JLIS, now Carillion. What next?

The saga of Croydon Libraries continues…

The background

Croydon outsource libraries, without consulting properly and ignoring the responses of those consulted.

The service in libraries was cut to the bone, before outsourcing, through a major reduction of experience library staff and librarians, major book cull, reduced promotion of events, limited access to working PCs and a system for loans, returns and reservations that has seen library users unable to get access to the books they want or left with heavy fines for books returned but not processed on the system.

The procurement process faltered. The companies applying were all asked to re-tender, adding to the delay and the expense. As predicted, JLIS won the contract, though quite how this win was achieved when Wandsworth chose GLL to run their libraries in this joint procurement process.

Private Eye, 10th January, 2013

The future?

Despite JLIS fighting hard to win the contract, just three weeks in, it came to light that Carillion have taken control of Croydon Libraries, outlined here.

Staff were unaware,

“…members of staff at the libraries were not informed of the sale and only realised a change had taken place after they noticed their emails had changed…” 

John Laing no longer sees libraries as core business,

“Adrian Ewer, chief executive of John Laing, said running libraries no longer fitted the company’s core strategy.”

And Carillion, who have no history of running library services, are trying to get to grips with what it means to run a library service.

 “A spokesman from Carillion said they are undertaking an operational review to gain an understanding of the library service and it will ensure all staff are kept fully informed of any future developments.” 

In the meantime, Croydon residents and the staff in Croydon libraries are left with the shambles.

Private Eye, Issue 1352, 1-12 Nov. 2013

What next?

#Croydon Defeated Libraries Motion – The facts

The motion put forward by Croydon Labour on libraries was defeated last night.  It is covered in the Croydon Advertiser:
Labour Party motion on Croydon’s libraries is defeated,

in the Croydon Guardian here:
Croydon Labour group pledges to tear up libraries contract if they win 2014 local elections

and on Inside Croydon here:
Emergency meeting called on sell-off of Public Libraries
here:
 Questions Pollard must answer over library shambles
 and here:
Council accused of being out of control on libraries

What are the facts?

• Save Croydon Libraries Campaign represents the views of residents and we seek to hold Croydon to account. We were consulted but no one took account of the views expressed. We know what Croydon residents want as they spoke up in their thousands and we continue to collect views and information. We are non-party political.

•   We DO NOT support Labour’s plans for Co-operative Trusts, as they report. We are yet to find a resident who understands what it means! The campaign has been given no information or consulted by Croydon Labour.

• JLIS have not pulled out of the contract, as has been reported.

• Croydon Council must allow the short-listed bidders to resubmit their bids under strict EU procurement rules. There are only GLS and Laing (JLIS) in the running.

• Croydon Conservatives are trying to downplay the seriousness of the collapse of the procurement process by referring to it as a delay, a pause or a hiccup. This will cause further delay and disruption to our library service, increase stress on staff who have worked under uncertainty for two years now, and will not come cheaply!

• The Conservatives have lost touch with their duty to serve the residents and for accountability. Cllr Sarah Bashford even claimed in the meeting last night that Cllr Pollard need not have made an announcement about the problem, which he referred to as “a small announcement” in the Budget meeting earlier this month, but could just have issued details in a press release. Cllr Lynne Hale said they were responding 100% as residents wanted!

• Croydon Labour are pressing for a Co-operative Trust model, without consultation, leaving residents confused and let down. At least the Conservatives went through the motions with their sham consultation!

• The Save Croydon Libraries Campaign has been used by Labour in their press release and this has been raised directly with them.  The Campaign will work with any political party or organisation in order to resolve the plight of our libraries and would encourage and support a cross party working group to discuss the issues before further grave and costly errors are made.

• Both parties are now acting without a mandate and this has got to stop!

Croydon residents are passively sitting and waiting to hear the outcome, confused by the misinformation in circulation, whilst our much loved library service decays under cuts by the back door and serious ongoing neglect.

We hope residents will stand up and be counted.  We must stop this as it is not what residents want!

