The ICO orders Stockport Council to reveal the deal with Steve Pilling!

Following a ruling by the Information Commissioner's Office, Stockport Council have until 15th October 2019 to reveal how much public money they have invested in The Produce Hall, along with what due diligence they performed prior to the awarding of the contract, or risk being found in contempt of court. 

The decision comes as Stockport Council sought to withhold this information to us (and the public) on the grounds of “commercial sensitivity”, based on a clause they have agreed with Steve Pilling in their contract for The Produce Hall which would prevent any information about the deal being released through Freedom of Information requests.

As part of their argument to withhold information about the deal, the council stated that “A duty of confidence forms part of the Agreement at section 17” and disclosure of this information would be a “breach of confidence” which "could reasonably lead to Steve Pilling bringing a court action for that breach of confidence" which "would be likely to succeed”.

Now, not only is it deeply concerning to us that the council would agree to clause in a contract aimed at preventing any information about this deal from being released through Freedom of Information requests, it is incredibly alarming that it was signed three months after we submitted our first Freedom of Information request, back in June 2018. 

Despite this, the ICO ruled in our favour and stated that "there is a strong and legitimate public interest in the openness and transparency of public authorities with regard to their decision-making processes. In particular, there will be a public interest in knowing more about commercial contracts and projects involving the expenditure of large amounts of public funds." 

Going back to our our first Freedom of Information request in June 2018, whilst the council didn't confirm any information about the deal, they did confirm information about the process which we had long suspected, including that:

• The council did not follow any official rules or regulations during the process to find a new operator for The Produce Hall as “there are no written formal regulations or guidelines" that applied to the ‘informal’ tender process they undertook.
• The selection panel visited Steve Pilling’s pub The Moor Top on 11th October 2017, as he was "unable to be accommodated" on the date of the formal presentation at the council's offices.
• During the selection panel's visit to his pub, Steve Pilling provided the panel with “samples of the proposed food offers for the Produce Hall and Blackshaws.”
• According to the council, these food samples were “below the threshold required for inclusion on the register of gifts/hospitality” and so were "never officially recorded". (We understand the threshold to be £10)

The failure of the council to conduct a 'formal' tender process means they were able to avoid the rules and regulations that govern a professional procurement process, including the “need to ensure fair dealing” and the need to ensure that “no gifts or hospitality are accepted”.  

The decision by the ICO to reveal the deal also follows what has been a year long campaign to reveal how our proposal scored against Steve Pilling's winning bid. Despite initially being told by the council that this wouldn’t be a problem, we still hadn’t received our own scores by August 2018 so we were forced to submit a Freedom of Information request to officially obtain them.

This Freedom of Information request was never properly responded to by the council so, in March 2019, we asked the ICO to investigate this matter. A couple of days later, the council replied to say that they had now had a chance to review the request and granted access to both our scores and Steve Pilling’s. What they revealed was quite interesting...

The scores showed that we actually scored higher than Steve Pilling for financial criteria, which analysed each bidder’s business plans including the proposed rental terms and amount of public money requested from the council. We both scored the same for community benefits but Steve Pilling scored higher for the quality of offer.

In their response, the council apologised for the time that it had taken to send us our scores, which had taken more than sixteen months, and admitted that their initial reliance on commercial sensitivity and their use of the requester’s identity to withhold the information was incorrect.

Ultimately, we welcome the decision by the ICO to reveal the deal with Steve Pilling for The Produce Hall, despite Stockport Council’s best attempts to keep this information from being released to the public.

Whilst this is clearly a victory for transparency and accountability, the council’s use of a ‘gagging clause’ in a contract to keep information regarding public spend from the public is deeply troubling.

It’s also clear from the evidence we’ve obtained over the last year that this 'informal' tender process didn’t abide by any of the rules or guidance that would normally apply during a formal tender process, despite Cllr. Kate Butler claiming on Twitter that this was a “professional competitive tender”.

When you have to fight for over a year to get access to your own scores, which then show you scored higher than the winning bidder on financial criteria, you just know something isn’t right!

Thank you again for all of your support on our petition to reveal the deal. When the council contact us with their response to our questions, we'll make sure to update you. 

The Foodie Friday Team x