Recommendation 11

The Department said it considered itself to be the steward of the system for auditing local authorities and acknowledged that it was important to maintain the quality of audits of local authorities.24 Audit firm EY told us that it safeguarded quality before deadlines.25 It explained that it would not provide an opinion on its audit of local authority to an “arbitrary deadline” or without sufficient evidence, at the appropriate quality, to support it.26 Audit firm Grant Thornton felt it had come under pressure to complete its audits 14 C&AG’s Report, para 2.16 15 Q 13 evidence session of 20 May 2021 16 C&AG’s Report, Figure 2 17 Qq 4, 26 evidence session of 17 May 2021 18 London Borough of Hackney submission, para 4 19 Q 41 evidence session of 20 May 2021 20 Local Government Association submission, page 2 21 C&AG’s Report, para 1.2 22 C&AG’s Report, para 2.25 23 C&AG’s Report, para 2.28 24 Q8 evidence session of 20 May 2021 25 Q 14 evidence session of 17 May 2021 26 Qq 2, 7, 31 evidence session of 17 May 2021 12 Local auditor reporting on local government in England to time, but,as with EY, it emphasised it felt it was more important to deliver the audit opinion to the right quality and only issue the audit opinion when it was ready, than to meet deadlines. Grant Thornton believed that this was the right thing to do, as otherwise it would not be giving the right level of assurance to local authorities on their financial statements and on their financial sustainability.27 The Local Government Association also recognised that the extra work demands on auditors in auditing local authorities had led auditors to de-prioritise deadlines.28 The need for greater transparency in local authority accounts