Please let us know your thoughts and, more importantly, what you see as the next key move for Save Croydon Libraries Campaign. 

All information will be treated in confidence.

Email savecroydonlibraries@gmail.com

Follow us on twitter @SaveCroydonLibs 

Join us on facebook https://www.facebook.com/groups/savecroydonlibraries/

Croydon’ s Extraordinary Meeting on Libraries

[View the story “Croydon EM on Libraries 18/3/13” on Storify]

Consult? Nah! Croydon Labour know best

Labour plan to impose Co-operative Trusts on the network of Croydon libraries; no consultation or public engagement, presumably no consultation with staff.

 How many residents visit the Croydon Labour site? Not many by the looks of it if the campaigners and residents shock at this announcement is anything to go by. The campaign has even spoken to staunch Labour supporters who had no idea this was the plan.

But, proudly displayed on the Croydon Labour website is the following undated entry.

Libraries safe with Labour 

BRIGHT FUTURE FOR CROYDON LIBRARIES – LABOUR’S VISION FOR 2014 

Over the last 2-years the Conservative-run Council in Croydon has run down our libraries and threatened closure of 6 branches. This on top of closing the Mobile Library Service. 

The Conservatives are currently in a needless dispute about Upper Norwood Library; with the possibility of closure still on the table. 

Today Labour announces that it will pick up the work of the last Labour Council (1994 – 2006) which had a fantastic record of investment in Croydon’s Library service, including new buildings at Broad Green, Selsdon and Ashburton; full refurbishment of Upper Norwood Library (with Government funding) and initiation of Thornton Heath Library refurbishment project. All libraries made fully accessible.  

Since 2006, Tory run Croydon Council has not initiated any new investment in the Library service. Instead, it has closed the mobile library service; reduced staffing and allocated a £250,000 budget to privatise the whole library service. 

Key announcements:1) Labour will not be committed to the Library Service being run by a private company or another local authority2) Labour calls on the Conservative-run Council to cut the wasteful back office spend to make savings in the Library budget. In 2010 / 11 Croydon Council spent 44.78% of the Library budget on back office services: like computers, call centres and building maintenance etc.3) Labour is committed to a professionally run Library Service in each community. 4) Labour is committed to establishing local Co-operative Community Library Trusts that will be a partnership between residents, users and staff in running, managing, enhancing and developing Croydon’s libraries5) Labour is committed to local libraries reflecting local communities; ensuring that each library will develop in its own unique way alongside core library services 6) Labour has written to the bidders and the Council solicitor making the above points 

Councillor Timothy Godfrey, Shadow Cabinet Member for Libraries said:
“Residents have shown that they support their local library time and time again. It is time the Council stepped up and actually involved local people in protecting and developing their local library service. Privatisation is simply a lazy approach.”

Councillor Godfrey added 
“Those organisations that are bidding to run our library service now know in clear terms what Labour’s plans are. If the Tories press ahead with this privatisation, we will be there in 2014 to pick up the pieces and re-build our library service in a cost effective, efficient way that engages properly with local people”

Upper Norwood Library again. But do Labour show any real interest in Croydon’s 13 libraries?

 Could there be any flaw in the plan? 

• Residents have not been consulted at all on this proposal. At least Croydon Conservatives went through the motions.

• Croydon Labour claim residents and library campaigners support this plan, yet no one can locate these individuals. Save Croydon Libraries Campaign is recognised, both within and outside Croydon.  Who is this other campaign group no one has heard of and who are these residents remaining so silent, only talking to Labour?

• And, most importantly, when they state, ” Labour is committed to establishing local Co-operative Community Library Trusts that will be a partnership between residents, users and staff in running, managing, enhancing and developing Croydon’s libraries” when did residents ever indicate they wanted to run or manage our libraries?

Can you believe #Croydon Labour on libraries?

A press release was issued today and kindly forwarded to the Campaign group as it had not shared directly with us. 

This press release will anger people further.  We are the campaign group in Croydon and no one has heard what we have to say so it is unbelievable that the press release is entitled “Labour Listens to Library Campaigners”

Here is the contents of the press release in its entirely.

