Barnet faces second judicial review challenge over outsourcing programme

The London Borough of Barnet is facing a second judicial review over its controversial One Barnet outsourcing programme, it has emerged.

The council had already received a pre-action protocol letter from lawyers at Steel & Shamash on behalf of resident Maria Nash over its decision to award preferred bidder status to Capital for a £320m contract to set up a New Support and Customer Services Organisation (NSCSO).

A second law firm, Public Interest Lawyers (PIL), has now sent a pre-action protocol letter on behalf of another resident, Susan Sullivan, warning of a challenge to the entire One Barnet programme.

Public Interest Lawyers argued that Barnet was acting unlawfully, “both as to the process it has adopted and the substance of its proposals”. 

The law firm said: “The One Barnet programme is unprecedented in its ambition and scale nationally, yet it has never been the subject of a consultation of Barnet residents nor an effective equalities impact assessment.”

The letter argued that Barnet had breached the public sector equality duty.

According to PIL, Barnet has failed to have regard to this duty “both in relation to the timing of its equality impact assessments – postponed until too late in the contracting process; and in relation to the form of the few assessments that have been carried out”. 

The firm added: “They have failed to evaluate the most important question: what is the impact of a wholesale and irreversible contracting out of the council’s functions?

“High-flown contractual promises of bidders lack essential rigour and detail and are no answer to this question. There has been inadequate consideration of mitigating actions.”

Public Interest Lawyers also alleged that Barnet had breached the best value duty in s. 3 of the Local Government Act 1999. It claimed that statutory guidance required consultation, which has not happened.

Finally, the firm argued that Barnet had failed in its public law duties of consultation and information. “In failing to consult, and to consider viable in-house alternatives, the council has unlawfully closed its mind to valuable democratic considerations,” it said.

Public Interest Lawyers called for the immediate suspension of any further contracting decisions by the council and the carrying out of a full and effective consultation and equalities assessment. 

Daniel Carey of Public Interest Lawyers said: “The law requires the council to consult residents and carefully evaluate the impact of its decisions on equalities groups.

"Yet, in the biggest decision the council could possibly take – to effectively cease to be a council as we know it – it has failed to do so. I hope the council will now listen to the legal arguments and give proper and lawful regard to residents and their concerns.”

In its letter, Steel and Shamash similarly alleged breaches of the best value, public sector equality, and consultation duties. It also accused Barnet of breaching public procurement law in handing the ten-year deal to Capita.

The NSCSO project is to cover a range of services, including estates, human resources, IT infrastructure and support, corporate procurement, revenues and benefits, finance and payroll, and customer and support services.

A report to the Cabinet at Barnet claimed that the NSCSO project and Capita’s final tender would make a significant contribution to the council’s corporate priorities.

The authority estimates that the arrangements would save £125.4m over the period 2013 to 2014.

Philip Hoult