WARNING - By their nature, text files cannot include scanned images and tables. 
The process of converting documents to text only, can cause formatting changes and 
misinterpretation of the contents can sometimes result. Wherever possible you 
should refer to the pdf version of this document.


CAIRNGORMS NATIONAL PARK AUTHORITY 
FINANCE COMMITTEE 
MINUTES 1/12/06 

MINUTES of MEETING of the 
FINANCE COMMITTEE of 


THE CAIRNGORMS NATIONAL PARK AUTHORITY 
held at Lonach Hall, Strathdon 
on 1 December 2006 


Present: 

Eleanor Mackintosh 	Bruce Luffman 
David Selfridge 		Gregor Rimell 


In Attendance: 

David Green, Convener 
Jane Hope, Chief Executive 
David Cameron, Head of Corporate Services 
Denby Pettitt, Finance Manager 


Apologies: 

None 


Welcome 

1. The Chairperson welcomed all present to the meeting, and noted apologies as set out 
above. 


Minutes of Previous Meeting 

2. The minutes of the previous meeting, of 20 October 2006 were approved without 
amendment. 


Matters Arising 

3. Members noted that David Bale had met with the Committee to provide further 
information on the Monitor Farm and Planning to Succeed projects, following initial 
consideration of these at the last meeting. Members had agreed the proposals 
following receipt of the information. 


Ratification of Matters for Decision presented to previous Finance Committee 
meetings (Paper 1) 

4. Members ratified the decisions taken at previous meetings which had not been 
quorate. 

5. Members also recorded formally that discussions on the Monitor Farm project had 
recognised that it would be required to: base the project on a farm within the Park; 
have a majority of project group members drawn from within the Park; and ensure the 
aims of the project were in line with the Park Plan aims. 


Balanced Scorecard Model: Finance Measures (Paper 2) 

6. David Cameron introduced this paper, which set out proposals for the establishment 
of a “balanced scorecard” model for monitoring organisational performance. The 
model sought to establish key performance measures with which to monitor the 
overall “health” of the organisation, taking account of financial management, human 
resource management, governance and risk management, and corporate and 
operational plan delivery. The paper presented sought the Committee’s views on the 
proposed financial management performance measures, whether the measures 
proposed adequately summarised the organisation’s financial health, and whether the 
proposed tolerance levels from target were appropriate in light of the Committee’s 
overall views of management of risk in delivering financial objectives. 

7. In discussion, members sought clarification of the reasons for developing the model. 
David Cameron responded that it was intended to complement, rather than replace, 
the existing, more detailed monitoring of annual budget performance currently 
undertaken by the Committee. The financial management elements were intended to 
provide a summary overview of the Authority’s current year budget position, likely 
outturn position, and latest estimate of the following year’s finances. Any areas 
highlighted as at increased risk indicated a requirement for senior management to 
investigate reasons for variation from targets and take remedial action where 
necessary. 

8. The balanced scorecard model as a whole also sought to embed risk management 
principles in the Authority’s overall performance monitoring. Additionally, 
incorporating the results of the balanced scorecard model into quarterly operational 
monitoring reports to the full Board afforded an opportunity to inform the Board of 
the wider performance of the organisation, and the areas being reviewed by its 
Committees, in a summarised form. 

9. Members welcomed the additional information, indicating that it was very helpful to 
have a summarised overview of organisational and financial performance. It was also 
thought to be helpful to give the full Board an at a glance overview of the status of 
organisational performance, and help to feed back some of the work of Committees to 
full Board meetings. 

10. Members agreed the proposals as set out in the paper. 


Approval of Expenditure Previously Presented to the CNPA Board (Paper 3) 

11. Denby Pettitt introduced this paper, which followed up a decision in principle by the 
Board to continue the delivery of the Land Based Business Training Project subject to 
detailed consideration of expenditure proposals and affordability by the Finance 
Committee. 

12. The paper now presented highlighted that funding for the project had been secured for 
2007 in line with original plans. As the European funding component was for a 
calendar year, funding was secured to December 2007. The Committee’s approval to 
delivery of the project was now requested. 

13. Members noted that they were aware of a significant amount of positive feedback for 
this project and welcomed the confirmation of funding for the coming year. 

14. The Committee agreed the proposals set out in the paper. 

15. The Chair requested that the Committee’s congratulations be forwarded to the Project 
Manager and project team. 


Ratification of Previously Approved Expenditure Proposals (Paper 4) 

16. Members formally approved the expenditure proposals which had been agreed 
between Committee meetings, in line with the Committee’s agreed scheme of 
delegation. 


Expenditure Proposal: Pan Government Agreement for Geographic Information 
(Paper 5) 

17. David Cameron introduced this paper, which sought the Committee’s approval to 
expenditure on the Authority’s contribution to the Pan Government Agreement (PGA) 
under which the CNPA gained a licence to use Ordinance Survey data in mapping and 
Geographic Information System (GIS) products. David highlighted that, as a new 
entrant to the PGA, the Authority had been receiving this licence agreement free of 
charge until March 2006. However, the overall PGA contract was now being 
renegotiated and all existing users were now required to pay a contribution to acquire 
licensed use of the data. 

18. David Cameron highlighted that the cost was relatively high, at around £50,000, and 
had been determined by a model applied to all participants in the PGA. Officers were 
continuing to raise the magnitude of this cost with the Department of Communities 
and Local Government, the responsible department for administering the PGA across 
the UK, and with the Scottish Executive. 

19. Members agreed the need for the expenditure and approved the proposal as set out 
in the paper. Members also expressed their concern over the scale of the charge, given 
the relatively small size of the organisation and asked officers to continue to pursue 
this matter. 


Outturn for the seven months to October 2006 (Paper 6) 

20. Denby Pettitt introduced the paper, setting out the latest information, to end October 
2006, on the Authority’s budget monitoring for the year. Denby highlighted that 
expenditure continues to be ahead of last year’s level, both in monetary and 
percentage terms, although we are under spent by £50,000 in the current year 
compared with the revised budget, presented to the Committee in October. 

21. Denby highlighted that, following the Quarter 2 Operational Plan review which was 
reported to the Committee’s last meeting, a list of new Operational Plan pipeline 
projects generated by various Groups that could be used to minimise any underspend 
has been presented to Management Team. As in previous years, the main thrust of 
Corporate Services’ financial management from now until the financial year end will 
be to ensure that we maximise the Authority’s use of its Resource Allocation from the 
Scottish Executive whilst continuing to ensure Value for Money is also obtained 

22. Members noted the current budget monitoring position. 


AOCB 

23. Bruce Luffman raised a potential joint project with NESTOUR on the Highland Tourist 
Route which had been flagged up to him in his capacity as a Board member. 

24. David Cameron responded that the Authority’s potential involvement in the project 
would have to be appraised in terms of its fit with Corporate Plan goals and 
Operational Plan objectives, as was the case with all projects. He undertook to raise 
the point with Visitor Services and Recreation Group which would be responsible for 
looking at projects in this area. 


Date of Next Meeting 

25. 
The next meeting of the Finance Committee was scheduled to take place at 9am on 26 
January 2007. [This date was subsequently amended following discussion with the 
Chair.]