Fringe eu procurement - nigel kletz


Published on

Published in: Business, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Flexibility- standard off the shelf items can require same detailed process as complex bespoke services
  • International competition is limited: especially in local government
  • Remove the detailed procedures form the directive and allow procurers to design and enact their own processes providing they are consistent with non-discrimination and transparency. The characteristics of simplified regime would include:- Greater flexibility as to which procurement route is adopted by the contracting authority; A simplified OJEU Notice; Timescales to be determined by the contracting authority; The Alcatel notice would not apply; The remedies of a contract being prospectively terminated, a civil financial penalty, and the contract being shortened would not apply
  • If both the contracting authority and the “contractor” are public bodies (however that term is defined) the contract should be exempt from the application of the Directives. This should be for any activities (whether or not they are commercial) and whether or not the public body that is undertaking the activity for the contracting authority is in direct competition with private economic operators Our top priorities are: Increasing the threshold at which the directives apply, especially for local authorities where international trade is rare. Creating the ability for authorities to negotiate with bidders on price \\ terms etc. during the tender process. Similarly increasing flexibility of the process. Enabling public procurement to be conducted much more quickly, especially for more straightforward goods and services.
  • Fringe eu procurement - nigel kletz

    1. 1. Cutting Through EU Procurement Red Tape Nigel Kletz Birmingham City Council 30 June 2011
    2. 2. <ul><li>Key Issues </li></ul><ul><li>Impact Directive has on delivering value for money through Public Procurement in terms of: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Prices paid </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Very high administration costs for suppliers & buyers </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Procedures make it difficult to buy innovative technology and services </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Impact on SMEs. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Inflexibility & largely unable to negotiate </li></ul><ul><li>BCC made these points directly to EU in Public Hearing on Modernising Procurement – May 11 </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Substantial response to consultation: Directly and in dialogue with suppliers </li></ul></ul>
    3. 3. <ul><li>Value for Money ? </li></ul><ul><li>Typical procurement process is lengthy: 6 to 18 months </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Roughly double that in the private sector. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Procurers favour long term contracts with fixed terms </li></ul><ul><li>Difficult for prices to reflect market dynamics </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Photo-voltaic panel procurement demonstrates this </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Frameworks agreements don’t maximise scale of procurement. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>International competition is limited: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Over 30 months – 3500 EOI of which 18 from EU (0.03%) – 2 Tenders received – I contract awarded </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Procedures disadvantage SMEs due to cost of bidding </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Discourage innovation and risk taking </li></ul></ul>
    4. 4. <ul><li>Remove the detailed procedures </li></ul><ul><li>Significantly increasing thresholds to level that stimulate cross border interest </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Contract value of £4m </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Allow buying from approved suppliers </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Providing list have been openly advertised. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Fear of challenge (eg “Remedies”) leads to risk averse behaviour </li></ul>Directives could be improved
    5. 5. <ul><li>Changing the Directives </li></ul><ul><li>Greater clarity needed on not for profit organisations and public to public contracts </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Should be excluded from scope </li></ul></ul><ul><li>The Directives could be modernised in either of 2 ways: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Build further clarification, guidance and rules into an already complex piece of legislation OR </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Strip the Directive back to a set of principles that must be abided by. BCC favours this approach . </li></ul></ul>