LABOUR LISTENS TO LIBRARY CAMPAIGNERS
Croydon’s Labour Leader Cllr Tony Newman and Lambeth Leader Cllr Lib Peck joined forces with Upper Norwood councillor Pat Ryan this week to restate Labour’s commitment to the much loved and treasured Upper Norwood Joint library. Labour Leader Councillor Tony Newman said:  

“Labour councillors have forced an Emergency meeting on Croydon Council for this Monday to defend all of Croydon’s libraries; fighting Tory plans to privatise our valued libraries and their staff. The Tories plans to sell our libraries will cost council tax payers in Croydon more money and it will rip the heart out of the libraries vital role in our community. These are not my words but those of library users and campaigners in Croydon.”  

Labour’s spokesperson for Libraries Councillor Timothy Godfrey said: 

“The Upper Norwood Library Trust is a model that the incoming Labour council of 2014 is determined to see rolled out across to other libraries in Croydon. It will give the community a real say in how our libraries are run and what services are provided there.” 

Leader of Lambeth Council Councillor Lib Peck said: 

“I was delighted to join Croydon Labour colleagues to reaffirm our commitment to Upper Norwood Library service and supporting Croydon Labour’s fight against the Tory cuts to library services and other sectors in Croydon.”

Croydon Labour have not forced a meeting.  This is procedure.

Croydon Conservatives do not plan to ” sell our libraries”.

If Croydon Labour insist on ignoring the views of residents they will have little chance of becoming “the incoming Labour Council of 2014” as no one will trust them. At least the Conservatives kept up the pretence of consulting. It was a totally flawed consultation and ignoring the views of residents but at least they went through the motions.  But Labour, who promised a public meeting that never materialised, are now foisting a plan, built of political dogma, without any engagement with the public.

Where did this come from? Does anyone know?

Is there any party in Croydon likely to actually represent the views and wishes of Croydon residents?

If there are any residents or library campaigners who are in contact with Labour and feeding in these views please do get in touch as we do not know of you and would like to understand where this has come from.

We doubt very much they exist.

Agenda for #Croydon Libraries Meeting 18/3/13

An extraordinary meeting has been called for Monday 18th March at 6.30pm.  The first any resident knew of this was when the details were circulated via facebook and email, late on Thursday.

To save you trying to find the papers buried on the council website the link is:

https://secure.croydon.gov.uk/akscroydon/users/public/admin/kab14.pl?operation=SUBMIT&meet=3&cmte=EMC&grpid=public&arc=1&utm_source=Library+Main&utm_campaign=3fbede5031-Emergency_Meeting3_16_2013&utm_medium=email

The only items for consideration are:

MATTER FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE COUNCILFollowing the receipt of a requisition signed by 13 Members of the Council, the Mayor has agreed that an Extraordinary Meeting of the Council should be held. 
The requisition states: 
“We hereby call an Emergency Council meeting to discuss the follow Motion:
This Council regrets the incompetence of Councillor Fisher’s administration over the failed privatisation of Libraries to John Laing.
It is vital that Croydon Council must be efficient and effective in delivery of front line services.
We agree to match the savings proposed in the John Laing deal by forming a cross party working group to deliver a Co-operative model based on devolved budgets and responsibilities; staff being employed directly through the council; removal of senior management layers; and ending the practice of expensive outsourced contracts for IT and facilities management”

And, you guessed it, the public and the press may be excluded from the meeting.

Camera ResolutionTo resolve that, under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act, 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following item of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information falling within those paragraphs indicated in Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972, as amended.

 Irrespective of this emails are circulating furiously, given the short time frame in order to alert residents to this meeting.

Given that this is a really important issue to residents and that local councillors know this, we are left wondering who no one was alerted to this if notice of this meeting was circulated to all councillors over a week ago? That’s what the posting clearly shows. See the issue date at the bottom of the entry, reproduced below.

 As a campaign group we would like to know:

Were you alerted to this meeting by any councillor of any party?
We know of only the Upper Norwood Library Campaign being altered by one councillor and in the hope that they would support Labour’s plans.

