Agenda item

Contact Officer, telephone number and email:

Duncan Ellis, 01263 516330, Duncan.ellis@north-norfolk.gov.uk      

The Chief Technical Accountant introduced the Report and informed Members that there had been no movement on the risks identified in the summary register. She added that a corporate projects risk had been added, and that any updates throughout the register were highlighted in green.

Questions and Discussion

The Chief Technical Accountant raised the Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFP) risk, and informed the Committee that the results of the spending review for Local Government had been announced last week. It was suggested that the outcome hadn’t brought any substantial good news for district councils such as NNDC. In summary, it was stated that the review equated to the Council’s current funding, with an increase for inflation. It was noted however, that it would not cover an increase in costs for several of NNDC’s services. The Chief Technical Accountant stated that the Council would continue to lobby ministers on the issues facing Local Government, and added that the planned fair funding and businesses rates review had been delayed for one year, which in effect provided more time to continue lobbying Government.

On recruitment, it was reported that the apprenticeships scheme had been a success, with several new members of staff recruited through the programme.

On the property assets risk, the Chief Technical Accountant informed Members that work at the Grove Lane property in Holt had been completed, and that the site was now being let as office space, providing an income for the Council.

Sheringham Leisure Centre, identified as one of the projects under the corporate projects risks, was noted to have been granted an additional £2m funding. It was stated that recommendations from the project management position statement would become actions to improve the corporate project management framework.

Members were encouraged to provide feedback on the format and content of the Corporate Risk Register, with a view to make improvements. The Internal Audit Manager noted that there was no indication of the Council’s risk appetite on the register, and suggested that risks should be articulated in a clearer fashion to reflect the cause and consequence of risks. For example, projects with impact and likelihood scores of 20 or above could be considered outside of the Council’s risk appetite, though this would be for the Council to decide. She added that it was not necessary to include low risks on the register. The Internal Audit Manager then referred to the MTFP risk and stated that though the majority of actions had been completed, the risk score had not changed, and suggested that the risk scores should be amended to reflect the current position.

On the corporate projects risks, the Internal Audit Manager stated that little detail was available for the individual projects, and suggested that risks needed to be linked to the Council’s corporate and strategic objectives. The Chairman added that whilst the corporate projects risk was new to the summary register, he was concerned that it appeared immediately as a high risk. He agreed that the corporate projects risk was too broad for the summary, and needed to be broken down into individual projects. Cllr J Rest proposed that a review of the content of the CRR be undertaken by the Section 151 Officer, and that corporate projects be presented individually on the summary register. The proposal was seconded by Cllr S Penfold.

Cllr C Cushing stated that risks over 60% were not usually considered a risk, but an assumption. The Internal Audit Manager replied that this again highlighted the need to identify the Council’s risk appetite, and suggested that anything over the risk appetite should not be progressed.

Cllr J Toye referred to the coastal erosion risk and asked whether the Council had any control over what was a natural phenomenon. The Chairman replied that there was a financial risk to the Council, as a consequence of the erosion. The Internal Audit Manager stated that in this case, the risk itself required clarification.

The Chairman asked whether resources were available to make the necessary improvements to the CRR, to which the Internal Audit Manager replied that she would be happy to assist the Section 151 Officer to make the changes. The Chief Technical Accountant stated that improvements to the CRR had to be given priority to avoid overlooking any future risks.

RESOLVED

That a review of the content of the CRR be undertaken by the Section 151 Officer, and that corporate projects be presented individually on the summary register.