Issue - meetings

Committee is asked to consider the significant strategic risks and issues highlighted in this report ensuring continued wider reporting of the Corporate Risk Register and actions across other Committees.

The Committee considered a report on the Corporate Risk Register.

Following changes to the internal audit arrangements the Committee asked which officer would now be responsible for the Corporate Risk Register.

The Group Head of Corporate Governance advised that this decision had not yet been taken but arrangements would be finalised by the end of May 2024 and reported back to the committee.

The Committee resolved to note the report.

To consider the significant strategic risks and issues highlighted in the report and present these to the Corporate Policy and Resources Committee.

The Committee received a report from the Audit Manager on the significant strategic risks to the Council in delivering its priorities.

The Committee received one question from a member of the public in relation to this agenda item:

Question One from Kath Sanders

Question: We are told three times in Appendix A that SBC has “participated in a review of capital risk mitigation with DLUHC and CIPFA” and is “in the process of taking on board any improvement suggestions”.

What are the improvement suggestions and when will the full report be published?

Response from the Chair: Many thanks for your question.

Whilst it is true that approximately twelve months ago officers and some councillors had constructive but confidential discussions with CIPFA colleagues, this has not yet led to any formal report or communication from DLUHC. This is in contrast for example with Runnymede Borough Council who were having similar discussions at the same time and who before Christmas received a Best Value non-statutory report from DLUHC.

Therefore we do not know what, if any, improvement recommendations we may receive from DLUHC or when, if ever, we will receive a formal set of recommendations. In the discussions with CIPFA we covered a number of strands including issues we were already addressing such as further periodic review by external experts of the performance of the investment assets portfolio (JLL recently reported to Development Sub-Committee), enhancing internal audit resilience and capacity (Council in February voted to move its internal audit arrangements to the Southern Internal Audit Partnership).

The Internal Audit Manager identified that the format and presentation of the Risk Register has been refreshed following implementation of a new system, this included removal of surplus content.

The Committee queried why the information on risk relating to the Local Plan had not been updated following the Extraordinary Environment & Sustainability meeting on 29 February 2024. The Internal Audit Manager advised that while she was presenting the report, individual risk owners were responsible for updating information relating to specific risk areas. It was agreed that this would be updated prior to the report being presented to Corporate Policy and Resources Committee in April 2024.

The Committee requested clarification around risk category 7 (Corporate Capacity, Resources, Recruitment and Retention) and asked why there was nothing related to the hiring of contractors on increased salaries for a special role that did not exist within the Council. The Internal Audit Manager advised that under the mitigating actions, reference was made to the Corporate Establishment Review which did address the issue of contractors. The Deputy Chief Executive advised the Committee that hiring of contractors was carried out in accordance with procurement rules, Contract Standing Orders, and reports would have been presented to relevant Committees.

The Committee asked why the risk around Borrowing (risk category 5) was given a score of 9 and queried whether it should be higher. The Deputy Chief Executive advised that the risk was focused on the rising interest rates and that mitigations were in place to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 17