Sunday 15 April 2018

Borders recycling contracts awarded without competition

EXCLUSIVE - by EWAN LAMB

The collapse of Scottish Borders Council's waste management strategy in 2015 when a £65 million contract with a debt-ridden treatment business had to be abandoned has apparently forced the local authority to award valuable recycling contracts without exposing the work to competitive tendering.

This month for the second time in a year SBC has published a notice confirming that their long-standing contract for dealing with so-called dry mixed recyclates will continue to be in the hands of J & B Recycling Ltd, of Hartlepool without rival firms having the opportunity to bid because of "special circumstances".

Since that company became sub-contractors to New Earth Solutions, the now defunct firm chosen by councillors to solve the Borders' waste treatment problems, collections of domestic recyclable rubbish have been hauled 110 miles by road to the Tees-side facility. It seems this is the most cost efficient method even though there are treatment plants closer to the Borders than Hartlepool.

In April 2017 SBC published an extremely rare voluntary ex ante transparency(VEAT) notice.

This notice indicated that Scottish Borders Council intended to contract with J & B Recycling Limited for the continuation of the current service.The work has an estimated cost of £300,000 per annum (including haulage from the Council's Waste Transfer Stations to Hartlepool). The contract  duration would be up to 3 years.

So what was the justification for the selected award procedure?

According to the notice:"Scottish Borders Council is in the process of reviewing future requirements for all Waste Management Services. During this period the highest priority for the Council is existing service delivery.

"Therefore until the new Waste Management Plan is fully implemented and to avoid a disproportionate impact on current waste operations it is necessary that existing arrangements relating to service provision continue. A detailed options appraisal has been conducted which confirms that this approach is the most appropriate solution delivering best value while meeting the necessary requirements of the Public Contracts (Scotland) Regulations 2015."

The Borders council has been working on a waste strategy for well over a decade, and their decision to link up with New Earth Solutions in 2011 cost local taxpayers at least £2.4 million when a planned project to build a £23 million treatment facility at Galashiels collapsed in disarray without a single brick being laid.

Now another VEAT notice has appeared on the Public Contracts Scotland website indicating the "award of a contract without prior publication of a call for competition in the Official Journal of the European Union".

The reasons cited on this occasion: "Extreme urgency brought about by events unforeseeable for the contracting authority and in accordance with the strict conditions stated in the Directive Explanation - Scottish Borders Council is in the process of reviewing future requirements for all Waste Management Services.

"During this period the highest priority for the Council is existing service delivery. Therefore until the new Waste Management Plan is fully implemented and to avoid a disproportionate impact on current waste operations it is necessary that existing arrangements relating to service provision continue."

A public procurement expert contacted by Not Just Sheep & Rugby offered the following opinion on the April 2018 VEAT notice: "Looking at the notice I do not believe the reasons are justified for the application of section 6 of the Procurement Regulations (Scotland) 2016. Paragraph (1)(c). The Regulations go on to state: (3) For the purposes of paragraph (1)(c), the circumstances invoked to justify extreme urgency must not, in any event, be attributable to the contracting authority.

"The circumstances stated in the notice do not comply with the regulations.This is simply poor planning.The council would have known for some time the strategy would not have been ready.

"In addition any strategy would have included a requirement for an interim arrangement during a transition period. (i.e. if they were going to build their own facility or use a third party, they would have needed to continue to dispose of the recyclables with a provider; therefore requiring a tender process). They could simply run a tender process for a short period of time."

COMING NEXT: How often have Scottish councils used VEAT notices in the last five years?


No comments:

Post a Comment