Wednesday, 13 April 2011

MetPro - Delegated Powers Report confirms a catalogue of errors

A rushed Delegated Powers Report highlights the failure to properly administer the MetPro Contract. Amongst other things the report confirms the following:

- MetPro Emergency Response took over a contract and operated it without the council's knowledge - even though all the bloggers of Barnet, but particularly Mrs Angry, had flagged it up much earlier.

- The report states that MetPro Rapid Response went into liquidation on 15th March 2011 yet they missed all the signs that they were in trouble six months earlier when on 10 August 2010 MetPro were issued a notice for the company to be dissolved by Companies House. At that time the company's correspondence was being directed to the insolvency specialists Bond Partners LLP.

- The report identifies that Blue 9 Security, the company who have taken over from MetPro, are actually cheaper than MetPro - so why on earth wasn't that picked up earlier? Perhaps it could have saved us some of the £1.2 million Barnet are supposed to have paid MetPro.

The Delegated Powers Report suggests this whole process was badly managed yet there will be no public inquiry. The report also states:

Section 5.7 of the council’s Contract Procedure Rules provides the delegated powers for Directors to take decisions on urgent or emergency matters. These decisions can also include the waiver of Contract Procedure Rules where justified. The justification in this case is contained in Section 5.8.2 of Contract Procedure Rules ‘the contract is for works, supplies or services that are required in circumstances of extreme urgency that could not reasonably have been foreseen.’

Strange then that at last night's council meeting the Labour emergency motion to discuss this matter was voted down because it was not urgent. This is a most serious matter, it runs to the heart of how contracts are managed at Barnet. With a massive outsourcing programme already commenced it is critical that the whole process of how contracts are managed needs to be examined now. We need a public inquiry now. An internal audit as is being proposed, will simply look like a cover up.


  1. I absolutely agree with everything you have said, Mr Reasonable. There is an urgent need of a full, honest, independent and open public inquiry. Anything less simply will not do, but such an investigation will be resisted to the last drop of their corporate blood. We must not allow this, or anything else, deter us from continuing to call for the proper scrutiny this very serious issue requires.

  2. What is very interesting about this DPR is how short it is. A refreshing change.

  3. That document has disappeared now. I printed off a copy but I didn't save it. Anyone know where it's gone? It seems to have been taken down because it 'hasn't been assigned to a meeting'. That's a shame, because it makes interesting reading!

  4. I see it's available again. Thanks for finding it, Mr R.

  5. They are cheaper cause they are not so good remember you get what you pay for

  6. Mrs anger you are very nasty person sitting in the orange tree watching the metpro it seem to me that you are really jealous of this company all you do is say bad things about them i think I should come to a meeting to support mr sharkey and his team not one person has said anything good about the work these guys did in five years I find that odd

  7. Mrs anger where is human rights in the metpro matter mr sharkey and team have human right you should stop writing rubbish about them If I was mr sharkey I'd have you all for slander