Section 17 of the Local Government Act 1988 has made that clear for many years. It prohibits the taking into account of non-commercial considerations in procurement decisions, including considerations relating to country of origin. The Public Contracts Regulations 2015 also do not allow for a contracting authority (off its own back) to boycott certain countries or organisations.
Councils do, from time to time, pass resolutions seeking to boycott. However, as The Queen (on the application of Jewish Rights Watch, t/a Jewish Human Rights Watch) v Leicester City Council demonstrates, these commissioning resolutions are either made by full Council (when the Executive rather than full Council has the power to make procurement decisions) or usually caveated by words to the effect of “so far as the law allows” (we sense the hand of a lawyer there). As the law does not allow it, any such resolution has no legal effect and is purely symbolic.
The issue of boycotts greatly concerns the Government; it was only last year that they issued a Procurement Policy Note on the subject. Now the Government proposes to amend the Revised Best Value Statutory Guidance to “Add a new paragraph stating that authorities should not implement or pursue boycotts other than where formal legal sanctions, embargoes and restrictions have been put in place by the Government”.
In our view, given the clear understanding of what Section 17 means and that procurement law does not allow local authorities to boycott, there is no need for any change to the best value guidance.
Does this mean that the Government has some other motive? The consultation refers to “pursue boycotts”. Does this mean that the Government is also going after purely symbolic resolutions and restricting local authority members from even commenting on issues?
We wait to see the outcome of the consultation and the exact wording that goes into the guidance. For reference, the consultation can be found here.
For more information about the issues raised in this article, please contact Mark Cook, Olwen Dutton, Gayle Monk or Alex Lawrence. To find out more about the work we do, please visit our website.
Under most construction contracts, the contractor takes on the ground conditions risk. However, a recent case has demonstrated that the risk can fall on the employer.
The UK Government has been consulting on how it should promote social value in its procurements. Here is our response that we submitted to the consultation...
The Tenant Fees Act 2019 came into force on 1 June 2019.
A recent case in the Court of Appeal will no doubt bring a sigh of relief for employers, but a corresponding sigh of disappointment may be uttered for equality and gender balance in the workplace.
This briefing assists response to the consultation paper by outlining the consultation questions, providing some background information and prompting some thoughts and potential answers.
A report published on 29 May by the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) has found that since 2009-10, local government spending on services has fallen on average by 21% in real terms.
A long-awaited decision of the Court of Appeal has clarified that a lower standard of proof should apply than previously thought before an Inquest can return a conclusion of suicide.
New regulations come into force on 1 June 2019, amending the Section 21 (s21) prescribed form template for use with assured shorthold tenancies.
In a challenging economic climate with continuing budget cuts and increasing expectations of staff, sickness absence remains an ongoing problem that is important to address.
Social housing providers will routinely have a number of construction projects underway at any one time. It is essential for client teams to understand and avoid key contract management pitfalls.
To receive invitations to our events, as well as information and articles on legal issues and sector developments that are of interest to you, please sign up to Newsroom.