Agenda item

To inform Audit Committee of the outcome of the Strategic, Generic and

Operational Risk Registers review.

Recommended – That the report be noted for informational purposes.

Stuart Sambrook, Policy Manager, provided a report to inform Members of the outcome of the Strategic, Generic and Operational Risk Registers review.

By way of background, the Councils mission statement in regards to Risk Management was as follows:

The Council is committed to adopting best practices in the identification, evaluation, and cost-effective control of risks to ensure that they are eliminated or reduced to an acceptable level.  It is acknowledged that some risks will always exist and will never be eliminated.  All employees must understand the nature of risk and accept responsibility for risk associated with their area of work.  In doing this they will receive the necessary support, assistance and commitment from Senior Management and Members.

The Council’s risk management policy was a long-term commitment and was an inherent part of good management and governance practices.  It stated within the Council Financial Procedure rules that the Council was responsible for approving the Council’s risk management strategy.  The Audit Committee was responsible for the review and monitoring of the Council’s risk management arrangements.

The Council had adopted the following definition produced by the Institute of Risk Management, which stated:-

Risk Management is the identification, measurement, control and financing of risks which threaten the existence, the assets, the earnings of the personnel of an organisation, the services it provides, the achievement of its corporate priorities or which may cause undue harm to the public.

Risk management must not be the responsibility of just a few specialists.  It must be a primary management responsibility for all managers and supervisors and must be a consideration for all employees.

Risk assessments were about asking:-

• What could go wrong?
• What was the likelihood of it going wrong?
• What would be the impact should it go wrong?
• What could be done to eliminate the threat?
• What should be done to reduce the threat’s likelihood or impact?

The above 5-point approach could be applied to decisions made every working day, at all levels of the Council.

The Council’s risk assessment scoring was based on the guidance of the Institute of Risk Management, as follows:

• 3 being a high risk;
• 2 being a medium risk;
• 1 being a low risk. 

The definitions of High, Medium and Low were also based on the guidance of the Institute of Risk Management and aided in assessing Impact and Likelihood.  A table was provided in the report which included those definitions.

Members were informed that the Corporate Risk Register included 101 key strategic risks facing the Council and outlined the controls currently in place to respond to those risks.  A summary of the Councils Risk Register was as follows:

• 17 Generic risks          -           (1 high 4 medium and 12 low)
• 65 Operational risks    -           (1 high 20 medium 44 low)
• 19 Strategic risks        -           (3 high 6 medium and 10 low)

The Committee was invited to review the amendments to the Strategic, Generic and Operational Risk Registers made since the submission of the last risk management report

Changes to the Strategic Risk Register

There had been 1 major change made to the Strategic Risk Register as summarised below and which was set out in more detail at Appendix 1 of the report.

Changes to the Generic Risk Register

There had been no changes made to the Generic Risk Register.

Changes to the Operational Risk Register

There had been 2 major changes made to the Operational Risk Register, as summarised below, and 27 minor changes, details of all changes being set out at Appendix 2 to the report.

A summary list of all risks contained in the Generic, Operational and Strategic Risk Registers was provided in the report as Appendix 3.

High Risks

The Council had one Operational risk with a rating classed as “High” – Theft or damage to vehicles and equipment (URN: 60)

One Generic risk had been classed as “High” - Failure to conserve energy and reduce emissions thus resulting in excess costs to the Council and negative impact on the environment (URN:2016),

Three Strategic risks had been classed as “High” - Failure to deliver on Council’s Climate Declaration pledge and achieve Council operations Carbon Zero by 2030 (URN:2035); Failing to recruit and retain suitably qualified staff (URN: 2001) and The acquisition of key town centre buildings and delivery of a £22 million regeneration project within Accrington Town Centre (URN: 2036).

Mr Sambrook reported that a fourth register, a Cyber-Security Register, was planned and should be available in time for the next meeting of the committee.

Councillor Haythornthwaite enquired about the level of assurance around the risks identified on the Operational Risk Register regarding failure to agree terms with landowners for the Huncoat Garden Village project.  Martin Dyson, Executive Director – Resources, responded that negotiations were on-going with the landowners, so as to coincide with any approvals being sought from other agencies, including National Highways.

Councillor Dawson considered that the risk associated with Leisure in Hyndburn should be monitored closely.  Mr Sambrook responded that this was a risk across all councils due to increased energy and staffing costs within that service area.  Councillor Dawson also suggested careful monitoring of the risks association with freehold and leasehold interests in the Accrington Town Centre Levelling Up interventions.  Mr Sambrook indicated that the wording of this risk was perhaps a little out of date, as this stage of the project was almost complete.  Councillor Dawson noted that there had been significant progress in the Planning Department’s staffing position and its ability to meet timescales for processing applications, which had previously been noted as a risk. Mr Sambrook replied that staffing remained a risk across the Council, but some of the issues regarding Planning had been alleviated, with a new planning IT system and new staff.  The risk level would be carefully monitored.

Mr Sambrook commented that a dashboard of key performance indicators would be available shorty to enable councillors to check the Council’s performance at a glance.

Councillor Clements noted that the Leisure issues were considered to be a medium risk.  She considered that the current proposal to spend some £12m should elevate the risk level to high.  Mr Sambrook commented that the designation for this risk was possibly on that borderline.

Resolved          (1)   That the content of the Risk Management Monitoring Report be noted.

(2)   That the Committee recommends that officers review the risk assessment on the Strategic Risk Register for the cessation of trading of the Council’s leisure service provider, with a view to that risk potentially being re-categorised as high