To consider the status of the council’s Corporate Risk Register in order to monitor the effectiveness of risk management within the Performance Management Framework.

Paul Harris, Head of Corporate Performance, introduced the report the purpose of which was to consider the status of the Council’s corporate risk register in order to monitor the effectiveness of risk management within the Performance Management Framework.

During discussion the following principal points were made:

·        The report provided an update of the Council’s risk register as at the end of July 2021.There had been some movement since the last report to the Committee including the following 3 escalated risks;

1.     The development of a Sufficiency Strategy which supports best value.

2.     High risk notable cases within the Courts.

3.     The sustainability and closure of a care-home which has been reintroduced as a risk in Adults and Communities.

·        It had been a year since the new risk framework had been implemented. The new changes had been embedded by external risk training which had reinforced the benefits of managing risk effectively. In addition risk leads had been identified in each directorate which brought about an inter-directorship risk leadership team which meant that Management Board looked at risk much more readily.

·        The approach to risk was similar to that taken by other Local Authorities.

·        Members voiced concern that there was an overarching risk for the Council, as the place of last resort, to bail out partner organisations.

·        The Council did not have an automatic right to access partners’ risk registers but it could do so if there was a provision of information clause in the contractual arrangements with them and if it was appropriate to do so for audit purposes.

·        Emergency planning for Covid was still in place so the Covid Risk Register remained as a separate operational risk register. However it was likely that some aspects, for example, the impact of Covid on learners, would push out and more fittingly reside in a strategy risk setting.

·        Officers would explore whether service areas’ sensitivity to risk from external factors such as interest rate rises or the availability of fuel, could be captured in any new risk systems. The Strategic Risk Management Board however had a responsibility to horizon scan for any potential risk.

·        The Treasury Management Strategy which was reviewed every year by Council addressed issues such as interest rate rises. The majority of the Council’s current borrowing was fixed term so any changes in interest rates did not affect it and any spare cash was invested so a rise in interest rates would be positive.

The Committee RESOLVED that:

1.     The significant Partnership Framework should consider how risks held by partners are assessed and how they affect the Council.

2.     Third party risks will be considered as part of the refresh of the Annual Management Plan.

3.     ‘Global’ factor risks such as interest rate fluctuations and workforce shortages are reviewed in relation to their sensitivity to sudden change.

ACTIONS:

a)     The Head of Corporate Performance to provide the Committee with a briefing paper on how risks such as EP-24 flood risk and EP-27 fuel poverty are being managed in rural areas.

b)     The Head of Corporate Performance to consider the increase of housing developments in rural areas and the impact these may have on the risk register.