Do you support the co-operative model being put forward by Croydon Labour?
We are yet to hear of any Croydon resident who asked for this or who is in support of this.

And

It is unlikely any resident or campaigner will get to speak but a very obvious question remains. Why are Labour proposing to match savings offered by Laing when GLL’s bid was cheaper and provided a better level of service?

Please add your comment to this post.

We’d love to hear what residents really think.

Shh! Croydon Labour calls meeting over Libraries

The following is being circulated to residents and has been passed to Save Croydon Libraries Campaign.  It clearly demonstrates that not only have the Conservative administration bungled the procurement process to outsource libraries, which will have cost Croydon dearly, but that Croydon Labour do not know what they are doing and emulate the Conservatives by acting without a mandate.

When will those elected to serve realise they have a duty to the residents of Croydon to consult and listen?

Residents are being told that,

“Following the statement made by the Cabinet Member Cllr Tim Pollard at the last Council Meeting that John Laing had withdrawn as the likely contenders to take over all the Libraries in Croydon, and that the Croydon Council would be re-tendering…..”

My comment: 
BUT Laing have not withdrawn. They tried to change the terms late on in the process around pension entitlements for staff.  Laing are experienced at procurement and many suspect they took advantage of the poor handling by Croydon.  As Croydon and Laing have long-standing business dealings they waited till the last moment to pull this detail, hoping Croydon Conservative administration would accept the terms. 

The collapse of the process means, under EU procurement law, all the short listed bidders have to be invited to resubmit their bid for the contract and can alter any aspect of this that they choose.  

GLL and Laings are the only two understood to be entering into this process. Given the apparent shoddy treatment of GLL it is surprising that they are willing to work with Croydon

In the meantime,

•  the Croydon library staff have an uncertain future hanging over them as we go back to the drawing board.
• Croydon Council is undertaking the redecoration of libraries out of this year’s budget, leaving staff shunted across the borough while libraries close. 
• The redecoration should have included an IT upgrade but this is on hold as we go back to the drawing board, meaning more disruption to services and more expense as this will need to be undertaken at another point in the future.

The communication continues to detail that an extraordinary meeting is being called by the Croydon Labour group for Monday 18th March at the Town Hall 6.30pm.  The aim outlined is to have a proper discussion on the plans to privatise all the Libraries in Croydon.

My comment:
BUT no-one has thought to communicate this to the Save Croydon Libraries Campaigners.

Given that this has only been received late on Thursday evening it hardly gives any time to prepare for this meeting or for interested residents to make arrangements to attend.

The wording of the motion is as follows,

“We herby [sic] call an Emergency Council Meeting  to discuss the following Motion: 

This Council regrets the incompetence of Councillor Fisher’s administration over the privatisation of Libraries to John Laing. It is vital that Croydon Council must be efficient in delivery of front line services. We agree to match the savings proposed in the John Laing deal by forming a cross party working group to deliver a Co-operative model based on devolved budgets and responsibilities: staff being employed directly through the Council; removal of senior management layers; and ending the practice of expensive outsourced contracts for IT and facilities management” 

My comment: 
Whilst the Upper Norwood Library, jointly-run until recently by Croydon and Lambeth, are now going down the Co-operative model route, this has not been discussed or consulted upon in relation to the 13 Croydon libraries.

Like all library campaign groups, Save Croydon Libraries Campaign has supported Save Upper Norwood Library Campaign in the decisions they have taken for their community.  Campaigners in Lambeth and elsewhere, where Co-operative models are being proposed, are open to the idea but wary of the potential of such a model to deliver a comprehensive and efficient library service.

The big difference is that these communities were consulted. Croydon was not!

No one in the consultation process asked for a Co-operative model and Labour did not choose to consult residents on such a proposal. 

Whilst huge potential savings on back office costs have been identified, including the exorbitant IT contract, heavily loaded on the libraries budget, no one has called for management layers within libraries to be stripped.  Given the cull of staff undertaken it is difficult to see what this would achieve, other than more closed libraries when a single member of staff calls in ill.  We’ve been there.  Let’s not repeat it! 

