Agenda item

Report of the Director of the Built Environment.

The Committee received a report of the Director of the Built Environment providing the Committee with assurance that risk management procedures in place within the Department of the Built Environment are satisfactory and that they meet the requirements of the corporate Risk Management Framework.

A Member queried why risk CR20 on Road Safety was considered an Amber risk and not a Red risk, as it had been considered a Red risk prior to the Bank on Safety scheme. There had been seven collisions at Ludgate Circus between 2013 and 2017, and there had been eight at Bank junction during the same period. The Chairman added that he agreed that Road Safety should be considered a Red risk.

A Member told the Committee that he felt the wording given for the impact of the risk on the risk register was inappropriate. Following a fatal accident in 2015 the City of London Corporation had been expected to take steps to address the risks, and failure to do so would have been a reputational risk. However, there were greater impacts away from reputation, and to describe the impact in this way was insensitive and self-interested. The wording of the risk was felt to be offensive and encouraged the wrong culture. The City of London Corporation would enhance its reputation by doing what was right. The Member advised the Committee that he had drafted a motion for the Committee to resolve to send to the Audit and Risk Management Committee on the matter.

A Member said that risks were assessed on a statistical basis and should not be assessed on the basis of emotion. The City of London Corporation should not accept responsibility for all accidents, as they could equally be caused by a driver or cyclist. Accidents would occasionally happen, and all the City of London Corporation could do was ensure that the highways were as safe as they could be. The Deputy Chairman suggested that the risk register could be presented more thematically as a policy, as this would be more cohesive and better strategically.

The Director of the Built Environment responded to points raised by Members. The wording of the risk related to Road Safety had been raised previously and had been considered at the Audit and Risk Management Committee who had done a deep dive on Road Safety, and compared it to other risks. Officers could review the presentation of risks, the way they were written and the level of risk for Road Safety.

The Member then proposed a motion, as follows, that:

This committee requests that the Audit & Risk Management Committee reviews the description of the Effects of risks not being mitigated for the Road Safety CR20 risk, and ensures that the description describes the true impacts, rather than ignoring these to merely focus on the reputational implications for the City. Furthermore; we request that all risks are reviewed to ensure that similar misjudgements are corrected.

The motion was seconded, and following a vote by Committee Members the motion was carried.

RESOLVED – That the report be noted, and that the Planning & Transportation Committee move that the above resolution be submitted to the Audit and Risk Management Committee.