The Supply Management jobsite

Have I missed something?

16 May 2012 |

The implications of two recent headlines appear to have escaped the procurement profession’s attention. One news story was the UK government expects to save more than £5 billion this year after a round of “tough contract negotiations” with suppliers. The other was that according to the National Fraud Authority, procurement fraud is costing the public sector £2.3 billion.

According to Cabinet Office minister Francis Maude, the savings have been achieved as a result of “tough contract negotiations”, relationships with Whitehall top-tier suppliers have strengthened as a result and those that have not reduced prices will not have their contracts renewed. Maude was quoted as saying “some of the contracts we inherited were an embarrassment to our suppliers. They were quite rich contracts”.

Have I missed something here? Given these suppliers have won tenders following an intense and transparent competition I am therefore intrigued as to how savings (the government expects £140 million extra from contract renegotiation this year) can be wiped off the contracted prices. Presumably post-tender negotiations have achieved these results. If so, I didn’t know that the rules had been relaxed.

Also, if you can reduce costs following a competitive tender exercise by such an amount then surely the tender process must be in disrepute. Why not just send in the “tough contract negotiators” for all our public sector needs? Are the named suppliers aware the consequences of the announcement are that there is now a public perception that they are ‘rip-off merchants’ and must be avoided at all costs? If the figures are correct then surely they must be publicly shamed and put on the same footing as bankers.

Similarly, when the public sector is operating under such tight rules and unsuccessful suppliers are actively being encouraged to sue as a consequence of unfair treatment, how is it possible to be fraudulently robbing the taxpayers by £2.3 billion – £1.4 billion of which is attributed to central government?

Both stories place public tendering in disrepute and there is obviously no reason to continue with any of it. All major procurement projects should be undertaken by “tough contract negotiators” and those suppliers who are not up to dealing with negotiators on this level should immediately train their sales staff or go out of business.

Finally, why is it when anyone saves a million, no one takes any notice any longer? Is this possibly the reason why “billion” is the new buzz word in the world of politics and business?

* Trevor Black is managing director at Blackwolds Consultancy

6 Responses to “Have I missed something?”

  1. A few very good questions asked Trevor. Would you be able to find answers?

  2. Perhaps we should place both bankers and suppliers in the stocks? Then we could launch a couple of billion rotten tomatoes in their direction.

  3. Some interesting questions, Trevor. I would like to have been a fly on the wall witnessing these “tough negotiations”, and wonder how and where the Gov negotiators were found. However, we can be sure that public sector tender process rarely (if ever) produce best results. If they did, the private sector would be adopting similar processes.

  4. There are a number of creative ways of reducing existing contract prices within the confines of EU Procurement Regs providing the scope of the contract is not being significantly changed. However, if Maude has intimated that suppliers which didnt play ball needn’t darken Central Government’s door again, that is something well beyond his pay grade.

  5. But Renata, you, as Francis Maude’s cheerleader, surely know the answers?

  6. But Another Fan of Felix CHAN, I am afraid I do not know the answers.
    I am not FM’s cheerleader, I simply like what I see.

Leave a Reply

Notify me on comments