Issue - meetings

That:

1.1              The Councils Risk Management Strategy is adopted.

1.2              The risk to the Green Belt be added to the Risk Register.

1.3              The Committee agrees to give delegated Authority to Associate Director of Corporate, Customer and Community to authorise minor changes to the policy, such as terminology, clarification, or administrative corrections with no significant impact.

Councillor Price proposed the recommendation as set out in the report and seconded by Councillor Nelmes.

Councillor Reed proposed an Amendment to the Risk Strategy Management, Seconded by Councillor Sims emphasising that the Green Belt is a crucial area that warrants consideration.

“To add a separate column to the right of the second table at Appendix A, concerning impact of the Green Belt, the precise risk thresholds to be agreed by Audit Committee.”

Members discussed the importance of the Green Belt; it was noted that the Local Plan was not produced in February and there had been an increase in housing and development. Concerns were raised on how the Green Belt would be measured as while Farmers themselves are part of the Green Belt they are too a risk to the Green Belt.

Demarcation lines between Audit Committee and Policy & Resources Committee were discussed. Concern was raised that if the risk adjustment and framework were wrong then the consequence would be more risk to the Council. Members were reminded that Officers had advised that no other local authority had the Green Belt in the Risk Management Strategy. The Risk Management Strategy was designed to manage risks in a balanced way.

On being put to the Council the proposed amendment fell by the vote being 13 For, 23 Against and 1 Abstention.

Members expressed approval that the Green Belt was a high priority, but members felt that too much officer time would be taken in assessing each risk against the Green Belt. The importance of putting the risk in the right place was discussed it was noted that if the risk was put in the right place, the appropriate action could be taken. Risk Management had been reviewed at each Full Council meeting.

On being put to the Council the substantive motion was declared CARRIED by the Chair of the Council by general assent.

RESOLVED:

That:

1.1              The Councils Risk Management Strategy is adopted.

1.2              The risk to the Green Belt be added to the Risk Register.

1.3              The Committee agrees to give delegated Authority to Associate Director of Corporate, Customer and Community to authorise minor changes to the policy, such as terminology, clarification, or administrative corrections with no significant impact.

This report proposes an amendment to the Risk Management Strategy and providing a delegation to the Associate Director of Corporate, Customer and Community to authorise minor changes to the policy.

Members discussed the Risk Management Strategy Amendment and the inclusion of the green belt as a category rather than an item on the Risk Register. Officers clarified the purpose of the Risk Management Strategy was about how the council operates and functions and not the district.

Councillor Cooper raised a motion that the Green Belt be added to the Risk Management Strategy Amendment as a category. Councillor Edwards seconded.

The item was put to the vote with 4 votes for, 7 votes against, and 1 abstained.

The Recommendations were agreed by general assent.

Following Full Council on 10 December 2024, Officers have been asked to consider the following amendment to the Risk Management Strategy:

“To add a separate column to the right of the second table at Appendix A, concerning impact of the Green Belt. The precise risk thresholds to be agreed by the Audit Committee.”

Recommendation

That:

       i.          The Council’s Risk Management Strategy is adopted.

      ii.          The Committee agrees to give delegated Authority to Associate Director of Corporate, Customer and Community to authorise minor changes to the policy, such as terminology, clarification, or administrative corrections with no significant impact.

The Head of Strategy & Partnerships introduced the report, highlighting the research involved examining practices of other local authorities to determine if Green belt should be categorised as a distinct risk. Ultimately, the recommendation is to maintain the current risk management strategy without amendments, which had already been reviewed and approved by the Audit Committee, Policy & Resources Committee, and Full Council in December 2024.

Members emphasised the importance of prioritising Green belt protection over government housing targets in local planning. They highlighted a historical disconnect between officer recommendation and Member priorities regarding Green belt preservation. Furthermore, Members added that residents are increasingly concerned about threats to the Green belt, and therefore they advocate for adding a column in the risk register to assess risks to the Green belt, asserting that this would align officer priorities with Member and community concerns. Officers responded by pointing out that certain risks, particularly financial ones, do not directly affect the Green belt, suggesting that including the Green belt on the risk register might skew the perception of other risks. Members countered however, that protecting the Green belt should be the top priority, and should be tracked in the risk register. They argued that even if assessments often show no impact, the Council should still prioritise Green belt issues. Officers questioned the feasibility of quantifying Green belt loss as an impact classification, and explained that while service disruptions and financial losses are quantifiable, the implications of losing Green belt land are less clear, and suggested that a strategic risk assessment for losing Green belt could be more effective. Members responded by emphasising the importance of distinguishing Green belt from general environmental concerns, arguing for a more precise measurement of Green belt loss based on square footage or percentage. Furthermore, Members argued that by adding the risk to Green belt as a category would support efforts to limit housing development in the Green belt, which is a significant concern for the community. Officers reassured that the recommendation will be sent to the policy-making committee for approval, and officers will explore risk categories further, including environmental options.

Councillor Mike Sims proposed an amendment to the recommendation, seconded by Councillor Ciaran Reed, that; ‘risk to Green belt’ is to be added to the risk register as a category.

On being put to the committee the motion was declared CARRIED by the Chair, the voting being by general assent.

RESOLVED:

That:

1. The Council’s Risk Management Strategy is adopted.

2. The Committee agrees to give delegated Authority to Associate Director of Corporate, Customer and Community to authorise minor changes to the policy, such as terminology, clarification, or administrative corrections with no significant impact.

And;

3. ‘Risk to Green belt’ is to be added to the risk register as a category as per the agreed amendment.