Issue - meetings

Report ES14034

Highlighting that L B Bromley’s current parking operations and enforcement contract with Vinci Park Services expires in September 2016, coinciding with the planned end date for L B Bexley’s parking contract with NSL, Report ES 14034 proposed that a Procurement Gateway Review be undertaken of the options for a single shared parking contract for both boroughs from October 2016. The review would assess options for the future delivery of the services and the packaging of the shared contract. It would take into account:

·  the current state of the market for enforcement services;

·  developments in parking management and enforcement nationally; and

·  consideration of options for inclusion in the new contract.

The Chairman suggested a PDS Working Group to oversee the proposed Gateway Review Team. The Working Group’s consideration of the parking services contract would include consideration of the proposals on parking enforcement announced by the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG). Although future changes were expected, a contract in the order of ten years would enable a contractor to invest in the service. A break clause could also be included e.g. after a period of five years.

Proposed changes on parking enforcement related primarily to the use of CCTV. It would be necessary to understand the practical implications of any changes and whether more enforcement would be necessary by foot patrols. Some exceptions were expected from any CCTV ban e.g. around schools and bus lanes. Clarity on the detail of changes should be provided during the review and their implications for the parking service provided in a further report to Members next March. The Portfolio Holder expressed concern for any ban on CCTV parking enforcement. It would adversely affect the range of areas enforced; the number of fines imposed for infringements and therefore the level of deterrent for unsafe and inconsiderate parking. It was unclear where parking officers currently employed on CCTV enforcement could be deployed. The Portfolio Holder suggested that road safety around schools could also be jeopardised as the cost of the fleet of CCTV cars could not be covered by use outside schools alone. Local MPs had been lobbied and London Councils were briefing Parliament on the proposals.

It was confirmed there would be a variable budget element for the shared service contract. As part of the review, consideration would be given to how enforcement costs are apportioned between the two boroughs.

RESOLVED that the Environment Portfolio Holder be recommended to agree that:

(1)  a Procurement Gateway review of options for the shared parking services contract be undertaken, and a further report brought to Members in March 2015;

(2)  specific consideration be given to options for the Key Performance Indicators to be used for managing the contract; and

(3)  the length of the contract be for a 10 year period with a potential break clause after 5 years.