Meeting documents

To consider the attached report.

Contact Officer:  Kate Mulhearn (01296) 585724

The Audit Committee had a role to monitor the effectiveness of risk management and internal control across the Council. As part of discharging this role the committee was asked to review the Corporate Risk Register (CRR). The CRR provided evidence of a risk aware and risk managed organisation and reflected the risks that were on the current radar for Commercial Board. Some of the risks were not dissimilar to those faced across other local authorities.

The risk register had been reviewed by Cabinet on 28 June 2017 and then updated by Commercial Board on 11 September 2017.  Since the previous Audit Committee meeting in June 2017 the following risks had changed, as detailed in the table below

Members were informed that management was continuing to consider the Brexit related risks with there still too much uncertainty about the specific implications on the strategic objectives and day-to-day operations of the council to put anything meaningful into the Risk Register.

The covering report and the CRR Update (Appendix 1) were in the open part of the agenda.  However, the CRR (Appendix 2) contains information on some risks relating to commercially sensitive decisions and, as such, was in Part 2 section of the agenda. Overall, there were 21 risks on the CRR (3 low risk, 4 moderate risk, 12 high risk and 2 extreme risks) and these were considered by Members. Information on the risk matrix and risk ratings (impact and likelihood) was explained further in the Committee report.

To facilitate discussion about the detail of the CRR, the Committee resolved to exclude the public from the meeting under Section 100 (A) (4) of the Local Government Act, 1972, on the grounds that the item involved the likely disclosure of commercially sensitive information as defined in Paragraph 3 of Schedule 12A of the Act. The disclosure of such information might prejudice negotiations for contracts and land disposals or transactions.

Members challenged robustly some of the assumptions made in the CRR, both in specific and general terms.

Members requested further information and were informed:-

(i)            Risk 9 – that a Community Safety Manager had been appointed in April 2017, who had responsibility for emergency planning and community resilience.  The Council’s Emergency Plan and business continuity arrangements across all areas were currently being updated.

Members commented that Parish Councils had been contacted about creating their own emergency plans but any impetus had lost momentum due to a lack of support from principal Councils.  An undertaking was given to clarify what role the County and District Council had in supporting the Parishes to draw up these plans.

(ii)           Risk 9 – that a report on the Council’s response to the Grenfell Tower disaster in regard to fire safety management of buildings managed or owned, as well as the actions being taken to mitigate the risk of any similar disaster occurring in the Vale, had recently been reported to the Environment and Living Scrutiny Committee.

(iii)          Risk 11 – an undertaking was given to provide information on whether London overspill and people resultantly moving into the area was leading to any additional safeguarding issues.

(iv)         Risk 17 – that the Council had successfully recruited to a number of vacant senior posts over the last few months, including appointing a new senior accountant.  However, it was still difficult to recruit planners due to a national shortage.  The Council had recently appointed 3 graduate planners.

Members were informed that the Council still had 20-30 vacant posts to fill in the new structure.  Some agency staff were being employed in these posts and their number would reduce as more staff were appointed.

As mentioned at the Audit Committee on 12 June 2017, Members again commented that the CRR should include mention of major external factors/risks – e.g. HS2, East West rail, Oxford-MK-Cambridge expressway, future of RAF Halton – and consider possible future impacts on the Council.  Members were informed that this matter had been considered by Directors after the June audit meeting and it had been decided that these were external factors and largely beyond the control of the Council to mitigate.  AVDCs role in these major infrastructure projects was as part of the strategic planning process.  Risks associated with the VALP and HS2 had been captured and reviewed at CRR numbers 7 and 16 respectively, as part of the risk management process.

RESOLVED –

(1)          That the current position of the Corporate Risk Register be noted.

(2)          That Commercial Board and Cabinet be recommended to split Corporate Risk number 2 (Commercialisation and Income Generation) into two separate risks – one in relation to the Commercial Property Investment Strategy and another relating to other commercial activities.