Agenda item

[To consider a briefing report on the Strategic Risk Register]

The Head of Audit presented a report on the Strategic Risk Register.  The former Chair of the Scrutiny Panel had requested a number of questions be answered with reference to the Strategic Risk Register.  The report provided answers to those questions.  The Strategic Risk Register was facilitated by the Audit Services Department and attempted to capture the top strategic risks the Council faced.  Each risk was assigned a risk owner and the relevant Cabinet Member.  Audit Services met regularly with the risk owners to ensure the register had accurately captured the current state of the named risks.  Audit Services used a scoring methodology which was detailed within the report circulated to the Panel. There was also a set of Directorate and Departmental risk registers where the lower level and more operational risks were captured. There were always discussions ongoing as to whether these risks needed to be escalated up to the Strategic Risk Register.  One area which Audit Services was hoping to improve was the Directorate Risk Registers.  Over the next 12 months work would be taking place to embed the importance of these registers within the Directorates and to improve their content. 

The Head of Audit stated the responsibility for the monitoring of the Strategic Risk Register lay predominately with the Audit and Risk Committee.  Benchmarking exercises did take place with other authorities to assess the Strategic Risk Register, where Wolverhampton always did well.  The Strategic Risk Register was seen regularly by the Strategic Executive Board.  The College had recently been added to the Strategic Risk Register at their intervention.  It was undoubtedly the case that some risks were more difficult to manage than others.  The Strategic Risk Register circulated with the papers had first been published in February, the latest version would be published in July and would be received by the Audit and Risk Committee.   An area currently identified as high risk on the register was the Civic Hall project. 

A Member of the Panel raised the difficulties that had been associated with the re-location of the outdoor market.  These had included asbestos issues, human remains being discovered and dangerously located petrol tanks.  The Head of Audit in response stated that the outdoor market may in the future be listed as an individual risk on the Strategic Risk Register, if after further discussions with the risk owner it was considered appropriate.

A Member of the Panel asked what happened in a situation where a risk had not diminished after a great length of time.  The Head of Audit in response said in this situation the risk owner would ordinarily be called to an Audit and Risk Committee meeting to explain why this had occurred and what action was being taken to mitigate the risk. 

A Member of the Panel stated data protection was a very significant risk at the current time especially because of the new GDPR legislation.  There were potentially severe financial and legal implications for non-compliance. 

A Member of the Panel complimented the Head of Audit Services for his work on risk within the Council.