Decision details

 RESOLVED:

That the Cabinet Procurement and Insourcing Committee:

1.  Agreed to approve an extension of the current contract to 30 November 2022

2.  Agreed  to approve the procurement strategy set out in the report for the procurement of a new Public Space Surveillance Monitoring contract commencing 1 December 2022.

REASONS FOR DECISION/OPTIONS APPRAISAL

To approve the procurement strategy set out in this report for the procurement of a PSS monitoring contract. The existing contract was awarded on 1 April 2012 and ran for a 5 year period. It was extended for 3 years in 2017, and for a further 2 years in 2020, both extensions were provided for within the original contract. The current contract is due to expire on 31 March 2022. This report seeks permission to extend the existing contract for 8 months until 31st November 2022 and to tender a seven year contract for the PSS Monitoring

service with the option to exercise ‘no penalty break clauses at years 3 and 5’. The estimated cost of extending the current contract by nine months is £360,600. The PSS Team has carried out a study into insourcing to consider this as an option for the service.

The current service provider is NSL Ltd (NSL - a company within the Marstons

Holdings Ltd group). NSL delivers this contract currently by employing one Operations Manager, four PSS Team Leaders and eight PSS Operators. Of the current staff, their average time in post is 4.7 years - the longest serving has been for 12 years; between them they have 61 years’ experience of monitoring PSS in Hackney. This is a very significant factor in the excellent reputation that Hackney PSS has with other London councils, nationally with UK councils, with Police forces, the Home Office and the Surveillance Camera Commissioner’s Office.

The following options were considered:

1. Insource and cease licensable activity, to remove the need for licensing.

2. Insource and obtain 'non front line' Security Industry Authority (SIA) licences for all suitable staff and Councillors. This would be required to comply with

information management law.

3. Let a new ‘out-sourced’ contract using similar terms and conditions for staff to the existing contract.

4. Let a new ‘out-sourced’ contract using enhanced terms and conditions for staff, bringing their terms and conditions in line as much as possible with Council staff.

5. To set up an independent trading company to undertake the PSS monitoring service.

*Information regarding SIA ‘non-frontline’ licensing to be found in Appendices C,D & E.

Option [1] - Insource and cease all licensable activity

The cessation of the licensable activity removes the need for all staff involved in the management structure, including Councillors, to obtain a licence. However, to cease licencing would prevent us carrying out PSS monitoring on some of the most challenging estates in Hackney, which are managed by Registered Social Landlords (RSLs) - the law says you need a licence to monitor cameras owned by someone else under a contract - to cease Public Space Surveillance Monitoring on these estates is untenable from a community safety point of view. As this situation impedes our pledge to move to insourcing in the borough, legal advice was sought and counsel confirmed that licensing is a legal necessity. The barrister’s findings can be found in Appendix A of the report.

If this option is selected, the financial cost would be circa £716k per annum.

However, the RSLs contribute towards the Council’s budgets for PSS, to pay for staff and infrastructure. The external income to the Council to assist with these costs is circa £160k per annum. If the Council is unable to offer this service to RSLs, because it would be unlawful, they will cease to pay us for the service - therefore the combined cost to the Council is £876k per annum.

Option [2]- Insource and 'non front-line' licence all staff concerned including Councillors

The cost of this is approximately a minimum of £75k every three years (assuming Councillors / staff do not change). The risk is that if an elected member cannot pass the rigorous conditions imposed by the SIA then surveillance has to cease.

If this option is selected, the cost would be circa £742k per annum, the increase of £202k over option 3 (out-sourced) is due to the difference in licensing, increases in pay and conditions.

Option [3] Retain the current ‘out-sourced’ arrangements through the

negotiation of a new contract using similar terms and conditions for staff to the existing contract

This is the status quo and has worked well since 2005. If existing staff terms and conditions are retained the cost will be circa £540k per annum, increasing annually in line with either Council pay or the London Living Wage (LLW) if Council pay stagnates.

Option [4]- Let a new ‘out-sourced’ contract using enhanced terms and

conditions for staff, bringing their terms and conditions in line as much as possible with Council staff

This is the status quo and has worked well since 2005, but can be improved to bring PSS Operators to parity with Council staff terms and conditions in almost every respect. If this option is selected, and the enhanced pay rates are implemented, the estimated cost would be £690k per annum. The cost increase is due to the extra pay and holiday in the contract to bring monitoring staff to parity with likely Council staff gradings and leave allowances. This will result in an increase of budget of £150k per annum based on current costs, increasing in line with pay awards.

Option [5] - To set up a Trading Company to undertake the PSS monitoring

service.

Timescales prohibit this option. The service has liaised with John Wheatley – Director of Sustainability and Environment and examined the resources needed, the timescales involved and then assessed the recruitment, training and licensing implications and it is not possible to achieve in the time available. This could, however, be a long term strategy and therefore break points are built into the proposed contract to allow this option to be further investigated and pursued.

This is a 5 year plan, to allow for initial options of lobbying to change the supposition that elected councillors would need to be Directors, if that fails or seems unlikely to succeed then route B could be explored with a trading company set up to take over at the no penalty break clause point.