Questions asked on tender process for Christmas and Hogmanay celebrations

An Edinburgh council officer said the ‘process is ongoing, but we expect it to be concluded shortly’ | Submitted

An objection to the report has been submitted by GC Live Ltd who unsuccessfully bid to run the events when they were last tendered. A major bone of contention would appear to be the waiving of the charge which was to be paid by the successful bidder for the loss of parking charge income to Edinburgh City Council, which was deemed to be £780,526.

During the tender process GC Live asked if there was room for negotiation on this figure and were told categorically – no. This sum was immutable and had to be paid to the council, so GC Live took this into consideration and amended their bid accordingly, to take into account that this sum had to be paid to the council. Their bid, however, was not accepted and Unique Assembly Limited were awarded the contract.

GC Live’s objection states that: “The council’s failure to enforce parking compensation charges approved by the Culture and Communities Committee in May 2024 and deemed non-negotiable during the procurement process is indefensible.”

It goes on to declare that, there is “no evidence of collection, record of legal variation, committee-authorised waiver of officer authority cited for bypassing adopted policy”. It contends that “this failure constitutes a breach of financial governance, procurement fairness, regulation 18 of the Public Contracts (Scotland) Regulations 2015” and that the result is “preferential treatment to one bidder, disadvantaging others and undermining the credibility of the council’s procurement process”.

GC Live Ltd wants the report to be withdrawn or deferred pending an independent review and for a supplementary report to be compiled detailing all unpaid sums and the enforcement position. If accurate, these assertions cast the council in a dim light to say the least. If GC Live lost out because they bedded the parking charge sum to be repaid to the council into their tender bid, only to see that this money has not been recovered from Unique Assembly Limited, it is understandable why they are crying foul.

This is not a paltry sum, and the council can ill afford the loss of £780,526 to the public purse. Other matters are also raised in the letter of objection to the report and will also have to be addressed by elected members.

As a former Festival and Events Champion for the council I tend to keep a close watch on the performance and public assessment of the cultural programme that the city proudly hosts. There is no doubt that Edinburgh is all the better for its cultural programme and the city’s reputation is rightly held in high regard throughout the world.

So it is important that nothing is done to jeopardise this reputation, and events and festivals producers must have confidence in what should be an open and transparent bidding process when the council invites tenders for the events it sponsors.

If true, GC Live’s observations on the performance of the contract, and the lack of enforcement of its terms as detailed in the invitation to tender documents issued by the council, cannot be taken lightly. If not taken seriously and appropriately addressed, they might well be presented to another forum for determination!