Today, I took part in a committee meeting which called in a report on the the
future delivery of digital and ICT services by Glasgow City Council. The report was called in by four SNP councillors and myself for further scrutiny. I was able to present key concerns about the proposed arrangements to deliver ICT services when the current contract comes to an end.
Critical
is the calculation of long-term costs. I asked what
account has been taken of outcome of the business case established
when
Serco was awarded a 10 year, £265m contract in February 2008 to
deliver ICT and Property Services to Glasgow
City Council.
Service
Glasgow LLP (trading as ACCESS), a Limited Liability Partnership
jointly owned by Serco and GCC was formed soon after to deliver the
contract from 1 April 2008. The contract was to deliver savings to
GCC in the order of £70m over 10 years, according to GCC’s
Business Case. The projected savings arise mainly from a guaranteed reducing charging profile over 10 years. Serco has committed to underwrite the performance of ACCESS to provide the services for 30% less by the end of the 10 year term and so the savings are guaranteed to GCC. These savings were to be achieved by increased productivity, requiring less staff to deliver the services and significant reductions against the third party supply chain of £12.4m inherited from GCC. I enquired if the costings have been reviewed, evaluated and used to help inform the development of the proposals emerging for the services from 1st April 2018?
Another concern is the assessment criteria. At
2.3 in the report, it refers to key criteria for the assessment.
The
current contract focused on benefits and protections for Glasgow City
Council to
ensure that Best Value continues to be achieved. These include
providing GCC with:
- A single point of accountability;
- Streamlined governance processes;
- Economies of scale;
- Standardisation of systems and processes;
- Established track record of delivery.
The
overarching commercial framework provides the Council with cost certainty and
protects the Council by transferring the financial and delivery risk
to ACCESS (which is underwritten by Serco), while continuing to share
any additional benefits.
This
new proposal has been developed without reference to the above
list of criteria. It refers to;
- service delivery and ability to innovate
- affordability
- risk transfer to the party best placed to manage it and
- time to implement the option
It
seems to be a lack of continuity in terms of assessment of:
- A single point of accountability;
- Streamlined governance processes;
- Economies of scale;
- Standardisation of systems and processes;
Due
to the significant change in the criteria used in the assessment
process, it would appear that the current contract arrangements
provided by a joint venture model are less likely to emerge as the preference for future service provision.
I asked what
process has led to the key criteria being chosen. Also, why
did the criteria change from the list used as part of the current
contract arrangements? I
am particularly concerned about a council assessment process removing
any reference to provision of "a single point of
accountability". This proposal involves millions of pounds of
public funding and there appears to be a lack of any consideration to ensure
accountability for decision-making within the contract.
There
is reference to a list of principles at set out in section 3 of the
report.
At
3.5 there is reference to protection
for staff:
• Terms
and Conditions, including pensions, protected
• No
compulsory redundancies
• No
compulsory relocation from Glasgow
How
is this going to be achieved without current governance arrangements,
processes and procedures? Reference
to structure of the current ACCESS Board was not provided. What is the
Project Board? How
will the contract report to councillors and committees? What
about the adoption of the Living Wage? How
will the proposal guarantee job security? How
will all current terms, conditions and employment status be retained
for all staff? How
will current pensions arrangements be guaranteed for all staff?
There
is no mention of property and asset management in the list of
principles. How
will this contract support Facilities
Management and Preventative Maintenance? How
does the contract support carbon management and sustainability of our
assets?
There is reference to details provided in section 6 risk transfer.The Council is now completely reliant on ICT to run services such as Education and Social Care. There is move to a paperless office and mobile services. The context of the proposal including changes since 2008 are not mentioned and trends for the next 7 years are not detailed. I asked what about the risks associated with financial systems and impacts of any failures. I sought details of safeguards to be in place if the ICT is outwith council control and there is significant failures in service delivery.
I mentioned the consultation with the council family and ALEOs to develop the proposal. There is no reference to any discussions across the council services and ALEOs. I asked for information about consultation to develop the principles as set out in section 3.
After committee deliberations between 1.30- 4pm, there was a vote on a motion by Green and SNP councillors to refer the report back to the Executive Committee seeking independent appraisal of all of the options for the future of digital and ICT services. This was passed by 8 votes to 7 votes.