joint report with Stirling Council would be
prepared for the Management Committee on 15 Sept.
8. Mugdock Strategy – Benjamin Carey
Benjamin presented an overview of the draft 5 year Strategy for Mugdock which aimed to
have the park almost financially sustainable by 2020. This is dependent on significant
investment and increased income. The draft Strategy will be taken to the Joint Management
Committee on 15 Sept.
Councillor Gotts suggested a Special Meeting to discuss the new Strategy with the Chief
Executives of East Dunbartonshire and Stirling Councils, or their representatives. Benjamin
and Councillor Gotts would be available on 29 Sept, if this suited the Council chief officers.
9. AOB
M Coulshed reported that the Ultim8 Warrior Challenge event had successfully taken place
with over 300 children taking part. The organisers had the best uptake of the challenge at
Mugdock than anywhere else in the UK and were keen to return again next year.
M Coulshed gave feedback on the Walled Garden which Caulders now leased. Plans for the
canopy cover for the outdoor sales area are going to be submitted to the Stirling Council
planning service during the course of the week. A fundraising campaign ‘Poppies in the
Park’ is about to commence profits of which will be split between Poppy Scotland and the
Erskine charity. 1916 iron poppy birdfeeders will be arranged on the grass and sold to
customers. This marks the year the charity was founded and will kick off their centenary
year celebrations.
Councillor Gotts requested that Colin Barrie be invited to the Joint Management Committee
on 15 September.
10. Dates of next meetings
Tuesday 1 December 2015
Tuesday 1 March 2016
Tuesday 14 June 2016
Page 9
Page 10
AGENDA ITEM NO: 7
MUGDOCK PARK JOINT
15 SEPTEMBER 2015
DR/083/15/TG
THOMAS GLEN, DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT &
REGENERATION
CONTACT OFFICER
MARY COULSHED, TEAM LEADER – MUGDOCK
PARK (TEL: 0141 956 6100)
SUBJECT
GENERAL PROGRESS REPORT
( Period July 2015 to Sept 2015)
1.0
PURPOSE
1.1
The purpose of this report is to inform the Joint Management Committee of the park’s progress
for the period July 2015 to Sept 2015.
2.0
SUMMARY
2.1
This report outlines operational matters within Mugdock Country Park including visitor
numbers, events programme and countryside issues.
2.2
Numbers attending events are good and feedback is generally positive. More events are being run by
Charlie’s Bar and Caulders will take over the Summer Bandstand programme.
2.3
Issues with parking continue to arise and the condition of the car parks is the source of many
complaints. This is picked up in the draft Mugdock Strategy.
3.0
RECOMMENDATIONS
3.1
It is recommended that the Committee:a) Notes the contents of this report.
THOMAS GLEN
DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT & REGENERATION
Page 11
4.0
MUGDOCK VISITOR STATISTICS (to August 2015)
4.1
Set out below in table 1 are the park visitor numbers to August 2015 with comparable figures
from previous years. The total footfall to date is 448,900.
Month
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
Total
2013
44,563
48,361
48,985
62,094
60,996
46,940
63,142
60,185
435,266
2014
40,062
48,381
44,526
63,155
61,651
57,474
61,681
61,141
438,071
2015
43,803
47,647
47,153
63,208
62,321
60,515
61,838
62,415
448,900
4.2
Visitor numbers have increased from the same period last year with August footfall being
higher due to new events within the park. MugStock brought 1,300 people through ticket
holders and participants/crew etc.
5.0
COUNTRYSIDE MATTERS
5.1
Volunteering and Land Management
5.2
Mugdock Conservation Volunteer numbers are continuing to rise. The Monday practical
conservation groups now has a regular attendance of 14 people. Over the summer period an
impressive 445 volunteer days were achieved.
5.3
There are also now 4 small separate groups of midweek volunteers who all carry out practical
conservation/gardening or path maintenance work on a weekly basis.
5.4
Two volunteers help carry out wildlife surveys and 3 volunteers regularly assist with
countryside events and 1 person with office and recording work.
5.5
Morgan Stanley Volunteers carried out a huge 192 work days with the ranger service this year.
Tasks undertaken included rhododendron and bracken clearance, scrub cutting, heath
management, path creation, path resurfacing, digging wader pools, American Raspberry
removal, bracken whacking and Himalayan Balsam pulling.
6.0
Education and Community Groups
6.1
The following table outlines the variety of formal education groups that visited Mugdock
Country Park for a Ranger led visit over the spring period.
6.2
The table does not include ranger led activities in the wider countryside of East Dunbartonshire
or south west Stirlingshire. The Ranger Service was fully booked for both formal education and
community groups over this 3 month period. Many of groups visiting Mugdock Country Park
do not come from East Dunbartonshire or Stirling areas, however the Ranger Service work
with a large number of East Dunbartonshire and Stirling Schools in greenspaces close to their
school or within the school grounds.
Name (no. of classes)
Topic
Level
Page 12
St Columbas (1)
Milngavie (1)
Glasgow Academy Milngavie
(2)
Glasgow Academy Milngavie
(1)
Jordanhill School (1)
Jordanhill School (3)
Pond and Minibeast study
Land and water creatures
Pond and Minibeast study
Primary
Primary
Primary
Signs of Summer
Pre- school
Environment
Aquatic Invertebrates
Primary
Primary
6.3
The demand for ranger visits to lead classes undertaking study in their school grounds and
greenspaces close to schools was high this year due in part to the prohibitive cost of transport.
6.4
The following table outlines the variety of community and corporate groups that visited
Mugdock Country Park over the spring period for a Ranger led visit, it does not include ranger
led activities in the wider countryside of East Dunbartonshire or south west Stirlingshire.
Name (no. of occasions)
East Pollockshields Out of
School Care
Bearsden After School Care
1st Kirkintilloch
2nd Bearsden Brownies
3D Drumchapel
Topic
Wild animals
Group
After school Group
Woodland adventure
Environmental games
Pond Dipping
Caring for your countryside
After School Group
Beaver scouts
Brownie Guides
Family
Foundations
7.0
Countryside Events Programme
7.1
Ranger led events that took place at Mugdock Country Park over the summer period were
mainly well attended although a couple had to be postponed due to the wet weather. Mugdock
events included; Fabulous Flutterbys, Walk Carbeth and Back, Family Nature Club – Bats,
Mugdock Minibeast Hunt, Pond Dipping @ Mugdock, Bat Roost Count Evening, Family
Shelter Building, Mugdock Superdog, Wonderful Water Beasties, Bumblebee Safari, Loch
Ardinning Family Day and Nature Club – Mini Beasties.
7.2
Other events led by the ranger service outwith the Mugdock boundary include-Walk:
Lennoxtown to Campsie Glen, Beautiful Beasties of Bearsden, Walk: The Luggie Meander,
Footpaths and Fairways - Kirkintilloch, Wild Storytelling at Lennoxtown, Finches and Flasks
at Dawn - Clachan of Campsie, Control the Invaders – Milngavie, Search the Skies for Swifts –
Kirkintilloch, Canal Dipping at Kirkintilloch Canal Festival, Lucky Dip at Twechar, Walk:
Cadder to Lennoxtown and Mini Monster Hunt – Torrance.
7.3
The October events programme has been compiled; there are ranger led events on every day of
the school holidays with something for everyone from conservation days to a wildlife triathlon.
7.4
Other events taking place over the summer months at Mugdock include:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Let’s Dance classes
Cinema Club – fortnightly
CD&Record Fair
Art Exhibition
Puppet Show – Charlie’s Bar
Silk painting, Ragrugs and Bookbinding
Page 13
7.5
Ultim8 Warrior Challenge was an obstacle course for children aged 5-15 and took place in
August. It involved 1km, 3km and 5km runs through mud and across obstacles. Over 300
children from the local area and wider afield took part.
7.6
The inaugural MugStock Festival attracted over 1,300 visitors to the park. There was a variety
of music in the marquees, arts and crafts for children, art installations and ‘happenings’ in the
park. It was well organised and introduced new visitors to Mugdock.
8.0
GENERAL PROGRESS AND OPERATIONAL ISSUES
8.1
Minute of Agreement between East Dunbartonshire Council and Stirling Council
The Minute of Agreement and Variation to the Minute has been discussed at Director level
between East Dunbartonshire Council and Stirling Council in July with another meeting
expected in Sept/Oct 2015.
8.2
The amendments have been mostly been agreed with further discussion required on the section
relating to financial contributions.
8.3
Mugdock 5 Year Strategy
The proposed Mugdock 5 year strategy provides a blueprint for delivering a sustainable park
with bold development and significant investment. Craigend Castle is a key site and along with
investment in parking, paths and cycleways will bring the infrastructure in the park up to a high
standard and enable the park to move towards becoming financially sustainable.
8.4
Training
Ranger Service staff have been trained in pesticide spraying which will allow staff to assist in
eradicating invasive species.
8.5
Booking System
An upgrade to the park’s Booking System has been installed. Staff are currently undergoing
training and will use the new system for future bookings. Developments in the ability to pay
for events on-line will be rolled out over the next few months.
8.6
Parking
Parking continues to be problematic on busy days. Stirling Council has agreed to install single
yellow lines and advisory signage on Craigallian Road.
8.7
Car park potholes have been partly addressed by East Dunbartonshire Council’s emergency
response team however the park continues to receive customer complaints and a more long
term solution is required.
8.8
Staff Structure
The staff structure for Mugdock was approved at the 25th June Council meeting. The structure
is in the process of being implemented.
9.0
IMPLICATIONS
9.1
This report has been assessed against the Policy Development Checklist and has been classified
as being an operational report and not a new policy or change to an existing policy document.
The implications for the Council are as undernoted.
9.2
Development & Regeneration – continue to support Mugdock Country Park development and
sustainability.
Page 14
9.3
Legal – legal involvement in drawing up the Variation to the Minute of Agreement between
East Dunbartonshire and Stirling Councils.
9.4
Customer Services & Transformation – implementation of the new Mugdock Structure.
Page 15
Page 16
AGENDA ITEM NO: 8
MUGDOCK PARK JOINT
15 SEPTEMBER 2015
DR/084/15/TG
REGENERATION
CONTACT OFFICER
PARK (TEL: 0141 956 6100)
SUBJECT
FINANCE REPORT – CAPITAL BIDS
( Period July 2015 to Sept 2015)
1.0
PURPOSE
1.1
The purpose of this report is to review the capital spend by Mugdock Country Park.
1.2
The report also outlines proposed capital bids for 2016-17 to East Dunbartonshire Council and
Stirling Council.
2.0
SUMMARY
2.1
Capital spend for 2015-16 is progressing with new interpretation panels currently being
designed and installed. The Adventure Trail will be on-site by the end of September and is
projected to be on budget.
2.2
Capital bids to East Dunbartonshire Council and Stirling Council require to be made in
November 2015 for the financial year 2016-17. In line with the draft Mugdock Strategy, and
given the urgency of work required to bring parking and pathways up to a good standard, a bid
for capital funding is proposed.
3.0
RECOMMENDATIONS
3.1
It is recommended that the Committee:a)
Notes the contents of the report; and
b)
Agrees to the Team Leader preparing capital bids for November 2015.
THOMAS GLEN
Page 17
4.0
BACKGROUND
4.1
CAPITAL SPEND 2015-16
4.2
The capital budget for 2015-16 was approved at the Joint Management Committee meeting of
11 March 2015. The table below outlines the progress of spend to date.
Approved budget
Visitor Centre
Signage and
Interpretation
£26,143
Confirmed spend to
date
£13,000
Adventure Trail
£24,000
£1,000
Balance remaining
£23,000
£13,143
Anticipated
timescale
Work to be
completed by
November 2015
Play equipment
to be installed in
Sept/Oct 2015.
4.3
CAPITAL BIDS 2016-17
4.4
Recognising that the park requires capital investment in order to achieve the goal of financial
sustainability, as set out in the draft Mugdock 5 year Strategy, it is proposed that capital bids
are made to East Dunbartonshire Council and Stirling Council as follows:-
East Dunbartonshire
Council
Paths and cycleways
Amount
£250,000
Year of spend
Financial year
2016-17
Stirling Council
Car park improvements
£250,000
Financial year
2016-17
4.5
Capital funding for Craigend Castle will be proposed for 2017-2020 following approval for a
funding application to Heritage Lottery Fund, Parks for People.
5.0
IMPLICATIONS
5.1
as being an operational report and not a new policy or change to an existing policy document.
5.2
Finance – Proposal subject to capital bidding process
5.2
Development & Regeneration – Support of capital bids
Page 18
AGENDA ITEM NO: 9
MUGDOCK PARK JOINT
15 SEPTEMBER 2015
DR/085/15/TG
REGENERATION
CONTACT OFFICER
PARK, (TEL: 0141 956 6100); AND
COLIN SCOTT, ESTATES SURVEYOR STIRLING
COUNCIL
SUBJECT
CRAIGEND CASTLE REPORT
1.0
PURPOSE
1.1
The purpose of this report is to provide an update on the status of Craigend Castle and review
the available options. In addition there is a health and safety concern which has recently arisen
and which requires some financial resources to address.
2.0
SUMMARY
2.1
Craigend Castle is both an asset to Mugdock Country Park and also a liability. There is a long
history of famous residents, business ventures and, ultimately, abandonment. It is situated at
the heart of the park but currently is an unsafe ruin and an eyesore. Previous attempts to apply
for funding a feasibility study have been unsuccessful.
2.3
The options open to the Joint Management Committee include site clearance, restoration,
preservation as a ruin, sale and development for re-use. Each of these options will incur a cost.
Heritage Lottery fund, Parks for People, would consider funding the development through a 2
stage application process.
2.4
Recent feedback from Stirling Council’s structural engineer contractors has alerted the park to
the positioning of the heras fencing. It is currently too close to the building and it is
recommended that it is moved out from its current position with the path being re-routed. This
will involve an element of cost.
3.0
RECOMMENDATIONS
3.1
It is recommended that the Committee:a) Agrees to address the re-positioning of the heras fencing and path re-alignment once cost
estimates have been obtained; and
b) Agrees to progressing an application to the Heritage Lottery Fund, Parks for People with
associated development costs including Structural update and RIBA stage 1 drawings.
THOMAS GLEN
Page 19
4.0
BACKGROUND
4.1
Craigend Castle, built in 1816, is Regency Gothic in style and is mentioned in ‘The Old
Country Houses of the Old Glasgow Gentry’ 1870. It was built on a site of previous structures
by the Smith family who had connections to the site earlier than 1660 and had bought the lands
from the Marquis of Montrose.
4.2
Craigend Castle is a c-listed building and is on the Buildings at Risk Register. However the
deterioration on the site is significant with some immediate remedial work required.
4.3
In October 2012 Craigend Castle was marketed by Stirling Council as a development
opportunity. Although some interest was shown in the site there was no offer of substance
which could be pursued.
4.4
In 2014 Strathblanefield Community Development Trust was given approval by the
Management Committee to apply for funding for a feasibility study from the Big Lottery. This
was unsuccessful, as was a subsequent application. The Development Trust has since
withdrawn interest in the site.
4.5
The Mugdock Consultation Report, published in March 2015, reports that almost none of the
respondents wants to see the castle demolished and most would like to see it developed for a
new purpose which would serve community needs.
5.0
OPTIONS
5.1
It is now necessary to review the options in relation to Craigend Castle as the structure
continues to deteriorate and no new use has yet been found.
5.2
Site clearance – in order to clear the site there would be considerable cost. Although this could
be offset against selling the stone it would still involve disruption to park visitors. The site
would also be lost to the park and, with it, a lot of the park’s historical value.
5.3
Preservation as a ruin – there would be a cost involved in stabilising the structure. As above
stone could be sold and the building could have some interpretation panels to explain the
history of the site.
5.4
Sale to private company/individual – although the least expensive options to date this has not
been successful. Craigend Castle and surrounding land could be put on the market again.
5.5
Development for re-use – stabilising the façade of the structure and building behind it would
require external funding and community involvement.
5.6
The immediate requirement is for an update to the structural report of 2004. This will provide
more realistic financial estimations in relation to the options and will cost in the region of £2k£3k.
5.7
In terms of external funding a funding stream called Parks for People, which is within the
Heritage Lottery Fund, contributes to heritage based projects up to a maximum of £5 million.
As part of a wider park initiative it would be possible to apply for funding to include a new use
for Craigend Castle. An updated structural report would be required for this application as
would architectural drawings to RIBA stage 1 (£2k-£3k).
Page 20
6.0
IMPLICATIONS
6.1
as being an operational report and not a strategic policy document. The implications for the
Council are as undernoted.
6.2
Financial Implications – Some cost associated with updating the structural report.
Page 21
Page 22
AGENDA ITEM NO: 10
MUGDOCK PARK JOINT
15 SEPTEMBER 2015
DR/091/15/TG
REGENERATION
CONTACT OFFICER
PARK (TEL: 0141 956 6100)
SUBJECT
MUGDOCK 5 YEAR STRATEGY 2015-2020
1.0
PURPOSE
1.1.
The purpose of this report is to provide an overview of the draft Mugdock 5 year Strategy
2015-2020 and ask the Committee to comment on and approve the Strategy.
2.0
SUMMARY
2.1.
Mugdock Country Park has commissioned Dunira Strategy to produce a 5 year plan for the
park to consider ways of developing the offering within Mugdock and provide direction in
making Mugdock financially sustainable.
2.2
Mugdock has a loyal visitor base but many areas of the park require investment. The Strategy
proposes investment priorities for parking infrastructure, cycleways and paths, and Craigend
Castle.
2.3
The Strategy also tackles the issue of financial contributions from the partner authorities. It
suggests a greater input from Stirling Council is essential to the success of the proposals.
3.0
RECOMMENDATIONS
3.1
It is recommended that the Committee:a) Notes the contents of this report; and
b) Agrees to the Strategy being approved subject to comment by Stirling Council.
THOMAS GLEN
DIRECTOR OF DEVLEOPMENT & REGENERATION
Page 23
4.0
BACKGROUND
4.1
Following the Mugdock Consultation process in 2014/15 a Strategy has been produced to
address the main issues arising from the Consultation report.
4.2
These include the importance to visitors of parking facilities, path improvements and the need
to address the issue of Craigend Castle.
4.3
The Strategy maps out a process for achieving financial sustainability for the park and requires
both Stirling and East Dunbartonshire Councils to agree to invest capital funds into the park.
5.0
STRATEGY REPORT
5.1
Central to the proposed Strategy for Mugdock is improved marketing of the park. This is
essential to bring new visitors/customers to the facilities and will allow services to develop in
response to customer demands.
5.2
Having the new Visitor Centre as the focal point for activity in the park will allow the park to
develop and promote new schemes such as loyalty and sponsorship packages. Tying
fundraising into tangible outcomes such as sponsor a birdbox/tree/path will be a useful
marketing tool for the park and will allow sponsors to feel their contribution makes a direct
difference to maintenance and development projects within Mugdock.
5.3
Formalising the informal links between the park and the Education Department’s Outdoor
Education service will allow the development of products and services and will continue the
promotion of the national health agenda providing outdoor activities within a safe environment
for all ages.
5.4
Investment over the next 5 years will allow the Strategy proposals to contribute to the aim of
financial sustainability for Mugdock. This includes introducing charging for parking,
providing better waking and cycling routes to attract new customers and finding a
community/heritage use for Craigend Castle which is self-sufficient financially, such as a Clan
Graham Centre.
6.0
IMPLICATIONS
6.1
6.2
Finance & Shared Services Implications – Investment required through capital programme.
6.3
Development & Regeneration Implications – Continued involvement in developing
Mugdock facilities.
.
Page 24
DUNIRA STRATEGY
Sustainable Business Solutions in Tourism
APPENDIX 1
Mugdock Country Park Strategy
2015-2020
Vision and Ambition for
Renewal and Transformation
PREPARED FOR:
PREPARED BY:
DUNIRA STRATEGY
Edinburgh
2015
Page 25
CONTACT DETAILS
Benjamin Carey FTS
Managing Director, Dunira Strategy
33 West Preston Street, Edinburgh, EH8 9PY
Telephone: 0131 202 0467 or 0845 370 8076
Email: [email protected]
Website: http://www.dunira.com
632 Mugdock Strategy 2015-2020
2
Page 26
© Dunira Strategy 2015
Executive summary ................................................................................................................................. 5
1.0
Context ........................................................................................................................................ 8
2.0
Vision .......................................................................................................................................... 9
3.0
Action Plan................................................................................................................................ 10
4.0
Transformation Programme ...................................................................................................... 11
4.1
4.1.1
Reception Centre ........................................................................................................... 12
4.1.2
Car Parks ....................................................................................................................... 12
4.1.3
Path networks ................................................................................................................ 13
4.1.4
Adventure Trail ............................................................................................................. 14
4.1.5
Allotments ..................................................................................................................... 14
4.1.6
Observatory ................................................................................................................... 14
4.1.7
Craigend Castle ............................................................................................................. 14
4.2
Capacity building .................................................................................................................. 16
4.2.1
Marketing Officer ......................................................................................................... 16
4.2.2
Mugdock Enterprise Forum .......................................................................................... 16
4.2.3
Development strategies ................................................................................................. 16
4.3
5.0
Infrastructure development ................................................................................................... 12
Marketing and fundraising .................................................................................................... 18
4.3.1
Friends of Mugdock ...................................................................................................... 18
4.3.2
Adopt-a-Tree ................................................................................................................. 19
4.3.3
The Mugdock Trust ....................................................................................................... 19
4.3.4
Clan Graham ................................................................................................................. 19
4.3.5
Database development .................................................................................................. 19
4.3.6
Tariff reviews ................................................................................................................ 20
4.3.6
Rent reviews.................................................................................................................. 20
4.3.7
Wedding fairs ................................................................................................................ 20
4.3.8
Parking charges ............................................................................................................. 20
4.3.9
Film location tours ........................................................................................................ 20
4.3.10
Payback schemes........................................................................................................... 20
4.3.11
MugStock 5 ................................................................................................................... 21
4.3.12
New events .................................................................................................................... 21
