Agenda and minutes

Members are asked to declare any interests they may have in the business to be discussed and/or indicate that Section 106 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 applies to them.

Members were asked to declare any interests they may have in the business to be discussed and/or indicate that Section 106 of the Local Government Act applied to them.

No declarations were made.

AGENDA

MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO NOTE

Under the law, the Cabinet is entitled to consider certain items in private.  Members of the public will be asked to leave the meeting when such items are discussed.

The Cabinet is recommended to consider the following reports in private on the grounds that they contain ‘exempt’ information as defined by the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985, as amended and consequently that the Cabinet makes the following resolution:-

“that the press and public be excluded during consideration of the following reports in accordance with the provisions of Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, as amended, because they involve the likely disclosure of 'exempt' information, as defined in the Paragraphs detailed below of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act and taking all the circumstances into account, it is considered that the public interest in maintaining the information as exempt outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.

Paragraph 3

Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information).

RESOLVED:

That the press and public be excluded during consideration of the following report in accordance with the provisions of Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, as amended, because it involves the likely disclosure of ‘exempt’ information, as defined in the Paragraph detailed below of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act and taking all the circumstances into account, it is considered that the public interest in maintaining the information as exempt outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.

                        Paragraph 3

Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information).

Under the provision of Access to Information Procedure Rule 19, with the permission of the Cabinet, Councillor Johnson was allowed to remain in the meeting for the discussion of the item, as a spokesperson on the Children and Young People Scrutiny Committee.

Councillor Suleman submits a report.

Councillor Suleman submitted a report explaining the process to date for the purposes of procuring a private sector partner to participate in the formation of a Local Education Partnership and to develop the first four schools as part of the Building Schools for the Future (BSF) 2008-12 project, a major development programme for the transformation of Secondary School provision in the City.

Councillor Suleman outlined the significance of the project both in terms of its impact on education and its major contribution to regeneration of the City.

It was noted that the evaluation process for the procurement exercise to date was conducted under strict pre-determined criteria within which a series of detailed analysis of sub categories such as legal, financial, design and employment and pensions was undertaken.  The criteria were set out in the Invitation to Negotiate (ITN) for bidders to see.  Bidders were set the task of presenting their proposals against these criteria to a given and equal timescale.

The final evaluation scores were very close between Bidder X and Bidder Z. However Bidder X had the highest score (and the highest weighted score) across the whole evaluation process and was therefore the Cabinet's preferred bidder.

Bidder Z scored highly across the partnering sections and very soundly on its ICT solution.  Bidder X was more consistent in its overall scoring with only one area of concern which covered integration issues (between Buildings, Facilities Management and ICT).  Bidder Z was far less consistent and there were scoring concerns  in a number of areas including Employment and Pensions.

Whilst both bidders were affordable when compared to the funding available, Bidder X offered better financial value than Bidder Z.  Bidder X was offering to deliver phase one of the project for  less than Bidder Z and offering a lower price on ICT (as further detailed in the report).  In addition, even though the price was lower, Bidder X was offering more building space across the four schools than the other bidder. It was also providing better design solutions at Judgemeadow and Soar Valley  and, in a particular respect as described in the report,  a better solution at Beaumont Leys School

Councillor Suleman also referred to the Education and Inspections Bill currently passing through Parliament and the additional risk it placed on the Building Schools for the Future project by highlighting to schools the potential for them to acquire trust status. It was noted that despite repeated requests from both Members and officers from the Council, Ministers had been unable to provide any answers to these concerns.  Whilst the City Council were progressing with measures to mitigate the risk associated with the transfer of control from Community school to trust status the Cabinet were very disappointed with the lack of response from Ministers and agreed to continue to press for central government recognition of the incompatibility of their policy of BSF on the one hand and trust schools on the other.

Councillor Suleman also thanked Councillor Johnson for his contribution to the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 55.

The meeting ended at 5.20 pm.