Added by Freedom of Information Team on 12 January 2017 at 14:29
Under the terms of the Freedom of Information Act 2000, please provide me with full details of all the Special Policing Services contracts your force currently has in place, and had in the past year.
For each one, please include the name of the organisation with whom the contract is held, the value of the deal, the length of the deal and date it was agreed, and the details of the service provided.
Please include ongoing contracts as well as one-offs – concerts or sports events, for example – in 2016.
Ie Contract with Mega Mall, £1m for five years signed in 2014, involves funding 10 PCs and a Sergeant to patrol shopping centre.
Please find here https://www.london.gov.uk/what-we-do/mayors-office-policing-and-crime-mopac/governance-and-decision-making/mopac-decisions-178f an example of a Metropolitan Police SPS contract in case this helps. If it is easier, I am content for you to simply send me copies of all of your SPS contracts in this form.
Please find the information in the attached table.
Please note however that in respect of some of the values of the contract the information has been withheld. The exemption applicable to this information is section 43, which relates to commercial interests.
In relation to the last entry concerning Bristol Airport ltd the information is also exempt by virtue of section 41, information provided in confidence.
Section 41 is an absolute and class based exemption which means that there is no requirement to identify and evidence the harm that would be caused by disclosure or consider the public interest. Disclosure of this information would constitute an actionable breach.
Section 43(2) is a qualified and prejudice based exemption and as such a harm and public interest test has been conducted. This is supplied below.
Harm in Disclosure
The cost values of this contract have been competitively negotiated with suppliers and disclosure would place both the supplier and the constabulary at a commercial disadvantage. Our ability to negotiate future tenders could be hindered and could result in us paying a higher price for this service which would impact on the cost to the public purse.
Public Interest Test
Factors Favouring Disclosure
Disclosure of the pricing schedule could provide a better understanding of the decision making processes and how public funds are spent.
Factors Favouring Non-Disclosure
As public funds would be expended, it is in the public’s interest that the most competitive negotiations are achieved. For example companies compete by offering something different and often this can be reflected in their pricing. Certain companies may offer a competitive rate to the constabulary. If this was known the supplier may no longer be in a position to offer such rates and room to negotiate is hindered. Ultimately, the public would pay more and this would have a negative impact on police resources as less funding would be available for other areas of policing.
In considering the arguments for disclosure or non-disclosure, whilst the value of public debate is recognised, the ability of the constabulary to further negotiate in the future is in the public’s interest as this would potentially affect the expenditure of public funds. On balance, the decision is that the pricing schedule will not be disclosed on this occasion. In accordance with the Act, the represents a Refusal Notice on this occasion.
In accordance with the Act, this represents a Refusal Notice for your request.
FOI reference: 1366/16.
Date of request: 04.01.17.