Financial Forecast ..................................................................................................................... 22
3
Page 27
Appendices............................................................................................................................................ 24
A.
Asset Review ............................................................................................................................ 24
B.
SWOT ....................................................................................................................................... 24
C.
PESTLE .................................................................................................................................... 25
D.
Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) ............................................................................... 26
E.
Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation (SIMD) ....................................................................... 27
F.
Local needs and national priorities ........................................................................................... 28
G.
Funding opportunities ............................................................................................................... 30
H.
Craigend Castle site .................................................................................................................. 34
4
Page 28
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The scope of the project is to provide a 5 year strategy for Mugdock Country Park (MCP).
East Dunbartonshire Council (EDC) needs to reduce costs by £24m over three years. The
main objective is to reduce costs and increase income. This can potentially be achieved
through operational efficiencies, more effective partnerships and enhanced marketing, but
there are opportunities for transformation.
Mugdock Country Park is the most popular country park in Scotland. Using unreliable
counters and a dated (but consistent) formula, it reports 600,000 visitors a year, but the figure
is widely believed to be closer to one million. A majority of the area is designated SSSI (Site
of Special Scientific Interest).
Shared between EDC and Stirling Council (SC), MCP is managed by the Mugdock Joint
Management Committee (MJMC), which includes representation of the two councils; the SC
area is nominally leased by EDC until 2049, although it can be handed back at a year’s
notice. Although the area around the visitor centre with the greatest footfall (estimated to be
c.90%) is within SC, 87.5% of funding is supplied by EDC and just 12.5% from SC1. There
is no separation between revenue and capital, which means that EDC is maintaining (and
improving) SC assets. Beyond the mixed use Stables, which house the MCP offices, ranger
service, visitor centre and a number of retail, catering and meeting spaces, the three most
substantial assets are Mugdock Castle, Craigend Castle and Caulders, all of which lie within
SC, although only Caulders (through rent) currently generates any regular income.
Community support, especially through volunteer activity, is outstanding. But there is a lack
of investment or vision; it is therefore allowed to subsist as a local resource. For SC, it is a
very minor asset and it is not mentioned in its Economic Strategy 2014 or Biodiversity
Action Plan 2012-2020; and there is little incentive for EDC to invest in something that is
ultimately a SC asset and costs such a relatively large amount to maintain.
MCP costs half a million to run (2014/15: £490,826) with roughly 25% (2015/15: £141,730)
being covered by rents, trading and events. The balance of 75% is met by the two local
authorities. There is a desire that ultimately MCP should pay for itself, but the immediate
objective is for EDC to reduce its contribution by a third from its current annual subsidy of
about £300,000 (2014/15: £305,459). This can be achieved in a number of ways.
A. Equilibrium through equalisation of contributions from the two local authorities. It is
inequitable and a historical accident that SC makes such a small contribution. There is
a strong case for change. Reducing EDC’s contribution from £305k (87.5%) to £175k
(50%) would more than achieve the desired reduction for EDC, whilst any additional
saving and new income would naturally then also be shared between the two councils.
B. Savings through operational changes. The configuration of the team at MCP needs
revision. There is a lack of commercial focus and co-operation with and between the
resident businesses, no substantive customer relationship management or marketing
and a relatively large number of rangers for the income generated. Adjusting the mix
of skills would create a commercial environment that is more responsive to market
1
A small change has already been agreed with SC allocating a minimum contribution of £50,000, which (on the
2015/16 budget of £465,484 and projected income of £121,274 represents a 14.5% share of the net expenditure
(£344,210) to be met from local authority funds, which is a modest 2% above the minimum requirement.
5
Page 29
needs and opportunities. We would propose to reduce the total number of staff by
20% from the budgeted 12.5 FTE to 10, reducing the number of rangers from 4.5 FTE
to 3, maintaining the team leader and two park wardens, and appointing a dedicated
marketing officer2 and 3 customer service assistants. This would result in a net saving
in staff costs of £60,000. The renewed team would be enhanced by the transfer of
EDC’s Outdoor Education Officer (currently based at Kirkintilloch) and ideally
additional SC staff (rangers, environmental management and outdoor education) too,
all of whom for the time being would be paid from other budgets and could make a
contribution through the rental of space and/or a share of programme income. A
Mugdock Enterprise Forum (MEF) comprising all the resident enterprises would be
established to coordinate park management and development plans; the MCP team
would provide a secretariat for the MEF and also marketing support, including
managing the introduction of a new booking system, to which all enterprises would
have access. Proposals from external businesses, such as the operators of MugStock
and other large events, would be considered by MEF as a group in order to maximise
opportunities and to mitigate risks; final decisions would be the responsibility of
MCP, albeit informed by MEF discussion. A new customer loyalty scheme Friends of
Mugdock (FoM) would be created with some high profile patrons and special founder
benefits, using a well-managed database; all enterprises would offer discounts to
members and they would be targeted for legacies and substantial donations through
exclusive events. There are opportunities for Mugdock Makkers to work alongside the
customer service team, perhaps even moving their retail space to the new visitor
centre, gaining greater market access and freeing up space for other enterprises.
Enhanced marketing, co-operation and event promotion would bring in greater
income and enable rents to be increased in due course. But it would take 2-3 years for
the income level to grow enough to reduce the net EDC contribution by a third unless
it is combined with an increase in the SC share. There is scope to draw on much more
officer support from both councils in IT, marketing and programme development.
C. Transformation through investment. Although much loved with a devoted following,
Mugdock is currently a tired asset overdependent on public finances, since it is not
delivering any statutory service. But it has the potential to become a national hub for
sustainability and healthy living, and a beacon for excellence in biodiversity
conservation and outdoor education. It has more than 30 assets, which could be
enhanced through the development of new products. An artworks trail, an outdoor
education centre, a triathlon centre, a network of leisure cycling paths, a top weddings
and events venue, model allotments working with schools and prisons, an
international observatory: all of these could be achieved through the work of a
dedicated marketing officer, working in consultation with MEF and other partners
through support from major funding sources, such as National Lottery, LEADER and
a range of other local and environmental organisations. The Mugdock Trust can assist
by providing a more tax-efficient channel for donations from UK residents and from
supporters further afield, including the Clan Graham Society from across the Pond.
The recent visitor survey demonstrated a need for new services and an enthusiasm for
development. Funders invariably require local authorities to show support, which in
practice means giving seed funding to major projects and/or commissioning relevant
studies to underline the opportunity. Without a step change in support from the two
councils, MCP will degrade and the opportunity for transformation will be lost.
2
It has been proposed that this new post would be called “Development Officer (Commercial and Marketing)”.
6
Page 30
Our strategy recommends a range of specific measures that the two councils need to jointly
and actively support. If implemented, the masterplan strategy will deliver a transformed asset
with all the proposed capital investment of £550,000 by the local authority partnership
recovered within 5 years, generating annual incremental revenue of more than £200,000 by
Year 3 and almost £400,000 in Year 5. This would significantly reduce revenue expenditure,
delivering significant savings to the local authority partnership between EDC and SC on its
current combined contribution of about £350,000.
It is however likely that the scale of anticipated benefit will prove to be an underestimate.
7
Page 31
1.0
CONTEXT
MJMC receives considerable ad hoc support from officials at SC and EDC, but there is a need to
create a masterplan approach, so that activity is coordinated and reflects local plans and national
priorities. The following Action Plan provides this strategic approach in order to support a range of
fundraising applications and investment promotion initiatives as part of an overall framework for
change.
This report therefore builds on Emma McMullen’s excellent Mugdock Country Park: Consultation
Review & Report (February 2015), which in the context of national planning policies and local
economic and environmental plans reviewed the results of a major visitor survey, which Dunira had
helped to design, and set out a range of key recommendations. These relate to:
(a) Car parking maintenance and provision
(b) Renewal and maintenance of public toilets
(c) Adventure Trail and paths network, especially in terms of provision for older children and
access by wheelchair and pram/buggy users
(d) Waste management, including greater provision of litter bins and dog waste bins
(e) Improved procurement
(f) Better public information and consultation about volunteering opportunities and development
plans, especially in relation to Craigend Castle and car parking
The earlier report concluded that there would be resistance to the introduction of parking charges and
other revenue raising measures, if these were not part of an overall programme of improvements and
strategic development. The conclusion was that, whilst there is a degree of sympathy for the economic
challenges faced by local authorities, park users must be treated as development partners if MJMC is
to achieve change.
8
Page 32
2.0
VISION
Considering the needs and opportunities, the following Vision and Mission Statement can be applied:
Vision
Mugdock is consistently ranked amongst the five most popular
country parks in Scotland. Mugdock Country Park is a leader in
outdoor education, management and enterprise; it delivers tangible
social and economic benefits for local communities in East
Dunbartonshire and Stirling, is renowned for its cycling network,
adventure trail and night observatory, and is a model of sustainability
in the organisation of boutique festivals and events.
Mission
Improving Scottish lives by embracing natural opportunities
9
Page 33
3.0
ACTION PLAN
This 5 year plan provides a strategic programme across three broad areas which together address all
the recommendations indicated by the survey, whilst also providing a response to the ongoing public
finance challenges.
Infrastructure development
2015/16 Reception Centre
Information boards
Enhanced waste facilities
Adventure Trail
Capacity building
Marketing officer
Mugdock Enterprise Forum
Outdoor education strategy
Parking strategy
Landscape/paths strategy
Festival and events strategy
Film location strategy
New booking system
2016/17 Main car park improvements Craigend Castle strategy
Cycle/path network
Artworks Trail
Allotments and eco-loos
2017/18 Observatory
2018/19 Other parking improvements
Craigend development
2019/20 Clan Graham Center
‘Son et lumière’
Summer concerts/picnics
10
Page 34
Marketing and fundraising
Friends of Mugdock
Adopt-a-Tree
Buy-a-Seat
Clan Graham
The Mugdock Trust
Database development
Tariff reviews
Wedding Fairs
Film location tours
Legacy campaigns
Rent reviews
Corporate payback
Community payback
Friends of Mugdock
Adopt-a-Tree
Parking charges
Friends of Mugdock
Adopt-a-Tree
Foundation privileges expire
Parking charges
Friends of Mugdock
Adopt-a-Tree
MugStock 5
New events revenue
Parking charges
Friends of Mugdock
Adopt-a-Tree
4.0
TRANSFORMATION PROGRAMME
MCP has tremendous assets, but their full value has not yet been realised. Some assets require
significant investment, whilst others require a different management approach; some require both.
The appendix summarises the opportunities relating to each of Mugdock’s assets, and here the most
important are explained in greater detail.
11
Page 35
4.1
Infrastructure development
Within the context of this 5 year strategy, a masterplanning approach to developing MCP is detailed.
There is currently no ‘masterplan’ for MCP. It is not generating income for the local authorities and
without a step change in approach it will stagnate and ultimately fail. It requires investment to achieve
transformation. EDC and SC can together lead this development and attract private sector investment,
but private sector and civil society organisations lack confidence in the public sector’s commitment to
anything beyond basic maintenance.
As one of Scotland’s most popular country parks, Mugdock’s main asset is of course the landscape,
which embraces both natural and cultural heritage. It is given that the Park’s heritage and biodiversity
conservation will be maintained and even enhanced. It is lovingly and professionally maintained by
rangers and volunteers, but the primary focus is on heritage conservation, rather than ‘monetisation’:
an unappealing term that in practice means the imaginative and efficient utilisation of assets to
promote social and economic development. This requires a more commercial approach to asset
management, as without an overall framework or strategy opportunities will continue to be missed.
4.1.1
Reception Centre
The well-planned new Visitor Centre meets VisitScotland requirements and provides an important
interface for providing information, taking bookings and selling attractive new stock to visitors. It is
functional and effective, and the cost has already been met through existing capital funds.
Some attractive new panels have been created at the new Visitor Centre, but most information signs
and navigation boards around the Stables and across MCP are tired and need to be renewed. Given
that MCP aspires to be a beacon for sustainability, there would be merit in exploring solutions that
involve renewable energy; a British company OnTheCase has designed and engineered a product,
called Solis Post (http://www.solispost.com/), which could be used at MCP. Based in Devon and with
limited profile in Scotland, the company has proposed to fit a series of modules to showcase the
product; this would be an opportunity for the MJMC to access a new applied technology 3 and
demonstrate its commitment to sustainability.
The provision of public toilets and bins for litter and dog waste is inadequate for MCP’s visitors.
There is a particular opportunity to provide facilities in the vicinity of Mugdock Castle, partly because
the existing ‘Portaloo’ is out of place and also in anticipation of the proposed development of
community allotments next year. A series of accessible toilets using composting technology could be
installed. A Welsh company NatSol4 (http://natsol.co.uk/), which has experience throughout Scotland,
could install a fully accessible timber-clad composting toilet for less than £7,000; a series of
installations, potentially at other sites owned or managed by EDC and SC, would substantially reduce
the unit price.
4.1.2
Car Parks
The car parks are too small and potholed. They also generate no income for MJMC. When they are
full, which happens frequently in summer, there is overspill onto the adjacent roads, which is
3
It is likely that comparable products and technologies exist in Scotland, including university engineering
departments, and there would be value in inviting expressions of interest from other suppliers through informal
procurement networks. MCP (typically through a local partner SME) would be able to access a range of grants
to develop academic partnerships, including through the Innovation Voucher Scheme (http://www.interfaceonline.org.uk/how-we-can-help/funding/standard-innovation-vouchers).
4
See previous note. The same applies, although the installation experience of NatSol would make them a more
compelling option.
12
Page 36
hazardous and anti-social. The survey indicated that there would be resistance from visitors to the
introduction of parking charges, and some of the local businesses, especially Caulders 5 , have
expressed concern. At the same time, users have made it abundantly clear that they are not satisfied
with existing provision and that they would be open to change, as long they are kept informed and are
properly consulted. This means embarking on a substantial programme of car park improvements,
starting with the main car park, applying parking restrictions to adjacent roads and consulting6 on
plans to introduce parking charges at least at the main car park in 2017, albeit within the wider
development framework and especially in the context of the proposed ‘Friends of Mugdock’
programme.
The introduction of parking charges is also related to the legitimate policy of promoting healthy travel
and sustainable transport, including walking and cycling.
4.1.3
Path networks
The existing paths network is almost not fit for purpose. It provides a number of links between sites,
but it is:
•
•
•
inadequate for majority of users with mobility problems, including wheelchair users
too narrow for mixed use (cyclists, runners, walkers)
lacking many interpretation opportunities
For such a remarkable place, MCP requires a more substantial network that will attract many more
leisure cyclists and serious runners. The arrival of Mugdock Country Cycles means that there is
motivation and commitment towards this kind of development; whilst the letting of the space in the
courtyard to a cycling business was not the result of a strategic plan, it offers an immensely strategic
opportunity for MCP to transform its offer with on-site business support. An Artworks Trail, perhaps
related to a Graham theme resulting from an international art competition and/or curated by Mugdock
Makkers, would provide an added dimension to the paths and help secure new markets; an
international art competition, even if the design came from a local artist, would again demonstrate
MJMC’s level of ambition. MJMC could apply for grants from the National Lottery and philanthropic
trusts, as well as for support from commercial businesses to support different aspects of this
development within a single strategic framework.
A number of bridleways exist in MCP, but they are not widely known or actively promoted. In due
course, as other elements of a renewed paths network emerge, there would be tremendous
opportunities to promote MCP as offering ‘Paths for (all) People’.
It would be desirable for the West Highland Way to be routed through MCP, but this is not a priority.
5
There may be merit in Caulders offering to reimburse its customers for parking charges, although the greater
opportunity will be to work through the MEF to market the FoM scheme as a replacement (and significant
enhancement) of its existing ‘Loyalty Card’ (http://www.caulders.co.uk/loyalty-card/), which costs £12 a year.
6
A user survey is required to explain and win support for this measure, which is practically unavoidable. A
range of price points should be proposed. In line with comparable parks, a £1 charge per motorised vehicle is a
likely result, although higher rates should also be considered and promoted. Possible exemptions could be
available to vehicles conveying disabled visitors and members of the armed forces in uniform, as well as buses
and coaches bringing school parties and electric vehicles. Charges could be waived on certain historic days,
such as 25 October (anniversary of the birth of James Graham, 1st Marquess of Montrose) and 30 November (St
Andrew’s Day). Charges and exemptions should be agreed by public consultation.
13
Page 37
4.1.4
Adventure Trail
Renewal of the Adventure Trail has already been prioritised by the MJMC and will help build loyalty
with a new generation of users. The recent survey showed that ‘older children’ is a group that MCP
largely fails to cater for. Cycle tracks and an adventure trail would significantly enhance the product
offer for this group, which tends to fall away as they become more independent of their parents.
4.1.5
Allotments
The terraces below Mugdock Castle would historically have served as a kitchen garden. In a mixed
demographic area, there is an opportunity to establish new allotments in a way that would be authentic
and also confirm MCP as a proactive local partner. As well as conventional allotments, there would
be scope to create community and school vegetable gardens, as well as becoming a site for bee hives
and source for ‘Mugdock Honey’. Local products could be sold partly as a fundraiser, but more as a
marketing device to demonstrate how much MCP is a member of the community. Blane Valley
Allotments Group has offered to support with advice, whilst the initiative is a natural extension and
sponsorship opportunity for Caulders.
4.1.6
Observatory
The Astronomical Society of Glasgow (ASG) wishes to establish the ‘Eric Tomney Memorial
Observatory’ at MCP and has presented its plans to the MJMC. This initiative should be facilitated by
the MJMC by leasing land at a ‘charitable rate’ and encouraging businesses to support it with relevant
late openings. But fundraising should be entirely led and managed by ASG and the observatory
should be operated as a discrete enterprise, even if the observatory would by association enhance the
profile of MCP. Any human resourcing or security measure required to enable ASG members to
safely use the car park at night should be charged at cost; access should not be unreasonably denied.
4.1.7
Craigend Castle
It can be argued that Craigend is the ‘elephant in the room’. It is an eyesore, but park users are totally
committed to its preservation, albeit ideally in a more productive form, including a new ranger base.
There are several considerations that may be relevant to the potential development of Craigend Castle:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Almost everybody agrees that “something must be done” with this ‘faded grandeur’
Believed to be on the site of an earlier Graham dwelling connected to Mugdock Castle7
Castle would be perfect backdrop for ‘Son et Lumière’ Mugdock History of Scotland8
EDC is keen to bring its outdoor education unit to MCP, but needs a home
Funding is available for initiatives related to sustainable living and Climate Change
Graham Society of North America has for years wanted to create a ‘Clan Graham Center’9
Historic Scotland would not permit any major development at Mugdock Castle
Natural amphitheatre of Craigend Field perfect for summer picnics and concerts
The current Duke of Montrose10 reportedly has a special interest in renewable energy
7
See Appendix H.
A ‘Mugdock History’ could focus on Montrose and ups and downs of the Grahams, arguably Scotland’s most
important family, as well as very contrasting histories of two of Scotland’s greatest cities: Glasgow and Stirling.
9
American English spelling.
10
One of his subsidiary titles is ‘Lord Mugdock’, since Mugdock has been the hereditary seat of the Grahams
since the 13th Century.
8
14
Page 38
Guided by SC, the MJMC has for many years been trying to bring Craigend Castle back into use. A
proposal to convert it into an outdoor education centre was made some years ago 11 , but not
progressed, partly because of coalition politics in EDC and SC since the 2007 local elections and
partly because of the Global Economic Crisis of 2008, which together inhibited public finance and
private investment.
Recently SC has received enquiries from several investors and developers, but none was compelling.
The solution may be to sit down with the Clan Graham Society and other partners (perhaps a
Glasgow-based university and private sector organisation) to explore a solution that involves:
100 year lease of Craigend Castle for £1
Creation of the ‘Graham Institute’, promoting research and education in sustainability
State-of-the-art outdoor education centre and ranger base for EDC and SC staff
Such an enterprise would require significant funding, but this would provide a focus and tangible goal
for fundraising by the Clan Graham Society. Apart from the cost of a feasibility study to develop the
concept and associated partnership, and some legal fees to implement it, the great advantage of this
approach is that it would transfer the primary risk to an organisation that already has a stated aim to
