One very important facet of local government is transparency, accountability, and that council's procurement of services is open to scrutiny.
For that reason I welcome the council's decision to engage an independent review of its contracting procedures, and not take the first option put up for discussion, that being for the staff to cherry-pick the contracts to be reviewed.
It is important that the independent review (and I have not yet seen the terms of reference) be given open and wide powers to review all contracts and procurement by the Far North District Council. One particular contract that should be looked at is the Alliance contract for the delivery of water and wastewater services in the Far North.
In your paper on Thursday July 20, it is alleged that eight sewerage schemes are non-compliant, or had abatement notices issued for non-compliance. This Alliance contract has been in existence since 2002.
The original contract was established in 2002 between Impact Services Limited, who were subsequently bought by Transfield Services, who were bought by Broadspectrum and who are now owned by Ferrovial. Ferrovial Agroman is a multi-national that carries out civil engineering construction, building and industrial projects worldwide.
How this Alliance contract works is that senior managers of Broadspectrum and the Far North District Council sit together as a management team for the delivery of water and wastewater services in the Far North.
This cosy relationship between the two parties has now existed for 15 years, and does not appear to have delivered excellent services for the ratepayers of the Far North.
The Alliance contract was questioned by Alan Bickers who independently reviewed council's infrastructure and asset management department in 2013/14. His report was presented to council in early 2014.
The council at the time was assured by senior management that the contract was going out to public tender before June 2014.
Well it didn't. I understand that in 2015 last term's infrastructure committee again asked when the contract was going to public tender, and were informed by council management that it was planned for June 2016. Well it didn't, and senior managers advised that the contract was carried over under 'delegated authority'.
The Mayor and councillors are asleep at the wheel while senior managers have just continually rolled the contract over under delegated authority.
Under the Local Government Official Information Act 1987 (LGOIMA) I asked four questions. The first question is covered above.
The other three questions, with answers provided July 20, 2017 are:
1. When was the contract last put up for public tender and advertised publicly? A: The contract is due to go to public tender late this year. It has not been to tender before.
2. When was the current contract awarded? A: The contract was originally a traditional contract, but was rewritten in 2007 as an Alliance.
3. What was the annual value of this contract? A:We are currently reviewing our obligations under the LGOIMA as to whether we are duty-bound to release the value of the contract to you. A decision regarding question 4 will be provided as soon as possible.
The answer to question 2 has been given for the past four years. I hope this year it will happen, and there is a halt to some of the contemptuous behaviours that senior managers have for the elected members of council and its processes. But I remain sceptical that it will eventuate; I have heard it all before.
This Alliance contract gives a private company unprecedented access to senior management in the Far North District Council. This same company is also the recipient of significant funding through the council's roading contracts.
One of the questions an independent review could undertake is to ensure all FNDC senior management have made appropriate declarations of conflict when involved in tenders / contracts involving contractors who have other contracts with the FNDC.
JOHN SCHOLLUM
Waimate North