PLC Public Sector reports:
“I am determined to find the right savings necessary to protect frontline services but every taxpayer pound must be made to work as hard as the person who earned it did.”
(John Denham, Communities Secretary, 24 September 2009)
Worthy sounding words indeed, but is it time to let procurement officers concentrate on securing value-for-money goods and services for the public sector, without constantly placing demands on them to “shape” markets and places, and deliver, and in some cases even develop, government policy?
A list of demands recently placed on public procurement officers includes:
- Delivering the Government’s apprenticeships targets;
- Addressing green, social and equality issues; and
- Improving health and safety in construction in both the public and private sectors.
In addition, John Denham is now stating that local authorities should use the estimated £42 billion they spend to “innovate and shape markets” giving increased opportunities to smaller suppliers, while at the same time making the necessary savings to protect current spending levels in areas such as health.
It is hard to disagree that in an ideal world, public sector spending would achieve all of the goals that have been set for it. However, the reality is that:
- The public procurement regime is not a simple one to follow with an ever increasing number of procurement challenges either completely derailing procurements or at the very least costing time and money. Introducing more and more, often competing, requirements and targets into the procurement process only increases the chances of mistakes being made and challenges occurring. This in turn increases the risk that the hard earned taxpayer’s pound is swallowed up by legal fees or is paid out in a settlement to ensure a project stays on track;
- Some of the guidance currently in existence is so nebulous that it inevitably leads to problems in interpreting it (which cost time and money) and also substantially different approaches being taken across the public sector; and
- There must be question marks over whether even the most competent procurement officer has the necessary skillset to interpret and develop broad policy objectives.
While procurement departments cannot operate in splendid isolation, without concern for the wider implications of what they are doing, surely it is time for the policy makers to make policy rather than pass the buck on to procurement officers who should be focusing on securing value for money.