achieve something akin to what is being proposed.
The Institute could also include a facility supporting ancestral research (a major segment of the visitor
economy, especially for the North American market) and an exhibition curating some (digitised)
Graham manuscripts and/or artefacts.
11
Dunira Strategy (2006): New Spaces in Old Walls: Mugdock Activity Centre.
15
Page 39
4.2
Capacity building
There are significant resources in both EDC and SC and goodwill towards MCP, but there is a lack of
strategic framework that inhibits the kind of development necessary for transformation. The current
plan is intended to provide a framework for action, but a number of institutional changes need to be
made, and some specific strategies need to be developed. Fortuitously, much of this can be delivered
in-house.
4.2.1
Marketing Officer
The MJMC has already identified the need for a Marketing Officer (MO), which will be achieved
through a revision of the MPC team and which will also deliver cost savings. As well as becoming
responsible for some key fundraising databases, the MO will need to take control of social media,
including Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/pages/Mugdock-Country-Park/181763101888094)
and Twitter (https://twitter.com/MugdockPark) pages; remarkably the latter was created and is
maintained by a committed local enthusiast Sean Botha, who runs Zulu (http://zuluseo.com/) and has
no formal relationship with the MPC, but who is keen to continue to support the MJMC.
For the role to be effective, the MO requires a secure marketing database for fundraising and
marketing campaigns, along with an efficient online booking system with appropriate access levels
for all park users and which can interface with the marketing database to identify high level users.
4.2.2
Mugdock Enterprise Forum
Again, MJMC has already constituted this group that now meets regularly. This is hugely positive.
There had been comments from some of the local businesses that there was a lack of coordination and
support for the enterprises operating in MCP. This complaint has been tackled head on, and there is
clear understanding that MCP as a destination is enhanced by the breadth of product offer with
considerable opportunities for joint marketing campaigns, promotions and programme planning.
Beyond regular meetings, the Mugdock Enterprise Forum (MEF) represents a more entrepreneurial
approach for MJMC, encouraging a more open environment in which concerns can be aired (and
addressed) and opportunities can be shared (and embraced), especially in relation to enterprise event
planning and coordination.
4.2.3
Development strategies
Working with staff at EDC and SC and all members of the MEF, the MPC management team needs to
produce a number of key strategies as part of the transformation programme. With the exception of
Craigend Castle, all of these can be produced without additional input. This is about building on local
knowledge and expertise.
(a) Outdoor education. With plans for an autumn programme already taking shape, this is about
relocating outdoor education staff from EDC to MCP, and developing a range of new
products to be delivered by the outdoor education team and ranger service to schools and
other groups, including commercial and community payback schemes. There are also linkages
to be made with the surrounding reservoirs.
(b) Parking. This is delivering the redesign of the car parks and introduction of payment and
access systems, along with restrictions on neighbouring roads. It also involves the design and
implementation of a public consultation and marketing campaign to ensure buy-in, alongside
promotion of the ‘Friends of Mugdock’, ‘Adopt-a-Tree’ and even ‘Buy-a-Seat’ campaigns.
16
Page 40
(c) Landscape/paths. Working with SC and EDC officials and all the local businesses, especially
Mugdock Country Cycles and Mugdock Makkers, and guided by the Rangers’ and MO’s
expertise, this will deliver a costed and coordinated plan for transformation. The main path
elements will need to be implemented by the local authorities as part of a ‘Spend to Save’
programme, whilst the Artworks Trail, which can incorporate new signage, can be funded
through sponsorship and creative industry grants.
(d) Festival and events. This is essentially a ‘lessons learnt’ review. MugStock demonstrated the
opportunity for a boutique festival, but also confirmed the importance of early planning and
substantial coordinated marketing. Working with MEF members to understand crunch points
and to identify additional opportunities for joint initiatives, more effective marketing and
incremental revenue. Designing more marketable (and more expensive) wedding packages,
especially for the North American market, would be an important additional output. There
would be significant potential opportunities for additional local businesses to offer outside
catering and other services.
(e) Film location. MCP’s landscape offers a huge range of film locations, including picturesque
lakes, spectacular woodland, historic castles and gun positions, a natural amphitheatre and
flooded quarry, and a unique view of Glasgow. Recalling that the Campsie Hills stood in for
South Africa in Monty Python’s The Meaning of Life demonstrates the value of imagination.
Shallow Grave and Taggart both filmed scenes at MCP, although only nominal ground rent is
ever charged and no capital advantage is taken for PR and marketing purposes. The MCP
team and MEF can develop location packages and promotional campaigns with SC’s Screen
Stirling (http://www.screenstirling.com/).
(f) Craigend Castle. Due to the highly technical aspects of this site and the possible solution
indicated above (4.1.7), it will be necessary to appoint external consultants to conduct a full
feasibility study, produce a condition report and conduct appropriate consultations with all the
potential partners and investors.
17
Page 41
4.3
Marketing and fundraising
MCP has never had a dedicated marketing function. Marketing requires strategy and resource. An
important component of marketing is fundraising, which can be defined as ‘marketing the outcome’.
Without a clear vision and strategic framework, fundraising is effectively impossible.
Just like the Clan Graham, whose story defines the Mugdock landscape, MCP is built on loyalty. But
this loyalty is not being ‘monetised’ or used in a productive way. An occasional Facebook post is not
marketing, and a “10p Donation” box is not fundraising. There is a real opportunity for all the park
users to become true partners in its transformation. As partners, they can also share the costs.
4.3.1
Friends of Mugdock
Parking charges are inevitable. But their introduction can be made more palatable as part of a more
compelling offer. A clear public commitment by EDC and SC to improve infrastructure, including the
car parks, is essential. A range of partnership benefits for regular users and supporters will also help.
The old ‘Friends of Mugdock’ (FoM) programme is moribund and, even if an out-of-date database
could be found, it would not meet current security and legislation requirements.
All members of the MEF recognise the value of database marketing and can offer discounts to FoMs.
Provisional discounts have been discussed, but the full schedule can be developed over time. The key
opportunity however is to attract ‘early adopters’ that recognise the long term value of avoiding all the
future parking charges.
With appropriate profiling (age and family situation) and linked to the booking system, the database
can be mined for legacy campaigns and other marketing activity.
The following table summarises price points for FoMs and also ‘Adopt-a-Tree’ (see 4.3.2 below).
Product option
Friends of Mugdock
Adopt-a-Tree
One
off
annual £52 (credit card) or £50
(individual/household)
(debit card)
Recurring Direct Debit
£4 per month (“£1 a
(individual/household)
week”) or £40 per year
£100 in first year, and then £40 (subject to annual
Combined package^
increase) in subsequent years
One
off
donation
£100 (lifetime
(individual)
adoption)
One
off
donation
£500 (annual adoption)
(commercial)
Remarks
£2 discount for debit
card payments
Discounts only
available to individuals
taking out direct debit
Tax deductible through
Gift Aid
Tax deductible as
charitable donation
^ Friends of Mugdock (FoMs) that sign up with a combined package in Year 1 (2015/16) can be given
special privileges, including:
•
•
•
being designated as ‘Foundation Friends’
no price increase for 3 years
invitations to special ‘Foundation Friends’ events
When introduced, parking charges will be waived for all FoMs
18
Page 42
It is intended that the FoM programme will be launched in time for Christmas, following completion
of the parking consultation. This will give it context and help embed the database for proactive
marketing activity in the New Year.
4.3.2
Adopt-a-Tree
Adoption is the most efficient way of connecting people to an environment, and it far easier when the
subject is tangible and beautiful. There are enough trees in Mugdock for the resource to be effectively
infinite. Naturally adoption (at least in the case of individuals) is “for life”, and the cost is relatively
modest, especially when combined with FoM membership. Individual trees can be identified and
assigned on Google Earth, so that adopters can visit their trees virtually, even if they are on the other
side of the world. One of the most compelling stories about social media in this context is the City of
Melbourne’s ‘Correspondence Program’ 12 , which provides an incredible source of material for
storytelling and for fundraising campaigns. Adoption can be given as a gift, particularly for children,
and will connect the children with MCP and the environment for life. Adopters (and the original
donors) can be invited to special events and also invited to consider making future legacies.
Commercial adopters would be annual and at a much higher rate. They would be encouraged to adopt
a tree as part of larger sponsorship schemes, and would be permitted to use images of their “tree” in
their own marketing.
A comparable ‘Adopt-a-Seat’ scheme can also be developed for the Theatre.
4.3.3
The Mugdock Trust
13
The Mugdock Trust (MT) offers a tax-efficient channel for subscriptions and donations, including
through the FoM and Adopt-aTree schemes. Whilst the MO can become Secretary of the MT, all the
processes will need to be formally agreed with the MT Board. If however the MT is unwilling to
participate, then a new charitable body will need to be registered.
4.3.4
Clan Graham
The Clan Graham Society (CGS) of North America (http://clangrahamsociety.org/) is the equivalent
body for donations by American friends. Given the relevance and range of future partnership
opportunity, it will be important to secure the support of this particular organisation. There would be
value in arranging a reception for CGS in New York next April during Tartan Week14; supported by
leaders of both EDC and SC, the MJMC Deputy Convenor (as a SNP member) might be the best
placed to secure the endorsement of Scottish Ministers for such an initiative.
4.3.5
Database development
12
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/people-can-email-city-trees-and-get-response-in-melbourne-citycouncil-green-scheme/story-fni0fit3-1227147515293
13
Unlike the Mugdock Trust, MCP (as well as EDC and SC) cannot claim tax relief on donations from UK
taxpayers, as they are not charitable organisations. On a donation of, say, £100 made through ‘Gift Aid’ or
‘Give As You Earn’, a charity will receive £125, whilst a standard rate (20%) tax payer will receive a £20
reduction on their income tax bill and a higher rate tax payer (40% or 45%) will receive even more. The
enhanced receipts can then be granted to MCP. Similarly, UK registered companies can claim relief on their
corporate gifts to charity and reduce their taxable profit by the value of their donation, although HM Treasury
will not normally make that relief available to charities, other than in exceptional circumstances.
14
http://nyctartanweek.org/
19
Page 43
Database maintenance will be a key function of the MO role to support all marketing and fundraising.
A well designed Excel spreadsheet should be sufficient, although proprietary software is available.
4.3.6
Tariff reviews
The MCP team has already implemented a tariff review, although all prices should be subject to at
least annual review, especially as the product offer is enhanced.
4.3.6
Rent reviews
Some members of the MEF acknowledge that their lease terms are attractive, but there has in the past
been a feeling that there is a lack of coordination and support from the MJMC. The MEF will be a
channel to explore how variations to existing terms might be made to justify operational changes and
a profit shares on new revenue streams. It is important that the MEF takes a collaborative approach to
these discussions, and ensure that new enterprises are identified as part of a commercial mix, so that
any rent review is seen in the context of a strategic plan.
4.3.7
Wedding fairs
Once the ‘Festival and events strategy’ has been produced in partnership with MEF members, there
would be merit in taking ‘Mugdock weddings’ to one of the many wedding fairs in Glasgow and
inviting a bridal magazine to visit MCP. This would involve some initial outlay, perhaps shared with
local partners, but increased bookings from 2017/18 and beyond would more than cover this cost.
A marquee, that could be available for many events, would be a justified investment.
4.3.8
Parking charges
It is intended that parking charges will be introduced from 2017/18. FoMs will be exempt from these
charges, whilst ‘Foundation Friends’ will additionally be exempt from any subscription increases in
the first few years, and this will be a key message in the marketing of the FoM scheme.
4.3.9
Film location tours
These can be arranged in partnership with Screen Stirling. Recognising that the world’s greatest
producers, directors and location scouts were all runners once, support can also be given by staff and
students on the innovative Masters programme in Filmmaking at the University of Glasgow15.
4.3.10 Payback schemes
The ranger service recognises the opportunity to develop more revenue streams through commercial
payback (corporate volunteer) and community payback (criminal justice) schemes. Once the Outdoor
education strategy has been completed, these can be pursued with the MO and support from EDC and
SC officials.
15
http://www.gla.ac.uk/postgraduate/taught/filmmaking/
20
Page 44
4.3.11 MugStock 5
It is anticipated that MugStock will be repeated, at least in some form. However, to justify the effort
and disruption, it will be important to apply lessons learnt and ensure that revenue for the MJMC and
MEF members is optimised. Part of the Festival and events strategy should be to make an outline plan
for what ‘MugStock 5’ (in 2019) should look like and how much revenue it should generate. Without
a clear strategy to ensure events in the intervening years are evolving in the right direction, it would
be unwise to lend any further support to this initiative. But with the right strategy MugStock can
become an important flagship event for MCP.
4.3.12 New events
It is impossible to predict all the possible new events and revenue streams, such as ‘Son et lumière’,
that will emerge in the coming years as a result of infrastructure development and capacity building.
Certainly they will provide much needed funds to deliver the outstanding education programmes and
leisure facilities that MCP offers, but they will also confirm MCP as “a leader in outdoor education,
management and enterprise”, which “delivers tangible social and economic benefits for local
communities in East Dunbartonshire and Stirling”.
21
Page 45
5.0
FINANCIAL FORECAST
The following table summarises the cost and revenue forecasts as a result of this strategy. Some
numbers, such as parking revenue, are deliberately conservative and likely to be underestimates.
Category
Component
Incremental
cost
Budget
year
Incremental revenue
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
?
?
?
?
?
£15,000
£40,000
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
£15,000
£20,000
£25,000
£30,000
£40,000
£5,000
£2,500
£3,500
£5,000
£8,000
£5,000
£10,000
£15,000
£20,000
£5,000
£10,000
£20,000
£150,000
£180,000
£180,000
Infrastructure
development
Reception
Centre
Infrastructure
development
Information
boards
Infrastructure
development
Enhanced
waste
facilities
Capacity
building
Marketing
officer
Through
renewal of
team
2015/16
Capacity
building
Mugdock
Enterprise
Forum
In-house
provision
2015/16
Capacity
building
Outdoor
education
strategy
In-house
provision
2015/16
Capacity
building
Festival and
events
strategy
In-house
provision
2015/16
Capacity
building
Film location
strategy
In-house
provision
2015/16
Capacity
building
New booking
system
In-house
provision
2015/16
?
Marketing and
fundraising
Friends of
Mugdock
In-house
development
2015/16
Marketing and
fundraising
Adopt-a-Tree
In-house
development
2015/16
Marketing and
fundraising
Database
development
In-house
development
2015/16
Marketing and
fundraising
Tariff reviews
In-house
development
2015/16
Infrastructure
development
Adventure
Trail
In-house
development
2015/16
Marketing and
fundraising
Wedding Fair
£5,000
2016/17
Marketing and
fundraising
Legacy
campaigns
In-house
development
2016/17
Infrastructure
development
Main car park
improvements
£150,000
2016/17
Infrastructure
development
Cycle/path
network
£250,000
2016/17
Already paid
2015/16
£5,000
2015/16
£10,000
2015/16
22
£5,000
Page 46
£10,000
Infrastructure
development
Artworks
Trail
Infrastructure
development
£0
2016/17
Allotments
£15,000
2016/17
Capacity
building
Craigend
Castle
strategy
£25,000
2016/17
Marketing and
fundraising
Rent reviews /
profit share
2016/17
Marketing and
fundraising
Payback
schemes
2016/17
Infrastructure
development
Observatory
Infrastructure
development
Other parking
improvements
Infrastructure
development
Craigend
Castle
development
Partner
funds
2018/19
Infrastructure
development
Graham
Institute
Partner
funds
2019/20
Infrastructure
development
Outdoor
Education
Unit / Ranger
Base
£10,000
2019/20
Infrastructure
development
Son et
lumière
£20,000
2019/20
Infrastructure
development
Summer
concerts /
picnics
£10,000
2019/20
Partner
funds
£50,000
£550,000
£2,000
£4,000
£8,000
£15,000
£10,000
£15,000
£25,000
£40,000
2017/18
2018/19
£15,000
Annual:
£20,000
£44,500
£222,500
£288,000
£378,000
Cumulative:
£20,000
£64,500
£287,000
£575,000
£953,000
23
Page 47
APPENDICES
A. Asset Review
[See separate Excel spreadsheet 632 Asset review matrix.]
B. SWOT
This SWOT analysis summarises MCP’s current position.
Strengths
Weaknesses
• Outstanding natural assets
• Limited marketing activity
• Significant cultural assets
• Antiquated booking systems
• Strong local support and loyalty
• Inadequate parking provision
• Established entrepreneurial businesses
• High dependence on local markets
• Enthusiastic volunteers
• Poor public transport connectivity
• Strong management team
• Tired facilities and visitor experience
• Proximity to Glasgow
• Uncertain stakeholder co-operation
• Expanding activity programme
• Governance arrangements
• Diaspora/support networks
Opportunities
Threats
• Commitment to change
• Pressure on public finances
• Expanded outdoor education
• Non-statutory status
• Capacity building and training in public
• Competitor activity in other parks
and private sectors
• Local Authority resistance to change
• Commercialisation
• Lack of long-term legal commitments
• Fundraising
• Zoning
• Showcasing of environmental products
• Alignment with National priorities
• Enhanced revenue streams
• Economic Recovery
• Promotion of local products
• Observatory
• Allotments
• Reservoirs
24
Page 48
C. PESTLE
The following PESTLE assessment provides a further level of analysis and context to inform strategic
priorities for development.
Political:
Economic:
• Stable democratic government with local
• Limited public funds.
government elections not due until 4 May
• Mixed local economies with high levels
2017, although Scottish parliamentary
of inequality, indicated by wide range in
elections on 5 May 2016 could have an
levels of deprivation.
impact.
• Access to a range of public (National
• ‘NOC’ on East Dunbartonshire Council
Lottery), private philanthropic and
with
a
3-way
(Labour/LibEuropean (ERDF/ESF) funding streams.
Dem/Conservative) coalition, resulting in
• Opportunities for greater commercial
no political affinity with ruling (SNP)
focus and alternative revenue streams.
government at Holyrood.
• ‘NOC’ on Stirling Council with a 2-way
(Labour/Conservative)
‘Partnership’,
resulting in no political affinity with
ruling (SNP) government at Holyrood
and no political authority for Stirling’s
(SNP) deputy chair of MJMC.
• Active participation by local Community
Councils in MJMC.
Social:
Technical:
• Strong local communities and networks.
• Expertise in environmental management,
with useful teams of volunteers.
• Significant groups requiring outdoor
access, including dog walkers, leisure
• Poor marketing capacity (human and
cyclists and regular runners.
technical).
• Local clusters of ‘ladies that lunch’ and
• Limited infrastructure for specialist
potential legacy targets, as well as
activities and events.
disadvantaged groups.
• Limited commercialisation approach.
• Outdoor education skills available, but
currently operating from outside Park.
Legal:
Environmental:
• Lack of long term commitment from
• Outstanding environmental assets.
local authority partners.
• Opportunity for enhanced strategic focus
• Limited protection for Craigend Castle
on environmental management of water
and energy resources and waste.
• Non-statutory responsibilities
25
Page 49
D. Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs)
The SSIs covering approximately 65% of the area of MCP are an obstacle to development, but also
help to ensure conservation of the asset and protection of the associated products.
Source: DEFRA (http://magic.defra.gov.uk/MagicMap.aspx)
26
Page 50
E. Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation (SIMD)
This map shows the close proximity of adjacent areas across all five quintiles of SIMD within a small
radius (walking distance) of MCP. Bearsden and Milngavie sit cheek by jowl to the south, whilst
Lennoxtown, a highly deprived area, is just beyond the edge of this area to the east.
Source: Scottish Neighbourhood Statistics (2012): http://www.sns.gov.uk/Simd/Simd.aspx
27
Page 51
F. Local needs and national priorities
Last year’s survey of MCP visitors showed strong local support, and the sustainable development of
MCP ark is entirely consistent with Scottish Government priorities.
These are summarised in the Scottish Government’s five Strategic Objectives, adopted in 2007.
Objective
Improve Scotland’s natural and built
Greener
environment and the sustainable use and
enjoyment of it.
Help people to sustain and improve their
health, especially in disadvantaged
Healthier
communities, ensuring better, local and
faster access to health care.
Help local communities to flourish,
becoming stronger, safer place to live,
Safer and Stronger
offering improved opportunities and a
better quality of life.
Expand opportunities for Scots to
succeed from nurture through to life
Smarter
long learning ensuring higher and more
widely shared achievements.
Enable businesses and people to increase
Wealthier
and
their wealth and more people to share
Fairer
fairly in that wealth.
Opportunity
Enhance
conservation
efforts;
promote outdoor education; enable
greater access.
Promote healthier lifestyles through
the sustainable development of
community resources.
Celebrate local heritage and enable
greater participation.
Develop outdoor education and
sports development resources for
residents from East Dunbartonshire,
Stirling and beyond.
Facilitate economic growth by
supporting social enterprise and
entrepreneurial co-operation.
Of fifty National Indicators used to track progress, Scotland’s performance is judged to be worsening
on six. The sustainable development of MCP will have no direct influence on “Improve the state of
Scotland’s marine environment”, but it will contribute in five other areas.
Indicator
Improve people’s perceptions of the
quality of public services
Reduce the proportion of individuals
living in poverty
Reduce children’s deprivation
Increase the abundance of terrestrial
breeding birds: biodiversity
Improve the state of Scotland’s
marine environment
Reduce Scotland’s carbon footprint
Opportunity
Demonstrate that EDC and SC are committed to investing in
assets to provide better public services.
Create opportunities to support healthier lifestyles and
sustainable livelihoods.
Promote network of community allotments and gardens.
Enhance biodiversity conservation efforts (with abundance of
terrestrial breeding birds as proxy performance indicator).
N/A
Promote sustainable transport and local food production.
It will also support many other key National Indicators, which are already generally improving. These
include:
Increase physical activity
Improve the state of Scotland’s historic sites
Increase people’s use of Scotland’s outdoors
28
Page 52
It can be argued that investment in MCP would support all sixteen National Outcomes, but eight
above all.
We value and enjoy our built and natural environment and protect it and enhance it for future
generations.
Our public services are high quality, continually improving, efficient and responsive to local
people’s needs.
Our young people are successful learners, confident individuals, effective contributors and
responsible citizens.
We live longer, healthier lives.
We live in well-designed, sustainable places where we are able to access the amenities and
services we need.
We have strong, resilient and supportive communities where people take responsibility for
their own actions and how they affect others.
