Agenda item

The Q4 2025/26 Risk Management report was presented for Members’ consideration. The report provided an overview of the Council’s corporate and departmental  risks for the period up to the end of March 2026, together with an update on progress made in strengthening the Council’s risk management framework.

Members were informed that significant work had been undertaken to review and refresh the Council’s approach to risk management. Assistant Directors had completed reviews of corporate risks, and a programme of training had been delivered across the organisation with the aim of embedding risk management practices more effectively. In addition, Internal Audit had reviewed the current risk management processes and would undertake a further review later in the year, or early in the next calendar year, once updated strategies and refreshed risk registers were in place.

It was reported that an officer Strategic Risk Management Group had recently been convened to review all corporate risks and that this group would continue to meet going forward. Consideration was also being given to involving a Member Risk Champion in future risk reviews in order to strengthen Member oversight of risk management.

The Committee was advised that the report set out the definition of corporate risks and included details of current risk levels. In particular, there were three risks identified with high inherent risk scores of 20 or above. The report also highlighted risks that had been closed, new risks that had been added, and a number of risks that had been amended. Members noted that a separate section detailed the latest position in respect of service-level risks.

During consideration of the item, Members raised a number of detailed queries regarding specific risk areas. Questions were asked in relation to the ‘Failure to meet waste requirements of the Environment Act 2021’ risk, with Members seeking further information on the progress to date, ongoing financial and operational pressures, and the potential financial implications in the event of a failure to meet the statutory compliance requirements, particularly with regard to the introduction of food waste service. Additional queries were raised regarding procurement, including the extent of progress made in updating policies, any gaps in staff training, and the assurance that the Council was fully compliant with legislative requirements.

Members also queried risks associated with the Renters’ Rights Act and requested clarification on the implications of non-implementation, the risks that remained outstanding, and the actions planned to mitigate these risks for both the Council as a landlord and for tenants. Concern was expressed that this risk may have been understated, and it was suggested that it should be upgraded a medium risk within the Council’s Corporate Risk Register until a comprehensive mitigation plan had been developed and reported.

Significant concern was raised in relation to outstanding remedial fire safety works. Members noted that a substantial number of fire remedial actions remained unresolved and that progress appeared limited. Members emphasised the importance of ensuring timely completion of these works and requested clarity on expected completion timescales and contingency arrangements in the event of contractor or resourcing issues.

In response, Officers present acknowledged that not all risk leads were present at the meeting and therefore detailed responses could not be provided on every point. However, it was confirmed that the issues raised by Members would be taken away and incorporated into the Quarter 1 report, which would be presented to the Committee at its next meeting. It was proposed that a comprehensive update addressing all outstanding queries would be included within that report to enable formal consideration by Members.

In respect of the risk of failure to comply with procurement rules, Officers advised that the Contract Procedure Rules had recently been updated and approved by Council, and that processes and procedures had been strengthened accordingly. Internal Audit reviews of procurement and contract management had also been undertaken, with actions incorporated into ongoing risk management activity.

Members highlighted the need for improved narrative within the report, particularly in relation to high-risk areas. Concern was expressed regarding limited information provided in respect of the one red-rated risk in the departmental risk register relating to the revenues service where insufficient contextual information had been provided. Officers subsequently clarified that this risk related to data compliance and the need to update vulnerability indicators within existing datasets. It was noted that this represented a significant piece of work, and the absence of fully updated and consistent data contributed to the high-risk rating.

Members suggested that future reports should include a brief explanatory narrative for all high-risk items in order to provide clearer context and support effective scrutiny by Members. Officers agreed with this approach and confirmed that this enhancement would be incorporated in future reporting.

Further discussion took place regarding the overall level of detail provided within the report. Some Members expressed frustration with the lack of detailed information in relation to some risks, particularly in the absence of relevant service leads. Officers acknowledged this concern and outlined a number of potential improvements, including targeted training sessions for Members, the provision of additional contextual information in addition to meeting reporting where appropriate, and the possibility of inviting specific risk leads to attend meetings on a cyclical basis or when particular risks were identified in advance.

The Committee agreed to resolutions as per the report, with addition of requesting a change to risk score in respect of the ‘Non-Implementation of the Renters Rights Act 2025’ Corporate Risk from low to medium risk.

RESOLVED that

1)    The strategic risks and mitigations detailed in the Corporate Risk Register be noted.

2)    The changes to risk scores, owners/leads, and removal/addition of risks had been considered, and changes suggested by Members as detailed in the pre-amble above.