Agenda item

To note the Risk Management Report

·        Corporate Risk Register

·        Deep Dive – Rail Reform Risk 310

Lead: Daniella Della-Cerra-Smith and David Worsley

 

4.1             Members received the report from the Risk Manager who highlighted key areas on the Corporate Risk Register.  She explained that the current risk environment had not changed significantly.  She explained that TfN is due to move to its new office at Manchester Town Hall next week and noted that TfN is continuing to monitor risk with regard to the political environment due to the anticipated general election. Risks across functional areas are being discussed having regard to the current political environment.  The Risk Manager highlighted the changes made to the risk register following feedback at the August meeting.

 

4.2          The Chair raised a point regarding particular risks which TfN has little or no control and how that information is viewed when looking at the risk register.  The Risk Manager responded that there is an indication recorded in the control action area of the register, recorded as either a high, medium or low score, indicating what influence TfN has over the risk.

 

4.3          Cllr Baker-Rogers asked how ambitions to reduce risks are decided on and whether there is sufficient drive and/or challenge to reduce a risk with a high rating. The Risk Manager explained that if additional actions have been put in place there will be a reduction in risk.  She provided assurance to the committee that very high and high risks are reviewed with the risk manager and work area manager on a monthly basis.

 

4.4          Cllr Mundry stated that in some areas, for example, funding, risks are not in TfN’s control or influence and that it is very difficult for organisations not to have at least some high risks. The Risk Manager commented that in the area of funding, the impact on the organisation is also very high. The Finance Director indicated that the cost base is in TfN’s control, so any reduced funding arrangements would need a commensurate reduction in our cost base.

 

4.5          Mr Brady commented that with regard to Mazars’ Audit report, from a good governance perspective, the committee needs to record that TfN has acknowledged that there is a significant risk but also that it is being mitigated via the risk register through risk 916. Mr Brady recognised that the political environment is being considered at a strategic level, and highlighted that other organisations are horizon scanning in relation to potential change in administration. The attendance and views of the Transport Secretary and Shadow Transport Secretary at the TfN conference were referenced.

 

4.6          Cllr Baker-Rogers asked for a narrative to be provided before risks are presented explaining why there are so many risks over which TfN is unable to influence or control the level. Additionally, Cllr Baker-Rogers asked why net zero is not an appropriate target for TfN; The Head of Decarbonisation for TfN has provided a response and this will be forwarded to Cllr Baker Rogers. 

1.1           

Deep Dive, Corporate Risk 310.

4.7          TfN’s Rail Strategy Manager gave an overview of the risk and answered the Committee’s questions. 

1.2           

4.8          Cllr Baker-Rogers acknowledged that this is a very timely piece of work and highlighted the importance of keeping it up to date. 

1.3           

4.9          Mr Brady requested more information about the relationship between the proposed North West business unit and the North East with TfN. The Rail Strategy Manager illustrated how the North East councils can now have more of a role in specifying local services and influence on what Northern are doing due to the track layout.  It will be difficult for the North West to have the same level of influence because there are more constraints on the West Coast rail line.

1.4           

4.10       Cllr Ross highlighted how things seemed to have stopped at a national level but at local or combined authority level there is a desire to get moving especially around the public transport rail offer.  TfN is balancing those two perspectives.

 

4.11       The Chair raised that risk is about assumptions made and it is how the assumptions are threatened that leads down a particular decision route.  The Chair noted that there was devolution in the write up of risk 310 and the idea of introducing a national centrally funded position by definition is counter-devolutionary, so he asked how could anything in that reform support this drive towards devolution of power.

1.5           

4.12       The Rail Strategy Manager explained how double devolution and political devolution could work.

1.6           

4.13       The Chair noted that we are bad at predicting the future, but we do know that eventually there will be rail reform, therefore the risk could be written by focusing on TfN’s ability to respond to change as it happens rather than focusing on Great British Railways. The Rail Strategy Manager responded by referencing the use of TfN’s future travel scenarios which  help with looking at the future and making long term plans.

 

Resolved:

1)   That the update to the Risk Management strategy be noted.

That  the update to the Corporate Risk Register and the Committee feedback on corporate risk 310 be noted .