Agenda item

To review and if appropriate amend Part 11 (Contract Rules of Procedure) following a request from the Procurement Board to do so.

The Council considered a report (Agenda Item 14) concerning proposed amendments to the Council’s Contract Rules of Procedure (Part 11 of the Constitution).

MOTION: Proposed by Councillor James Fredrickson and seconded by Councillor Jeanette Clifford.

That the Council:

“the proposed amendments to Part 11 (Contract Rules of Procedure) be agreed and that the changes come into effect on the 16^th September 2016”.

AMENDMENT: Proposed by Councillor James Fredrickson and seconded by Councillor Jeanette Clifford:

“That the recommendations set out in Paragraphs 2.1 and 2.2 set out in the report be approved and adopted subject to the following amendments:

11.4    Authority

That the first column of paragraph 11.4.4 be amended to read:

Total Contract Value

per annum*

Less than £100,000

£100,000 or more and less than £500,000

£500,000 or more and less than £2.5 million

£2.5 million or more

11.5    Tendering

That the first column of paragraph 11.5.2 be amended to read:

     Total Value £

A             Less than 10,000

B             10,000 or more and less than 100,000

C             100,000 or more and less than relevant EU threshold²

D            Relevant EU threshold or more²

Councillor Fredrickson commented that the amendments which had been previously circulated to members and also tabled at the meeting were minor amendments to clarify the action required if contracts amounted to the exact value of some of the thresholds.

The amendment was put to the vote and declared CARRIED.

Councillor Fredrickson noted that the report sought to adjust the thresholds required for the Executive to sign off contracts. The key change was that contracts valued between £500k and £2.5m would be signed off by Heads of Service, in consultation with the relevant Portfolio Holder, under delegated authority. As these decisions were key decisions they would still have to appear on the Forward Plan for 28 days and would be subject to the Council’s usual call-in procedures. This changes was designed to streamline decision making.

Councillor Lee Dillon commented that she was happy to support the changes as Members and the public would still be aware of forthcoming decisions as they would appear on the Forward Plan and the decisions could still be called-in. He requested that the decisions be monitored to ensure that Heads of Service did not aggregate or disaggregate contracts to circumvent the agreed processes.

Councillor Alan Macro commented that, although not a contract, the Council had recently spent significant sums of money (around £250k) on legal fees associated with a Judicial Review. He stated that although he did not necessarily disagree with the decision to review he felt that the process was not transparent and he asked if this was something that the Governance and Ethics Committee could look into.

Councillor Clifford noted that the changes had involved a lot of work and she thanked all Members and Officers for their input. She noted that the Council had a duty to obtain best value and these changes represented a more mobile and streamlined process but retained the checks and balances described by Councillor Fredrickson.

Councillor Fredrickson thanked Councillors Dillon and Clifford for their comments. He responded to Councillor Macro by explaining that the sums he was quoting for the Judicial review covered a five year period and that large proportion of the costs had been funded by the Local Enterprise Partnership. He therefore stated that there was no need for the Governance and Ethics Committee to consider this matter.

The Substantive Motion, as amended, was put to the meeting and duly RESOLVED.