We live in a Scotland that is the most attractive place for doing business in Europe.
We reduce the global environmental impact of our consumption and production.
Aligning the development of MCP with Government priorities will help ensure access to funds.
29
Page 53
G. Funding opportunities
We have identified a range of funds that could be available to renew, improve or enhance many of the
Country’s Park’s 31 current assets and 2 proposed developments. The reference numbers correspond
to those given in the asset matrix. Additional support (including assistance with grant applications)
can be given to other assets, especially key management systems, through secondments and in-house
services from the two local authorities.
A1
Funding
Title
Amount
Website
Deadline
"Landscape"
Information
A2
Path Network
Funding
Title
Amount
Website
Deadline
Information
A3
Funding
Title
Amount
Website
Deadline
Bridleways
Information
Creative Scotland Open Project Funding
£125,000
www.creativescotland.com/funding/funding-programmes/openproject-funding
Ongoing. Contact Creative Scotland initially. You will need to seek
prior approval from Creative Scotland before applying. If approval
is given, decisions will take up to 12 working weeks from the date
we receive your application form.
To invest in cultural facilities, refurbishments and equipment which
improves access, presentation and enjoyment of the arts and film for
the population of Scotland. It aims to provide facilities that support
the development of skills, assist artists in creating work and making
it more accessible to the public. Furthermore, the funds aim to
ensure improved access to the prioritised groups of people who have
lower-than-average engagement with creativity. Support will be
given to projects that develop skills or artistic practice, projects that
create something new and of high quality, projects which either
present work to audiences, or which try to develop and reach new
audiences (including those hard to reach), projects which encourage
more people to get involved in artistic and creative activity.
Paths for All
£15,000
http://www.pathsforall.org.uk/pfa/support/grants-a-funding.html
Ongoing.
Supports community groups, workplaces and projects that improve
health, promote walking and improve the environment for people to
be active every day. This development could also be supported by
the LEADER funding.
LEADER
£150,000 (include for Mugdock County Cycles path development)
http://www.gov.scot/Topics/farmingrural/SRDP/LEADER
http://www.gov.scot/Topics/farmingrural/SRDP/LEADER/lags
Ongoing – need to initially contact local access group (LAG)
LEADER is a bottom-up method of delivering support for rural
development through implementing Local Development Strategies.
Support is awarded by 20 Local Action Groups (LAGs) and is
aimed at local projects with a wide community benefit that show an
element of originality or experimentation, where possible, and
complement other activities within the Local Development
30
Page 54
Strategy. A series of roadshows are scheduled to take place in early
2015 to explain the changes in the SRDP 2014 - 2020 schemes. It
would be possible to approach Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) for
50% match funding.
A8
Mobility
vehicles
Funding
Title
Amount
Websites
Deadline
Information
A9
Funding
Title
Amount
Website
Deadline
Ablution and
Shower
Facilities
Information
A12
Funding
Title
Amount
Website
Deadline
Mugdock
Country
Cycles
Information
Funding
Title
Play
area, Amount
Adventure
Website
Trail
A17/18
AFTAID or Mobility Trust
Unknown
www.mobilitytrust.org.uk, www.aftaid.org.uk
Ongoing
There are no obvious specific grants for mobility scooters to
organisations. ACTAID and Mobility Trust provide grants for
mobility scooters for individuals and might consider funding
scooters for the park if a strong application is made.
Sportscotland: Sports Faculties Fund
£12,000
http://www.sportscotland.org.uk/funding/sport_facilities_fund/
Ongoing: One Stage application process
To service the development of the new Mugdock County Cycle Path
and the improved foot paths, the provision of new changing
accommodation can be funded through this scheme. This funding
stream funds developments that are for the public good and will
provide equitable opportunities for increased sports participation by
the community at local level. Applicants need to demonstrate that
the proposed development is for the public good and will provide
equitable opportunities for increased sports participation by the
community at local level. This funding stream is for capital
expenditure only. As part of this, adequate waste facilities including
specified recycling bins could be included in the plans and
contribute to improving the aesthetic of the local sports area.
LEADER: SRDP
£150,000 (incl for bridleways development)
http://www.gov.scot/Topics/farmingrural/SRDP/LEADER
http://www.gov.scot/Topics/farmingrural/SRDP/LEADER/lags
Ongoing – need to initially contact local access group (LAG)
LEADER is a bottom-up method of delivering support for rural
development through implementing Local Development Strategies.
Support is awarded by 20 Local Action Groups (LAGs) and is
aimed at local projects with a wide community benefit that show an
element of originality or experimentation, where possible, and
complement other activities within the Local Development
Strategy. A series of roadshows are scheduled to take place in early
2015 to explain the changes in the SRDP 2014 - 2020 schemes. It
would be possible to approach Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) for
50% match funding.
Awards for All Scotland
£10,000
www.biglotteryfund.org.uk/globalcontent/programmes/scotland/awards-for-all-scotland
31
Page 55
Deadline
Information
A18
Adventure
Trail
Funding
Title
Amount
Website
Deadline
Information
A23
Funding
Title
Amount
Website
Deadline
Craigend
Castle
Information
A23
Funding
Title
Amount
Website
Deadline
Craigend
Castle
Information
D1
Allotments
Funding
Title
Amount
Website
Deadline
Information
Ongoing
The Awards for All provides the opportunity to get small grants that
will fund a range of projects which involve bringing local people
together, helping people learn, improving local spaces and getting
people more active. Suggest submitting an application for both the
development of the play area refurbishment and the adventure trail.
Robertson Trust: Small Grant
£10,000
www.therobertsontrust.org.uk/index.php/making_an_application/
Ongoing – Trustees meet six times a year to discuss applications.
Contributing to the Awards for All Grant, the Robertson Trust
supports projects that have Community Sports and Health as two of
their priorities.
Heritage Enterprise: Heritage Lottery
£1.5mil
http://www.hlf.org.uk/looking-funding/our-grantprogrammes/heritage-enterprise
Ongoing
Heritage Enterprise can help communities repair derelict historic
places, giving them productive new uses. Application is a tworound process. Submit a project enquiry form online and local HLF
staff will be in touch within ten days.
There is an opportunity to apply for a start-up grant to assist in the
development of the management structure for how best to operate
and run the future development.
Robertson Trust: Major Capital
£1.5mil
http://www.therobertsontrust.org.uk/index.php/making_an_applicati
on/
Three times per year
Major capital donations, likely to be for capital developments in one
of the Trust’s priority areas where the total project costs are in
excess of £1mil, will be considered three times a year in January,
May and September. As an independent grant-maker and we are
willing to take risks and support new ideas; however, we will also
fund ongoing work which can show it makes a difference.
Donations can take the form of core funding including salaries and
general running costs, project grants or capital grants for building or
equipment.
Garfield Weston Foundation Main Grant: Environment
£50,000
www.garfieldweston.org/how-to-apply/
Ongoing
The Foundation supports a range of environment projects ranging
from organisations that raise public awareness of, and to undertake
finding solutions to specific issues (e.g. sustainable fishing sources
32
Page 56
and community based solutions such as gardens) in addition to
charities that actively deliver conservation projects. Need to cover
ground works, access to water, security fencing, tool store,
individual sheds, along with compost bins and water butts.
33
Page 57
H. Craigend Castle site
A review of historic maps indicates that a significant structure on the site of Craigend Castle was built
sometime in the first half of the 17th Century, which of course coincides with the life of the 1st
Marquess of Montrose (1612-1650), who remains the Graham’s most important son.
•
1860 (http://maps.nls.uk/view/74430876) – The Ordnance Survey Stirlingshire Sheet XXVII,
surveyed 1860 and published 1865, clearly shows the Victorian house, along with the stables
to the north.
•
1817 (http://maps.nls.uk/view/74400332) – John Grassom’s map of Stirling shows that by the
date of publication (which is generally recorded as the date Craigend Castle was first built)
there was already a substantial structure on the site.
34
Page 58
•
1750 (http://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/#zoom=14&lat=55.9725&lon=-4.3179&layers=4) –
William Roy’s Military Survey of Scotland shows that the site of Craigend Castle had a
structure surrounded by substantial plantings in the mid 18th Century, which would seem to
confirm the existence of an earlier building (long before 1817), as also indicated by the site
survey conducted by our architect Benjamin Tindall in 2006.
•
1654 (http://maps.nls.uk/view/00000438) – Joan Blaeu’s Atlas of Scotland shows a castle
structure at the same site.
35
Page 59
•
1650 (http://maps.nls.uk/view/00000672) – Robert Gordon’s near contemporary map of
Stirlinshyr & Lennox is thin on detail, although this may because it was largely based on
Pont’s earlier (1595) survey. It does however nicely show Mugdock (“Mugdok”) in relation
to Glasgow (“Glasco”).
•
1595 (http://maps.nls.uk/view/00002329) – Timothy Pont’s map of The East Central
Lowlands.
36
Page 60
James Graham, Lord Mugdock and 1st Marquess of Montrose, and spent much of his youth at
Mugdock16. Since the Craigend Castle site has always been part of the Mugdock Estate, the earlier
structure must have been connected to Mugdock Castle.It can therefore be argued that Craigend
would be a highly suitable location for the proposed “Graham Center” or Graham Institute.
16
Hastings, Max, Montrose: The King’s Champion. London: Victor Gollancz, 1977.
37
Page 61
Page 62
"Landscape"
Path network
Bridleways
MCP offices
Ranger Service
Visitor Centre Car Park
Visitor Centre
Mobility vehicles
Toilets
Bins
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Assets
Retail
Room hire
Land hire
Revenue for MCP
Maintenance
Maintenance
Maintenance
X
Renewal, plus introduction of
facilities at more remote
sites
Page 63
X
Renewal
Better retail
Car park charges
Maintenance and
security
(opening/closing)
HR and stock
Corporate "volunteer"
events, community payback
Salaries, equipment
and volunteer
expenses
X
X
HR and services
X
Recommended
Reshape team, develop new
marketing resources and
booking systems, enhanced
coordination
Expansion to include cycle
paths and eco lighting
systems
Film locations, festivals,
artworks trail, enhanced
interpretation, increased
prices, "Adopt-a-Tree"
Opportunities for change
X
Mugdock
Conservation
Volunteers
Support
Proactive marketing
Maintenance
Maintenance
Maintenance and
services
Costs to MCP
X
Already
planned
Development
X
X
To investigate
20% on purchases
Exempt from
charges
Community rates
on room hire
Indicative
discounts for FoM
?
YES
YES
?
YES
Sponsorship
opportunity
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
Investment need
Meeting rooms
Mugdock Country Cycles
Charlies
Theatre
Stables Tea Room
Mugdock Makkers
Play area
Adventure Trail
Caulders
Walled Garden
Craigend Pond
BBQ sites
Craigend Castle
Camping
Mugdock Castle
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Events
Site hire
Site hire
Events
Rent
Rent
Rent
Mugdock Trust
volunteers
Maintenance
X
Allotments, bee hives,
enhanced facilities and
prices, new local products,
more weddings
Page 64
X
Activity centre, outdoor
education centre, rental
accommodation, film
location, "Buy-a-brick"
Monitoring and
security
X
Increase prices
Increase prices
Transfer to Caulders
Renegotiate lease
Renewal
Maintenance
Maintenance
Maintenance
Maintenance
X
Exhibition coordination with
Caulders
Renewal
X
Coordinated marketing
X
Reduce children's parties,
coordinate bookings with
Charlie's, "Sponsor-a-seat"
Room hire, film
showings
X
Cycle paths, minibus
transfers
X
X
Increased pricing, proactive
marketing, enhanced
booking system
Coordinated marketing
Maintenance
Maintenance
Rent
Rent
Room hire
X
X
X
X
X
50% on rates
50% on rates
10% on food, drink
and plants
10% on works
20% on coffees,
10% on food
10% on seat prices
20% on coffees,
10% on food
20% on services,
10% on goods
15% on room hire
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
Craigend Quarry
East Car Park
South Lodge Car Park
Drumclog Moor Car Park
Khyber Car Park
27
28
29
30
31
Secretariat
Enterprise network
Marketing
Mugdock Management
Committee
4
5
6
Grants
Maintenance
Counters
3
Maintenance
Maintenance
Design
Branded (local) products
2
Royalties,
commission
Booking system
Maintenance
Maintenance
Maintenance
Maintenance
Maintenance
Security
Maintenance
1
Management systems
Mugdock Loch
26
MCP team
MCP team
MCP team
MCP team
MCP team
MCP team
X
X
X
X
Increased donations, FoM
promotion
promotion
promotion
promotion
X
X
Renewal of information
portal and social media
accounts, dedicated
marketing resource, renewed
focus on SC market
Reconfigure to ensure
political commitment and
representation by SC
Page 65
X
Coordinating body for all
enterprises within MCP
Renewal and enhancement
Honey, whisky
Renewal and coordination
X
Promotion as film location
Rowing boats, open water
swimming, triathlon
X
X
X
X
YES
YES
?
?
?
?
YES
YES
YES
YES
Allotments
Observatory
2
New developments
Mugdock Trust
1
7
Page 66
X
Permanent observatory with
Astronomical Society
overnight access, modest
of Glasgow
rent
[Subject to
development]
X
X
Renewal of "Friends of
Mugdock" with proactive
fundraising and marketing
Community/school vegetable
gardens, local honey, eco
toilets
MCP team (as
secretariat and data
controller)
Blane Valley
Allotments Group
Secretariat,
administration
[Subject to
development]
Development
assistance
YES
YES
YES
AGENDA ITEM NO: 11
MUGDOCK PARK JOINT
MANAGEMENT
COMMITTEE
15 SEPTEMBER 2015
FSS/056/15/MD
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE & SHARED SERVICES
CONTACT OFFICER:
GAIL MORRISON, TEAM LEADER
(TEL: 0141 574 5512)
SUBJECT TITLE:
2014/15 FINAL OUTURN POSITION & 2015/16 PERIOD
4 REVENUE MONITORING REPORT
1.0
PURPOSE
1.1
This purpose of this report is to inform committee of the revenue budget performance for the
period to 27 July 2015 and highlight any variances projected to 31st March 2016.
1.2
This report will also inform committee of the final revenue budget performance for year
ending 31st March 2015, and present the Annual Accounts 2014/15.
2.0
SUMMARY
2.1
The Revenue Budget for 2015/16 is currently £0.344m, and the overall financial position
shows a projected overspend of £0.025m. The reasons for the projected variance are
detailed in the report. Officers are aware of their requirement to deliver a balanced budget,
and are reviewing areas to address this budget pressure currently being reported.
2.2
The audited position for 2014/15 was approximately £0.042m under budget. This
represents a reduction of £0.004m due to a number of additional accruals identified during the
audit process. This can be seen through the final audited statements.
3.0
RECOMMENDATIONS
3.1
It is recommended that the Committee:a)
b)
c)
Note the projected overspend of £0.025m arising in the current financial year and the
committed management actions to reduce;
Note that officers are reviewing all budgets in detail to address any areas of financial
pressure, and to ensure overspends are contained; and
Consider and approve the audited Annual Accounts 2014/15 for Mugdock Country
Park Joint Management Committee.
IAN BLACK
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE & SHARED SERVICES
Page 67
4.0
BACKGROUND
4.1
Total Budget 2015/16
4.1.1
The Service budget for 2015/16 is £0.344m, a decrease of £0.093m due to a saving of
£0.100m for service redesign, which has been offset through pay adjustments i.e. 1.5% pay
increase. Note that officers are reviewing all budgets in detail to address any areas of financial
pressure, and to ensure savings targets are achieved.
4.2
Variances Arising this Cycle
4.2.1
The current variances are initially based on service budget monitoring statements showing
actual spend against budget as at period 4 (27 July 2015). However, projections for the full
year as shown in Appendix 1 incorporate all financial trends and projected variances
identified to date following discussion with the service. Variances arising during the current
period are summarised in Appendix 1, and result in a projected overspend of £0.028m.
Officers are reviewing how this budget pressure can be reduced.
4.3
Audited Annual Accounts 2014/15
4.3.1
The audited Annual Accounts 2014/15 for Mugdock Country Park Joint Management
Committee are attached as appendix 2 to this report. These show a final underspend of
approximately £0.042m, a reduction of £0.004m on the unaudited position. These Accounts
are presented for consideration and approval by this Committee. Formal authorisation of the
Accounts has been arranged for 24 September 2015.
5.0
IMPLICATIONS
5.1
This report has been assessed against the Policy Development Checklist and has been
classified as being an operational report and not a new policy or change to an existing policy
document. The implications for the Council are as undernoted.
5.2
Development & Regeneration – review areas to address current budget pressure and ensure
an improved financial position is achieved at the end of the financial year.
5.3
Finance & Shared Services Implications – Arrange for formal authorisation of 2014/15
Annual Accounts following approval by this committee. Continue to monitor and report on
2015/16 revenue budget position.
5.4
Customer Services & Transformation – None
Page 68
Supplies and Services
Management action to reduce overspends in other areas will be made within Supplies &
services, this will be quantified in a later report.
East Dunbartonshire Council Share (87.5%)
Page 69
294,210
50,000
344,210
Net Expenditure to be met from Constituent Authorities
Stirling Council Share (12.5%) - Budgeted at £50,000 miniumum
(27,527)
(121,274)
Total Income
74,808
10,687
85,495
(18,867)
113,022
465,484
(57,024)
1,790
13,891
(8,660)
535
4,700
6,918
18,110
51,250
52,000
85,669
£
£
343,643
Actual as at
Period 4
Annual
Budget
(64,250)
INCOME
Rent and Recharges
1
Additional Rental income is expected for the Cycle Hire Shop.
Trading and Events
2
Sale of Goods is expected to underachieve in income for Shop Sales, due to late opening
of shop. Management is looking at other ways to increase income in this area, there is
expected additional rental income.
4
Transport and Plant
No annual variation is forecast at this time.
Admin and Other Costs
5
No annual variation is forecast at this time.
Total Expenditure
3
EXPENDITURE
1
Employees
Budgeted turnover savings are unlikley to be met at this time.
2
Property Costs
An overspend in electricity is expected in 2015/16, this is due to actual meter readings
being performed rather than estimations. This will be reviewed in the CCLS.
Management will take steps to eliminate any overspends by managing spend within other
areas.
SUMMARY FINANCIAL POSITION as at Period 4: 27 July 2015
MUGDOCK COUNTRY PARK
REVENUE MONITORING 2015/16
28,000
4,500
7,500
(3,000)
23,500
0
0
0
8,500
15,000
£
£
28,000
4,500
7,500
(3,000)
23,500
0
0
0
8,500
15,000
Projected Variance
Cumulative
This period
£
322,210
50,000
372,210
(116,774)
(49,524)
(67,250)
488,984
13,891
4,700
52,000
59,750
358,643
Projected
Outturn
4.36%
8.13%
-3.71%
-13.15%
4.67%
5.05%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
16.59%
%
Variation
APPENDIX 1
Page 70
Address:
4th Floor, South Suite
The Athenaeum Building
8 Nelson Mandela Place
Glasgow
G2 1BT
AGENDA ITEM 12
Telephone:
0845 146 1010
Email:
[email protected]
Website:
www.audit-scotland.gov.uk
Mugdock Country Park Joint Management Committee
15 September 2015
Annual Audit Report
1.
International Standard on Auditing (UK and Ireland) 260 (ISA 260) requires auditors to report
specific matters arising from the audit of the financial statements to those charged with
governance of a body in sufficient time to enable appropriate action. We are drawing to your
attention matters for your consideration before the financial statements are approved and
certified. We also present for your consideration our draft annual report on the 2014/15 audit
which identifies significant findings from the financial statements audit. The section headed
"Significant findings from the audit in accordance with ISA260" in the attached annual audit report
sets out the issues identified. This report will be issued in final form after the financial statements
have been certified
2.
Our work on the financial statements is now substantially complete. Subject to the satisfactory
conclusion of any outstanding matters and receipt of a revised set of financial statements for final
review, we anticipate being able to issue an unqualified auditor’s report on 15 September 2015
(the proposed report is attached at Appendix A). There are no anticipated modifications to the
audit report.
3.
In presenting this report to the Joint Management Committee we seek confirmation from those
charged with governance of any instances of any actual, suspected or alleged fraud; any
subsequent events that have occurred since the date of the financial statements; or material noncompliance with laws and regulations affecting the entity that should be brought to our attention.
4.
We are required to report to those charged with governance all unadjusted misstatements which
we have identified during the course of our audit, other than those of a trivial nature (£200) and
request that these misstatements be corrected. No unadjusted misstatements were noted.
5.
As part of the completion of our audit we seek written assurances from the Treasurer on aspects
of the financial statements and judgements and estimates made. A draft letter of representation
under ISA580 is attached at Appendix B. This should be signed and returned by the Treasurer
with the signed financial statements prior to the independent auditor’s opinion being certified.
Page 71
APPENDIX A: Proposed Independent Auditor’s Report
APPENDIX A
Independent auditor’s report to the members of Mugdock Country Park Joint Management
Committee and the Accounts Commission for Scotland
I certify that I have audited the financial statements of the Mugdock Country Park Joint Management
Committee for the year ended 31 March 2015 under Part VII of the Local Government (Scotland) Act
1973. The financial statements comprise the Movement in Reserves Statement, Comprehensive
Income and Expenditure Statement, Balance Sheet Statement and Cash Flow Statement and the
related notes. The financial reporting framework that has been applied in their preparation is
applicable law and International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRSs) as adopted by the European
Union, and as interpreted and adapted by the Code of Practice on Local Authority Accounting in the
United Kingdom 2014/15 (the 2014/15 Code).
This report is made solely to the parties to whom it is addressed in accordance with the Part VII of the
Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973 and for no other purpose. In accordance with paragraph 125
of the Code of Audit Practice approved by the Accounts Commission for Scotland, I do not undertake
to have responsibilities to members or officers, in their individual capacities, or to third parties.
Respective responsibilities of Treasurer and auditor
As explained more fully in the Statement of Responsibilities the Director of Finance & Shared
Services at East Dunbartonshire Council, as Treasurer, is responsible for the preparation of the
financial statements and for being satisfied that they give a true and fair view. My responsibility is to
audit and express an opinion on the financial statements in accordance with applicable law and
International Standards on Auditing (UK and Ireland) as required by the Code of Audit Practice
approved by the Accounts Commission for Scotland. Those standards require me to comply with the
Auditing Practices Board’s Ethical Standards for Auditors.
Scope of the audit of the financial statements
An audit involves obtaining evidence about the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements
sufficient to give reasonable assurance that the financial statements are free from material
misstatement, whether caused by fraud or error. This includes an assessment of: whether the
accounting policies are appropriate to the body’s circumstances and have been consistently applied
and adequately disclosed; the reasonableness of significant accounting estimates made by the
Treasurer; and the overall presentation of the financial statements. In addition, I read all the financial
and non-financial information in the Annual Accounts to identify material inconsistencies with the
audited financial statements and to identify any information that is apparently materially incorrect
based on, or materially inconsistent with, the knowledge acquired by me in the course of performing
the audit. If I become aware of any apparent material misstatements, irregularities, or inconsistencies
I consider the implications for my report.
Opinion on financial statements
In my opinion the financial statements:

