Oakham Town Council, Contract Corruption. the Audit Commission, Grant Thornton UK LLP

A short while ago I was asked by Oakham Town Council to provide proof that there is an issue with
the way contracts are awarded and the involvement of the Clerk in the process of of awarding these
contracts.

My response to Oakham Town Council was their own records and documents contain the proof.

For example in 2009 the internal auditor picked up the council had paid one of the Clerks close
friends a large sum of money. This payment was paid even though the invoice contained no address
details. At the following meeting the Clerk reported this to member according to the minutes as
if it was a minor issue.

The recipient of that payment was once employed by the Town Council and is a Director of a company
that went on to supply a service.

The cost of that service rose by several thousands of pounds over the following years.

It was not until I found the connection to the Clerk did the council finally agree to put out to tender
and the contract value has dropped each year since.

Then finally behind closed doors the Clerk decided to declare an interest regarding the new tender
from that company.

At the last full council meeting the contract was renewed fortunately to a new company once again.
Once again the contract was awarded behind closed doors.

Public and Press excluded due to the confidential and sensitive nature of the matters to be discussed.

So often this council forgets it is handling public money.

The Minutes for the last meeting include the following entry:

The Clerk left the room during consideration of the next item of business as a close friend
is a director of one of the companies which has submitted a tender.

I need to find the rules on tendering but I believe it is about time "close friends" are banned
from tendering from tendering for public money at Oakham Town Council.

I am currently working on finding out who is the external auditor for Oakham Town Council.

so they can investigate value for money for the tax payer regarding the Oakham Gym based
in Princess Avenue.

When I sat at the council table the council paid for a survey this conducted in secret.

the council was considering moving out of Victoria Hall it costs them over £10,000 a year
to rent a small space,

As a result of that survey a report concluded it would cost around £30,000 for the council
to make the move work. That is about 3 years of the current location cost.

It was decided behind closed doors the public would not be happy if the council spent
so much money on that move.

The council fail to explain why they then went onto to spend nearly £64,000 making the
premises suitable for a private business.

A local surveyor valued the property in its poor condition and said the council would be likely
to gain a rent of £12,000 a year.

So why now after extensive improvements why do the council let it to a private company
for less £9,000 a year for the next six.

This will not cover the costs paid by the tax payer, this is not value for money.

The expenditure is about a quarter of this years income / precept.

The Council agreed to put the property on the open market and later in a closed
meeting retracted that decision and and let it to a person who just happened to
approach the Clerk.

I have spoke with many members of the public and business owners who find
this expenditure used to set up a man in business, not a community project
a private company wrong an unacceptable.

I have been advised by Rutland County Council that I should contact the external
auditors and ask them to investigate.

I asked the Clerk for the address he has provided me with a copy of a letter
from the Audit Commission who appoint the auditor the letter is dated 29th
August 2012 it names the Auditor as  Grant Thornton UK LLP no address
given the Clerk writes a note saying the council does not have a contact address
yet.

So I will have to start with the Audit Commission.

I wrote to my MP Alan Duncan
asking who I should raise this concern with he so far has failed to respond.

I hope they will start the ball rolling and look into the Gym and the garden centre
contracts mention in this post. Neither appear to have provided value for money
for the local tax payer,