Report of the Head of Democracy and Governance

This report provides an update on the Council’s Corporate Risk Register.

The Committee received a report of the Head of Democracy and Governance, including the latest Corporate Risk Register, which was presented annually to the Committee. 

Councillor Williams referred to the contract management of outsourced services, particularly the ICT contract.  He asked if the Committee could be provided with the details of the latest situation regarding the contract.

The Portfolio Holder, Councillor Watkin, stated that the Council was not in the position where it wanted to be and was still pursuing service improvements from the provider.  The Council was applying pressure from all levels of the organisation.  Some minor improvements had been made.  The contractor had brought in a new management team to work on the project.  Currently the Council was focusing on achieving improvements from the contractor. 

Following a question from Councillor Williams about the new team, the Portfolio Holder advised that the Council’s ICT Client Section Head felt that the new team understood the work that was required.  The Council wanted a realistic statement of what was achievable; promises should not be made if the contractor was unable to keep them. 

Councillor Khan noted the description used for the ‘reputational’ category.  He questioned whether officers should be involved in political matters.

The Head of Democracy and Governance responded that the term was not related to politics but the reputation of the Council as a public body.  She explained that if some of the items listed in this category were not carried out, they could have an impact on the reputation of the local authority, for example the Public Services Network accreditation.  If this was not completed correctly, the Council’s remote access to government services could be disabled, thereby affecting housing benefit payments.

In response to a further comment from Councillor Khan, the Head of Democracy and Governance agreed to look at the description and present it to the next Risk Management Group meeting. 

Councillor Khan said that he was concerned that some risk ratings were not reducing, for example homelessness.  He asked what action would be taken to reduce the rating.

The Head of Democracy and Governance advised that the rating had not been reduced as the Council had received a record number of homeless applications.  The Council was investigating options including if it was possible to develop further hostel accommodation; working with the Council’s partners; or discharging its duty to the private sector.  Some of the risks in the report related to projects which were not the overall responsibility of the Council, for example Croxley Rail Link, although the Council did have a stake in it.  She reminded members that the Risk Register recorded potential risks and causes.

In response to a question from Councillor Khan about the Foundation Trust status of West Herts Hospitals Trust, the Head of Democracy and Governance advised that officers were still waiting for the Trust to publish its strategy; this was likely to be after the General Election.  There had been no more information about the Foundation status.

RESOLVED –

that the Corporate Risk Register be noted.