give a true and fair view in accordance with the applicable law and the 2014/15 Code of the state
of the affairs of the body as at 31 March 2015 and of the income and expenditure of the body for
the year then ended;

have been properly prepared in accordance with IFRSs as adopted by the European Union, as
interpreted and adapted by the 2014/15 Code; and

have been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government (Scotland)
Act 1973, The Local Authority Accounts (Scotland) Regulations 2014 and the Local Government
in Scotland Act 2003.
Opinion on other prescribed matters
In my opinion:
Page 72

the information given in the Management Commentary for the financial year for which the
financial statements are prepared is consistent with the financial statements.
Matters on which I am required to report by exception
I am required to report to you if, in my opinion:

adequate accounting records have not been kept; or

the financial statements are not in agreement with the accounting records; or

I have not received all the information and explanations I require for my audit; or

the Governance Statement has not been prepared in accordance with Delivering Good
Governance in Local Government; or

There has been a failure to achieve a prescribed financial objective.
I have nothing to report in respect of these matters.
Elaine Boyd FCCA
Senior Audit Manager
Audit Scotland
4th Floor South Suite
Glasgow
G2 1BT
25 September 2015
Page 73
Appendix B: ISA 580 - Letter of Representation
Elaine Boyd
Audit Scotland
4th Floor, South Suite
8 Nelson Mandela Building
Glasgow
G2 1BT
Dear Elaine,
Annual Accounts 2014/15
1.
This representation letter is provided in connection with your audit of the financial statements of
Mugdock Country Park Joint Management Committee for the year ended 31 March 2015 for the
purpose of expressing an opinion as to whether the financial statements give a true and fair view
of the financial position of Mugdock Country Park Joint Management Committee, as at 31 March
2015 and its comprehensive net expenditure for the year then ended.
2.
I confirm to the best of my knowledge and belief, and having made appropriate enquiries of
senior officers and the Joint Management Committee, the following representations given to you
in connection with your audit of the Mugdock Country Park for the year ended 31 March 2015.
General
3.
I acknowledge my responsibility and that of Mugdock Country Park Joint Management
Committee for the financial statements. All the accounting records requested have been made
available to you for the purposes of your audit. All material agreements and transactions
undertaken by Mugdock Country Park Joint Management Committee have been properly
reflected in the financial statements. All other records and information have been made available
to you, including minutes of all management and other meetings.
4.
The information given in the Management Commentary and Governance Statement present a
balanced picture of the Mugdock Country Park Joint Management Committee and is consistent
with the financial statements.
5.
I confirm that the effects of uncorrected misstatements are immaterial, individually and in
aggregate, to the financial statements as a whole. I am not aware of any uncorrected
misstatements other than those identified in the auditor's report to those charged with
governance (ISA260).
Financial Reporting Framework
6.
The financial statements have been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the Local
Government (Scotland) Act 1973, The Local Authority Accounts (Scotland) Regulations 2014, the
Local Government in Scotland Act 2003 and the Code of Practice on Local Authority Accounting
in the United Kingdom 2014/15.
Page 74
7.
Disclosure has been made in the financial statements of all matters necessary for them to show a
true and fair view of the transactions and state of affairs of Mugdock Country Park Joint
Management Committee for the year ended 31 March 2015.
Accounting Policies & Estimates
8.
All material accounting policies adopted are as shown in the Summary of Significant Accounting
Policies included in the financial statements. The continuing appropriateness of these policies
has been reviewed since the introduction of IAS 8 and on a regular basis thereafter, and takes
account of the requirements set out in the Code of Practice on Local Authority Accounting in the
United Kingdom 2014/15.
9.
The significant assumptions used in making accounting estimates are reasonable and properly
reflected in the financial statements. There are no changes in estimation techniques which
should be disclosed due to their having a material impact on the accounting disclosures.
Going Concern
10.
The Joint Management Committee has assessed Mugdock Country Park's ability to carry on as a
going concern, as identified in the Management Commentary, and have disclosed, in the
financial statements, any material uncertainties that have arisen as a result.
Related Party Transactions
11.
All transactions with related parties have been disclosed in the financial statements. I have made
available to you all the relevant information concerning such transactions, and I am not aware of
any other matters that require disclosure in order to comply with the requirements of IAS24, as
interpreted by the Code of Practice on Local Authority Accounting in the United Kingdom
2014/15.
Events Subsequent to the Date of the Statement of Financial Position
12.
There have been no material events since the date of the Balance Sheet which necessitate
revision of the figures in the financial statements or notes thereto including contingent assets and
liabilities.
13.
Since the date of the Balance Sheet no events or transactions have occurred which, though
properly excluded from the financial statements, are of such importance that they should be
brought to your notice.
Corporate Governance
14.
I acknowledge as Treasurer my responsibility for the corporate governance arrangements. I
confirm that I have disclosed to the auditor all deficiencies in internal control of which I am aware.
15.
The corporate governance arrangements have been reviewed and the disclosures I have made
are in accordance with the Code of Practice on Local Authority Accounting in the United Kingdom
2014/15. There have been no changes in the corporate governance arrangements or issues
identified, since the 31 March 2015, which require disclosure.
Page 75
Fraud
16.
I have considered the risk that the financial statements may be materially misstated as a result of
fraud. I have disclosed to the auditor any allegations of fraud or suspected fraud affecting the
financial statements. There have been no irregularities involving management or employees who
have a significant role in internal control or that could have a material effect on the financial
statements.
Assets
17.
On realisation in the ordinary course of the Joint Management Committee’s business the current
assets in the balance sheet are expected, in my opinion, to produce at least the amounts at
which they are stated.
Liabilities
18.
All liabilities have been provided for in the books of account, including the liabilities for all
purchases to which title has passed prior to 31 March 2015.
Carrying Value of Assets and Liabilities
19.
The assets and liabilities have been recognised, measured, presented and disclosed in
accordance with the Code of Practice on Local Authority Accounting in the United Kingdom
2014/15. There are no plans or intentions that are likely to affect the carrying value of
classification of the assets and liabilities within the financial statements.
Provisions
20.
There are no material liabilities which have resulted, or may be expected to result, by legal action
or otherwise, from events which had occurred by the balance sheet date, and of which Mugdock
Country Park Joint Management Committee could reasonably be expected to be aware. As a
result, no provision is included in the accounts.
Yours sincerely
Ian Black
Treasurer
Page 76
Page 77
March 2015
Prepared for Mugdock Country Park Joint Management
Committee
Annual Audit Plan
2014/15
Mugdock Country
Park Joint
Management
Committee
Appendix 1
Page 78
Audit Scotland is a statutory body set up in April 2000 under the Public Finance and Accountability (Scotland) Act 2000. We help the Auditor
General for Scotland and the Accounts Commission check that organisations spending public money use it properly, efficiently and effectively.
2
3
[email protected]
Materiality.................................................................................................5
14
Appendix II: Significant audit risks
Page 79
13
Appendix I: Planned audit outputs
Audit team ..............................................................................................11
Audit fee .................................................................................................11
11
Website: www.audit-scotland.gov.uk
Switchboard: 0131 625 1500
G2 1BT
Summary assurance plan ......................................................................10
Fees and resources
Glasgow
Audit issues and risks ..............................................................................9
9
4th floor (South Suite)
Independence and objectivity ..................................................................7
Audit issues and risks
Audit Scotland
Quality control ..........................................................................................7
Reporting arrangements ..........................................................................5
Blyth Deans, Senior Auditor
Our approach ...........................................................................................4
4
[email protected]
Format of the accounts ............................................................................3
Audit Approach
Elaine Boyd, Senior Audit Manager
Key contacts
Responsibility of the Treasurer................................................................3
Responsibility of the appointed auditor ...................................................3
Responsibilities
Summary of planned audit activity ..........................................................2
Introduction ..............................................................................................2
Summary
Contents
current national risks that are relevant to local
circumstances
the impact of changing international auditing and
accounting standards
our responsibilities under the Code of Audit Practice as
approved by the Auditor General for Scotland
issues brought forward from previous audit reports.




Annual Audit Plan 2014/15
the risks and priorities facing the Joint Management
Committee
This report summarises the key challenges and risks facing
Mugdock Country Park Joint Management Committee (the
Joint Management Committee) and sets out the audit work that
we propose to undertake in 2014/15. Our plan reflects:
2.

Our audit is focused on the identification and assessment of
the risks of material misstatement in Mugdock Country Park
Joint Management Committee’s financial statements.
1.
Introduction
Summary
Page 80
3.
Mugdock Country Park
2
a review and assessment of the Joint Management
Committee's governance and performance arrangements
in a number of key areas.

the accounts have been properly prepared in
accordance with the Local Government (Scotland) Act
1973 and the 2014/15 Code of Practice on Local
Authority Accounting in the United Kingdom (the
Code)

an audit of the financial statements
they give a true and fair view of the state of affairs of
as at 31 March 2015 and its income and expenditure
for the year then ended

an audit of the financial statements and provision of an
opinion on whether:


Our planned work in 2014/15 includes:
Summary of planned audit activity
The audit of the financial statements does not relieve
management or the Joint Management Committee, as the body
charged with governance, of their responsibilities.
Auditors in the public sector give an independent opinion on
the financial statements. We also review and report on the
arrangements set in place by the audited body to ensure the
proper conduct of its financial affairs and to manage its
performance and use of resources. In doing this, we aim to
support improvement and accountability.
6.

maintaining proper accounting records
It is the responsibility of Treasurer, as the appointed "proper
officer", to prepare the financial statements in accordance with
relevant legislation and the Code of Practice on Local Authority
Accounting in the United Kingdom (the Code). This means:
7.
Responsibility of the Treasurer
Our responsibilities, as independent auditor, are established by
the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973 and the Code of
Audit Practice, and guided by the auditing profession’s ethical
guidance.
5.
Responsibility of the appointed auditor
4.
Responsibilities
Page 81
8.
The financial statements should be prepared in accordance
with the Code which constitutes proper accounting practice.
3
preparing financial statements which give a true and fair
view of the state of affairs of the Joint Management
Committee as at 31 March 2015 and its expenditure and
income for the year then ended.
Format of the accounts

understanding the business of the Joint Management
Committee and the risk exposure which could impact on
the financial statements
assessing the key systems of internal control, and
considering how risks in these systems could impact on
the financial statements
identifying major transaction streams, balances and areas
of estimation and understanding how the Joint
Management Committee will include these in the financial
statements
assessing and addressing the risk of material
misstatement in the financial statements
determining the nature, timing and extent of the audit
procedures necessary to provide us with sufficient audit





Our audit approach is based on an understanding of the
characteristics, responsibilities, principal activities, risks and
governance arrangements of the Joint Management
Committee. We also consider the key audit risks and
challenges in the local government sector generally. This
approach includes:
9.
Our approach
Audit Approach
Page 82
11.
10.
clear responsibilities for preparation of financial
statements and the provision of supporting working papers
delivery of unaudited financial statements to agreed
timescales with a comprehensive working papers package
completion of the internal audit programme for 2014/15.



4
Auditing standards require internal and external auditors to
work closely together to make best use of available audit
resources. We seek to rely on the work of internal audit
wherever possible and as part of our planning process we
carry out an early assessment of the internal audit function.
Internal audit is provided by the internal audit section within
East Dunbartonshire Council. Overall, we concluded that the
internal audit service operates in accordance with Public
comprehensive closedown procedures for the financial
statements accompanied by a timetable issued to all
relevant staff

We have also considered and documented the sources of
assurance which will make best use of our resources and allow
us to focus audit testing on higher risk areas during the audit of
the financial statements. The main areas of assurance for the
audit come from planned management action and reliance on
systems of internal control. Management action being relied
on for 2014/15 includes:
evidence as to whether the financial statements give a
true and fair view.

Stock
We plan to place formal reliance on aspects of the work of
internal audit in the following areas, to support our audit
opinion on the financial statements:
Based on our knowledge and understanding of the Joint
Management Committee we have set our planning materiality
at 1% of gross expenditure. For 2014/15 planning materiality is
£5,900.
We set a lower level, known as performance materiality, when
defining our audit procedures. This level depends on
professional judgement and is informed by a number of factors
including:
14.
15.
International Standard on Auditing 320 provides guidance on
the concept of materiality. We consider materiality and its
relationship to audit risk when planning the nature, timing and
extent of our audit and conducting our audit procedures.
Specifically with regard to the financial statements, we assess
the materiality of uncorrected misstatements, both individually
and collectively.
13.
Materiality
12.
Sector Internal Audit Standards (PSIAS) and has adequate
documentation standards and reporting procedures in place.
Page 83
5
Local authorities must publish the unaudited accounts on their
websites and give public notice of the inspection period. For
19.
The Local Authority Accounts (Scotland) Regulations 2014
require that the unaudited annual accounts are submitted to
the appointed external auditor no later than 30 June each year.
The Joint Management Committee is required to consider the
unaudited annual accounts at a meeting by 31 August.
18.
Reporting arrangements
In addition, an inaccuracy which would not normally be
regarded as material in terms of monetary value may be
important for other reasons (for example the failure to achieve
a statutory requirement, or an item contrary to law). In the
event of such an item arising, its materiality has to be viewed in
a narrower context; such matters would normally fall to be
covered in an explanatory paragraph in the independent
auditor’s report.
17.
extent of audit testing coverage.

For 2014/15 performance materiality has been set at £4,700.
We will report, to those charged with governance, all
misstatements greater than £300.
nature and extent of prior year misstatements

16.
extent of estimation and judgement within the financial
statements

Signed audited accounts and the audit certificate are required
to be published on the East Dunbartonshire Council website by
31 October. The annual audit report is required to be
published on the website by 31 December.
An agreed timetable is included at Exhibit 1 below which takes
account of submission requirements and planned Joint
Management Committee dates:
21.
22.
The 2014 regulations require the Joint Management
Committee to meet by 30 September to consider whether to
approve the audited annual accounts for signature.
Immediately after approval, the annual accounts require to be
signed and dated by specified members and officers and then
provided to the auditor. The Controller of Audit requires audit
completion and issue of an independent auditor's report
(opinion) by 30 September each year.
20.
the Joint Management Committee, the unaudited accounts
should be published on the website of East Dunbartonshire
Council.
Page 84
6
Matters arising from our audit will be reported on a timely basis
and will include agreed action plans. Draft management
reports will be issued to the responsible head of service and
relevant officers to confirm factual accuracy. Responses to
30/9/15
Independent auditors report signed
23.
TBC
TBC
TBC
Ongoing
TBC
Joint Management Committee date
and Annual Audit Report.
ISA 260 report to those charged with governance
Audit Committee agenda, and issue of combined
Agreement of unsigned financial statements for
Treasurer
Latest date for final clearance meeting with the
issues
Progress meetings with lead officers on emerging
working papers package
Submission of unaudited financial statements with
statements
Planned committee approval of unaudited financial
TBC
TBC
Meetings with officers to clarify expectations of
working papers and financial system reports
Date
Key stage
Exhibit 1: Financial statements audit timetable
All annual audit reports produced are published on Audit
Scotland's website: (www.audit-scotland.gov.uk).
Planned outputs for 2014/15 are summarised at Appendix I.
25.
26.
International Standard on Quality Control (UK and Ireland) 1
(ISQC1) requires that a system of quality control is established,
as part of financial audit procedures, to provide reasonable
assurance that professional standards and regulatory and legal
requirements are being complied with and that the independent
27.
Quality control
We will provide an independent auditor’s report to Mugdock
Country Park Joint Management Committee and the Accounts
Commission that the audit of the financial statements has been
completed in accordance with applicable statutory
requirements. As part of streamlining our audit approach, this
year the Annual Audit Report will be combined with the ISA
260 report. As a result, the Annual Audit Report will be issued
by 30 September which is one month earlier than previous
years.
24.
draft reports are expected within four weeks of submission. A
copy of all final agreed reports will be sent to the Treasurer,
Director of Development & Regeneration at East
Dunbartonshire Council, Mugdock Country Park Team Leader,
the Joint Management Committee and Audit Scotland's
Performance Audit and Best Value Group.
Page 85
As part of our commitment to quality and continuous
improvement, Audit Scotland will periodically seek your views
on the quality of our service provision. We do, however,
welcome feedback at any time and this may be directed to the
engagement lead, Elaine Boyd.
29.
7
Auditors appointed by the Accounts Commission must comply
with the Code of Audit Practice. When auditing the financial
statements, auditors must also comply with professional
standards issued by the Auditing Practices Board (APB) and
those of the professional accountancy bodies. These
standards impose stringent rules to ensure the independence
and objectivity of auditors. Audit Scotland has in place robust
arrangements to ensure compliance with these standards
including an annual “fit and proper” declaration for all members
Independence and objectivity
28.
auditor’s report or opinion is appropriate in the circumstances.
The foundation of our quality framework is our Audit Guide,
which incorporates the application of professional auditing,
quality and ethical standards and the Code of Audit Practice
issued by Audit Scotland and approved by the Accounts
Commission. To ensure that we achieve the required quality
standards, Audit Scotland conducts peer reviews and internal
quality reviews and has been subject to a programme of
external reviews by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of
Scotland (ICAS).
Auditing and ethical standards require the appointed auditor to
communicate any relationships that may affect the
independence and objectivity of audit staff. We are not aware
of any such relationships pertaining to the audit of Mugdock
Country Park.
30.
of staff. The arrangements are overseen by the Assistant
Auditor General, who serves as Audit Scotland’s Ethics
Partner.
Page 86
8
Income: Auditing standards (ISA 240 The auditor’s
responsibility to consider fraud in an audit of financial
statements) requires auditors to presume a risk of fraud where
income streams are significant. East Dunbartonshire Council
and Stirling Council are the constituent authorities of the Park.
Both bodies receive a significant amount of funding from the
Scottish Government, however some is received from other
sources. The extent and complexity of income means there is
an inherent risk that income could be materially misstated. We
will carry out analytical procedures on income streams and
detailed testing of revenue transactions focusing on the areas
of greatest risk.
Management override of controls: ISA 240 states that audit
procedures should be responsive to risks related to
management override of controls. We will design and perform
32.
33.
Based on our discussions with staff, attendance at committee
meetings and a review of supporting information, we have
identified the following main financial statements risk areas for
your organisation.
31.
Audit issues and risks
Audit issues and
risks
Page 87
Financial Pressures: Given the current economic climate,
opportunities for the Park to generate external income remain
limited. This presents a risk that the Park may not receive the
required level of funding required to continue to operate the
same level of service. Furthermore, this could increase the
funding requirement from the Joint Management Committee.
36.
9
Organisational Structure: As part of East Dunbartonshire
Council’s Organisational Planning (2013-17) strategy, a
proposal for the updated Organisation Chart was due in
February 2014. This has not yet been finalised and the Park
continues to operate without an approved staffing structure.
There is therefore a risk that key posts in the Park have not
been identified and filled, which may impact on the Park’s
operational performance.
35.
Expiration of Minute of Agreement: The most recent Minute
of Agreement between East Dunbartonshire Council and
Stirling Council expired on the 31 March 2014. This agreement
regulates the management of Mugdock Country Park and the
responsibilities of the two parties. The absence of a current
agreement leaves the ongoing management of the Park
uncertain, particularly if no renewed formal agreement is
entered into.
34.
audit procedures to address these risks within Mugdock
Country Park.
Budget Profiling: In-year budget analysis indicates that costs
in relation to utilities and publicity are on course to exceed their
respective budgets. There is a risk that costs in excess of
those budgeted will be realised, requiring additional funding
commitments from the Joint Management Committee.
Constituent Authority Contributions: Current spending
levels in utilities and publicity will result in a budget deficit at
the year end with additional funding required from constituent
authorities. Constituent authorities may be unable to fund
higher levels of expenditure and may have to consider a more
effective and efficient operating model for the Park.
38.
39.
Within these identified risk areas there is a range of more
specific risks and these are summarised at Appendix II. In
most cases, actions to manage these risks are either planned
or already underway within the organisation. Details of the
sources of assurance that we have received for each of these
risks and any audit work we plan to undertake is also set out in
40.
Summary assurance plan
Local Authority Funding: The 2014/15 budget for the Park
shows a significant increase in deficit from the previous year.
Each year this deficit is made up from contributions from East
Dunbartonshire Council and Stirling Council. The increased
funding demand of £150,000 being placed on the respective
Council’s represents a risk to the Park’s ongoing operation.
37.
Page 88
Appendix II. In the period prior to the submission of the
unaudited financial statements, we will liaise with senior
officers on any new or emerging issues.
10
your organisation’s allocation of the cost of national
performance audits and statutory reports by the Accounts
Commission

The agreed audit fee for the 2014/15 audit is £3,480. Our fee
covers:
43.
the costs of planning, delivering and reporting the annual
audit including auditor’s attendance at committees
In determining the audit fee we have taken account of the risk
exposure of the Joint Management Committee, the
management assurances in place, and the level of reliance we
plan to take from the work of internal audit. We have assumed
receipt of a complete set of unaudited financial statements and
comprehensive working papers package by 8 June 2015.
42.

