Minutes:
Due to Technical issues Mrs Tara O’Shea (Kent and Medway Safety Camera Partnership Project Manager) was unable to present the report remotely. Mrs Nikola Floodgate (Growth, Environment and Transport) presented item 9.
1. Mrs Floodgate introduced the report which set out the procurement of the fixed camera system used in the existing Kent and Medway Safety Camera Partnership. It was highlighted that the current contract was due to expire in August 2025 after 10 years of duration. This had consisted of an original 5-year contract with a 5-year extension that had been activated.
2. The Cabinet Member and Officers responded to questions of detail and noted comments, which included the following
· Members were informed that spend for five years was £1.296 million and had been significantly less than the previous contract period.
· Members asked for if this was an extension of the current contract or an entirely new contract as envisaged in the last to paragraphs of the supporting documentation. Officers apologised for any confusion within the supporting documentation and clarified that there was a need for a new contract via the existing Crown Commercial Services framework.
· Members noted the response and raised that whilst small technical contracts with a reduced supplier base could be challenging there should be an expectation that Kent County Council would be undertaking the correct tender process.
· Officers explained that due to the strict governance associated with the installation of the camera equipment that the associated teams had engaged with professional due diligence from KCC’s Commercial Services Team. An open tender could not be pursued due to the sensitive equipment having to be overseen by the Home Office. Members acknowledged the response but highlighted its absence from the associated paperwork.
· The contract would be a direct award under the existing Crown Commercial Services Contract and be governed by the Home Office and associated judicial requirements. Spend was to be limited to maintenance only. Funding was directly sourced from partners such as National Highways, Medway Council and KCC.
· Members asked for clarification on the partnership funding aspects. It was asked if KCC was to pay to suppliers directly on behalf of all partners and would seek contributions from partners once payment has been made. Officers acknowledged that section 5.5 in the documentation may be unclear in indicating that KCC are spending £75,000 in its own revenue funds. Officers clarified that funds would be pooled together from the relevant partners.
· The issue of non-payment from associated partners was raised and asked if KCC would cover costs if partners had been unable to contribute. It was noted that KCC in terms of non-payment liability would be discussed at the Kent and Medway Safety Camera Partnership and any unitary authority not contributing would have maintenance ceased.
· Additional camera costs would draw from the core road safety budget. Monitoring of replacement items was subject to the scrutiny of the Kent and Medway Safety Camera Partnership.
· It was requested that a paper was to be provided to committee at a later date with an explanation of the workings of the camera partnerships and how they function together. Additionally, Members asked that the number of non-highway cameras be added to paper.
3. RESOLVED to endorse the proposed decision, namely:
That the Cabinet member for Highways and Transport agree to:
i) APPROVE the procurement and contract award of safety camera equipment and service through national frameworks.
ii) (ii) DELEGATE authority to the Corporate Director of Growth Environment & Transport, to take relevant actions to facilitate the required procurement activity; and
iii) (iii) DELEGATE authority to the Corporate Director of Growth Environment & Transport in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Highways and Transport, to take relevant actions, including but not limited to, awarding, finalising the terms of and entering into the relevant contracts or other legal agreements, as necessary, to implement the decision as shown at Appendix A.
Supporting documents: