More on Bidding

This is a key time as bidders try and decide whether to proceed or not, so here's a few more bits and pieces on the topic:-

Now Grayprils fools day is gone it's probably worth looking at whats really going on from a different perspective. Once upon a time Serco and G4S were the governments golden boys, but now sadly for them they're bruised and tired and known as dirty companies.

Then it was ATOS. They did great things curing more sick and disabled people then were cured by divine miracles at Lourdes. They for a while also dined at the top table with our neoliberal gods. Now? Towel thrown in, bloody nosed, and a corporate reputation that can only be described as toxic they're going back to France. All of these companies not only have been labelled filthy companies, but they've paid the government many millions of pounds for achieving that reputation.

More recently Buddi have looked to become that favoured child. But after years of trying and at considerable financial cost they decided to cut their losses and go. Losing time and money is one thing, but seeing the true cost of a government contract, they decided it just really wasn't worth it. The odd thing is that Buddi, unlike the others, have enhanced their corporate reputation by walking away. It's clear that whilst money's good, moral fibre, social values and ethics are priceless.

The favoured one at this moment in time would appear to be Capita. Tagging contract, and top of the pile for any new contracts awarded. Indeed their share price has risen recently because of the favour shown towards them by government.

But all is not as it seems. Local councils that have awarded them contracts are beginning to grumble loudly. Birmingham in fact are trying to oust them. They can do the same job themselves at a fraction of the cost that Capita charge. So how long before they start to feel the wrath of Whitehall, begin to reel from reputational damage, and be forced to hand back multiple millions of pounds? Who knows - but it's sure going to happen!

Government contracts? Be smart and leave well alone, don't get Graypril fooled.

***************
I have no doubt that Graylings plans took a massive hit when Serco and G4S were identified as very crooked companies. They would have taken most of the TR contracts as prime providers. With the withdrawal of many interested parties and bidders becoming so few, I'm left wondering if this move by Serco recently may have any significance towards TR?

Rupert Soames is joining Serco as its chief executive a month earlier than expected as the security giant looks to quickly rebuild its reputation in the electronic tagging scandal's wake. Serco said in a brief statement that Soames, who is the grandson of British wartime prime minister Winston Churchill, will now take the helm on May 1 rather than in June. He joins from his role as boss of energy firm Aggreko. The business is under criminal investigation by the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) after it emerged that the Ministry of Justice had been overcharged on Serco's contract to carry out the electronic tagging of criminals. In some cases it was alleged that taxpayers were billed for tagging work that was never carried out. Serco's rival G4S, another outsourcing firm, is also caught up in the scandal. When the SFO investigation was announced, Serco's then chief executive Christopher Hyman quit. Serco was subject to a ban on government contracts until early 2014 as a result of the tagging furore.

*************
I heard from someone working for a potential external bid team that they are concerned about the deals struck by the unions in terms of no redundancies and maintaining T&C's for a set period (obviously, as we all knew, part of their business model was to cut staff). Also, concerns about a dissatisfied work force (highlighted by this weeks strike), and the potential union involvement at a later date if job changes etc take place.

I doubt the main players will have these concerns, they'll just ride roughshod over people. But a lack of competition may leave scope for the unions to make waves; the likelihood is the proposed CRC services will be scaled back when they realise they don't have to offer so much (and thereby reduce their profit) to win a bid for the contracts. 

Then there's this continuing problem for A4E as reported in the Daily Mail:-

Four former employees of scandal-hit welfare-to-work firm A4E admitted swindling taxpayers yesterday. The guilty pleas follow a police investigation into the troubled company which is paid more than £200m by the Government each year. 

All four were arrested after the Daily Mail revealed concerns about taxpayer-funded employment schemes run by A4E two years ago. The company was employed by the Department for Work and Pensions to deliver an employment and training scheme called 'Inspire to Aspire'. It pocketed huge sums from the public purse for getting people off benefits by delivering training and helping people to find work.

But Whitehall officials called in police over concerns that staff were billing taxpayers for 'successful' work that was not carried out or for non-existent clients. A whistleblower claimed forged signatures and blank timesheets were 'routine' techniques used for bumping up the numbers of successful job placements. The four former A4E recruiters admitted a total of 32 offences during a hearing at Reading Crown Court yesterday.

All the offences took place between over four years until February 2013. No date has been set for the former employees to be sentenced. They each face up to 10 years in prison. The A4E controversy began in February 2012 when it was revealed that its founder Emma Harrison had paid herself £8.6 million. Damaging allegations followed that workers at the firm were inappropriately claiming 'success' fees, sometimes for individuals who worked for no more than 24 hours. Officers from Thames Valley Police's economic crime unit searched its headquarters in Slough, Berkshire, as politicians called for a full inquiry.

The furore forced Mrs Harrison, worth an estimated £70 million, to step down as chairman and resign from her role as David Cameron's 'back to work tsar'. Mrs Harrison remains the majority shareholder after building up the company, formerly called Action For Employment, into an operation spanning 11 countries. Her boasts that she can find jobs for the long-term unemployed have won her a string of lucrative Whitehall contracts over the past 20 years. A4e is one of several contractors which earn payments for helping the out-of-work find a job. Half of its work is subcontracted to charities, generating millions in management fees. A further eight former A4E employees, aged between 25 and 43, are expected to go on trial in October accused of fraud.

To ordinary citizens it seems incredible that any government would even consider giving yet more contracts to companies whose employees have been proved to be involved in systemic fraud that benefits the company rather than the individuals directly. This is what the Public Contract Regulations 2006 says:-  

Criteria for the rejection of economic operators

23. (1) Subject to paragraph (2), a contracting authority shall treat as ineligible and shall not select an economic operator in accordance with these Regulations if the contracting authority has actual knowledge that the economic operator or its directors or any other person who has powers of representation, decision or control of the economic operator has been convicted of any of the following offences—

(a) conspiracy within the meaning of section 1 of the Criminal Law Act 1977 where that conspiracy relates to participation in a criminal organisation as defined in Article 2(1) of Council Joint Action 98/733/JHA;

(b) corruption within the meaning of section 1 of the Public Bodies Corrupt Practices Act 1889) or section 1 of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1906;

(c ) the offence of bribery;

(d) fraud, where the offence relates to fraud affecting the financial interests of the European Communities as defined by Article 1 of the Convention relating to the protection of the financial interests of the European Union, within the meaning of—

(i) the offence of cheating the Revenue;

(ii) the offence of conspiracy to defraud;

(iii) fraud or theft within the meaning of the Theft Act 1968 and the Theft Act 1978;

Finally, I saw this interesting observation on facebook which rather neatly sums up the dilemma for NPS-bound colleagues:-
So I started reading the Becoming a Civil Servant Guide this morning...I managed to get to point 2 before wanting to throw it in the fire....Not convinced I want to come back to the UK and resume with NPS anymore!

"2. The duty of the individual civil servant is first and foremost to the Minister of the Crown who is in charge of the Department in which he or she is serving. In the context of the National Offender Management Service (NOMS) and the Ministry of Justice, this is the Justice Secretary, Chris Grayling."