Examination of Witnesses (Questions 220-238)
9 MARCH 2005
DR GORDON
MURRAY, MR
COLIN CRAM
AND MS
KATHERINE COPE
Q220 Mr Chaytor: What about reducing
carbon emissions, reducing waste, reducing the impact of landfill,
issues of food supply and diet, health, all this sort of stuff,
there is no reference to these things there, is there? This is
all at a fairly abstract level and this is my concern.
Dr Murray: This goes back to the
earlier question, you look to the sustainable procurement guidance
which supports this, which has a significant amount of detail.
I have a copy with me which I am happy to leave. It has a significant
amount of detail on the sustainable food initiative, on the development
of SMEs, on carbon emissions and on the impact of particular processes.
Q221 Mr Chaytor: The document you are
referring to you are going to leave with us? This is the thing
we should be looking at to get more detailed information.
Dr Murray: That document has a
significant amount of detail on how to do it and how to embed
it within the process. This [NPS] says this is where you should
be going and this sustainability in local government procurement
creates the strategic framework for using that.
Q222 Mr Chaytor: This is far more specific
than the document?
Dr Murray: Yes.
Q223 Mr Chaytor: Looking at the outcomes:
you said earlier you can detect in suppliers' brochures a sort
of change in the nature of products which are available. How is
this measured and where do we go to find some measurement of the
changing nature of the outputs? Is your website the sole source
of that or do you publish an annual report which tries to document
these changes in the nature of products which suppliers make available
to local government? How can we assess what is happening in the
field if there is no single document which tries to measure the
changes you say you can detect?
Dr Murray: I am happy to leave
another document with you which is the Year On Report on
the progress of the National Strategy, which compares progress
since the year 2000 with where we were a few months ago.
Q224 Mr Chaytor: That is a one-off document,
it is not a regular publication. There is not an annual monitoring
system which tries to pull this together and so on?
Dr Murray: With regard to the
National Procurement Strategy there is a part of the local government
world which is called the Implementation of Milestones Group who
are specifically responsible for measuring the implementation
of the National Procurement Strategy and addressing how to move
forward that amount of initial support we need.
Q225 Mr Chaytor: The IMG is also under
the umbrella of LGA?
Dr Murray: The Implementation
of Milestones Group is under the ODPM/ the LGA National Procurement
Strategy Steering Group. I am happy to leave a copy of that Year
on Report as well.
Mr Chaytor: I am just trying to piece
the bits of the jigsaw together.
Q226 Chairman: Is anyone measuring it?
You can have any numbers, you have a plethora of different organisations
and people sitting around earning good Civil Service salaries
and pensions doing the stuff, but is anybody measuring it?
Dr Murray: The IDA measure it,
but there has only been a year of the National Procurement Strategy.
It was measured after a year and it was published on 1 March.
It is measured on an annual basis. There is a four year strategy
of measuring the impact every year, so yes is the answer. I think
you said about the type of difference in suppliers?
Q227 Mr Chaytor: Yes, because you said
earlier that you can detect a difference in the products.
Dr Murray: No, I was not referring
to suppliers, I was referring to consortia, which are used sometimes
as suppliers for local government, but are generally owned by
local government organisations. Certainly there has been an increase
in the greening of their catalogues. That could be measured, but
we have not spent a great deal of time measuring it and have not
been asked to. Certainly we can see an increase in the use of
those consortia contracts.
Q228 Mr Chaytor: Moving on to the Centres
of Excellence themselves: Camden is the centre for the London
region, but all the English government regions now have a Centre
of Excellence, do they or not?
Ms Cope: Camden is not the Centre
of Excellence for London, it is the ALG in conjunction with Hammersmith
and Fulham and Westminster. Camden is leading on sustainable procurement
for London through the Centre of Excellence.
Q229 Mr Chaytor: Do all the other English
regions now have one Centre of Excellence?
Dr Murray: Colin is the Director
of the North West Regional Centre of Excellence.
Mr Cram: The short answer to that
is yes. There are nine regions in England and nine Centres of
Excellence covering every council.
Q230 Mr Chaytor: Are they all functioning
at the same level? Are they likely to have a similar impact or
are they taking on their tasks in different ways? How do you judge
the performance to date? When will they be reviewed? Is this going
to go on forever or is there some point at which this concept
of the Centres of Excellence will be assessed and monitored?
Mr Cram: The Centres of Excellence:
probably the best definition is the lead efficiency change agents
for local government. Effectively, the North West Centre of Excellence
started up in January of this year and most of the others started
at a similar time, either January or just before, or in the case
of one or two just after. It is probably fair to say that we are
finding our feet. I guess you want to know how we will be judged
and I have been asked that question several times. Effectively,
we are working on behalf of the local authorities. To some extent,
in our region we are acting as a catalyst to enable them to deliver
various local government agendas, particularly the Efficiency
Agenda and the National Procurement Strategy for local government.
I guess the best judges of us will be our constituents, our local
authorities. We will be measuring the impact of some of our initiatives.
Q231 Mr Chaytor: It is a bit difficult
because if your argument is that the Regional Centres of Excellence
are there to drive recalcitrant local authorities forward, is
it not a flaw in the system if it is those very recalcitrant local
authorities who are going to assess the impact of the Regional
Centres of Excellence? Surely somebody else should be going out
and assessing them?