Over the past four years, Audit Scotland has reduced audit
fees by 23.5% in real terms, exceeding our 20% target. Due to
further refinement of our audit approach we have been able to
restrict the increase in audit fees for 2014/15 to 1% which, in
real terms, represents a 0.6% reduction at 2014 price levels.
41.
Audit fee
Fees and resources
Page 89
Where our audit cannot proceed as planned through, for
example, late receipt of unaudited financial statements or being
unable to take planned reliance from the work of internal audit,
a supplementary fee may be levied. An additional fee may
also be required in relation to any work or other significant
exercises outwith our planned audit activity.
a contribution towards functions that support the local
audit process (e.g. technical support and coordination of
the National Fraud Initiative), support costs and auditors’
travel and subsistence expenses.
45.
11
Elaine Boyd, Senior Audit Manager, Audit Services is your
appointed auditor. The local audit team will be led by Blyth
Deans who will be responsible for day to day management of
the audit and who will be your primary contact. Details of the
experience and skills of our team are provided in Exhibit 2.
The core team will call on other specialist and support staff as
necessary.
Audit team
44.

Page 90
12
central government sectors. Prior to working for Audit Scotland, Jim spent fifteen years in various IT development, quality,
Senior Auditor (ICT)
Jim has fourteen years experience of public sector ICT audit with Audit Scotland, covering local government, health and the
Jim Cumming,
Scotland qualification in September 2015.
Trainee Auditor
security, system administration and project management roles in engineering.
Aimee joined Audit Scotland in October 2014 and will commence studying for the Institute of Chartered Accountant of
Accountant of Scotland qualification.
Ray joined Audit Scotland in 2013 as a professional trainee and is currently studying for the Institute of Chartered
health and central government sectors. In January 2014, Blyth qualified as a Chartered Public Finance Accountant.
Blyth joined Audit Scotland in February 2009 and has six years public sector audit experience within the local government,
Aimee MacDonald,
Trainee Auditor
Ray Buist,
Senior Auditor
Blyth Deans CPFA,
and seven years in private practice.
central government. Prior to this, Elaine spent seven years in a financial management and audit role within the public sector
Elaine has thirteen years experience of public sector audit with Audit Scotland, covering local government, health and
Elaine Boyd FCCA,
Experience
Name
Exhibit 2: Audit team
December
2014
November
2014
January
2015
February
2015
March
2015
April
2015
Annual Audit Plan: An outline of
the planned audit work for the
2014/15 audit, including key risk
areas identified.
Page 91
May
2015
June
2015
August
2015
September
2015
October
2015
Independent auditors’ report:
Opinion on the financial
statements.
July
2015
Combined ISA 260 / Annual Audit
Report: Draws significant matters arising
from our audit to those charged with
governance prior to the signing of the
independent auditor’s report.
The diagram below shows the key outputs planned for the Joint Management Committee in 2014/15.
Appendix I: Planned audit outputs
13
Source of assurance
accordance with ISA240.
there is an inherent risk of fraud in
The extent and complexity of income means
amount of income in addition to SG funding.
Park. Each body receives a significant
Council are the constituent authorities of the
East Dunbartonshire Council and Stirling
Income







monitoring controls and variance analysis.
Page 92
Commencement of internal data matching.
Initiative and other Anti-Fraud Networks.
Active participation in the National Fraud
& Corruption and Code of Governance.
Refreshed policy coverage in respect of Fraud
Fraud Team.
Establishment of the Council’s Corporate
cycle of Committee reporting.
Board and member scrutiny through regular

focusing on the areas of greatest risk.
Detailed testing of revenue transactions
Analytical procedures on income streams.
Assurance procedure
Established budget setting process including
Audit risk of material misstatement in financial statements
Audit Risk
14
In this section we identify a range of risks facing Mugdock Country Park, the related source of assurance received and the audit work we
propose to undertake to secure additional assurance. The management of risk is the responsibility of the Joint Management Committee and its
officers, with the auditor’s role being to review the arrangements put in place by management. Planned audit work, therefore, will not
necessarily address all residual risks.
We undertake a risk-based audit whereby we focus on those areas where we have identified a risk of material misstatement in the accounts.
This section shows how our audit approach focuses on the risks we have identified through our planning procedures. ISA 315 Identifying and
assessing the risks of material misstatement through understanding the entity and its environment defines a significant risk as “an identified and
assessed risk of material misstatement that, in the auditor’s judgement, requires special audit consideration.”
Appendix II: Significant audit risks
key roles have not been identified and filled.
structure for the Park represents a risk that
The absence of an approved organisational
Organisational Structure
Agreement has not been agreed.
remains uncertain while a formal Minute of
The ongoing management of the Park
Expiration of Minute of Agreement


Page 93
will be reported to Council once completed.
budget a review of structures is ongoing and
2014 re savings proposals within the Park’s
Following the decision of Council in November


Agreement and this will be concluded by the
summer recess.

Work is ongoing to revise the Minute of
Audit risk from wider responsibilities under Audit Scotland’s Code of Audit Practice
whistleblowing, probity and codes of conduct.
Established protocols in respect of

effectively.
Ongoing review of authorised signatories.

that otherwise appear to be operating
in preparation of Annual Accounts.
Compliance with Accounting Code of Practice
financial statements by overriding controls
accounting records and prepare fraudulent
of management’s ability to manipulate


variance analysis.
unique position to perpetrate fraud because

Budget monitoring controls and detailed

As stated in ISA 240, management is in a

Established set of Financial Regulations.
committee papers and minutes.
Monitor developments through review of
Engage in discussions with key officers.
Monitor developments throughout the audit.
outside the normal course of business.
Evaluating significant transactions that are
Review of accounting estimates for bias.
Detailed testing of journal entries.
Assurance procedure

Source of assurance
Management override of controls
Audit Risk
15
Committee.
required from the Joint Management
likelihood that additional funding will be
course to exceed budget, increasing the
Actual costs for utilities and publicity are on
Budget profiling
Committee.
provided by the Joint Management
and requires additional funding to be
risk to the ongoing operations of the Park,
The increasing budget deficit represents a
Local Authority Funding
Joint Management Committee to cover costs.
or place additional financial burden on the
impact on the ongoing operation of service,
generate external income may negatively
Limitations in the ability of the Park to
Financial Pressures
Audit Risk



recurring pressure.
Page 94
change in supplier is not anticipated as being a
pressure in utilities in 2013-14 as a result of a
manage to allocations whilst the one off
Publicity budget has been monitored in year to
other income sources.
financial pressures and seeks to maximise
operating model which reflects the current
however will seek to develop a sustainable
Both Councils remain committed to the park
income streams and specific project income.
activities, as well as consideration of other
areas of income growth from existing and new
external consultants will include identified
based on engagement with stakeholders and
Development of new business plan for the park
Source of assurance




financial statements at year end.
Assess budget performance through testing of
Review as part of 2014/15 audit work.
Assurance procedure
16
operating model for the Park.
consider a more effective and efficient
levels of expenditure and may have to
authorities may be unable to fund higher
from constituent authorities. Constituent
year end with additional funding required
publicity will result in a budget deficit at the
Current spending levels in utilities and
Constituent Authority Contributions
Audit Risk

Page 95
other income sources.
financial pressures and seeks to maximise
operating model which reflects the current
however will seek to develop a sustainable
Both Councils remain committed to the park
Source of assurance

Assurance procedure
17
Page 96
Page 97
September 2015
Annual audit report to
Members and the
Controller of Audit
Mugdock Country
Park Joint
Management
Committee
APPENDIX 2
Page 98
This report will be published on our website after it has been considered by the council. The
information in this report may be used for the Accounts Commission’s annual overview report on
local authority audits published on its website and presented to the Local Government and
Regeneration Committee of the Scottish Parliament.
This report has been prepared for the use of Mugdock Country Park Joint Management Committee
and no responsibility to any member or officer in their individual capacity or any third party is
accepted.
The Accounts Commission has appointed Elaine Boyd as the external auditor of Mugdock Country
Park Joint Management Committee (“the Park”) for the period 2011/12 to 2015/16.
Audit Scotland is a statutory body which provides audit services to the Accounts Commission and
the Auditor General. (www.audit-scotland.gov.uk)
The Accounts Commission is a statutory body which appoints external auditors to Scottish local
government bodies. (www.audit-scotland.gov.uk/about/ac)
Website: www.audit-scotland.gov.uk
Telephone: 0131 625 1500
4th Floor South Suite
Glasgow
G2 1BT
Ray Buist, Trainee Auditor
[email protected]
[email protected]
Karen Cotterell, Senior Auditor
Blyth Deans, Senior Auditor
[email protected]
Elaine Boyd, Senior Audit Manager
[email protected]
Key contacts
Appendix III - Summary of national report 2014/15 .......................... 23
Appendix IV - Action Plan .................................................................. 24
Financial management and sustainability........................................ 11
Governance and transparency.......................................................... 14
Page 3
Appendix II - Summary of local audit reports 2014/15 ..................... 22
Audit of the 2014/15 financial statements .......................................... 6
Page 99
Appendix I – Significant audit risks .................................................. 17
Introduction .......................................................................................... 5
Best Value ........................................................................................... 16
Key messages ...................................................................................... 4
Contents
Contents
Page 4
Outlook
Governance
and
transparency
Financial
management
and
sustainability
Audit of
financial
statements
Key messages
Key messages
The Park reported an underspend against budget of £65,952 for 2014/15.
Overspend noted against utilities budget at year end of £16,145. Publicity also overspent by
£3,300.
An updated Minute of Agreement between the constituent authorities is required to confirm
funding arrangements and to ensure the financial sustainability of the Park.
The Park continues to utilise the financial systems of East Dunbartonshire Council.
Improvements could be made to transparency by making committee papers and minutes publicly
available on the Park or Council websites.
No specific internal audit work was carried out on the transactions of the Park in 2014/15.
The outlook for public spending for the period 2015/16 to 2016/17 remains very challenging.
The Park will continue to face financial constraints which may increase the pressure on them to
deliver their statutory duties and meet established performance targets. The Park will again
need to be prepared to face the challenging financial environment ahead.







Quality control improvements are required in the preparation of financial statements and
supporting working papers.

Page 100
Unqualified auditor's report on the 2014/15 financial statements.

We have included in this report only those matters that have come
to our attention as a result of our normal audit procedures;
consequently, our comments should not be regarded as a
comprehensive record of all deficiencies that may exist or
improvements that could be made.
7.
Page 5
The cooperation and assistance afforded to the audit team during
the course of the audit is gratefully acknowledged.
Appendix IV is an action plan setting out our recommendations to
address the high level risks we have identified during the course of
the audit. Officers have considered the issues and agreed to take
the specific steps in the column headed "Management
action/response". We recognise that not all risks can be eliminated
or even minimised. What is important is that Mugdock Country Park
Joint Management Committee understands its risks and has
arrangements in place to manage these risks. The Park and Joint
Management Committee members should ensure that they are
satisfied with proposed action and have a mechanism in place to
assess progress and monitor outcomes.
6.
8.
A number of reports, both local and national, have been issued by
Audit Scotland during the course of the year. These reports,
summarised at appendices II and III, include recommendations for
improvements.
5.
Page 101
An audit of financial statements is not designed to identify all
matters that may be relevant to those charged with governance. It is
the auditor's responsibility to form and express an opinion on the
financial statements; this does not relieve management of their
responsibility for the preparation of financial statements which give a
true and fair view.
ensuring that the financial position is soundly based.

4.
putting in place proper arrangements for the conduct of its
affairs

Our responsibility, as the external auditor of the Mugdock Country
Park Joint Management Committee, is to undertake our audit in
accordance with International Standards on Auditing, the principles
contained in the Code of Audit Practice issued by Audit Scotland in
May 2011 and the ethical standards issued by the Auditing
Practices Board.
implementing appropriate internal control systems

3.
preparing financial statements which give a true and fair view
The management of the Park is responsible for:
2.

This report is a summary of our findings arising from the 2014/15
audit of Mugdock Country Park Joint Management Committee. The
report is divided into sections which reflect our public sector audit
model.
1.
Introduction
Introduction
The financial statements of the Park have been prepared on the going concern basis. Action is
required to formalise an updated Minute of Agreement between the constituent authorities to ensure
the future operation and financial sustainability of the Park.
We review and report on other information published with the financial statements, including the
management commentary, annual governance statement and the remuneration report. We have
nothing to report in respect of these statements.


As part of the requirement to provide full and fair disclosure of
matters relating to our independence, we can confirm that we have
not undertaken non-audit related services. The 2014/15 agreed fee
for the audit was set out in the Annual Audit Plan and this remains
unchanged.
The concept of audit risk is of central importance to our audit
approach. During the planning stage of our audit we identified a
11.
12.
Information on the integrity and objectivity of the appointed auditor
and audit staff, and the nature and scope of the audit, were outlined
in our Annual Audit Plan issued to management on 23 March 2015.
10.
Page 102
We received the unaudited financial statements on 8 June 2015, in
accordance with the agreed timetable. Although working papers
were also provided, these were not subject to a suitable quality
control process and a number of errors were identified. This had an
adverse impact on audit progress, with additional work required by
the audit team as a result. East Dunbartonshire Council staff
provided support to the audit team which assisted the delivery of the
audit to deadline.
Page 6
9.
Overview of the scope of the audit of the financial
statements
We have completed our audit and issued an unqualified independent auditor’s report.

Submission of financial statements for audit
Other information
Going concern
Audit opinion
Audit of the 2014/15 financial statements
Our audit involved obtaining evidence about the amounts and
disclosures in the financial statements sufficient to give reasonable
assurance that the financial statements are free from material
misstatement, whether caused by fraud or error.
On receipt of the financial statements and following completion of
audit testing we reviewed our materiality levels and concluded that
our original calculation remained appropriate.
17.
A number of presentational and monetary adjustments were
identified within the financial statements during the course of our
audit. These were discussed with relevant officers who agreed to
amend the unaudited financial statements.
19.
20.
Page 7
International Standard on Auditing 260 requires us to communicate
to you significant findings from the audit, including:
Significant findings from the audit
All misstatements identified during the audit, which exceeded our
misstatement threshold, have been amended in the financial
statements.
18.
Evaluation of misstatements
We summarised our approach to materiality in our Annual Audit
Plan. Based on our knowledge and understanding of Mugdock
Country Park Joint Management Committee we set our planning
materiality for 2014/15 at £4,900 (1% of gross expenditure). We
report all misstatements greater than £200. Performance materiality
was calculated at £3,900, to reduce to an acceptable level the
probability of uncorrected and undetected audit differences
exceeding our planning materiality level.
16.
Page 103
We consider materiality and its relationship with audit risk when
planning the nature, timing and extent of our audit and conducting
our audit programme. Specifically with regard to the financial
statements, we assess the materiality of uncorrected
misstatements, both individually and collectively.
15.
Materiality can be defined as the maximum amount by which
auditors believe the financial statements could be misstated and still
not be expected to affect the decisions of users of financial
statements. A misstatement or omission, which would not normally
be regarded as material by amount, may be important for other
reasons (for example, an item contrary to law).
14.
Materiality
13.
number of key audit risks which involved the highest level of
judgement and impact on the financial statements and consequently
had the greatest effect on the audit strategy, resources and effort.
We set out in our Annual Audit Plan the audit work we proposed to
undertake to secure appropriate levels of assurance. Appendix I
sets out the significant audit risks identified during the course of the
audit and how we addressed each risk in arriving at our opinion on
the financial statements.
Significant matters arising from the audit that were discussed, or
subject to correspondence with management.

Page 8
The Minute of Agreement between East Dunbartonshire Council and
Stirling Council expired in March 2014. The Management
Commentary within the annual accounts states that there is an
agreement in place between the councils which splits the
Administrative and Funding Arrangements on an 87.5%:12.5% basis.
However, in the absence of a formalised Minute of Agreement, there
is a risk that the Park may not receive the required level of funding in
order to continue providing essential services.
Minute of Agreement
Issue
Other matters which in the auditor's professional judgment, are
significant to the oversight of the financial reporting process.

During the course of the audit we identified the following significant
issues that, in our view, require to be communicated to you.
Written representations requested by the auditor.

Directors from East Dunbartonshire Council and Stirling Council met in
July 2015 to discuss this issue, and a further meeting will take place in
September/October 2015 to agree the percentage split. Anticipated this
will be concluded by December 2015.
Resolution
21.
Page 104
Significant difficulties encountered during the audit.

Significant findings from the audit
The auditor’s views about significant qualitative aspects of the
entity’s accounting practices, including accounting policies,
accounting estimates and financial statement disclosures.

Audit testing of post year end payments identified that all items in the
sample had been accounted for in the incorrect financial year. Each
invoice in the sample related to 2014/15 but had been accounted for
in 2015/16. An adjustment was required to accrue these invoices into
2014/15. There is a risk that this incorrect accounting treatment has
been applied across all post year end invoices.
Invoices accounted for in incorrect financial year
Internal Audit have not carried out any specific work on the Park’s
transactions during the year. Although reference is made to the work
carried out by Internal Audit on East Dunbartonshire Council’s
systems within the Management Commentary, this does not
guarantee that those transactions specific to the Park have received
suitable coverage. It is not therefore possible to take specific
assurance from this work.
Internal Audit coverage
Issue
Page 105
Page 9
In 2014/15, the council undertook to achieve an earlier closure for East
Dunbartonshire Council’s Accounts, including Mugdock. This was
successfully achieved, with unaudited Accounts being available in early
June 2015. This resulted in deadlines being set for the accrual of invoices
in early April, and the majority of invoices being picked up through this
process. Although the Finance team spent some time later in the process
reviewing accruals, materiality levels meant that the focus was on
significant sums. Although a number of Mugdock invoices failed to be
accrued, the total sum was only around £1.5k, and therefore would be well
below any materiality thresholds. However, the Finance team will ensure
that 2015/16 process has low threshold for Mugdock invoices.
Audit Scotland have carried out transactional testing on key council
systems, reporting this through their annual systems report. Internal audit
testing has focused on systems with work being initiated within the service
to look at the management of income. It is intended that this will cover key
financial areas. This work was deferred in the 2014/15 audit plan whilst an
operational service review was undertaken, however, work is now being
progressed. Internal auditors did not attend the stock count at Mugdock
as this was deemed to be immaterial (around £800), although we were
advised that representatives from Audit Scotland were due to attend.
Resolution
Page 10
The shop within the visitor centre at the Park was closed at the year
end. As at 16 July 2015, the shop remained closed awaiting Building
Control sign off prior to re-opening. There is therefore a risk that the
Park are not maximising revenue potential during the busy summer
months.
Shop closure
The unaudited accounts included a Balance Sheet that did not
balance. A balance of £1 was disclosed for Total Assets less Current
Liabilities. Although this only required a small presentational
adjustment, it is clear that such an error should have been picked up
prior to submission for audit.
Balance sheet in unaudited accounts did not balance
Testing identified that there was a misposting relating to the year end
accrued income journal. Following an incorrect posting, the
adjustment was posted the wrong way round resulting in a total
variance on the receivables balance of £23,274. This indicates a
weakness in control over journal entry processing and is consistent
with findings included in the East Dunbartonshire Council Internal
Controls Report for 2014/15.
Misposting of year end accrued income journal
Issue
Page 106
Although the shop has been closed, the former premises has been leased
out to a Cycle Hire company. This arrangement will increase the rental
income to the park.
This was the result of minor rounding error, but agree that this should have
been picked up prior to submission to audit. Will ensure there is quality
control process built into 2015/16 Accounts.
Journal processing is being reviewed by the Finance team, following the
findings of the Internal Controls report. Revised process will be introduced
during 2015/16.
Resolution
The Park sets an annual budget to meet its service and other
commitments for the forthcoming financial year. Regular monitoring
of expenditure and income against agreed budgets is central to
effective financial management.
23.
The Park’s balance sheet as at 31 March 2015 reflects net assets of
£0. However, this includes a temporary advance from East
Dunbartonshire Council of £746. This reflects the net position of
26.
Net revenue expenditure to be met by constituent authorities in
2014/15 was £50,115 lower than in the previous year.
current assets and liabilities at the year end and represents a cash
inflow position.
29.
28.
financial regulations are comprehensive, current and promoted
within the Park
reports monitoring performance against budgets are accurate
and provided regularly to budget holders
monitoring reports do not just contain financial data but are
linked to information about performance
members provide a good level of challenge and question budget
holders on significant variances.




