Share |
The truths they don't want you to read....

Monday, February 06, 2012

Public sector tendering

There are been much discussion about who should or shouldn't be allowed to tender on various Council contracts, but as this report from esteemed economists Jim and Margaret Cuthbert makes clear the problem is much deeper than that.

It is not about closing doors.  It is not about preventing people contracting.  It is not about protectionism.

The challenge in hand is how to maximise the benefit for the local community when tenders are awarded.

As an example, if a finance tender is awarded to a local firm of accountants, then the money is spent locally, circulates locally and can result in higher and better skills being available locally. 

It is clear that a Council - for instance - has the power to insist on certain local benefits as part of the tendering process.  That might be the creation of a certain number of apprenticeships or other specific terms and conditions which ensure that the local community benefits.

As long as everyone has the same obligations, that is perfectly permissible, and this can dissuade those companies with little interest in the community, beyond the tender, from bidding for the work.

It doesn't guarantee that local firms will win the work, but it does keep more money in the local community.

Which is A Good Thing.

As I argued 5 years ago, it is possible and legal to do this if the will-power existed in the Council Chamber.

It didn't then, and I suspect it doesn't now.


Anonymous said...

I think the Council is very blinkered when it comes to giving work out. The perception is that mainland is best, whether it's builders, lawyers, consultants, rat-catchers. There are numerous examples at the moment that dispute that notion.

Anonymous said...

So so simple to understand and so easy to implement as our council well knows, the question is why is it not being implemented?

Use the schools as an example here, the rule of thumb is for every 1million pounds 1 apprentice would be employed. WISP £60million, how many apprentices.... 5, Shocking!!!

Lews castle if these irish roughians get it you can be assured not 1 apprentice would be employed, the excuse would be that as it is a short term contract they cant. if that contract went to a local firm it would help apprentice numbers, local tradesmen, suppliers and other construction and civil engineering firms, the entire island would benefit, and go out and ask all of these people who they would prefer to work for it wouldn't be the irish.

Cllr Campbell, you would get just as many fuel sales if not more, if local firms had the contract, you may even score as us Islanders eat more pies than the irish!

Anonymous said...

How many local companies have employed apprentices on the back of work from the schools project??

Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...

so where have the apprentices came from that are mentioned elsewhere?

Anonymous said...

I know of 1 local contractor who has taken on 2 apprentices, and at least 4 people from the back to work programme.

Anonymous said...

There were very few employed by subcontractors through no fault of thier own. quoting none shows your complete incompitence and lack of knowledge on this topic so away you go and comment on a topic on which you are knowledgable

Hundreds of young people have sucessfully completed their apprenticeships over the last few years here which is down to the support of local contractors, but narrow minded idiots like your self will choose to ignore that fact aside im sure.

Anonymous said...

If a tender is awarded to a local firm of accountants, they do not need to buy materials that cannot be manufactured, obtained or fabricated on the islands, so there is a significant difference. Neither of course would they need to rent accommodation, hire cars or spend money on any of the other less tangible benefits which accrue locally.