I have to say that calling a meeting at such short notice, on a model not yet explained, explored or consulted upon, places Labour in a very weak position indeed. But then I hear regularly that Labour are not listening and are not interested in representing parts of the borough, such as the South. 

Croydon residents have fought long and hard to defend their libraries.  They do not want to run them!

The clear message is that we value a professionally run service. This includes not only our qualified librarians but the experienced and knowledgeable library staff – many having worked their way up to management positions through dedication and commitment and others just offering a brilliant service as a long standing member of the team, including our Saturday staff – many of whom have been forced to move on when hours were cut.

Croydon Labour are doing a disservice to the Croydon community by pushing this politically loaded statement through for debate.

Let’s see real engagement.  

Let’s see those elected to serve really listening to the residents.

Let’s see all parties working for a better future for Croydon rather than the petty point scoring to which we are now so accustomed.

Croydon deserves better!

Post submitted by:
Elizabeth Ash, Croydon Libraries Campaigner
….in haste, given no time to consult further because of the lack of notice.

I’d love to hear what other residents think of this proposal.

Labour’s Statement on #Croydon Libraries

We reproduce Labour’s press release which was posted by a member on our Facebook page, along with further clarification and an audio extract for those not present at the meeting.

Croydon Labour Press Release:

TORY LIBRARY COVER-UP AS CONTRACT COLLAPSES

Despite warnings from Labour councillors in previous meeting and widespread public opposition, Cllr Fisher’s Tory administration dream of selling off our much loved libraries lay in tatters last night as Laing’s integrated services spectacularly pulled the plug on Croydon – despite being handed hundreds of millions of pounds of our money as taxpayers from Croydon Conservatives.

Wasting council tax payers money was clearly not a concern as the humiliating u-turn was tucked away at the end of the full council meeting. In a calculated abuse of local democracy, the increasingly controversial Mayor of Croydon refused to allow Labour’s spokesperson for libraries to question the Tory frontbench over the debacle.

The decision to go back to tender to sell off our libraries is one of the biggest issues in Croydon, so one could be forgiven for expecting such an announcement to be given more prominence and urgency. This on the night that Croydon residents are asked to fork out more money than they can afford to pay for the Croydon Tory Council Tax hike.

Labour’s spokesperson for Libraries Councillor Timothy Godfrey said:

“The Tory failure to run this borough properly is now costing tax payers dearly. We need to implement real savings in the library service now and in a responsible way that is not based on the dogma of privatisation. Labour’s plan can be implemented now and can deliver the savings that had been promised by Laings; savings that can be used to benefit local people rather than go into the pockets of Laing’s shareholders.

Labour Leader Councillor Tony Newman said:

“We are calling an emergency meeting of the council to hold to account the Tory front bench and seek a full explanation in light of this latest act of total incompetence and waste of money. Surely 5-years later the full details of the secret deal to build a multi-million pound luxury Tory HQ in so called partnership with Laing’s must be published for all to see.”

For those not at the meeting some points may not be clear from listening to the announcement made, which Cllr Pollard clearly refers to as “a small announcement” You can listen here. 

Bear the following in mind as you listen:

The order of the agenda items were altered, knowing that this announcement would therefore come at the end of the meeting, giving no time for councillors to raise any questions. This appears to be a deliberate ploy to silence any discussion and if you listen the Mayor is quick to state “no questions”. This is followed by the most bullish behaviour from the Mayor, Cllr Eddy Arram, likened by some on twitter to someone barking orders at a dog, as he repeatedly shouted at Cllr Godfrey, “Sit down!” and then “Out!”.  The audio even picks up someone spitting under their breath, in exasperation, ” Get him out of here, now!”

What followed was that Cllr Timothy Godfrey was evicted from the Chambers, his Labour colleagues followed, and the Conservative Councillors are then heard to laugh heartily at agreeing to receive the reports, without challenge, with no one present to object.

