Bournemouth Council chiefs set to bring back 22 staff from outsourcing partner Mouchel

‘FINE TUNING’: John Beesley ‘FINE TUNING’: John Beesley

BOURNEMOUTH council bosses are set to bring 22 staff back ‘in-house’ from their outsourcing partner Mouchel .

The surprise move comes just five months after 12 of the staff – finance officers – joined the private company. But councillors say it is not a U-turn or a reflection on the performance of Mouchel , which currently has 480 former Bournemouth Council staff on the payroll from a number of departments.

Council leader Councillor John Beesley, told the Echo: “I am sure there will be criticism from the usual suspects but there is political support for this and it’s what is in the long term interests of the town.”

He described it as “fine tuning” of their Mouchel contract, which has been in place since December 2010. He said part of the reason was that the council is proposing to set up a community financing initiative to lend money to small and emerging businesses, social enterprises and individuals in the current, difficult economic climate.

Cllr Beesley declined to put a figure on how much the council could or would lend if the idea were to be approved by cabinet. But he added: “To be effective, obviously we would be talking about millions of pounds, but we will not be putting council taxpayers’ money at risk.

“Stimulating the local economy is critical. The government can’t do it all and the banks clearly don’t want to know. Local councils clearly have a role to play.”

Other staff being brought back include HR and IT specialists. Mouchel boss Tony Williams said he was not disappointed by the move, which he said was part of the evolving partnership between the company and the council.

President of Bournemouth Chamber of Trade Nigel Hedges, added: “Any new initiative to invest in the local economy is to be welcomed.

“It is vital if we are to get out of recession.”

The council’s outsourcing contract with Mouchel has been controversial and critics say there are still question marks over exactly how much it will deliver in terms of savings.

Comments(25)

penhale says...
11:13am Wed 18 Jul 12

Excuses, excuses, why not just say that you made a mistake, people would think more of you if you admitted you got it wrong in the first place.

Adrian Fudge says...
11:47am Wed 18 Jul 12

Is there a single sensible person who believes that IF they set up a "community financing initiative" that it would take 22 people to run it
Besides that if they were going down that route the normal process would be to discuss the matter, putting forward its aims and objectives, and alongside it submit the cost ie the staff required
That part of the story , which in my view would be a good idea to stimulate the local economy should have been done a long time ago using the huge the reserves thy have been stuffing away (£98M at the end of this year) but is only being put forward to deflect criticism of Cllr Beesleys lack of control
Its interesting to note that the Medium Term Financial Plan downgraded the savings supposedly being made with the outsourcing by £48m over the first 5 years and over , I believe, £100M over the 10 years of the contract
The reason I can confirm the figure above is because the council at present wont confirm the situation despite a Freedom of Information request
Without knowing the seniority of these people it is impossible to know the cost but it must be in the region of £1M+.
There is an Audit and Governance Committee that is meant to scrutinise these sort of actions . Perhaps for once it might do its job

Old Colonial says...
12:09pm Wed 18 Jul 12

Mouchel's share price as at 1208 today: 2.83p.

BmthNewshound says...
12:10pm Wed 18 Jul 12

Council leader Councillor John Beesley, told the Echo: “I am sure there will be criticism from the usual suspects but there is political support for this and it’s what is in the long term interests of the town.”
.
By political support I suspect Beasley means his well whipped fellow Tory councillors. Whats in the long term interests of the town is for the Council to bring all services back in-house. This isn’t fine tuning its an admission that the contacts wasn’t properly scoped and that Charon & Beasley got it wrong in awarding the contract to Mouchel.
.
We know that Mouchel has already admitted that it will not be able to deliver the cost savings it promised in its tender. In light of this and the fact that Mouchel’s finances are in such a mess questions should be asked as to whether the contract should have been awarded to them in the first place.

whataboutthat says...
12:19pm Wed 18 Jul 12

C'mon Andy Martin, don't be a lickspittle, write something decent about this Mouchel farce, the lack of contractual negotiating skills at the heart of this council and wipe the grin of Beasley's face..

Bob49 says...
1:12pm Wed 18 Jul 12

Perhaps the council could now bring ASR back 'in house' - though 'in Bournemouth' might be a start.

The sad mess down there has now seen the volleyball nets now reduced to two - and surprise, surprise they are no longer available to the public.

It's no use for surfing, it's not safe to bathe there, the beach has been washed away leaving only shingle and now the Volley ball nets are out of bounds.

It was bad enough when they blocked off the only amenity for kids, playing around the outflow pipe. No wonder the wretched place is a ghost town.

