Issue - meetings

To consider the strategic director’s report. 

Purpose: to consider the potential additional benefits and savings available by extending procurement arrangements to encompass other corporate services and other district council partners. 

Cabinet considered the strategic director’s report on a proposal to test the market with a view to extending the financial services contract to other corporate services. 

Eleanor Hards made a statement to Cabinet expressing concern at the proposal to include democratic services in the list of services for market testing.  Councillors were dependent on impartial advice offered by this service and this could be lost if the service was privatised. 

David Turner made similar points, expressing concern at the proposal to include democratic services in the corporate services contract.  He also questioned whether officers had any knowledge from political parties on the future availability of the new homes bonus to the council.  He questioned whether the outsourcing of services was a full Council decision, whether there would be efficiencies and economies of scale, whether the analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of contracting out services had taken into account the problems experienced in the early stages of the financial services contract, whether Cabinet would have forecast redundancy figures when it met in December, and whether opposition members could have access to the project board working on this contract. 

The strategic director responded to the points made.  He believed that all services identified in the report should be market tested and drew comparisons with the high quality outsourced benefits service where the contractor already provided impartial advice to vulnerable people and councillors.  He was not aware of any stated intention by the political parties to withdraw new homes bonus funding to the council but explained that all political parties had highlighted public spending including new homes bonus as areas in need of reform.  The decision to outsource services was an operational decision, not a change to any council policy, and therefore the decision lay with Cabinet.  Efficiencies and economies of scale had not yet been demonstrated but Cabinet would not be advised to outsource if service quality became unacceptable; value for money comprised quality and cost and officers had already given quality a higher weighting in this project in the appointment of our technical consultant (70 per cent quality: 30 per cent cost).  Cabinet would not have forecast redundancy figures in December because the council could not know if there would be any redundancies until after it had analysed tenders in 2015.  Opposition members could have access to the project board if cabinet allowed it.  He added that the option of in-house bids to run the services had been discounted but that in-house teams were being supported to transform during 2015 in order for them to be in the best shape possible when they were compared with market tenders on a value for money basis. 

Cabinet supported the proposal to test the market but would not determine which services would be outsourced at this stage.  Cabinet asked that property management was added to the list of services subject to market testing. 

RESOLVED: to

(a)       confirm the re-tendering of financial services rather than seek to bring the services back in-house, with  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7