There is not only no real democracy in Croydon there is clearly no shame as to how low those who claim to serve us will sink in order to push through their plans and cover up the complete collapse of their procurement process.

You can listen to the full meeting on Croydon Radio.

Cllr Pollard’s Q&A on Croydon Libraries

The following Q&A was received by a resident from Cllr Tim Pollard in early December and is reproduced here, in full. 

Croydon is reticent to announce that Laings is the preferred bidder and at least one local councillor still feigns ignorance. 

It also worth noting that Cllr Pollard makes another broken promise here.  We’ve highlighted it in red.  Not only have Croydon not announced the savings they claim this will make they have not announced the bidder publicly. Some suspect this may be because the process is still being challenged.

Have other bidders been treated fairly? If challenged, this could lead to a costly legal challenge.

And how can Croydon really effectively judge the service another provider offers when they are incapable of seeing the deterioration under their control?  

Q&A CROYDON LIBRARY PROCUREMENT

Why couldn’t this service continue to be delivered in house?

Croydon Council, like all councils, has seen a significant reduction in its income as a result of the economic climate and the national requirement to reduce the structural budget deficit. Croydon could not continue to deliver a service in house at the same levels as today and make the savings that are necessary to meet

overall council budget requirements.

The alternative to bringing in an external provider would have been to cut services, potentially leading to the closure of branches.

Are you going to be shutting libraries to deliver this service in future?

No: a key objective of the outsourcing of the library service was to maintain of the current network of libraries. This contract will enable us to achieve this objective.

How did the Council choose its Preferred Bidder and why was this different to Wandsworth Borough Council’s Preferred Bidder?

The Council, in conjunction with Wandsworth Borough Council, ran a thorough and rigorous evaluation procedure. It was made clear throughout the procurement process that the two Councils intended to award separate contracts and therefore Bidders bid for each Council’s contract separately submitting two distinct tenders. The tenders submitted by each Bidder differed significantly between the Councils.

The Councils formed a Joint Project Team which included officers from both Councils. This Joint Project Team evaluated each tender received for both boroughs against pre-determined and published evaluation criteria and each sub-criterion was scored. For each borough a separate score was awarded to each Bidder: in other words, it was quite possible for a bidder to score highly for one borough but poorly for the other. As a result of this evaluation process the different preferred bidders were identified for each Council. The Joint Project Team made recommendations based on the results of this process.

The Joint Project Team comprised Officers with a wide range of technical and professional experience and qualifications from both Croydon and Wandsworth including ICT, HR, FM and Legal Services and all the evaluation scores were agreed within the team.

The team also received advice from external specialist advisers throughout the procurement and evaluation phases.

Why don’t you publish bidders’ tenders?

It is standard procurement practice not to publish tenders. There are a number of reasons for this. From the participating organisation’s point of view, participation in the tendering process costs them a great deal of money and their submissions are unique to them and covered by intellectual property law. They would not want their work and ideas to be freely available to their competitors or other potential

customers.

From the council’s point of view, the publishing of tender submissions may impact on the competitiveness of the process as companies may chose not to bid if their tenders would be made public. It may also reduce quality of the tenders proposed, with Bidders less willing to reveal any commercial “edge” because of the risk of this being made available to their competitors. If this were the case it would have a negative effect on any procurement exercise that the council partakes in and result in poorer value to the public.

We are also precluded from making tenders public because of our legal obligation under the Public Contracts Regulations 2006 (as amended) to keep Bidders solutions confidential and not to reveal the information to any other participant or to reveal the information generally. The purpose of this is to keep the integrity of the procurement process and to encourage Bidders to be as open and innovative as possible with their solutions.

Is the preferred bidder the best value for the council and taxpayers?

By “best value” we mean which tender was the “most economically advantageous” to the Council as this was the criteria which were used to evaluate the tenders. The evaluation took into account price, technical, quality and legal proposals. John Laing Integrated Services Limited submitted the most economically advantageous tender for Croydon.

What was the point of running the joint procurement exercise when you have appointed different bidders?

