Not designed for a simple, happy result

When a government body is dealing with bidders for a multi-millon-pound contract, it’s advisable to be clear on guidelines and procedures from the outset. Surely it’s Policy 101.

The potential row brewing over Perth and Kinross Council’s awarding of the £20 million contract to redesign the city hall is unfortunate, and casts a shadow over an otherwise exciting project.

There was considerable public interest and engagement in the shortlist process and choice of the winning bidder in the design contest.

But for the waters to get muddied by what appears to be a confusing selection process is unfortunate.

The architectural firm that won on points, as it were, from the official selection panel is considering its options after the contract was awarded to a firm with the most popular design, and most attractive budget, but not on the top of the ‘official’ scorecard agreed on by council and the Royal Incorporation of Architects in Scotland (RIAS).

Now there are accusations the council did not play fair, and the inevitable to-and-fro, with the possibility of legal action being alluded to.

This could result in costly legal fees and even a delay to a long-awaited project.

Hopefully there is a swift resolution to this, but it does beg the question as to why the procedure was not crystal clear at the outset.