Page 11
We assessed the role and status of the proper officer against
CIPFA’s “Statement on the role of the Chief Financial Officer in
Local Government” and concluded that the Park complies with the
statement’s five principles.
the Treasurer has sufficient status to be able to deliver good
financial management

As auditors, we need to consider whether the Park have established
adequate financial management arrangements. We do this by
considering a number of factors, including whether:
Financial management arrangements
27.
Page 107
The Park has also experienced a significant decrease in income
levels during 2014/15. This is explained by a decrease in the
number of planned events taking place at the Park, as well as the
property recharge being lower than anticipated.
25.
Overall the Park reported an underspend against budget of £65,952.
To achieve this, the Park were able to manage spend in areas such
as operating costs. However, it was noted that utilities costs have
exceeded budget by £16,145. A £3,300 overspend was also noted
against the publicity budget.
24.
Financial outcomes
In this section we comment on the Park’s financial outcomes and
assess the financial management arrangements.
22.
Financial management
Financial management and sustainability
As auditors we attend a number of committee meetings each year.
Members provide an adequate level of challenge and question
budget holders on significant variances and service performance
issues.
We have concluded that the Park’s financial management
arrangements are broadly satisfactory. However, there are some
areas where improvements could be made to enhance existing
arrangements. Whilst overall financial management is broadly
satisfactory, there remains an issue with budgets not reflecting
actual outturn. Action should be taken to ensure that appropriate
Page 12
33.
Conclusion on financial management
32.
Financial monitoring reports are submitted to the Joint Management
Committee on a quarterly basis. However, although most variances
are explained in terms of underlying service delivery there remains
areas where explanations are absent or unclear. Furthermore,
action is not always taken to address areas of projected adverse
variance throughout the year. There is a requirement for the service
to work in conjunction with Finance to construct meaningful budgets
that monitor current service delivery.
31.
budgets are set in order to minimise the potential for significant over
or underspends.
long term financial pressures are understood and planned for
investment in services and assets is effective.


36.
The Park set its 2015/16 budget in March 2015. The 2015/16
budget was set at £328,137 and reflects the budget reduction
process which was reported to the Joint Management Committee on
16 December 2014.
Action plan 2
Effective long-term financial planning, asset management and
workforce planning are crucial to sustainability. It is also vital that
the Park finalise an updated Minute of Agreement between the
constituent authorities. Without this, there is a significant risk that
essential funding may not be provided and the longer term financial
sustainability of the Park cannot be confirmed. This issue was also
reported in 2013/14. It is disappointing to note that progress since
then has been limited.
spending is being balanced with income in the short term

Financial sustainability means that the Park has the capacity to
meet the current and future needs of its users. In assessing financial
sustainability we are concerned with whether:
Financial planning
35.
34.
Financial sustainability
Page 108
Action plan 1
The Park is covered by East Dunbartonshire Council’s financial
regulations. We concluded that these are comprehensive and
current. The council’s financial regulations are available on the
council’s website.
30.
Page 109
Looking ahead, it is clear that the outlook for public spending for the
period 2015/16 to 2016/17 remains very challenging. The Park will
continue to face financial constraints which may increase the
pressure on them to deliver their statutory duties and meet
established performance targets. The Park will again need to be
prepared to face the challenging financial environment ahead.
Decisions must be based on a clear understanding of the current
financial position and the longer-term implications of decisions on
services and finances.
37.
Outlook
Page 13
Citizens should be able to hold the Park to account about the
services it provides. Transparency means that citizens have access
to understandable, relevant and timely information about how the
Park is taking decisions and how it is using its resources. Overall
we concluded that the Park is open and transparent although there
are some areas where practices could be improved.
39.
Financial transactions are processed through East Dunbartonshire
Council’s financial systems. The Annual Governance Statement for
the year 2014/15, signed by the Treasurer, outlines these
arrangements. It is therefore the responsibility of the Council’s
management to maintain adequate financial systems and
associated internal controls. The Governance Statement concludes
that the council has an adequate system of internal financial
controls with a number of weaknesses identified.
Internal audit is an important element of the East Dunbartonshire
Council governance structure. Our review established that the work
of internal audit is of an adequate quality allowing us to place
reliance in a number of areas. However, no specific work on the
Park was carried out. As a result, assurances could not be taken in
relation to these transactions.
43.
Internal audit provides members and management with independent
assurance on risk management, internal control and corporate
governance processes. We are required by international auditing
standards to make an assessment of internal audit to determine the
extent to which we can place reliance on its work. To avoid
duplication, we place reliance on internal audit work where possible.
42.
Internal audit
41.
Page 110
As part of our audit we reviewed the high level controls in a number
of systems fundamental to the preparation of the financial
statements. Our objective was to obtain evidence to support our
opinion on the Park’s financial statements.
Page 14
40.
Internal control
Members and management of the Park’s Joint Management
Committee are responsible for establishing arrangements to ensure
that its business is conducted in accordance with the law and proper
standards, that public money is safeguarded and for monitoring the
adequacy and effectiveness of these arrangements. We concluded
that the Park has effective overarching and supporting governance
arrangements which provide an appropriate framework for
organisational decision making.
38.
Governance and
transparency
Governance and transparency
In our Annual Audit Plan we highlighted the responsibility audited
bodies have for establishing arrangements to prevent and detect
fraud and other irregularities. In our opinion the overall
arrangements for the prevention of fraud within the Park are
satisfactory, although it should be noted that no system can
eliminate the risk of fraud entirely.
Audited bodies are responsible for ensuring that their affairs are
managed in accordance with proper standards of conduct and have
proper arrangements in place for implementing and monitoring
compliance with standards and codes of conduct, standing orders
and instructions. Auditors consider whether bodies have adequate
arrangements in place. No issues have been identified by us for
inclusion in this report.
Papers and corporate documents are available online and there
is only limited use of taking papers in private

48.
47.
Page 111
Meetings are held in public

When assessing transparency we consider if:
46.
Transparency
45.
Arrangements for maintaining standards of
conduct and the prevention and detection of
corruption
44.
Arrangements for the prevention and detection of
fraud
Financial statements are clearly presented and budget
monitoring papers are concise and clear
Page 15
The financial statements are clearly presented and reflect the
budget monitoring papers presented to committee throughout the
year. However, improvements could be made in terms of the quality
of variance analysis included as part of these monitoring reports in
order to ensure appropriate action is taken to address projected
adverse variances.
Action Plan 3
Meetings of the Park’s Joint Management Committee are held in
public but papers and minutes are not available from the website.
The website should also publish information on corporate policies,
targets and performance. However, no such information is included.

Best Value
Best value is a key factor to consider when planning policies,
programmes and projects and when taking any spending decisions.
The Park should have systems and processes to ensure that it can
demonstrate that it is delivering best value by assessing and
reporting on the economy, efficiency, effectiveness and equality in
service provision.
The number of visitors to the Park is monitored on a monthly basis
and presented to the Joint Management Committee as part of the
General Progress Report. The total number of visitors for 2014/15
was calculated to be 628,620. This was an increase of 24,917 on
the total recorded in 2013/14.
51.
The Park follows the Equalities Policy in place at East
Dunbartonshire Council. A report was published in April 2015 in
accordance with the direction as set out in the Act.
54.
55.
We confirm the financial sustainability of the Park on the basis of its
financial position. However, the operation of the Park is dependent
on Local Authority funding. As their funds are projected to decrease
in the next few years this may have a negative impact on funding
available to the Park. It is important that the Park secures funding to
support service needs and monitors this closely against
expenditure. As local government bodies are facing a funding
environment which is subject to sustained pressure to deliver more
with less this may also impact on funding and service delivery.
Outlook
The Equality Act 2010 introduced a new public sector ‘general duty’
which encourages equality to be mainstreamed into public bodies’
core work. The Act requires that by no later than 30 April 2015 and
every two years thereafter, public bodies must publish a report on
the progress made to achieve the quality of outcomes it has set.
53.
Equalities
Page 112
Audit Scotland carries out a national performance audit programme
on behalf of the Accounts Commission and the Auditor General for
Scotland. The reports issued in 2014/15 are outlined in appendix III.
Page 16
52.
National performance audit reports
Audited bodies have a specific responsibility to ensure that
arrangements have been made to secure Best Value. Auditors of
local government bodies also have a responsibility to review and
report on the arrangements that specified audited bodies have
made to prepare and publish performance information in
accordance with directions issued by the Accounts Commission.
50.
Performance management
49.
Best Value
Best Value
The extent and complexity of income means there is an inherent
risk of fraud in accordance with ISA240.
East Dunbartonshire Council and Stirling Council are the
constituent authorities of the Park. Each body receives a
significant amount of income in addition to SG funding.
ISA 240 presumes an inherent risk of fraud where income
streams are significant.
Risk of material misstatement due to fraud in revenue
recognition
Risk of material misstatement
Audit Risk
Detailed testing of journal entries
Review of accounting estimates
Analytical review of income streams to
confirm completeness and identify any
unusual transactions or variations in
income.
Substantive testing of income
transactions to confirm occurrence and
accuracy of amounts in the financial
statements.




Page 113
Evaluation of accounting policies for
income and expenditure

Assurance procedure
Page 17
No issues have arisen as part of
our audit work that would
indicate fraud in revenue
recognition.
Results and conclusions
The table below sets out the financial statement audit risks we identified during the course of the audit and how we addressed each risk in
arriving at our opinion on the financial statements.
Appendix I – Significant audit risks
Detailed testing of journal entries
Review of accounting estimates
Evaluating significant transactions that
are outside the normal course of business



Risk of management override of control
Page 18
The Park are currently operating without an approved
organisational structure. The absence of an approved
organisational structure for the Park represents a risk that key
roles have not been identified and filled.
Organisational Structure

Page 114
A review of committee papers
and minutes was carried out.
The organisational structure
was approved at the East
Dunbartonshire Council meeting
on 25 June 2015.
Updates received from officers
indicate that a formal Minute of
Agreement has yet to be
agreed. As a result, the risk
and uncertainty remain.
No issues have arisen as part
of our audit work that would
indicate management
override of controls affecting
the outturn or year-end
position.
Engage in discussions with key officers.

The Park’s Minute of Agreement between the constituent
authorities expired on 31 March 2014.
The ongoing management of the Park remains uncertain while a
formal Minute of Agreement has not been agreed.
Monitor developments throughout the
audit.

Expiration of Minute of Agreement
Risks identified from the auditor’s wider responsibility under the Code of Audit Practice
Management’s ability to manipulate accounting records and
prepare fraudulent or biased financial statements by overriding
controls that otherwise appear to be operating effectively.
ISA 240 requires that audit work is planned to consider the risk
of fraud, which is presumed to be a significant risk in any audit.
Assurance procedure
Audit Risk
The increasing budget deficit represents a risk to the ongoing
operations of the Park, and requires additional funding to be
provided by the Joint Management Committee.
Local Authority Funding
Limitations in the ability of the Park to generate external income
may negatively impact on the ongoing operation of service or
place additional financial burden on the Joint Management
Committee to cover costs.


Financial Pressures
Page 115
Review as part of 2014/15 audit work.
Assurance procedure
Audit Risk
Page 19
No issues noted as part of
2014/15 audit. Amount to be
met by constituent authorities
has reduced from the prior year.
No issues noted as part of
2014/15 audit. Although income
has reduced from 2013/14
levels, this has been offset by a
significant reduction in
expenditure.
Page 20
A review of committee papers
highlighted further weaknesses
in budget profiling and
monitoring. Finance reports
highlighted large overspends in
Utilities and Trading & Events at
the year end. A large
underspend against budget for
Employee Costs was also
recorded but this relates to a
reduction in costs associated
with exit packages as opposed
to a reduction in employee
costs. The employee costs
budget was not suitably
adjusted to reflect this.
Assess budget performance through
testing of financial statements at year
end.

Page 116

Budget profiling
Actual costs for utilities and publicity are on course to exceed
budget, increasing the likelihood that additional funding will be
required from the Joint Management Committee.
Assurance procedure
Audit Risk
Current spending levels in utilities and publicity will result in a
budget deficit at the year end with additional funding required
from constituent authorities. Constituent authorities may be
unable to fund higher levels of expenditure and may have to
consider a more effective and efficient operating model for the
Park.

