Letter: GBC’s Audit Unreliability Is Real

Published on: 16 Sep, 2026
Updated on: 15 Sep, 2026

From John Murray

In response to: GBC’s Finances Are Not One of the Many Issues to Be Alarmed About

Councillor Potter’s response to my letter on the subject of GBC’s accounts deserves a reply.

As he will be well aware, GBC received a “disclaimer” audit for the year end March 2025. This means that, instead of saying that the accounts give a true and fair view of the council’s financial position – which he claims is correctly stated – the auditors found themselves unable to do so.

The language of the audit report is plain enough (see: ‘Reason for disclaimer of opinion’ at p17) and, far from stating that the numbers were in order, the auditors listed some significant concerns.

This has been the case for Guildford for some years now and, since the basis for one year’s accounts is the accuracy of the proceeding one, it is difficult to imagine that GBC will receive a “true and fair” audit for the year ended March 2026.

Surrey, on the other hand, did receive a “true and fair” audit for 2025 and may expect to do so for 2026.

Reference to an overspend on a particular item at Surrey is a red herring (an overspend, if that is what it is, does not undermine the accuracy of the figures). Drawing attention to a financial plan is similarly irrelevant because it is only a projection and is not subject to audit.

I never sought to make light of the issues at Spelthorne and Woking; I simply stated that at least the problem could be quantified. This is hardly the case with GBC’s accounts, something with which West Surrey County Council will now have to wrestle. It is a real problem certainly not nonsense as Lib Dem Cllr Potter claims.