The London Assembly Audit Panel met on Wednesday 21 October 2026 to review the external and internal audit reports for the Greater London Authority (GLA). Key discussions included findings from the external audit of the GLA's financial statements, progress on internal audits, and the corporate risk register.

External Audit Report

Ian Young from EY presented the External Audit Results Report for the year ended 31 March 2026. He stated that the audit was substantially complete and an unqualified audit opinion was expected. Two significant findings were highlighted:

• Property Classification at OPDC: Certain non-current assets classified as investment property by the Old Oak and Park Royal Development Corporation (OPDC) did not meet the relevant definition and should be reclassified as property, plant and equipment. This will require a prior period adjustment and restatement of comparative figures. Management is preparing the necessary amendments.
• Valuation of Long-Term Debtors: A potential misstatement was identified in the valuation of a long-term debtor measured at fair value through profit and loss, due to the incorrect interest rate being applied. Management has assessed the impact, and EY is reviewing their supporting documentation.

Despite these issues, the overall audit picture was positive, with the majority of audit focus areas completed without material issue. The London Stadium's onerous contract provision was noted as significant due to its size and the judgment involved, but the basis for the provision was deemed appropriate. A £7.9 million adjustment in the original calculation had been corrected by management.

Regarding value for money, EY had completed their detailed work and concluded that there were no significant weaknesses in the authority's arrangements concerning financial sustainability, governance, or economy, efficiency, and effectiveness. The full commentary will be included in the auditor's annual report in December.

Assembly Member Léonie Cooper AM raised concerns about the ongoing issue of the London Stadium's onerous contract provision, describing it as Groundhog Day and questioning what could be done to improve the situation, which she attributed to arrangements entered into by the previous Mayor, Boris Johnson. It was confirmed that many of these arrangements are contractual, limiting the ability to make changes. The current revenue cost of the stadium was estimated to be around £19 million a year.

Assembly Member Krupesh Hirani AM questioned the £24 million to £26 million annual cost of the Oxford Street regeneration project, noting that it was assured to be paid by commercial sponsorship and street activations, and asked how much had been committed so far. It was stated that publicly, zero pounds and zero pence had been committed.

Internal Audit Reports

Mark Woodley, Group Audit Lead from MOPAC, provided an update on internal audit progress. Several reviews had been finalised, including the Adult Skills Fund and Material Systems Payroll Follow-Up. The Good Growth Fund and London Stadium Governance and Financial Arrangements reports were substantively complete but would be presented at the next meeting.

Fieldwork was underway for audits of recruitment and selection, the General Ledger, the Green Roots Fund, and Freedom of Information Act requests. Terms of reference were being issued for audits of the Inclusive Talent Strategy, London Resilience Unit, and Rough Sleeping.

A formal follow-up audit for business continuity arrangements was deemed disproportionate. Instead, an advisory review will be undertaken to assess alignment with good practice and ensure recommendations from the original audit have been addressed.

The Directorate for Audit, Risk and Assurance (DARA) had undergone an external quality assessment against the Global Internal Audit Standards, concluding that the service Generally Conforms. This was seen as a positive outcome, reflecting the professionalism of the team and effective governance arrangements. A Quality Assurance Improvement Plan is being developed to address recommendations from the assessment.

Regarding counter-fraud work, the Adult Skills Fund had seen further information received about a previously investigated grant recipient. The GLA had terminated the funding agreement, but additional concerns were identified with another provider, including evidence of learner accounts being created through a single login. This matter was considered by the Fraud Response Panel. The 2026-27 National Fraud Initiative had commenced, with privacy notices sent to all staff.

Assembly Member Krupesh Hirani AM asked about the amount of public money lost or at risk concerning the Adult Skills and Employment cases. Faye Hammond, Chief Finance Officer at the GLA, stated the figure was around £1 million, a significant amount. She explained that litigation was underway, and the GLA was investigating financial investigations beyond legal processes to recover assets.

Assembly Member Léonie Cooper AM questioned if the Adult Skills Fund accounted for a disproportionate number of fraudulent payment issues. It was noted that over £300 million in grant funding is distributed, making it a higher-risk area. Controls are in place, including due diligence on companies and dip-testing of provider compliance.

Mark Woodley then presented the findings of the Adult Skills Fund governance framework audit, which received a Substantial Assurance opinion. Key findings included clearly defined governance structures, decision-making responsibilities, and accountability arrangements. Oversight is provided by the Adult Skills Fund Mayoral Board and the Supporting Londoners to Benefit from Growth Project Board. Funding allocations and budgets are approved through established processes, and provider performance, expenditure, and compliance are monitored. An area for improvement was that some policies and guidance within the framework were not linked to the current versions on the GLA website, and fraud awareness training was not included.

