Labels and Tags

Accountability (71) Adequate documentation (7) ADR in procurement (4) Allocation of risks (6) Best interest of government (11) Best practices (19) Best value (15) Bidder prejudice (11) Blanket purchase agreement (1) Bridge contract (2) Bundling (6) Cancellation and rejection (2) Centralized procurement structure (12) Changes during bid process (14) Clarifications vs Discussions (1) Competence (9) Competition vs Efficiency (29) Competitive position (3) Compliance (35) Conflict of interest (32) Contract administration (26) Contract disputes (4) Contract extension or modification (9) Contract formation (1) Contract interpretation (1) Contract terms (3) Contract types (6) Contract vs solicitation dispute (2) Contractor responsibility (20) Conviction (4) Cooperative purchasing (3) Corrective action (1) Cost and pricing (13) Debarment (4) Determinations (8) Determining responsibility (37) Disclosure requirements (7) Discussions during solicitation (10) Disposal of surplus property (3) Effective enforcement requirement (35) Effective procurement management (5) Effective specifications (36) Emergency procurement (14) eProcurement (5) Equitable tolling (2) Evaluation of submissions (22) Fair and equitable treatment (14) Fair and reasonable value (23) Fiscal effect of procurement (14) Frivolous protest (1) Good governance (12) Governmental functions (27) Guam (14) Guam procurement law (12) Improper influence (11) Incumbency (13) Integrity of system (31) Interested party (7) Jurisdiction (1) Justification (1) Life-cycle cost (1) Limits of government contracting (5) Lore vs Law (4) market research (7) Materiality (3) Methods of source selection (33) Mistakes (4) Models of Procurement (1) Needs assessment (11) No harm no foul? (8) Offer & acceptance (1) Other procurement links (14) Outsourcing (34) Past performance (12) Planning policy (34) Politics of procurement (52) PPPs (6) Prequalification (1) Principle of competition (95) Principles of procurement (25) Private vs public contract (17) Procurement authority (5) Procurement controversies series (79) Procurement ethics (19) Procurement fraud (31) Procurement lifecycle (9) Procurement philosophy (17) Procurement procedures (30) Procurement reform (63) Procurement theory (11) Procurement workforce (2) Procurment philosophy (6) Professionalism (17) Protest - formality (2) Protest - timing (12) Protests - general (37) Purposes and policies of procurement (11) Recusal (1) Remedies (17) Requirement for new procurement (4) Resolution of protests (4) Responsiveness (14) Restrictive specifications (5) Review procedures (13) RFQ vs RFP (1) Scope of contract (16) Settlement (2) Social preference provisions (60) Sole source (48) Sovereign immunity (3) Staffing (8) Standard commercial products (3) Standards of review (2) Standing (6) Stays and injunctions (6) Structure of procurement (1) Substantiation (9) Surety (1) Suspension (6) The procurement record (1) The role of price (10) The subject matter of procurement (23) Trade agreements vs procurement (1) Training (33) Transparency (63) Uniformity (6) Unsolicited proposals (3)

Thursday, May 20, 2010

Distinguishing procurement systems from procurement participants

This is a case of blaming the stage rather than the actors, in this lead in to a story from The Bahamas.

'Never going to be perfect'
The Government's public procurement system is not "ever going to be perfect", a former Chamber of Commerce president told Tribune Business yesterday, arguing that the Bahamas' relatively small size and interwoven family/political relationships made it impossible to "eliminate the foolishness that goes on".

Responding to the proposed public procurement reforms, which could save the Government up to 30 per cent (close to $130 million) on its existing $400 million annual contracts budget, Dionisio D'Aguilar said that while he was wary about introducing more bureaucracy into public sector contract processes, efforts to eliminate corruption and political influences had to be made.

The two greatest problems, Mr D'Aguilar said, were "the corruption of persons in the Government having [family/personal] relationships with the [bidding] parties, and the political relationships, where the politicians influence who the Government does business with.

"Both are equally as bad, and you've got to think of a system that eliminates both."

Reforms outlines by consultants Peter Trepte and Jorge Claro at an April 26-28 conference in Nassau, in the shape of regulations, are designed to comply with the Bahamas' obligations under the Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) and the World Trade Organisation (WTO), and introduce "international best practices" into the Bahamas.

While the award of many contracts would still be decentralised, with Procurement Units and Tenders Committees much in evidence, the consultants have recommended the creation of a Public Procurement Department, headed by a Chief Procurement Officer, which would engage in centralised procurement for goods and services used across government departments.

The recommendations also involve the creation of a Public Procurement Board, which will be formed from members appointed by the private sector and Ministry of Finance, to oversee all government procurement.

And, unlike the current structure, an Independent Procurement Review Tribunal will be created to "determine all appeals, matters and disputes" relating to government contracts that come under its jurisdiction. This will provide a formal avenue of appeal to disgruntled bidders that currently does not exist.

"There's many factors that go into the awarding of bids other than cost. If you go for the best cost, you do not necessarily get the best bid. I have people that provide services for me at Superwash that are reliable. You develop a relationship with someone in government, you deliver for them and, hopefully, deliver for the people, but it is not necessarily the best price.

"At the end of the day, you want to work with people who deliver good results. You've got to measure cost against the ability of the provider to deliver. That's the hard thing, and you will not get it right all the time. The Government is dealing with people who give the best quote, but are unable to deliver."

COMMENT: Most modern procurement regimes, and Guam's in particular, require an independent inquiry into the responsibility of bidders. They require that the bid be responsive but also that the bidder be responsible. Responsibility in this instance requires both demonstrable capability and reliability to perform.

In competitive sealed bidding, price is the third, independently critical component of an award decision. Even in negotiated contracts, responsibility is key to evaluation of qualifications, but price must independently be determined to be fair and reasonable, regardless of qualification and responsiveness.


While it is unfortunate to blame the system on the actors, it is indeed the case that a fair, transparent and accountable procurement system requires a trained, impartial and professional cadre of procurement staff. There's no point having the most advance fighter jet in the world if you put a bus driver in to pilot it.

What I do sympathize with is the chagrin felt about the inevitability of procurement controversy, even when there is no dishonesty or malfeasance. There will never be a protest-free procurement system, because there will always be disagreement over facts, disputed interpretations and actions. Procurement should not be judged by the numbers or facts or inconvenience of protests, however. Anymore than societies should be judged by the numbers of civil court actions, traffic court cases and family law actions. Society has learned to build a dispute resolution process into its social organization to deal with the human nature of its members. It is too much to expect humans will ever be free of contest and controversy, especially where, as in government contracting, so much money, political influence and other special interests are involved. That is why no procurement system will ever be complete without an effective, accessible, fair and impartial review component.

No comments: