Agenda item

Risk Management Update


Information Business Partner – Vanessa Higgins gave an update of the Council’s Risk Management arrangements in accordance with generally accepted good practice.


The Strategic Risk Register identified 16 Strategic Risks, of which 8 were rated ‘high’ and therefore above the risk tolerance threshold. There had been 4 changes to the strategic risk profile as follows:-


·       New high rated risk around employee wellbeing, included in response to the pandemic and new ways of working;

·       Downgrading of the external funding risk from high to medium due to levelling up and shared prosperity funding streams coming online;

·       Increased risk rating for environmental regulation to incorporate climate change targets;

·       Downgrading of opportunity risk around trading and commercialism due to project being temporarily put on hold due to the pandemic.


The Operational Risk Registers showed 42 Operational Risks, of which 9 were rated ‘high’ and therefore above the risk tolerance threshold. A number of changes had been made to reflect the new management structures and responsibilities, including:-


·       Development Services – Building Control risk removed now that the Derbyshire partnership was in place. Arboreal risks added;

·       Communities – new register in place, all rated ‘medium’ including resourcing of Climate Change Action Plan;

·       Revenues & Benefits – rationalisation of Universal Credit risks, supplier failure risk reinstated;

·       Environmental Health – escalation of major incident risk to reflect the ongoing pull on public health resources.


September’s Project Risk Review saw 1 new project added – Developer Contributions Supplementary Planning Document. 2 projects had been closed due to completion – Hybrid Mail & Civica Pay (Phase 1). Existing Project Risk Registers were:-


·       Committee Management System;

·       Leisure Consultancy;

·       Assets Database;

·       Collective;

·       Countryside Sites;

·       Cheadle Town Centre;

·       Brough Park;

·       Tunstall Road area;

·       Sports Villages;

·       Procurement Workflow;

·       Building Control Partnership;

·       Land Charges migration;

·       NEW Developer Contributions.

Members raised queries regarding the report as follows (responses in brackets):-


·       Had there been any member involvement in the formation of the Agile Working Policy? (Once the policy was formed it would be reported back to members for comment. This report was to identify the strategic risks rather than to consider the actual content of the policy.)

·       Could an update be provided to members on the Tunstall Road development project, following issues regarding land ownership and ‘ransom strips’? (This request would be forwarded to the Regeneration Team.)

·       Had a risk been identified through the 2 Alliance Councils being in differing regions – Staffs Moorlands (West Midlands), High Peak (East Midlands) with regard to potential Local Government reorganisation? (The position had been noted, but there had been no specific plans for reorganisation announced by government – only preliminary considerations around different governance models associated with the potential transfer of resources and responsibilities.)

·       In the light of a recent storm and resultant power outages etc, was Emergency Planning included in the risk register? (Contained within the Business Continuity Plans were details of how key services would respond in such circumstances, covered by a General Reserves Assessment. The Council also had insurance to cover for business interruptions.)


RESOLVED – That the Council’s risk position and the mitigation / fruition plans as summarised within Appendices to the report be NOTED.

Supporting documents: