That bankrolls criminal empires at considerable cost to the taxpayer in tax avoidance and benefit fraud. The is also a growing bill for patching up the human misery resulting from the trade in illegal drugs and prostitution.
This is alarming enough but, when the businesses used by criminal gangs as a means of laundering cash, typically private hire taxi firms and security companies, become so thoroughly embedded in society that they attempt to secure legitimacy by bidding for public service contracts, we reach a dangerous new tipping point.
Officials responsible for procurement in the public sector are required to award contracts on the basis of best value. While it is clearly not in the public interest to award such contracts to suspected criminals, the rules are tightly framed in terms of fact rather than suspicion. An illustration of this difficulty is the £2m contract NHS Greater Glasgow was on the brink of awarding to a taxi company until alerted by Strathclyde Police that it had been linked to organised crime. The board postponed the decision and has still to award the contract.
One welcome effect of this case, however, is that it has brought a new awareness to public bodies that unwittingly they could be financing organised crime. Procurement officials are now working with the Scottish Crime and Drug Enforcement Agency to examine how they can guard against awarding contracts to criminals within the existing rules and whether new powers are required.
It is essential that everything possible is done to prevent criminals receiving any of the £8bn of public sector contracts awarded in Scotland every year. Despite the complexities in tightening up the rules, which may require new legislation, there is a need for urgency in working within the current system to prevent crime lords profiting from contracts for major new projects such as the 2014 Commonwealth Games and the new Southern General Hospital in Glasgow.
In the meantime, existing filters such as the Security Industry Authority vetting scheme should be used by all public bodies to ensure that security contracts are awarded only to approved companies.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article