This post gives the recent history of Swindon Council’s attitude to Swindon Dial a Ride (SDAR) service.   The Council’s Value for Money Review (5th October 2009) contains unspecified legal advice recommending cessation of the Grant to SDAR, and appears to have triggered the proposed reduction of £50k in grant aid contained in Swindon Borough Council’s draft budget early this year.  This was opposed by all  and was subsequently dropped.  At least, so it appeared at the time.

Most of us relaxed when the Conservative group amendment to a labour resolution at the Full Council meeting of was unanimous.  But someone has been beavering away in the background, sharpening the knife avainst SDAR, but keeping a low profile until the election was safely out of the way.  The first the Labour Group knew of the decision to submit the service to a full tender regime was when the special Procurement Advisory Group (PAG) meeting agenda was published.  I suspect most members of the Council were equally surprised!

Swindon Dial a Ride did respond in detail to the Value for Money report, but have been denied access to officers to discuss a Service Level Agreement (and much else) ever since 2006.  Council Officers have  failed in their duty to attend any of SDAR board/management meeting for over two years.  Had they done so the efficiency and value provided by SDAR wwould have been crystal clear to them. SDAR also provided independent legal advice to the effect that grant aid for a registered charity involved in the transport and care of disabled people did not come under Article 87 of the EU treaty; again I have a copy of that advice.

My own first reaction was to challenge the Councils legal advice and Officials supplied it to me after checking at the highest level.  I was astounded that the advice was dated 25th January 2010.   I suspect any reader will note the significance of the date that the Council passed the supportive resolution unanimously. I am not at liberty to divulge the contents save to say that I regard the advice as having been ‘invited’.

The EU legislation is titled ”On public passenger transport services by rail and by road“.  As its title makes clear it deals with public passenger transport – not a service which exists for people who cannot use public transport!!

However, as I have said to the Labour Group and I am quite clear about it, it would be a bold elected Councillor indeed who ignored their own legal advice.  Should the Council fail now to proceed to tender and a disgruntled alternative operator chose to contest the grant award and win, Councillors would arguably be personally liable “jointly and severally” –  now there’s a phrase to conjure with.

We are where we are,  and I am content that some Tory members will seek to protect the service by ensuring that any tender document is not ‘tweaked’ and that SDAR gets a fair chance to compete despite unseen enemies.

Cabinet and Lead members make the decisions on behalf of the Council. The Procurement Advisory Group is tasked with ensuring that the Council receives the best service for the most competitive price. Quality of service matters, and so does the unintended consequences that might be missed by others.  Penny wise and pound foolish some call it.  The PAG process is carried out in stages, and to say that to say that “PAG passed it” misrepresents what PAG is about.

Clls Des Moffatt

p.s. Its interesting to note that WiFi did not go through the Procurement Advisory Group.