Constituent Authority Contributions
Page 117
Assurance procedure
Audit Risk
Page 21
A significant underspend
against employee costs has
resulted in lower than expected
constituent authority
contributions. However, as
noted above, this underspend is
actually as a result of fewer exit
packages during the year and a
budget that did not reflect this.
In real terms, employee costs
have actually risen.
Page 22
January
2015
February
2015
March 2015
2014/15 Financial Statements.
April 2015
May 2015
Annual Audit Plan: Planned external audit work for the
August
2015
September
2015
October
2015
November
2015
December
2015
2014/15 financial statements
Independent auditors’ report on the
July 2015
Page 118
June 2015
report.
statements prior to the formal signing of the independent auditor’s
significant matters arising from the audit of the financial
draws to the attention of those charged with governance
Audit of Mugdock Country Park Joint Management Committee and
governance. Summarises our main findings from the 2014/15
Annual Audit Report: Annual report to those charged with
Summary of Mugdock Country Park Joint Management Committee local audit reports 2014/15
Appendix II
Appendix II
June 2014
July 2014
August
2014
September
2014
October
2014
financial plans.
services standards and affordability; and, the sustainability of
need to take a longer-term view on: options available for services;
this they need good-quality and timely financial information. They
role in ensuring that approved budgets are used to best effect. To do
money is used and what is achieved. Councillors have an important
budgets and hold people in their organisations to account for how the
challenges – Leaders and managers must produce balanced
December
2014
Page 119
November
2014
other debt on their finances.
implications of borrowing and
to set out the longer term
requirements but need to do more
Councils are meeting professional
management in councils -
Borrowing and treasury
Scotland’s public finances - a follow up: Progress in meeting the
May 2014
communities.
address inequalities within specific
targeted priorities for improvement that will
should be used to help set relevant,
they are expected to achieved. Local data
Partnerships are still not clear about what
into action – Many Community Planning
Community planning: Turning ambition
Summary of Audit Scotland national reports 2013/14
Appendix III
January
2015
February
2015
March
2015
May
2015
June
2015
Value.
finances and achieving Best
making in managing their
the progress councils are
high level, independent view on
government in Scotland – A
An overview of local
April
2015
single complete picture of the devolved public sector’s finances.
Page 23
provide a sound base for financial reporting and scrutiny, there is no
that while the audited accounts of public bodies across Scotland
reporting for accountability and decision-making. The report also notes
importance of comprehensive, transparent and reliable financial
enhanced financial powers from April 2015. The report emphasises the
undergoing fundamental change. The Scottish Parliament will have
Commission the framework for Scotland’s public finances is
Update on developing financial reporting - Following the Smith
Appendix III
Page 24
12/31
1
Page/para
No.
Budget variances should be analysed in detail to
allow appropriate action to be taken to address
areas of projected adverse variance.
Recommendation
There is a risk that significant under and
overspends will continue if budget monitoring
arrangements are not improved.
Risk
Financial monitoring reports are submitted to the
Joint Management Committee on a quarterly basis.
Although most variances are explained in terms of
underlying service delivery, action is not always
taken to address areas of projected adverse
variance throughout the year. There is a
requirement for the service to work in conjunction
with Finance to construct meaningful budgets that
monitor current service delivery.
Budget monitoring
Issue/risk/Recommendation
Action plan
Appendix IV
Appendix IV
Page 120
Mary Coulshed/Gail
Morrison
Responsible officer
September
2015
Target date
Finance will take responsibility for
preparing the financial report to the
Joint Committee, and will update the
appendix to make this more relevant
to information received by officers on
a monthly basis.
Monthly meetings take place to
monitor spend and these will
continue. Adverse variances will be
more closely monitored and
explained.
Management action/response
The Park’s Minute of Agreement between East
Dunbartonshire Council and Stirling Council
expired on 31 March 2014. This was also
highlighted within the 2013/14 Annual Audit
Report. It is vital that the Park finalise an updated
Minute of Agreement between the constituent
authorities. Without this, there is a significant risk
that essential funding may not be provided and the
longer term financial sustainability of the Park
cannot be confirmed. It is disappointing to note
that little progress has been made on this issue.
12/35
An updated Minute of Agreement should be agreed
to confirm the funding arrangements for the Park
over the short, medium and long term.
Recommendation
There is a risk that the Park will become
unsustainable.
Risk
Minute of Agreement
2
Page/para
No.
Page 121
A meeting took place between
Thomas Glen from EDC and Robert
Steenson of Stirling Council in July
2015 to discuss Mugdock Park. The
Minute of Agreement and Variation to
the Minute was central to discussions
and all points were agreed, with a
further meeting to be scheduled to
confirm the percentage split of
funding for the park.
Mary Coulshed
Responsible officer
Page 25
December
2015
Target date
Appendix IV
Page 26
Meetings of the Park’s Joint Management
Committee are held in public but papers and
minutes are not readily available from the website.
The website should also publish information on
corporate policies, targets and performance.
However, no such information is included.
15/47
Committee papers and minutes should be made
available on the Park or council websites.
Recommendation
There is a risk that the public do not have the
required level of access to committee discussions
and decisions.
Risk
Transparency of committee meetings
3
Page/para
No.
Appendix IV
Page 122
Mary Coulshed
Responsible officer
September
2015
Target date
Agreed that these should be on
website, and this will be addressed.
APPENDIX 3
M ugdock
Country
Park
Joint Management
Committee
Annual Accounts
2014-15
Page 123
CONTENTS
Management Commentary ................................................................................................................................................... 1
Annual Governance Statement............................................................................................................................................. 4
Statement of Responsibilities for the Accounts .................................................................................................................... 7
Principal Financial Statements ............................................................................................................................................. 8
Movement in Reserves Statement .................................................................................................................................. 8
Comprehensive Income and Expenditure Statement ...................................................................................................... 8
Cash Flow Statement ...................................................................................................................................................... 8
Balance Sheet ................................................................................................................................................................. 9
Notes to Principal Financial Statements ............................................................................................................................. 10
Independent Auditor Report................................................................................................................................................ 12
Page 124
www.mugdock-country-park.org.uk
Management Commentary
A
Strategy & Objectives
Mugdock Country Park is one of Scotland’s leading Tourist Attractions, a Country Park maintaining Scotland’s
Natural Heritage. Also, offering a Countryside Ranger Service, it leads on outdoor learning & environmental activities
throughout East Dunbartonshire & South-West Stirling. Mugdock Country Park is working to develop a sustainable
operating model to reflect the current pressures of the park and maximise income sources.
B
Fair Review of Business
The Annual Accounts presents the financial position of Mugdock Country Park as at 31 March 2015.
The principal financial statements comprise: Movement in Reserves Statement, Comprehensive Income &
Expenditure Statement, Balance Sheet and Cash Flow Statement. Explanatory notes are also provided.
a) Management Committee
Chair:
Vice Chair:
Councillor Eric Gotts
Councillor Graham Lambie
Elected Members: Councillor Rhondda Geekie
Phone Number:
Stirling Council
Councillor Jim Gibbons
Councillor Maureen Henry
Councillor Vaughan Moody
Councillor Anne McNair
Councillor Corrie McChord
0300 123 4510
Stirling Council
b) Administrative and Funding Arrangements
The arrangements for Mugdock Country Park are conducted in accordance with the Minute of Agreement between
East Dunbartonshire Council and Stirling Council and accordingly the Park is financially supported on an 87½% - 12
½% basis by the respective authorities. In addition to the constituent authorities’ agreement to fund the Park’s
activities, there are a number of other bodies who provide funds to support the work of the park, including Mugdock
Trust, Scottish Natural Heritage, Historic Scotland, and Clan Graham Society. Project funding through organisations
such as the National Lottery, LEADER, or Central Scotland Green Network is also secured.
East Dunbartonshire Council is responsible for overseeing the administrative arrangements of Mugdock Country
Park Joint Management Committee, for all financial arrangements for the Park and, as permanent employer of the
staff at Mugdock County Park, is liable for any IAS19 (International Accounting Standard 19: Employee Benefits)
commitments arising.
c) Financial Summary
The Comprehensive Income & Expenditure Statement on page 8 shows that net revenue expenditure to be met by
constituent authorities in 2014/15 was £50,115 less than in the previous year.
Decreased staffing costs and maintenance costs (slope remediation works were a one off in 2013/14) have been
partially offset by a lower yield from rental income from and recharges to park tenants.
The net cost of service for 2014/15 was lower than budget by £41,621, which has in turn reduced the cost to
Partners.
Page 125
1
2014/15
2014/15
Budget
Actual
Variation
£'000
£'000
£'000
Expenditure
559
493
(66)
Income
121
97
(24)
Net
438
396
(42)
Staffing costs have decreased as there have been no redundancy costs in 2014/15. In real terms, employee costs
were higher during the year due to the ongoing review and approval of a revised organisational structure. This
revised structure was approved in June 2015, and will be implemented during 15/16. Employee costs are expected
to reduce going forward. Maintenance costs have exceeded budget, however this was controlled by managing
spend in other areas, i.e. the operating budgets. Improvement works to the visitor centre, and a new booking
system resulted in additional one off costs of £0.016m in the year. It is hoped that this investment will contribute to
improved trading in future years. Income for the park has significantly decreased, due to a decrease in number of
planned events and the property recharge being lower than anticipated. These adverse variations have been
managed through control of spend in other areas.
Although the contribution from Stirling Council is set at 12.5%, there are a number of accounting costs which are not
part of the recharge eg holiday pay accrual (£1,949 in table below). This table clarifies the 2014/15 contribution from
Stirling Council.
2014/15
Adjust
2014/15
Chargeable
Expenditure
493,452
1,949
495,401
Income
96,944
0
96,944
Net
396,508
1,949
398,457
12.5%
49,807
less 13/14 Adjustment due to Remediation Works met in full by EDC
4,448
14/15 Final contribution
45,359
The Balance Sheet on page 9 shows that, as at the financial year end, there is a temporary advance from East
Dunbartonshire Council of £746. This reflects the net position of current assets and liabilities at the year end and
represents a net cash inflow position as at 31 March 2015.
The Cash Flow statement on page 8 summarises the external transactions associated with the Park on a cash basis.
d) Performance Information
The total number of park visitors for 2014/15 has been calculated at 628,620. This is an increase of some 24,917
on the total calculated for 2013/14, and reflects good weather conditions prevalent during the year and increased
attendance at events and targeting marketing.
C
Future Developments
In order to continue to attract high levels of footfall Mugdock offers events including nature & conservation, outdoor
activity, theatre and music. A new festival in the summer of 2015, MugStock, will take place over a weekend in
August and will aim to attract up to 2,000 visitors. An obstacle course aimed at 8-15 year olds, Ultim8 Warrior
Challenge, will be held in August.
The Astronomical Society of Glasgow is working with the park management to site an Observatory at Mugdock. The
Society will provide an educational programme throughout the year and link in with Countryside Ranger activity.
Page 126
2
D
Principal Risks & Uncertainties
The main risks to Mugdock Country Park are income realisation, financial pressures and the expiration Variation of
the Minute of Agreement between East Dunbartonshire Council and Stirling Council. A Risk Register has been
established for the park which is wide ranging and monitored on an on-going basis.
Work is underway to revise the Minute of Agreement between the partner authorities and this should be in place by
the summer. A new financial system is currently being developed to monitor income streams and this will lead to
more exact business planning in future years, with expenditure generating events being reviewed. Management
actions began during 2014/15 to look at all financial pressures and ensure that these are dealt with accordingly. This
work will continue throughout 2015/16.
Chairperson, Mugdock Country Park Joint management Committee
24 September 2015
Thomas Glen
Director, Development & Regeneration - Mugdock Country Park Joint Management Committee
24 September 2015
Ian Black CPFA
Treasurer, Mugdock Country Park Joint Management Committee
24 September 2015
Page 127
3
Annual Governance Statement
Annual Governance Statement 2014-15
1.
What we are responsible for
Mugdock Country Park is responsible for ensuring that its business is conducted in accordance with the law and
appropriate standards, that public money is safeguarded, properly accounted for and used in an economic, efficient
and effective way for Mugdock Country Park. The council has a statutory duty to make arrangements to secure best
value under the Local Government in Scotland Act 2003.
To meet our responsibility, we have put in place proper arrangements for overseeing what we do. These
arrangements form the basis of our governance framework which is intended to make sure that we do the right
things, in the right way, for the right people, in good time, and in a fair, open, honest and accountable way.
During the course of the financial year we have approved and introduced a Code of Corporate Governance. The
Code has been prepared in accordance with the CIPFA/SOLACE publication “Delivering Good Governance in Local
Government” and is aligned to its six constituent core principles of good governance. This statement explains how
East Dunbartonshire Council reviews the effectiveness of these arrangements and delivers good governance.
2.
The aim of the governance framework
The Council’s governance framework comprises the systems, processes, cultures and values through which
Mugdock Country Park is directed and controlled. It also describes the way it engages and plans with, accounts to
and provides leadership within the community. The framework allows us to monitor how we are achieving our long
term aims, and to consider whether our aims have helped us deliver appropriate services that are value for money.
The system of internal control is a significant part of that framework and is designed to manage risk to a reasonable
level. It cannot eliminate all risk of failure to meet the targets in our policies, aims and objectives and can therefore
only provide reasonable and not absolute assurance of effectiveness. The system of internal control is based on an
on-going process designed to identify and prioritise the risks to the achievement of East Dunbartonshire Council’s
policies, aims and objectives, to evaluate the likelihood of those risks being realised and the impact should they be
realised and to manage them efficiently, effectively and economically.
Governance arrangements have been in place throughout the year and up to the date of approval of the statement of
accounts. Following the agreement of the Code of Corporate Governance, arrangements were enhanced to include
a formal governance framework. The framework was developed by the Corporate Risk Team with evidence being
collated within the Council’s performance management system, Covalent, to enable on-going monitoring, review and
demonstrate compliance. The Council’s Audit & Risk Manager has reviewed the process throughout its
development to ensure that it meets the requirement of the Code and the CIPFA/SOLACE good practice.
3.
The governance framework
Some of the key features of the governance framework are set out in the following paragraphs.
Purpose, Outcomes & Vision
Mugdock’s purpose and outcomes form a consistent thread cascading from the vision of ‘working together to achieve
the best with the people of East Dunbartonshire’ through the Single Outcome Agreement to its strategic and local
outcomes and priorities. Within the Development & Regeneration directorate the key performance at Mugdock is
monitored and developed to meet agreed targets.
Common Purpose, Clear Functions and Roles
Mugdock provides a clear statement of roles and responsibilities through the Minute of Agreement with Stirling
Council which governs the period 1999 to 2049, and any subsequent Variation to the Minute.
Promoting Values
Mugdock promotes positive values and demonstrates good governance through upholding standards of conduct and
behaviour. This is done using East Dunbartonshire Council’s established code of conduct for both its employees
and Elected Members which is a written Statement of good practice and convention. The Statement aims to clarify
roles and responsibilities and to establish accepted behaviour and practices. It also aims to enhance and maintain
the integrity of local government and demands high standards of personal conduct.
Page 128
4
Informed & Informed Decision Making
Mugdock sets out its processes and controls to be vigorous and transparent about how decisions are taken and
listening and acting on the outcome of constructive scrutiny. This includes having good quality information, advice
and support to ensure that services are delivered effectively and are what the community wants. Mugdock has
developed a risk register which is updated on an on-going basis and is monitored by the Mugdock Joint
Management Committee.
Developing Capability & Capacity
Mugdock seeks to ensure that members and officers have the skills, knowledge, experience and resources they
need to perform well in their roles. This includes developing the capability of people with governance responsibilities
and evaluating their performance as individuals and as a group. Mugdock looks to encourage new talent for
membership of the authority so that best use can be made of individuals’ skills and resources in the balancing of
continuity of service alongside the need for service redesign.
Engaging with Local People & Stakeholders
Mugdock seeks to engage with stakeholders through developing effective partnerships and ensuring positive
relationships are in place. Mugdock management actively facilitates feedback from visitors and provides sufficient
opportunities to allow constructive input to the park. A Customer Consultation was carried out during 2014 which
had over 760 respondents and forms the basis of a 5 year strategy which is currently in draft form. This strategy,
once agreed, will inform the direction of the park over the coming years.
4.
Review of effectiveness
Mugdock has responsibility for conducting, at least annually, a review of the effectiveness of its governance
framework including the system of internal control. The review of effectiveness is informed by the work of the
Development & Regeneration Director within the Council who has responsibility for the development and
maintenance of the governance environment, the Audit & Risk Manager’s Annual Report, and also by comments
made by the external auditors and other review agencies and inspectorates.
During 2014/15, East Dunbartonshire Council continued to put in place appropriate management and reporting
arrangements to enable it to be satisfied that its approach to corporate governance is both appropriate and effective
in practice. Specifically, the Council’s governance arrangements have been reviewed against the requirements of
the CIPFA/SOLACE Framework. Whilst this process of review is co-ordinated corporately and approved by the
Corporate Management Team, Directors have a responsibility to ensure that their own governance arrangements
are adequate and operating effectively. In line with the CIPFA/SOLACE Framework, each Director is required to
make an annual statement confirming that this is the case. Such disclosures include those by the Director of
Development and Regeneration, being the chief officer responsible for the management of Mugdock Country Park,
as well as the Director of Finance and Shared Services in relation to, amongst others, the financial support provided
to the Park. For 2014/15, these Director disclosures do not highlight any significant governance issues that require
to be reported.
On the basis of Internal Audit work completed in 2014/15, East Dunbartonshire Council’s internal control procedures
were generally found to operate as intended with reasonable assurance being provided on the integrity of Council
controls. A number of recommendations have been made by the internal audit team to further improve controls with
action plans developed with management to address the risks identified.
The level of assurance provided by the Audit and Risk Team can never be absolute. This reflects the sample nature
of the work carried out, the relative scope and objectives of audit assignments and those explanations offered, and
evidence provided by officers. In addition, factors external to the audit process, including human error, collusion or
management overriding controls highlight the potential for systems highlighted as being satisfactory to become
exposed to risk or loss.
A number of national and local reports have been issued by East Dunbartonshire Council’s external auditors, Audit
Scotland, during the financial year and these have been evaluated as part of the internal audit opinion above. These
reports highlight the need for betterment in a number of key areas including financial controls relating to
reconciliations, authorised signatories, inventories and imprest certificates. Required improvements have been
agreed by Senior Officers with corresponding improvement actions plans being put in place with these being linked
to the transformation programme of activities where applicable. These financial controls are relied upon by Mugdock
Country Park, and therefore the improvement action plan is welcomed.
Page 129
5
5.
Significant Governance Issues
The system of governance (including the system of internal control) provides reasonable assurance that assets are
safeguarded; that transactions are authorised and properly recorded; that material errors or irregularities are either
prevented or would be detected within a timely period; and that significant risks impacting on the achievement of our
strategic priorities and outcomes have been mitigated. The review carried out in 2013/14 highlighted improvements
that could be implemented in some areas and these are contained within the Development & Regeneration
Directorate Improvement plan for 2014/15, which officers will continue to progress during 2015/16.
6.
Conclusion
We consider the governance and internal control environment operating during 2014/15 to provide reasonable and
objective assurance that significant risks impacting on the achievement of our principal strategic priorities and
outcomes will be identified and actions taken to avoid or mitigate their impact. A number of improvements are
proposed to further strengthen our governance arrangements and these are set out above. Implementing the action
plan is a priority and progress will be reported to the Mugdock Joint Management Committee. Systems are in place
for regular review and improvement of the governance and internal control environment. The Council will continue to
review its Corporate Governance arrangements and take any additional steps as are required to further enhance
these arrangements and will review their implementation and operation as part of the next annual review.
I confirm that the Council’s financial management arrangements conform to the governance requirements of the
CIPFA Statement on the Role of the Chief Financial Officer in Local Government (2010).
24 September 2015
Thomas Glen
Director, Development & Regeneration - Mugdock Country Park Joint Management Committee
24 September 2015
Page 130
6
Statement of Responsibilities for the Accounts
Statement of Responsibilities for the Accounts
The Joint Management Committee is responsible for:
•
making arrangement for the proper administration of its financial affairs and to ensure that an appropriate
Officer has the responsibility for the administration of those affairs. The Joint Management Committee has
appointed the Treasurer to that role.
•
managing its affairs to secure economic, efficient and effective use of resources and safeguard its assets
24 September 2015
The Treasurer is responsible for:
•
the preparation of the Authority’s Annual Accounts which, in terms of the CIPFA/LASAAC Code of Practice
on Local Authority Accounting in the United Kingdom, is required to present fairly the financial position of the
Joint Management Committee at the accounting date and its income and expenditure for the year ended 31
March 2015 and its income and expenditure for the year to that date;
•
selecting suitable accounting policies and applying them consistently;
•
making judgements and estimates that were reasonable and prudent;
•
complying with the Code of Practice;
•
keeping proper accounting records which are up to date; and
•
taking reasonable steps for the prevention and detection of fraud and other irregularities.
Ian Black CPFA
24 September 2015
Page 131
7
Principal Financial Statements
Movement in Reserves Statement
31 March 2014
£
31 March 2015
£
nil
nil
Balance as at 1 April
Surplus / (deficit) for the financial year
nil
nil
nil
Balance as at 31 March
nil
Comprehensive Income and Expenditure Statement
2013/14
2014/15
£
338,852
91,959
45,275
54,925
28,190
24,701
0
3,444
587,346
81,792
58,931
0
140,723
390,818
55,805
446,623
£
Expenditure
Employees
Maintenance
Utilities
Trading and Events
Operating
Publicity
Capital Funded from Revenue
External Audit Fees
Income
Rents and Recharges
Trading and Events
Donations
Amount to be met from Constituent Authorities
Stirling Council
0
318,406
41,639
34,396
43,668
20,447
13,300
15,630
5,966
493,452
44,586
47,358
5,000
96,944
351,149
45,359
396,508
Net Surplus or (Deficit) for the Year
0
Cash Flow Statement
2013/14
2014/15
£
343,244
245,254
588,498
(452,583)
(20,255)
(81,792)
(554,630)
£
Cash Outflows
Employee Costs
Other Operating Costs
Cash Inflows
Requisitions from Constituent Authorities
Received for Goods and Services
Other Operating Receipts
33,868
Net Cash Flow from Revenue Activities
Page 132
316,667
160,449
477,116
(383,323)
(87,018)
(37,950)
(508,291)
(31,175)
8
Balance Sheet
31 March 2014
£
40,237
6,639
0
46,876
14,955
31,921
46,876
31 March 2015
£
Current Assets
Receivables
Inventory
Temporary Advance to East Dunbartonshire Council
Current Liabilities
Payables
Temporary Advance from East Dunbartonshire Council
0
Total Assets less Current Liabilities
25,398
835
0
26,233
25,487
746
26,233
0
The audited accounts were issued on 24 September 2015.
I certify that this presents fairly the financial position of Mugdock Country Park Joint Management Committee at 31
March 2015 and its income and expenditure for the year ended 31 March 2015.
Ian Black CPFA
24 September 2015
Page 133
9
Notes to Principal Financial Statements
1. Accounting Policies
a) General Principles
The Annual Accounts summarise Mugdock Country Park Joint Management Committee’s transactions for the
2014/15 financial year, and its position at the year-end of 31 March 2015. The Local Authority Accounts (Scotland)
Regulations 2014 requires Annual Accounts to be prepared, and section 12 of the Local Government in Scotland Act
2003 requires these to be prepared in accordance with proper accounting practices. These practices primarily
comprise the Code of Practice on Local Authority Accounting in the United Kingdom 2014/15 (the Code) and the
Service Reporting Code of Practice 2014/15, supported by International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). In
cases where accounting practices and legislative requirements conflict, the latter will apply. This is in agreement
with the accounting concept of ‘primacy of legislative requirements’.
The accounts are designed to give a ‘true and fair view’ of the financial performance and position of Mugdock
Country Park Joint Management Committee for 2014/15. Comparative figures for 2013/14 are provided. The
accounting convention adopted in the Annual Accounts is principally historical cost.
The accounting concepts of ‘materiality’, ‘accruals’ and ‘going concern’ have been considered in the application of
accounting policies. The materiality concept means that information is shown where it is of such significance as to
justify its inclusion. The accruals concept means that financial activities are accounted for on an accruals basis in
the year that they take place, not simply when cash payments are made or received. The going concern concept is
based on the assumption that the functions of the Park will continue in operational existence for the foreseeable
future.
b) Employee Benefits
Post-Employment Benefits: Employees of the Park are members of The Local Government Superannuation
Scheme (LGPS) which is a defined benefit statutory scheme, operated by Strathclyde Pension Fund, and
administered by Glasgow City Council in accordance with the Local Government Pension Scheme (Scotland)
Regulations 1998. LGPS is accounted for as a defined benefits scheme.
Under the terms of the minute of agreement between East Dunbartonshire Council and Stirling Council, East
Dunbartonshire Council is the permanent employer of the staff of Mugdock Country Park and deals with all payments
related to the Local Government Superannuation Scheme. For that reason, revenue commitments and balance
sheet disclosures for the purposes of IAS19 are identified within the accounts for East Dunbartonshire Council rather
than those for the Park.
c) Long Term Assets
Title to the community assets of Mugdock Country Park rests with Stirling Council. However, under the revised
management agreement signed by the constituent authorities, which came into effect from 1st April 2008, East
Dunbartonshire Council has beneficial use of the fixed assets of Mugdock Country Park.
In addition, East
Dunbartonshire Council has a lease on these assets until 2049.
Accordingly, it has been considered appropriate that the Park’s fixed assets are consolidated into the accounts of the
Council. At 31 March 2015, the total net book value of the Park’s buildings & equipment was £553,548 and of
community assets was £2,180,000.
d) Inventories
Inventories are included in the Balance Sheet at the lower of cost and net realisable value. The cost of inventories
is assigned using the weighted average costing formula.
2. Pensions Commitment
The Council is the permanent employer of the staff of the Park, and deals with all payments related to the Local
Government Superannuation Scheme. Accordingly, revenue commitments and balance sheet disclosures for the
purposes of IAS19 are identified within the accounts for the Council rather than those for the Park.
Mugdock Country Park pensions contribution payments for 2014/15 were £42,748 (2013/14 £35,984).
3. Exit Packages
During 2014/15 no employees received exit packages as a result of voluntary redundancy.
Page 134
10
4. Shop Trading Account
st
During the year ended 31 March 2015, the Joint Management Committee continued to operate a shop in Mugdock
Country Park, selling souvenirs and other sundry items. However, this shop ceased trading in February 2015
contributing to the final loss for the full year, as shown below.
2013/14
£
£
15629
8,257
10,264
(6,639)
11,882
3,747
Sales
Inventory at the start of the year
Purchases
Less: Inventory at the end of the year
Cost of Goods Sold
Gross Profit / (Loss)
2014/15
£
£
11,574
6,639
10,624
835
16,428
(4,854)
5. Leasing Commitments
2013/14
2014/15
£
nil
nil
nil
Payable within One Year
Payable within Two to Five Years
Payable beyond Five Years
£
nil
nil
nil
6. Net Cash Flow from Revenue Activities
2013/14
£
£
8,257
6,639
(1,618)
7,521
40,237
32,716
17,725
14,955
2,770
33,868
Change in Inventory
Opening balance
Closing balance
Change in Receivables
Opening balance
Closing balance
Change in Payables
Opening balance
Closing balance
Net Cash Flow from Revenue Activities
2014/15
£
£
6,639
835
(5,804)
40,237
25,398
(14,839)
14,955
25,487
(10,532)
(31,175)
7. Temporary Advance (to)/from East Dunbartonshire Council
As at 31 March 2014
£
31,921
As at 31 March 2015
£
746
Page 135
Movement 14/15
£
(31,175)
11
Independent Auditor’s Report
Independent Auditor’s Report
Page 136
12
MUGDOCK PARK JOINT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE
AGENDA & ALL PAPERS
COUNCILLOR GOTTS
COUNCILLOR GEEKIE
COUNCILLOR GIBBONS
COUNCILLOR HENRY
COUNCILLOR MOODY
COUNCILLOR MCNAIR
1
1
1
1
1
1
STIRLING COUNCIL
COUNCILLOR LAMBIE
COUNCILLOR McCHORD
1
1
STIRLING COUNCIL OFFICIALS
COLIN MACKAY
1
SUBSTITUTES
COUNCILLOR BERRILL
COUNCILLOR BRISLEY
1
1
11
Mr. N. Everett, Scottish Natural Heritage, 2 Caspian House, 2 Mariner Court,
Clydebank Business Park, Clydebank, G81 2NR
J. Hutchison, Strathblanefield Community Council
P. Graves, Strathblanefield Community Council
I. McAllister, Milngavie Community Council
Mr. D Shenton, Scottish Wildlife Trust, 6 Ninians Rise, Kirkintilloch G66 3HU
Mr. C Castle, Mugdock Trust, 91 Finlay Rise, Fairways, Milngavie G62 6QL
E
E
E
E
1
1
EAST DUNBARTONSHIRE COUNCIL OFFICIALS
G. MacFarlane, Economic Development Manager
M. Coulshed, Team Leader, Mugdock Park
G. Morrison, Team Leader Finance
External Audit, Broomhill, Kirkintilloch
Committee Services Officer
1
1
1
1
1
AGENDA & NON PRIVATE PAPERS
Milngavie & Bearsden Herald
Newsdesk at The Herald, Glasgow
Stirling Observer
Scotsman
1
1
1
1
Total
=
2
5
4
__
22
__

MJMC papers 15 Sept 2015

Transcription

Similar documents

Food Safety

maryland division of financial regulation

Untitled - Caja Rural Granada

Z1000 LEAD AUDITOR 5 Days

4-D - Building an IA Function From The Ground-Up

AGM Report

How To Collate and Present Your Supporting Information

April 5, 2011 - Callaway

SBIR accounting system webinar

Zero Waste Agro Organics Ltd.