Agenda item

To review and note the Corporate Risk Register.

The DFR introduced the report and informed Members that officers were keeping a close eye on the emerging situation in Ukraine, with the potential for fuel shortages that could effect the waste contract, whilst additional fuel reserves were being investigated. He added that approval of the 2022/23 budget was now complete, whilst procurement remained challenging amongst ongoing inflationary pressures. It was noted that Covid infections had remained relatively low compared to other areas, and subsequently staff absences had not been as high as predicted. The DFR stated that at a strategic level, the Council were reviewing the Government’s Levelling Up white paper and awaiting further information on the Council’s allocation from the shared prosperity fund. He added that the Net Zero Strategy had now been approved, and officers would be working to implement the action plan, whilst energy rebate payments would be made in April. It was noted that updates to the risk management framework and register itself would be prepared for the June meeting.

Questions and Discussion

       i.          The CE stated that officers were receiving guidance on contingency planning as a result of the situation in Ukraine with reference to fuel supplies, price increases and an emerging refugee situation. He added that the Government’s Levelling Up white paper had chosen Norfolk as one of nine areas invited to discuss a potential County deal, and this was being actively discussed by Leaders and Chief Executives across the County. It was noted that the shared prosperity fund contained £400m for the whole Country, and it was therefore suggested that expectations should be managed on the level of funding made available to North Norfolk and the wider County, though full details were yet to be announced. The CE referred back to the situation in Ukraine and noted that the Council only had one contract with a Russian company via a consortium arrangement, and advice was being sought on the level of exposure and whether this could be curtailed.

      ii.          Cllr P Heinrich referred to p101 and asked whether the Council was as secure as possible from cyber-attack, which would be an increasing risk under the current circumstances. The DFC replied that he had recently discussed the matter with the ADOR, and been informed that all necessary updates had been made in advance of the required deadline and that it remained a key priority.

     iii.          Cllr H Blathwayt noted that EY had pulled out of all operations in Russia, and said that he hoped this would have a positive impact on their UK operations. He added that Bacton Gas Terminal was also a strategically important asset for the UK, and asked whether security had been increased. The CE replied that conversations were taking place with regards to energy security and the transition to net zero, and it was expected that the site would remain a strategically important asset in the immediate future.

    iv.          Cllr S Penfold asked whether updates could be provided with more up to date information, noting that it appeared that some risks had not been updated since January for the March meeting, such as the Net Zero Strategy, which had now been approved. The DFC replied that the January dates supplied were slightly misleading, and efforts were made to ensure the report was as up tot date as possible prior to publishing the agenda. He added that the report had been submitted just prior to Full Council’s decision to approve the Net Zero Strategy, hence it was not listed as approved. The PPMO confirmed that data had been supplied in February, mostly within the second and third week to provide as much up to date information as possible.

RESOLVED

To review and note the Corporate Risk Register.