Issue - meetings

The Head of Strategic Finance and Property introduced the report and drew Members’ attention to the change in the scoring to risks three, four and seven.

The Head of Strategic Finance and Property said that the increase in risk three (performance, resilience and security of IT systems) from A2 to A1 was due to a Cabinet Office review of the shared ICT services. He said that the increase in the risk four (staff capacity and skills to deliver services) from B3 to B2 was due to a national shortage in lawyers, Planning and Environmental Health officers. He said that the increase in risk seven (Judicial Review and/or a major legal challenge) from C3 to B3 was in response to the progress of the Council’s key capital projects. 

Councillor Curtis referred to risk four (staff capacity and skills to deliver services) and risk 5 (poor performance or failure of key partner or contractor) and questioned if the scores for these risks should be higher. 

The Head of Strategic Finance and Property said that temporary agency staff were being used to fill vacant posts. He said that new recruitment methods were being utilised to attract staff, and opportunities such as carer graded posts and   sponsored apprenticeships were being offered. He said that the Council was also exploring the possibility of sharing a Planning lawyer with North Herts District Council.

The Head of Strategic Finance and Property said that with regards to risk 5, the Council pre checked the credit ratings of all suppliers. He said that contracts included bonds and guarantees and that the Council had contingency plans in place should a contract fail.   

The Head of Strategic Finance and Property said that contracts were monitored monthly and that poor performance by a contractor could trigger penalties, and a performance management regime before the termination of contract.

The Chairman reminded Members that the risk matrix scored each risk post mitigations.   

Councillor Curtis referred to risk 6 (Judicial Review and/or major legal challenge) and asked if officers were confident that the score for this risk should not be higher.

The Head of Strategic Finance and Property said that the costs arising from Judicial Review and/or major legal challenge would not be in compensation. He said that the costs would be legal and the delay to effected projects. He said that the score for this risk was agreed by the Head of Legal and Democratic Services and was again post mitigations. 

Councillor Fernando said that he could see the points raised by Councillor Curtis, but that he agreed with the score for risk 6 post mitigations. The Chairman concurred with Councillor Fernando.

Councillor Fernando said that the change in the score to risk 3 (following a review by the Cabinet Officer of the Council’s IT systems) was concerning as it was an area which the Committee had looked at before and suggested that the Council was therefore behind the curve.

The Head of Strategic Finance and Property said that it was unfortunate that the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 433