Agenda item

Matt Sanham introduced the report making the following key points: 

·  The council monitored and manages the corporate risks through the corporate  risk register;

·  Contents of the report highlighted the high priority corporate risks, and the  arrangements in place to ensure these risks were monitored and managed  appropriately;

·  The council had a proactive methodology on risk management and an  interdepartmental cooperation on risk strategy;

·  Risks had been assessed with a combination of the likelihood of something  happening and the impact which arises if it does happened;

·  Risk was considered unavoidable in organisations;

·  At the staff level, the high level corporate risk register was regularly considered  by the corporate management team. 

Speaking under Council Procedure Rule 20.1 a Member asked questions and made  a comment as follows: 

·  There was £1.2M in the budget for the risk of increased spend due to  homelessness;

·  There was a large piece of work regarding Berths 4/5 and project management  framework;

·  The environment act would be discussed after the 2024 General Election;

·  There was no guaranteed external funding for the net zero strategy, however, the council was budgeting for electric vehicles and charging stations.

Members commented and asked the following questions: 

·  If repairs are made to the council estates, would the council opt for a net zero  strategy? 

·  Questioning was raised regarding the risk scoring within the reports;

·  Was there a review on how operational risks were deal with around emergency  response and business continuity?

·  Members were pleased with the resilience within the risk management report  regarding cyber-attacks;

·  Discussion around more frequent in-house working for council employee’s was  raised in relation to risk management, specifically cyber-attacks and mental  health;

·  Was the council recognising national standards, or was this tailored to the  district? 

Chris Blundell, Mike Humber and Bob Porter responded with the following comments:

·  The council was looking for sustainable long term solutions;

·  There was a journey to net zero strategy whilst considering the council’s housing stock;

·  Five tower blocks within the tower block refurbishment programme would see the  removal and replacement of external wall insulation, this would be carried out  sustainably;

·  The social housing decarbonisation fund would improve the EPC ratings of the  tower block buildings, reducing the carbon emissions;

·  The council was looking at corporate estates, and reducing carbon emissions  within these estates;

·  Some risks were considered more severe than others. It was difficult to make comparison against different risks as each risk hit different categories of risk. Although risks were picking up different scorings, it was noted that each risk has  a different composition due to hitting high scores across different risk categories;

·  The council planned for emergencies of all sorts and size across the district;

·  The operational risks regarding emergency response and business continuity  would be reviewed and brought back to the committee;

·  There was a detailed management plan which had been produced from the internal audit;

·  Valid points were raised regarding the return to in-house working of council employee’s. Members would have the ability to shape and influence the policy when this topic comes to the General Purposes committee;

·  The risk management was a governance source of guidance which the council  followed.

Councillor Donaldson proposed, Councillor Britcher seconded and members AGREED:

To approve the review of corporate risks and discuss annexed risks.