MORE than £8million went unpaid in council tax and business rates in Surrey last year.

That’s nearly double the £4.4million of savings planned from changes to the county’s 58 children’s centres, according to BBC local democracy correspondent Rebecca Curley.

The figures have been released as part of the statement of accounts for Surrey County Council for 2017/18 and is just over £1million shy of the £9.7million the council is looking to save for the entire early years help budget.

Local taxation arrears – which encompasses unpaid council tax and business rates for all the borough and district councils, as well as the county council, the police and the parishes – amounts to £8,114,000.

This was just over half a million less than the previous year’s accounts which recorded a figure of £8,748,000 and would be enough to pay for 271 fully-trained firefighters in Surrey.

For a further comparison, the total budget for Surrey’s CAMHS (child and adolescent mental health services) in 2017/18 was £8.318million.

The financial report compiled by independent auditors sets out all the expenditures and incomes up to March 31, 2018, for Surrey CC highlighting areas of risk.

The governance of children’s services was identified as an area of focus.

An audit report carried out by Grant Thornton concluded that because of the most recent inadequate Ofsted report they had to conclude “the processes and procedures” in place in relation to children’s services are “not conducive to providing value for money for residents”.

The reports were presented to the council’s audit and governance committee on July 26.

The committee heard that the council called in the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy (CIPFA) to undertake a review of its financial resilience just two years after the last report was compiled, which meant that Grant Thornton could not complete its audit of children’s services.

Lib Dem councillors criticised the doubling up on reviews. The CIPFA cost taxpayers £25,000 in 2016.

Councillor Will Forster, who sits on the audit and governance committee, said the previous review warned that the financial position of Surrey CC was “extremely worrying” and that “it is risk of becoming financially unsustainable”.

He was told during the meeting the reason CIPFA had been called in again was due a change in council chief executive officer, with Joanna Killian taking up the post in March and wanting a fresh review carried out.

Surrey’s chief finance officer resigned at the start of July prompting concern among councillors due to the amount of savings needed over the next few years.

Commenting after the meeting, Mr Forster said: “It is concerning Surrey County Council is, for the second time, having to rely on an external body to provide it with financial reassurance.

“It also emphasises the lessons and warnings from the first CIPFA report have not been learned or heeded, and that the county council’s financial position is still poor.

“Furthermore, the timing of the second CIPFA report has overlapped with the annual auditing of the county council’s financial statements by Grant Thornton.

“As there was an assumption that their work would overlap with this second CIPFA review, Grant Thornton did not complete a review of the County Council’s financial position and so cannot give a ‘Value for Money’ conclusion as part of their audit.

“With the county council looking at saving £250million over the next two years, Surrey residents will be concerned that County Hall’s finances are still so fragile”.

A council spokesman said: “It is well recognised that local government budgets across the country are under severe pressure. We have a clear responsibility to ensure our finances are as robust and sustainable as possible in these new and unprecedented circumstances.

“There is still more for us to do to make sure our financial planning is able to withstand these pressures, so we are in a position to serve our residents as effectively as possible.

“Independent assessment of this by the sector experts will ensure there is no doubt about where we stand.”

Grant Thornton stated in its report it would give a ‘value for money’ verdict at a later date.