Minutes:
Mr. Andre Wheeler, a resident in Barwell, asked
the following questions under Standing Order 35:-
“1. When
did the Council sign the contract with Galliford Try Plc to build the George
Ward Community Centre?
2. Why was a group of residents in
Barwell given £20,000 of tax payers’ money, of which a large part was
spent without any checks and balances put in place by the County
Council? Can I be reassured that this is not happening in other parts
of the County Council?”
The
Chairman replied as follows:-
“1. In line with Constructing Excellence principles, Property Services undertook a tender exercise in 2006 to establish a framework of contractors to procure capital works. The tender was based on a quality / price assessment with the price establishing a % figure for fixed prelims and profit that, pro – rata could be applied to all projects. The framework, whilst not being a specific works contract, is a binding document that sets out the working relationship between the parties including conditions of appointment, the form of contract etc. The agreed form of contract was the NEC option C which works on an open book basis to which the %addition is applied.
A competitive tender to establish a guaranteed maximum price was held between the contractors in July 2008 leading to the appointment of Galliford Try Construction Ltd as principle contractor.
An instruction to proceed was
issued by letter on
2. The
County Council allocated a grant of £20,000 per year to the George Ward
Community Project (GWCP) from 2007/08 to support the local Steering Group in
the development of the GWCP and, now that the Centre is open, to contribute
toward on-going expenditure and help it to achieve sustainability as soon as
possible.
The money has been held by the County Council and allocated to the Group
as required. Expenditure was agreed at the multi-agency project board that met
monthly until the completion of the Centre in July. Key items, for example were
to develop the George Ward Centre website and training, which were approved at
the Project Board and the detail discussed at GWCP Committee meetings. Smaller
items of expenditure such as travel expenses for Committee Members and printing
costs were agreed in principle by the Project Board, with the detail overseen
by the GWCP Committee.
The County Council has worked with the volunteers from the GWCP
Committee, who have dedicated a significant amount of time to deliver this
exciting new Community Centre, to keep the costs of the project down and leave
the Centre in the best possible financial position going forward.”
Mr. Wheeler asked the following supplementary
question in relation to question 1:-
“Why did the instruction to proceed with building the Centre precede the
GWCP Committee’s business plan?”
The Chairman
responded that he would ensure that Mr. Wheeler was provided with a written
response to his supplementary question.
Mr. Wheeler asked the following
supplementary question in relation to question 2:-
“Why were the following key items of expenditure approved by the George
Ward Community Project Committee, making use of taxpayer’' money:
·
A PC
maintenance contract worth over £1,000;
·
Travel
expenses amounting to over £400; and
·
Wep page costs
amounting to over £3,000?”
The Chairman responded to the effect of:-
“As stated, all key items of expenditure were agreed by the multi-agency
project board and this would have included the two larger amounts stated in the
supplementary question.
Smaller items of expenditure, such as travel costs, were overseen by the
GWCP Committee. The majority of the travel costs incurred were due to members
of the GWCP Committee traveling to and from County Hall. The County Council is
thankful to the volunteers involved in the GWCP Committee for their work in
ensuring that the project came to fruition.”