Bradford Council has come under increasing fire for its refusal to state whether the spiralling cost of its Bradford-i computer system is damaging front-line services.

Last week the Telegraph & Argus revealed that the cost of the hi-tech system had soared to £170m from the original estimate of £158m and was expected to rise much higher before the end of the ten year contract with IT giant IBM.

The T&A has requested specific information from the Council on where the money to pay for the added costs is to come from and what impact this would have on front-line services.

The Council was also asked what kind of risk assessment had been factored into the contract and what the estimated figure for the whole project was.

A statement from Becky Hellard, strategic director for corporate services, said: “Before the contract was awarded, a detailed risk assessment was carried out and agreed by the Executive.

“The contract was subject to internal and external audits throughout and four ‘gateway’ reviews were carried out on the delivery of the project by the 4Ps – a team of local government project delivery specialists. This would have picked up and addressed issues of risk at an early stage of the contract process.

“The increase in the value of the contract is to cover additions and inflation costs. These additions include a new library lending system, a new system for the delivery of multi-agency services for children and young people, improvements to computer services in youth centres and libraries, and interactive online planning services.

“The money for the contract is allocated through the annual budget. Front-line services remain a priority for the Council and Bradford-i is already improving the way we deliver those services efficiently.

“The overall cost of the contract by 2015/2016 will depend on inflation and any further services we choose to buy from IBM.”

Labour group leader on Bradford Council Ian Greenwood said the situation was not good enough. He said: “There is absolutely no way Council can know the final cost of the project. It depends on risks that they cannot predict.

“The whole mistake made was getting a contract which put the risk on Council not the provider. In my view it was a politically-motivated decision and totally cynical which in my view is utterly unacceptable and shameful and those responsible should resign.”

He had no doubt of the impact on core services the additional expense would cause. “It already has impacted on services,” he said. “When you are looking at a cost of roughly £3.5 million per year, money which should have been used to support front-line services but can’t be, it is already having an impact. When you combine this with the other money which is being wasted it is a serious problem and I think people have a right to know where their money is going.”

Conservative deputy leader Dale Smith declined to comment on the subject, saying he believed the issues had been explained fully.

Local government union Unison states that it has received assurances from the Council that, given that the bulk of the Bradford-i contract is now complete, any additions to that contract will be prioritised against other essential services.

Patrick Kerry, of Unison, said: “With the introduction of the new Industrial Relations Framework the trade unions are consulted with at the earliest opportunity with an opportunity to put alternative options forward which may include projects being offered to the ICT market to ensure value for money.”

e-mail: paddy.mcguffin@telegraphandargus.co.uk