THE Parish of Burnsall is to be charged more than £100 for its annual audit this year - even though there are only two transactions going through the village's accounts.

The village, which due to its tiny population has small parish meetings called by sole elected representative Alan Stockdale, rather than a full parish council, pays only for maintenance of street lighting with its funds.

It levies a small precept on the council tax which Craven District Council collects and then pays into the village's account. Work by contractors from the council costs around £400 each year, and there are no more transactions after that payout; only the payment for the audit.

"We have always seemed to be charged a lot for our audit, but this year it's the most we've been asked for, at £126, said Mr Stockdale. "Accountancy firms always ask us to present our accounts for them in different ways; this year it seemed that they had asked us for the simplest presentation yet, so it seems difficult to understand why they're charging us so much."

A new government system for the auditing of public accounts has been in place for two years. Information is presented as required by the internal auditor, and simply sent off to the allocated external accountant.

Previously, all Craven parish accounts had been audited through Craven District Council, on a pre-organised day at Skipton Town Hall, and the process took some time on that day.

"The new system's a lot more simple, but much more expensive," said Mr Stockdale. Previously the bill had hovered around the £80 mark. This is the second year running in which Mazars, Neville and Russell, of Southampton, have won the contract to audit the accounts of several small villages in the Craven area. Last year, the charge for Burnsall was £121.

Auditors for public accounts are appointed by the Audit Commission in London, and it seems that there is little the villagers can do about the charges.

"If the bills get any higher, the only option would be to place a further precept on the villagers' council tax," said Mr Stockdale.

Parish clerk Gordon Nicoll, suggests that, in his accounting experience, the audit for the Burnsall accounts should take little more than ten minutes.

"I know the hourly rates for this kind of work are very high, but that works out at over £600 per hour!" said Mr Stockdale.

He agreed that the new scheme was much more simple. "Previously, it all had to be done at Skipton Town Hall, where the auditor would hold court for the day and organise everything - but I had to take an hour off work for that and it was a very complicated way of doing things."

Ian Strong, from the Yorkshire Local Councils Association, said that Burnsall's was a typical problem throughout the region's small parishes.

"The new system of audits for public money means that an internal audit by an independent person is done first, then the details are passed on for the external audit, in theory meaning a lighter cost for the councils.

"It works on a system of fixed costs, and tries to be a one size fits all scheme, but it ends up with the smallest communities often paying very large amounts in relation to their accounts, in effect subsidising the larger ones."

Mr Strong has been fighting the case for small villages such as Burnsall and is seeking national help to bring a change.

"It's a very long process," he said. "As with any new Government scheme, difficulties soon come to light, but it takes a long time for anything to change.

"No-one is denying the need for these accounts to go to audit. It is public money, so of course there have to be checks made. What we are asking for is a greater level of flexibility in the system, to provide for villages like Burnsall."