By having officers from two councils assessing the bids jointly we not only brought a wealth of experience and quality assurance to the evaluation, but it also created economies in the process that saved money for each authority. For example, the total bill for external legal advice was roughly the same as it would have been for one borough, but under this procurement it was split between the two boroughs.

Whilst the procurement was run jointly it was made very clear that the councils might not award both contracts to one bidder.

Why was GLL acceptable to Wandsworth and yet you appointed JLIS?

Whilst the procurement was run jointly it was made very clear that the Councils might award the contracts to different bidders. Each tenderer was required to submit a separate bid for Croydon and Wandsworth. GLL’s bid was the most economically advantageous offer for Wandsworth. JLIS submitted the most economically advantageous offer for Croydon.

What were the differences between the bids for London Borough of Wandsworth and London Borough of Croydon?

Because of our legal obligations under the Public Contracts Regulations 2006 (as amended) to keep Bidderssolutions confidential and not to reveal the information to any other participant or to reveal the information generally, we cannot reveal the details of bids nor the major differences. However, we can say that GLL’s bid for Wandsworth’s libraries was compliant and offered the most economically advantageous bid for them in terms of the price and quality standards offered. In the case of Croydon’s libraries, it was the JLIS bid which was compliant, and was the most economically advantageous bid for us in terms of the price and quality standards offered.

Rumours in the local press and blog sites suggest that the cheapest bid for this contract was disqualified. What efforts did you make to ensure that the lowest price bid was acceptable?

Because of the duty we have to maintain commercial confidentiality (outlined above) we cannot discuss individual bids, but we can discuss the principles of the evaluation process. The evaluation took into account both price and quality aspects. At the final tender stage the price element of the bids carried the more substantial weight in the evaluation, making the price the more important part of the evaluation.

However the Council also wished to ensure that a quality service was to be delivered to residents. Whilst quality received a lower percentage weighting than price at the final tender stage, the officers set strict quality thresholds for tenders which, if they were not met, could give rise to the tender being rejected. The reason for this was that the officers had provided Bidder’s with detailed feedback on their initial proposals at length during the dialogue phase and entered into dialogue with the bidders around any issues arising. 

Therefore if these final‐stage thresholds were not met it was felt that the bidder would not be able to meet the Council’s requirements.

Did all the bids received include the provision of professional librarians and sufficient local management oversight?

The tender documentation requires that the Contractor is to:

‐ provide suitably qualified and experienced staff to deliver and develop the Services and to maintain or increase standards of delivery and quality.

‐ provide sufficient management, professional and frontline operational staff to deliver and develop the services and to maintain or increase standards of delivery. Managerial and professional staff will have appropriate qualifications and experience.

Any bid which did not meet the minimum required standard under this evaluation criteria, for example by not providing qualified librarians or sufficient management capacity, could be given a score that could lead to the rejection of their bid and all bidders were aware of this.

Is it possible for a bidder who “finishes bottom” to be awarded a contact, as suggested in a local blog site?

No, the process ensures that the winning bidder is the one who offers the most economically advantageous bid for the Council in terms of set criteria including quality and price.

Was a bidder rejected because they are not qualified to run a library service, as suggested on the same site?

No. The first stage of the selection process tests bidders’ ability to run a library service and no bidder would have got through to this final stage if they were not qualified to run a library service. However, it is possible for a bidder to be disqualified at the final stage if they scored sufficiently poorly on one of the evaluation sub‐criterion.

Is Upper Norwood Joint Library part of the outsourcing (sic)

Upper Norwood Joint Library has never been part of the outsourcing of Croydon library services. The council’s approach to Upper Norwood Joint Library was agreed by cabinet in September. Officers are working hard on the implementation of the community management model for the library.

How will the council ensure that the quality library service currently received is maintained when the contract is let?

The winning bidder will be contractually obliged to provide the services to meet the Council’s requirements in accordance with the council’s specification and the way the bidder planned to meet the need through its proposed methodology.

Rigorous and robust monitoring is being put in place in place and there will be regular and frequent checks and visits made by the council to ensure that all standards continue to be met. We are very confident that the contractor will deliver an excellent service, but the council also has the ability to impose substantial

penalties if performance does not meet the required standards.