Laura Dubek, Head of Programme Delivery at the GLA, joined online and confirmed satisfaction with the substantial assurance opinion.

Assembly Member Krupesh Hirani AM questioned the proportion of providers receiving unsatisfactory audit opinions (four out of 25). It was clarified that these audits are carried out by an external provider and are risk-based. Concerns were raised about falling learner participation due to reduced funding allocations, and the lack of capacity to meet demand in sectors like construction and engineering. Ms. Dubek explained that funding reductions are linked to government allocations and that providers are working proactively to manage budgets. The GLA is working with industry and key sectors through the Mayor's sector talent boards to identify skills gaps.

The Payroll Follow-Up audit received a Reasonable Assurance opinion. Progress had been made in strengthening payroll controls, with five of seven agreed actions fully implemented and two partly implemented. Areas of improvement included strengthened payroll and SAP training, improved governance and approval processes, and embedded formal arrangements for identifying, tracking, and recovering payroll overpayments. Two outstanding areas required attention: evidence for new starter checks was not consistently retained, and draft terms of reference for performance meetings were awaiting formal approval.

Diane Tranmer, Executive Director of Corporate Resources and Business Improvement, and Justine Kenny, Chief People Officer, were present for this item. The Chair noted a significant improvement in the error rate for payroll, which was now consistently below 1%, a substantial improvement from previous levels. Assembly Member Krupesh Hirani AM asked about support for staff who may have been subject to overpayments. Ms. Tranmer explained that repayment plans are agreed to be affordable, and wellbeing initiatives, including an employee assistance program, are available. Léonie Cooper AM questioned what was holding back full compliance with recommendations. Ms. Tranmer stated that with the recent move to a Transport for London (TfL) managed system for standard recruitment, these checks are now embedded, and full compliance is expected by the next year.

Corporate Risk Register

Faye Hammond, Chief Finance Officer, presented the refreshed corporate risk register. Two new risks had been introduced:

• Elections 2028: A risk around operational planning for the Mayoral and London Assembly elections.
• Devolution: A risk reflecting the opportunities and potential changes in statutory responsibilities and governance expectations arising from the government's devolution agenda.

Risk 4 (Funding) had been reframed to reflect changes in the business rates regime. Risk 5a (Corporate Governance) was reframed to focus more on delivery planning and the Mayor's delivery portfolio. Risk 5b (Safeguarding of Public Funds) now explicitly includes financial probity risk associated with grant-giving. Risk 7 (Workforce) had an increased residual impact score due to the need for agility in response to devolution, while the residual probability score fell, resulting in an overall decrease in the risk score. Risk 9 (Change and Transformation Programmes) saw a decrease in its residual impact score, reflecting a move towards business as usual continuous improvement. The corporate EDI risk and the risk around alignment of budget to Mayoral priorities had been removed, with the former now managed at directorate level and the latter deemed to be significantly reduced.

Assembly Member Krupesh Hirani AM asked about the election risk, specifically concerning the possibility of coinciding with a general election. Ms. Hammond clarified that the concern was primarily internal planning related to polling, counting, and supplier technology. Léonie Cooper AM raised concerns about cyber risk, noting it remained at the highest level of risk despite the TFL cyber attack. Ms. Hammond explained that cyber risk is a significant risk for all organisations and will always remain high. She offered to address specific IT issues raised by Assembly Members separately.

Assembly Member Thomas Turrell AM raised a point about property risks, particularly concerning building costs and the viability of projects due to inflation. He questioned how this was captured in the risk register, especially for entities like GLAP, LLDC, and OPDC. Ms. Hammond confirmed that construction-only risks were not specifically articulated but were captured within broader risks such as financial resilience and company governance. She highlighted that lending to private developers for housing is monitored quarterly.

Draft Annual Governance Statement 2025-26

The panel was asked to comment on the draft Annual Governance Statement (AGS) for 2025-26. The statement outlines the GLA's governance arrangements and actions taken to address governance issues.

Monitoring of Expenses and Taxable Benefits

The panel noted the taxable benefits and expenses incurred by the Mayor, London Assembly Members, and Senior Staff between 1 April and 31 August 2026. Travel card costs for Assembly Members totalled £12,360. Senior staff expenses amounted to £60,647, with a significant increase in foreign travel costs compared to the previous year.

Register of Gifts and Hospitality

The panel noted the register of gifts and hospitality received by the Mayor, London Assembly Members, and staff between 1 March and 30 September 2026. A total of 26 declarations were made by the Mayor and Assembly Members, and 198 declarations by GLA staff. Eight declarations were made by the Mayor, and 18 by ten Assembly Members. The report highlighted that 63% of staff declarations were received within 28 days, a decrease from the previous period. Five corporate declarations for tickets to major sporting events were also noted.

The meeting concluded with the date of the next meeting scheduled for 14 December 2026.