Agenda item

Quarter 3 2018-19 Risk Report (Agenda item 8)

Report of Maxine O’Mahony, Executive Director for Strategy & Governance.

Minutes:

Members agreed the Exclusion of Press and Public at this point of the meeting (see agenda item 18) to enable the Capita Risk Report (Agenda item 19) to be discussed with agenda item 8.

 

RESOLVED that under Section 100(a)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and the public be excluded from the meeting for the following item of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraphs 3 and 4 of Schedule 12A to the Act.

 

Ross Bangs the Corporate Improvement and Performance (CIP) Manager presented the report.

 

There were 14 risks included within the Quarter 3 Risk report, one less than at the end of Quarter 2.

 

Of the 14 risks, the 3 considered as high included the risk of a critical ICT breach, the continued impact following the introduction of the Homelessness Reduction Act and the risk to the Council of not maximising its Asset Portfolio relating to income.

 

The risk relating to staff recruitment and retention had been reduced to a lower rating and the risk relating to the occupancy of Riverside had been removed as requested at the previous meeting.

 

The implementation of the General Data Protection Regulations continued to be above target and a new target date had been proposed for 31 May 2019 following audit recommendations involving new terms being drafted to include new contractual obligations to the Council’s suppliers and how they handled and processed Council data.

 

In addition, the Team was keeping a watching brief on how implications surrounding Brexit could impact the Council’s contracted supplier supply chains.

 

Councillor Hewett made some observations; firstly, the content and the process on how the risks were being dealt with, felt and looked much better than it used to be; however, he asked the Corporate Improvement and Performance (CIP) Manager to describe the process behind some of the revisions made in relation to staff recruitment and what had caused the likelihood score and the target impact score to change.  Members were informed that these scores had changed due to several meetings with the Head of Service and how the Council advertised its vacancies.  The new ways of advertising had improved recruitment rates and the Executive Manager had been content with these improvements.

 

Councillor Hewett’s second observation was in relation to the target dates being moved and felt that the original target date should remain as the date the target had originally been set.  He asked the Corporate Improvement and Performance (CIP) Manager and the Internal Audit Manager to revisit the register as it required some further thought.  Another observation was the word ‘likelihood’ which he felt should be condensed to fit into the column and finally, the business rate retention scheme that had been trended as downwards should, in his opinion, be static at 4.

 

Mr Plaskett, the Independent Lay Advisor to the Governance & Audit Committee had been critical of the Risk Register at the previous meeting and thanked the Corporate Improvement and Performance (CIP) Manager for this new version.  Councillor Hewett endorsed the above comments as he also felt more confident with this new version and apologised for all the challenges that he had raised in the past.

Councillor Wilkinson and Councillor Monument queried the description under the failure to deliver the Council’s Corporate priorities.   It was explained that this risk could be removed as the target had been maintained for some time.   Councillor Hewett disagreed and felt that the risk should remain as it did not cease to be a risk even though the targets had been achieved.  Mr Plaskett supported its removal at this stage but to be re-instated subject to change.  It was agreed that the same rationale should be used for the Corporate Business Continuity Plan.  Referring to the Business Rate Retention Scheme, the Chairman believed that the consultation did not provide a clear picture of the future and therefore the risk should remain.  Members agreed that the Business Rate Retention Scheme risk should remain.

 

Referring to the final risk in respect of Capita Services, Councillor Hewett advised that this matter had already been included on the Overview & Scrutiny Commission Work Programme for the next meeting in March 2019.  The Chairman felt that it should be added to the Governance & Audit Committee Work Programme too for future debate.  Members were informed that this matter had already been added to the Internal Audit Plan.

 

The report was otherwise noted; subject to a watching brief being kept on implications of national policy (such as Brexit); and the following risks being removed from the Risk Register:

 

1.     Failure to deliver the Council’s Corporate priorities

2.     Failure to effectively implement the Corporate Business Continuity Plan.

Supporting documents: