Agenda item

Report of the Director – Finance and Corporate Services

The Communications and Customer Services Manager presented the Risk Management Progress Report and confirmed that this comprised 36 corporate risks, 21 operational risks and three opportunity risks.

The Communications and Customer Services Manager took the Group through changes to the risk register and said that no new risks had been identified and that three had been removed, including central Government funding following the settlement last year. He noted that that areas of increased risk included the 5-year housing supply and asylum relocation scheme and that there was reduced risk in relation to inflation, the council's Carbon Management Plan and CCTV cameras.

Councillor Gowland asked whether the Council’s IT systems operated on local systems or if they were cloud based and what mitigation was in place if the cloud went down. The Communications and Customer Services Manager said that the Council used a cloud based system and had made much investment to ensure that its system was as robust and safe as possible and regularly reviewed possible threats and implications. He said that he would report back to the Group on cloud mitigation in the next Risk Management update.

Councillor Chewings referred to the increased risk in the asylum relocation scheme and asked what had changed to lead to this increase. The Communications and Customer Services Manager said that this was due to Serco indicating that they may be looking at more properties within the Borough, although assurances had been given as to how the properties would be assessed and managed. He noted that this had been discussed at a recent Communities Scrutiny Group meeting.

Mr Causton asked whether the Council had conducted a simulated cyber-attack, if there were any lessons learned from it and whether those lessons could be brought to the next meeting of this Committee. The Communications and Customer Services Manager confirmed that the Council had conducted simulated attacks and he would confirm to the Group about any outcomes. The Assistant Director for Finance added that a confidential report had been prepared by Internal Audit, feedback from which could be shared with the Group at the next Internal Audit update report.

Councillor Thomas referred to the risk related to staff retention and asked whether the Council had any budgetary provision to deal with this, particularly in the LGR transition year. The Assistant Director for Finance said that the Council had an LGR reserve and whilst it had not been allocated to specific items as yet, staffing was a potential allocation in the future.

Councillor Thomas referred to an increase in risk for Gamston SPD and noted its impact on the five-year housing supply and GNSP and asked whether the mitigations in place were sufficient. The Communications and Customer Services Manager said that the Council was lobbying Government to review national policy and noted the difficulty in managing a site of this size and complexity and the associated impact on housing land supply. Councillor Thomas thought that the Council needed to be more proactive and look for measures that it could implement itself to deal with this matter.  The Chair thought that a risk plan was required that could be followed through. An update would be included in the next report to Cabinet, due in March.

Councillor Om asked what system the Council used to record risk, who had access to that system and how often risk assessments were carried out. The Communications and Customer Services Manager responded that the Council used the Pentana system and that this informed the risk registers presented to Committee. He said that a selected number of Officers had access to it and that performance clinics were held every other month. The Assistant Director for Finance said that risks were monitored on an ongoing basis and that any changes in circumstances were reviewed and an assessment completed, with operational level assessments completed on a monthly basis.

Councillor Matthews referred to the asylum relocation scheme and noted that it had increased then decreased and referred to a report to Cabinet regarding Article 4 direction and asked whether that had been taken into account in the risk decision making process. The Communications and Customer Services Manager said that the increase in risk had been triggered by Serco potentially looking for more properties in the area.

Councillor Chewings referred to CCTV being downgraded in risk and noted that much mitigation seemed to be about future activity and asked whether the downgrade was appropriate. Councillor Regan asked about potential costs in transitioning from setup to maintenance. This is covered as part of the budget process.

The Chair suggested that information about the risk owner, risk lead and activity taking place in relation to a risk be provided.

Councillor Thomas referred to New Homes Bonus and Capital Resourcing not being risks but still being classified as risks. The Assistant Director for Finance said that due to the timing of the production of this report New Homes Bonus appeared on it but that for the new year it would not appear. In relation to the Capital Financing risk, she explained that this related to delivery of projects and schemes and as such there was always a risk that costs such as labour and materials would increase which may impact on the deliverability of those schemes. She noted that the purpose of the report was to provide an overview and summary of the changes to risks and confirmed that the Risk Management Group discussed the details of the risks and that Officers carried out weekly and monthly monitoring.

Councillor Gowland referred to the risk of a break in seamless service delivery being classified as red and the link to LGR. The Assistant Director for Finance said that this related to the unknown risk posed by LGR and to ensure that there were measures in place between now and vesting day.

Councillor Thomas referred to increased service demand resulting from increased population leading to expected increased cost and increased service pressure but thought that this would also lead to increased Council Tax revenue. The Assistant Director for Finance said that increased demand would impact on all Council services it was unlikely that this would be covered by the increase in Council Tax.

Councillor Thomas referred to the destabilisation of the budget risk and the Assistant Director for Finance said that this risk related to the impact of LGR on the Council’s five-year plan and as such was recognising that there would at some point be an impact on it.

Councillor Gaunt referred to the five-year housing supply and also to the Gamston SPD mitigation which looked to other sites within the Local Plan Part 2 which could be quickly released and asked what reflection and lessons had been learned in relation to the Council’s Local Plan. Checks and balances with Councillors are managed via the LDF Group.

Councillor Wells referred to the Disabled Funding Grant (DFG) and the Assistant Director for Finance confirmed that this related to DFG historically being underfunded with demand far outstripping funding, with the Council having topped up funds out of its own budget previously.  She said that the risk related to the deficit in grant funding potentially leading to a loss of quality of life and that the Council hoped for a change to the formula in the settlement and was waiting for notification.

It was RESOLVED that Governance Scrutiny Group:

a)    scrutinised the changes made to the Council’s Risk Register during this period

b)    considered and made recommendations on risks that have red alert status.