Mr Cram: I do not think it is
the recalcitrant local authorities and I do not think one should
look at it that way. We are the catalyst for the Efficiency Agenda,
we are the catalyst for the National Procurement Strategy for
local government and, also, we are the efficiency focal points
for government organisations and government departments with local
authorities in the region. The Efficiency Agenda identified, very
clearly, that efficiencies can be made through much greater collaboration
between local authorities, that was one of the means. One of the
things we are doing is encouraging that collaboration. The collaboration
may be, in particular, what we term work streams, commodity areas,
or it can be, for example, encouraging collaboration in corporate
services. Also, we shall be encouraging the transfer of best practice,
identifying best practice in some councils and identifying, if
you like, opportunities for other councils to seize upon that
best practice. Those are some of the things we are doing. It is
not recalcitrant councils, we are looking for opportunities as
much as anything through collaboration.
Q232 Mr Chaytor: If the changes following
the Gershon Report are going to have this absolute focus on finding
cash savings because Gershon has established a very ambitious
figure for savings to come out of local government, what is going
to happen to the concept of sustainable procurement? Is that going
to be sidelined in the mad rush to get cashable, bankable savings
by greater economies of scale?
Mr Cram: Certainly in the North
West, and I guess nationally, the answer is no, it is not being
sidelined. We have got three main themes in the North West: one
is strategic procurement; another is collaborative or corporate
services; and the third theme is, what I call, sustainable communities,
but essentially that is sustainable procurement and it is other
things which relate to sustainable communities as well. That is
very important to the councils of the North West. I think it is
also fair to comment that Gershon's 50% of the efficiencies—and
I think the word efficiency rather than savings tends to be used
in the Gershon Report—are cashable. Gershon defines efficiencies
in a number of ways which probably you would expect from someone
coming from perhaps more an engineering background. It is not
necessarily cost savings, it may be buying something rather better
for the same price. I guess you can buy something which is much
better for a higher price. Also, it is about moving resources
to the frontline. If you are suggesting there is a clash between
sustainability and Gershon, I do not believe there is. Maybe I
can give what I think is a very concrete example?
Q233 Joan Walley: How are you defining
sustainability in that?
Mr Cram: I was afraid you might
ask that. There is a whole range of ways that I am probably defining
sustainability. One is certainly creating more sustainable local
communities.
Q234 Joan Walley: What do you mean by
that?
Mr Cram: We have a work stream
that, for example, we believe will encourage small businesses
and remove some of the obstacles to small businesses. Under that
heading we include also social and healthcare, waste management,
transport—we have a national lead on transport in the North
West—and there is food as well, we are creating a work stream
on food. There is a whole variety of areas where we are looking
at sustainability.
Q235 Joan Walley: What about emissions
or pollution or recycling objectives?
Mr Cram: We have not started to
tackle that yet. As far as emissions are concerned, I would expect
that to come within the transport initiative, certainly as far
as transport emissions are concerned.
Q236 Joan Walley: House building?
Mr Cram: We have a construction
work stream and we intend that should be included.
Q237 Chairman: Is not, perhaps, demolition
more of an issue for Mr Prescott?
Mr Cram: Judging by the house
prices in our part of the world, there would still seem to be
more demand than there is supply. I am astonished at the price
of houses, certainly in the Manchester area. I do not know if
that answers your question? We have a number of work streams tackling
various elements of sustainability. I guess the definition of
sustainability will vary according to those work streams. I think
in some instances we can do an awful lot—and I passionately
believe this—which delivers sustainability, efficiencies
and sometimes economies. Would you like some examples?
Q238 Mr Chaytor: That is fine. Can we
move on to two other areas very briefly. The question of Gateway
Reviews: can you say something about the impact of Gateway Reviews?
Is there some possibility of introducing a "green" environmentally
friendly Gateway Review? Tell us a little about your views on
that.
Mr Cram: Gateway Reviews were
introduced to improve the outcomes of projects because, as you
know, a number of central government projects did not deliver
the outcomes people expected and often a lot of money was wasted.
Gateway Review is something I want to introduce widely in the
North West. I believe it can benefit not only on what we might
term ordinary projects, but also it can be used for determining
whether particular policies should be pursued. The first stage
is a Gateway Zero where you identify, "Is this whole thing
feasible?" and then "Is there a business case there?".
Certainly, one could apply that for environment, if there is a
particular environmental objective. I would prefer to see things
in terms of projects, so one has an objective which is an outcome.
First of all then, "Is the objective a reasonable one? Is
it a sensible one? Is there a business case there? Are the resources
being put in place to deliver that outcome?" in other words,
"Is it a genuine project or an act of wishful thinking?"
Therefore, I think the Gateway Review can be of great benefit,
but I would not tend to see these as projects. Therefore what
I want to see is the environmental outcome expressed in a way
which is a measurable outcome and clearly identifiable. That is
a personal view, but that is what I would like to do. I would
like to see the Gateway Review introduced widely within the North
West for a whole variety of purposes.
Dr Murray: First of all, nobody
in local government would accept for one minute that the drive
is just for cost reductions; this was the previous question. The
Audit Commission's approach, in terms of how we can demonstrate
that a council is performing well includes, for example, that
procurement decisions are not based solely on lowest cost options,
but achieving greatest benefits to the public purse, for example,
securing health or environmental benefits and opportunities for
joint procurement. That is how they are going to be judged in
the next round of the CPA. With regard to the Gateway Review process:
if an organisation has agreed to put their projects through a
Gateway Review process, sustainability is looked at. That is addressed
in terms of compatibility with the project with the overall policy
objectives of the organisation and fits with other government
issues; it is addressed within the process as it is. In my evidence,
I suggested also that there was a potential for the organisation
to use its overview, its scrutiny function and to question, "Are
we do doing as much as we can at individual stages?" We see
that as a productive way in which you can use overview and scrutiny
to embed further before it is too late; are we doing as much as
we can do with regards to sustainability procurement.
Chairman: Thank you very much indeed.
We have gone 15 minutes beyond what I intended. We are grateful
to you.
| 