Maybe they could use some of the millions supposedly saved by using Mouchel to develop Boscombe seafront to what was promised - or was the failure to deliver there just another bit of 'fine tuning' - or tweaking as it was once known.

This council continues to stagger from one shambles to another.

step up says...
1:20pm Wed 18 Jul 12

Beesley states 'won't be putting council tax payers money at risk' !! Just whose money does he think he's putting at risk ? His own ?? I think not. This is the problem with local politians the just don't get the fact that they don't have a pot of money money available to waste and gamble with fallen from the sky it is OUR money and they are under a huge obligation and accountable in the way it is spent ! Not Council Tax Payers money ???!!! Then whose exactly Mr Beesley?? By the way....very proud to be 'one of the usual suspects' it's called legitamely holding to account.

rudolph_hucker says...
1:37pm Wed 18 Jul 12

The smoke and mirrors, the false savings, the gagging of officers, the cosyness of it all, the debts, the wastage and the greedy incompetent self-serving parasites sat in the town hall all make me sick.

HRH of Boscombe says...
2:16pm Wed 18 Jul 12

Old Colonial well done but what's your point? That's higher tahn closing prices for the last week.

boverboy says...
2:24pm Wed 18 Jul 12

It would appear that the partnership between the Council and Mouchel is not even working when it comes to an attempt at issuing joint spin. Community finance is said to be only part of the reason could the failure of Mouchel to deliver against the contract be the rest. Cllr Beesley refers to the ussual suspects - could these be the electors by any chance!

jinglebell says...
4:06pm Wed 18 Jul 12

"Mouchel boss, Tony Williams...." ...............surel
y this isn't the same Tony Williams who is the Chief Executive of B'mth Council? B'mth Council wouldn't dream of doing anything compromising like that surely?

Bob49 says...
5:03pm Wed 18 Jul 12

I think there is a Tony Williams BBC and an Anthony Williams Mouchel


Maybe it's just a generic name for an incompetent official

muscliffman says...
5:45pm Wed 18 Jul 12

But unfortunately Councillor we 'usual suspects' cannot help but to notice that the first lifeboat full of twenty-two ex-Bournemouth Council Officers has just been lowered from the great ship Mouchel.
All in good time.........the truth will out.

EGHH says...
10:09pm Wed 18 Jul 12

If you want to see outsourcing to a private profit driven organisation in action just look at G4S!

There some things that need to be kept under public control.

EGHH says...
10:14pm Wed 18 Jul 12

Read this:

http://bournemouth-l
ibdems.org.uk/en/art
icle/2012/591504/the
-mouchel-saga-update
d-complete-overview-
april-2010-may-2012

It seems that Tony Williams and Anthony Williams are one and the same!

EGHH says...
10:18pm Wed 18 Jul 12

Umm the way its written by the LibDems implies this. Perhaps its just a coincidence.

infohound says...
10:35pm Wed 18 Jul 12

A friend who works at the council tells me that the 12 finance officers are a large part of the original finance team - it would be good to know what percentage is being transferred back as "fine tuning". I also understand that the 12 being transferred back are all the senior level accountants leaving Mouchel with a much weaker team and limited management capability. It seems unlikely Mouchel will be able to achieve many finance savings if the team has been split as it will lose the flexibility of a fully integrated team, it seems more likely that the council will have increased costs as a result of duplicated effort and decreased efficiency

infohound says...
10:47pm Wed 18 Jul 12

The Echo article quotes John Beesley as saying that the Mouchel contract had been in place since December 2010. This seems unlikely for the finance team outsourcing as the Echo reported the suspension of the Chief Accountant for arguing against the outsourcing of the finance team on 31st October 2011. The finance team must have been transferred a month or so after that article so the decision to transfer 12 staff back can only be after 6 or 7 months of being with Mouchel. This does not look like fine tuning, more like panicked adjustments or possibly something more mundane eg the usual culprits, personalities or politics

Adrian Fudge says...
11:13pm Wed 18 Jul 12

infohound wrote:
The Echo article quotes John Beesley as saying that the Mouchel contract had been in place since December 2010. This seems unlikely for the finance team outsourcing as the Echo reported the suspension of the Chief Accountant for arguing against the outsourcing of the finance team on 31st October 2011. The finance team must have been transferred a month or so after that article so the decision to transfer 12 staff back can only be after 6 or 7 months of being with Mouchel. This does not look like fine tuning, more like panicked adjustments or possibly something more mundane eg the usual culprits, personalities or politics
The Finance people were transfered June 2011
What is interesting is that this transfer was supossedly going to save Bournemouth Council £263K in this current financial year
Unless these workers are on average saleries under £12K per annum which is extremely unlikely or there is a reduction in the payment to Mouchel it it obvious that the outsourcing will be costing us more money than the original in house cost.
It seems a strange Contract that enables variation on the hugh and totally unaccountable scale that is going on but bearing in mind the Councils track record perhaps it should come as no surprise
When will the Councillors who have a duty to scrutinise this on our behalf actualy do their job that they are content to take their allowances for