How much did this procurement exercise cost (sic)

The total cost to date is approximately £94,000, which includes external legal costs, staff costs and some actuarial fees. The largest element of cost was the external legal advice.

The legal costs would have been approximately double this if we had not conducted the procurement jointly with Wandsworth.

Why was this decision taken at Corporate Services Committee rather than going back to Cabinet?

Corporate Services Committee is the council committee which reviews all contracts valued at over £500k before making recommendations of award to the relevant Cabinet Member. Cabinet can also award contracts where necessary, but this is unusual. In either case, due to the issues of commercial confidentiality alluded to above, the discussion would take place in closed session. The decision to move to preferred bidder status can be called in to the Scrutiny committee for review and this meeting will take place on 5 December.

The decision to outsource library services in principle was taken in open session in September 2011, following an earlier review of the branch network, which was also discussed in Cabinet as well as being called in for review by the Scrutiny Committee.

What benefits for residents and library users will there be?

Details of the savings that are expected to be made will be formally confirmed in the next few weeks, however they look to be substantial, and we expect the cost of the procurement exercise to be recouped within the first few months of the new contract.

What we can continue to assure residents is that no branches will be lost, and the new contract also guarantees that the council will retain the freehold of all its library buildings. Current levels of service will be maintained and improved, with branches opening for the same number of hours as they do now.

There will be a complete refresh of ICT services for the library service, improved service for the public including the availability of WIFI (currently not available in branch libraries). There will be an increase in the book fund (money spent on buying books). There will be participation in new initiatives e.g. the National

Reading Offer.

The library service will continue to look for more opportunities to involve members of the community and create further links with the voluntary sector through friends groups, fundraising events and social and learning activities.

Increasing the cost of running libraries – So #Croydon

It is shameful that £250K was wasted on a procurement process that sees Croydon awarding the libraries contract to JLIS, a subsidiary of John Laing, but the farce does not end there.

The procurement process was sold to residents as a way of saving money, by working with Wandsworth, therefore offering economies of scale. Laing  is  a company that is already heavily involved in Croydon, including the building of the shiny new council HQ, which Croydon council  insists is being built at nil cost, and a £450m regeneration scheme.  The truth is exposed as various deals are already coming unstuck. If you want further details Inside Croydon covers this issue extensively.

But Wandsworth appointed GLL, a not-for-profit company with some expertise in running libraries, employing experienced librarians to oversee the provision.  They were chosen as they offered ‘best value for money’ – their tender representing not only the lowest price of the short-listed bidders but also realising the highest score in evaluations.

As Cllr Timothy Godfrey points out, the deal stuck in Croydon will not realise any saving. In fact it will cost Croydon more than offering the contract to GLL or continuing the management of libraries in house, to the tune of a cool £4m over the life of the contract and no economies of scale realised.

The shocking figures for Croydon libraries were released in the recent CIPFA data, where back office costs, long identified as a huge barrier to the efficient and cost-effective running of Croydon libraries, are exposed as completely out of all proportion with any well run library service. This is no news to campaigners or the Labour opposition in Croydon as this was highlighted early on as a reason to reconsider the procurement process not only by Labour’s Godfrey but by Tim Coates, who attended a shadow cabinet meeting and presented the stark facts to all in attendance, including the then Conservative lead on libraries Cllr ‘Booktoken’ Bashford.

Given this, it is unbelievable that Croydon would plump for a more expensive deal with Laing than to tackle the problem that they created in the efficient running of Croydon libraries or opting to let GLL run services, jointly with Wandsworth, at least excusable as it is cheaper and better than what is already on offer.

Thanks to Private Eye for covering the story – Issue 1331, available in all good newsagents.

Private Eye – page 28 of Issue 1331 – 11 January – 24 Jan. 2013

So we have a greatly reduced spec, no economies of scale and a hugely inflated cost to Croydon, in order to outsource our libraries to Laings (JLIS). 

You really couldn’t make it up!