HM Government of Gibraltar notes the Principal Auditor’s comments on the Occupational Health Services (OHS) contract awarded to Maritime Medical Services Limited (MMS) in 2024, which fail to take on board the broader context of the situation, the operational risks the Government faced, and the value for the taxpayer provided both by procedural efficiencies and the avoidance of inaction costs.

These are the circumstances surrounding this contract:

• MMS was already delivering occupational health services to HMGoG and the GHA on an ad hoc basis and was the only dedicated provider of these services in Gibraltar.

• The Government addressed perceived conflict of interest concerns at the outset. The GHA doctor listed as a director of MMS was granted a formal career break effective from the start of the contract.

• At the time of award, the GHA’s pre-employment medical screening process was delayed by 9 to 12 months, creating significant risk as individuals were joining the Public Service without proper medical clearance.

• Sickness absence levels across departments had become unsustainable, requiring urgent action to support return-to-work processes, initiate timely medical retirement, or resolve outstanding cases.

• The contract was awarded for an initial period of three years and included clear Key Performance Indicators, monthly monitoring, quarterly reviews, and departmental training for senior staff.

• This agreement consolidated multiple fragmented Occupational Health Service contracts across departments into a single Government-wide contract, delivering substantial procedural efficiencies.

• It introduced clear timelines, requiring medical appointments for workers to be offered within 10 days instead of the typical month-long wait under the previous system. By ensuring employees are seen sooner, health issues are addressed earlier, leading to savings for the Government as well as improved staff morale and working conditions.

• The suggestion that value for money was compromised fails to account for the cost of inaction at the time, including the daily impact on productivity caused by inadequate Occupational Health Service provision.

While the Government welcomes scrutiny and remains committed to transparency, it is concerned that the Principal Auditor’s commentary in this instance reflects an overly narrow interpretation of procurement. It fails to take into account the practical realities of delivering essential public services or the broader, long-term approach required to properly assess value for money.

It is crucial that assessments of value for money include not only the cost of action, but also the often far greater cost of delay or inaction.

ENDS