tbpoole says...
7:23am Thu 19 Jul 12

rudolph_hucker wrote:
The smoke and mirrors, the false savings, the gagging of officers, the cosyness of it all, the debts, the wastage and the greedy incompetent self-serving parasites sat in the town hall all make me sick.
Move then.....are they really that much better anywhere else?

juniperberry says...
10:37am Thu 19 Jul 12

Clearly none of the commentators here have any commercial experience in running efficient operations. Anyone of a senior enough level in the private sector will tell you that operational necessity requires teams/depts to be outsourced/off-shore
d/in-housed as the business needs. Clearly there is strategic aim here that needs more financial expertise within the direct control of the council. I've lived in many other similar minor towns and seriously they don't have councillors with this level of commercial understanding that know how to drive economic development. So the surf reef doesn't work -big deal - it didn't use tax payers money but it has done its job and the businesses who invested in the area aren't complaining, the people who got jobs because of it aren't complaining. ASB has plummeted in the area and lots of people now visit spending money which goes in to the local economy. It's been the catalyst for improving the area, which is being used to start on other areas of Boscombe. This is a good news story!

hrryseccombe says...
12:59pm Thu 19 Jul 12

juniperberry wrote:
Clearly none of the commentators here have any commercial experience in running efficient operations. Anyone of a senior enough level in the private sector will tell you that operational necessity requires teams/depts to be outsourced/off-shore

d/in-housed as the business needs. Clearly there is strategic aim here that needs more financial expertise within the direct control of the council. I've lived in many other similar minor towns and seriously they don't have councillors with this level of commercial understanding that know how to drive economic development. So the surf reef doesn't work -big deal - it didn't use tax payers money but it has done its job and the businesses who invested in the area aren't complaining, the people who got jobs because of it aren't complaining. ASB has plummeted in the area and lots of people now visit spending money which goes in to the local economy. It's been the catalyst for improving the area, which is being used to start on other areas of Boscombe. This is a good news story!
As a businessman in Boscombe I am appalled at the surf reef Fiasco, it is extremely embarassing to see places such as the reef building and many business named after this failed surf Reef, and I am continually asked about this matter by visiting tourists. Have you seen the high street recently, its packed full of empty shops. Our one big chance of regenerating the area (speaking as a former member of the regeneration group now the highly controversial BCIC) through using the centrally placed victorian community centre (22 rooms of historical and highly functional community space bequethed to Boscombe people by Percy Bysse Shelley and the former Childrens School and the first Childrens theatre in the uk backed by the LEA) to attract tourists and build skills in a highly deprived community whilst also securing local jobs, will be cynically levelled for 11 small houses. Most of the businesses in the area are struggling heavily. I believe that the millions of pounds the council is talking about releasing is largely destined to help struggling hoteliers and developers in favour with the council, as obviously it is not destined for valid community projects such as the BCCA. I am intrigued to see where this money is coming from and why, as it is not tax-payer money it cannot be from the supposed savings of the mouchel deal ( these savings seem to be getting less and less each day and I can see in the long run it will cost us much more, particularly if Mouchel goes belly up. The more I look into the shenanigans of the council the more appalled I become. I am also highly offended to be labelled as "the usual suspects" because i express a differing opinuion to the one councillor Beesley promotes.

wonderway says...
1:24pm Thu 19 Jul 12

the reason they were returned to the council was John Beasley was having trouble counting over ten with his fingers and his mum never taught him to tie his shoe laces so he could not take his shoes and socks off to count any higher. You cant see this because his figures for finical prudence never add up. Well how long before the moment of Armageddon arrives and every member of staff returns they will be laughing all the way to the bank made redundant twice in few months and re-en-stated sounds the council have same standards and morals of certain FIFA representatives .

LaughingLarry says...
1:55pm Thu 19 Jul 12

I won't pretend to understand financial stuff but surely a well phrased FOI by someone who does could provide some interesting reading.

In Absentia says...
9:04am Fri 20 Jul 12

LaughingLarry wrote:
I won't pretend to understand financial stuff but surely a well phrased FOI by someone who does could provide some interesting reading.
They'll just hide behind the quote that their contract with Mouchel is 'commercially sensitive'. It'd be a waste of time.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree