Agenda item

To set out details of the governance in place to ensure robust procurement of goods and services, particularly for contracts over £2.5m, in order to enable the Committee to respond to a proposal from a member of the public for a scrutiny review.

The Committee considered the report (Agenda Item 7) which provided details of the governance in place to ensure robust procurement of goods and services, particularly for contracts over £2.5m, in order to enable the Committee to respond to a proposal from a member of the public for a scrutiny review.

Members resolved to suspend standing orders to permit a member of the public, Mr Paul Morgan, to address the Committee.

Mr Morgan did not feel that the report addressed the points made in his request for a scrutiny review. He offered to provide further evidence to support his concerns for when the full review was undertaken.

Mr Morgan felt that transparency of some key decisions for the awarding of contracts was lacking. He was concerned at the level of delegation afforded to officers to make these decisions. Mr Morgan felt that there should be greater transparency of reports relating to the award of sizeable contracts, as had been the process prior to 2023. He requested that this prior process be reintroduced.

Members resolved to reinstate standing orders.

Mr Martin Sargeant (Service Director – Strategy and Governance) presented the report which provided background information on the Council’s procurement processes. The report was intended to inform the Committee’s decision on whether or not to proceed with a scrutiny review.

Mr Richard Howroyd (Service Lead – Procurement and Commissioning) explained that he had been reviewing the Council’s procurement processes since commencing his role in December 2025. His findings to date included the view that the Council’s processes were in keeping with other local authorities. Alongside this, Mr Howroyd explained that he was working on a new Procurement Strategy which would be brought to the Executive for approval in due course. He would seek input from the Constitution Review Task Group as part of this work.

Councillor Howard Woollaston felt that the level of transparency for the award of contracts, with a value in excess of £2.5m, had decreased since 2023. He added concerns about a lack of transparency for lower value contracts. There was also the need for Members to be able to review alternative options.

Mr Howroyd explained that the Procurement Act 2023 introduced significant changes, including requirements for transparency at certain stages. However, while Members could be involved prior to the contract award phase, the Act limited such input at the award stage and during the standstill period that followed.

It was suggested that training sessions could be arranged for Members on procurement processes to help improve understanding of the process and when engagement could take place. This was welcomed by Members.

Councillor Carolyne Culver felt that paperwork should be made available at the pre-procurement phase, i.e. the development of business cases. She highlighted some examples where such paperwork was not made available.

Councillor Culver noted that some of the points raised in the scrutiny request had not been addressed in this report. She was of the view that the scrutiny request had been accepted.

Councillor Ross Mackinnon felt that Member oversight of contracts could be valuable and paperwork should be made available at the appropriate stages, recognising that this might be restricted to Part II. Democratic oversight was needed for the significant expenditure of public money and this should include both Executive and non-Executive Members to help maintain public confidence.

Mr Howroyd agreed that transparency was important as was Member involvement. The timing of this did however need careful consideration to avoid risks of legal challenge. This would form part of carefully managed procedures.

Mr Howroyd stated that he could return to scrutiny if Members wanted further input to the Procurement Strategy.

Councillor Antony Amirtharaj felt that a level of oversight was already in place with Members able to scrutinise the procurement plans formulated by officers.

Councillor Jeff Brooks (Leader of the Council) outlined that there was a level of scrutiny in place for the formation of business cases and there was potential for this to be enhanced before the procurement process was entered into. This could be progressed through the Constitution Review Task Group.

There was however a need for extreme caution for the actual procurement phase, taking into account the tightened requirements of the Procurement Act.

Councillor Brooks felt it could be useful for scrutiny to consider the Procurement Strategy prior to it being submitted to the Executive.

Councillor Culver requested that the report return to Committee, providing any outstanding information in response to Mr Morgan’s scrutiny request, and explaining where information could not be provided. Wider scrutiny could then follow.

Action:

·         An updated version of the report would return to Committee for further scrutiny.