THE way in which Tunbridge Wells Borough Council handles contracts for work done on its behalf has been branded a "shambles". At a meeting of the Tory-controlled council, Liberal Democrats spoke out citing "serious" failures in procedure.

These had been identified in an internal audit, which nevertheless rated the council's systems as "adequate". Members heard that "adequate" defines controls being in place and met to varying degrees, but with gaps which weaken the system.

But Liberal group leader Cllr David Mills said: "They are barely grossly inadequate. They are, in point of fact, a complete and utter shambles."

He listed a string of discrepancies he claimed had occurred:

* Contracts drawn up without reference to the legal department

* Standard terms altered with no evidence of risk assessment

* Contracts not properly signed

* 65 per cent of contracts which should have been sealed were not

* Contracts completed after work had started

* Copies of contracts not retained by the council

* Rules not followed

* Standing orders ignored

Cllr Mills blamed the Conservative leadership for failing to exercise proper controls over the two and a half year period reviewed. He said: "In my view, those atv the top with managerial responsibilities in these areas should now be seriously considering their positions." He called for the Audit and Performance Review Committee to revise the audit report's opinion from "adequate" to "unsatisfactory".

And he demanded a more detailed investigation, with recommendations for putting things right and action against those responsible for the failures.

Fellow Liberal Cllr Bruce Ballantine said it had taken nine months from the report's completion for its findings to be put before the committee.

There had been a bid to treat it as an exempt item, not open to the press and public, and at first it had been given low key, "for information only" status. Cllr Ballantine feared that as the audit had looked only at the overall adequacy of systems, its findings might be "only the tip of the iceberg".

But council leader Cllr James Scholes (Con) insisted: "At all times proper project approval and tendering and contract selection procedures have been in place."

He said that since 1986 a centrally maintained contracts register had been abandoned in favour of individual services keeping their own records. Where these had been found to be lacking by the auditor, the Finance Director was recommending a standard format to be maintained by the services concerned.

A report is due next month, setting out what improvements need to be made, and Cllr Scholes said it could mean standing orders having to be reviewed. The Liberals' failed to get the issue referred back to the Audit and Performance Review Committee when councillors voted 22-13 against the move.

A Labour amendment along similar lines but deleting an instruction to downgrade the auditor's opinion to "unsatisfactory", was lost by the same margin.