News
Public sector tendering scheme to aid access for smaller businesses
A free online tender marketplace to help SMEs win a larger share of government contracts is to be launched by the government.
The move is in response to a Treasury-commissioned study, which was led by former chairman of the British Venture Capitalist Association, Anne Glover.
It follows pressure from PrintWeek and criticism from within the industry of the current process.
Under the proposals, all tender documents will be issued electronically by 2010. It’s hoped this will reduce the reams of paper companies are required to fill in. Tenders are also planned to be as brief as possible to prevent confusion.
Glover said: "Although there is much good practice in both local and central government, with some real progress since the 2003 report, it became clear that small firms still face substantial hurdles to compete with larger enterprises.
"This means that they lose out and that government also misses the opportunities for innovation and better value for money SMEs can deliver."
Paul Manning, account director at Printflow, said: "I think it’s brilliant that the government is taking steps to improve accessibility. It would be useful to access a one-stop shop for all tenders. The current tendering process is spread too unevenly over too many sites, none of which offer a single access point."
Public procurement is estimated at over £175bn per year, representing around 13% of the UK’s gross domestic product.
Treasury: new website
Advertisement
Comments
Mark Snee - 03 December 2008
This misses the point entirely, and the government should direct local authorities and other public sector institutions to stop aggregating print buying into massive tenders, which are then tied up for years with a tiny number of printers on a 'framework' list.
That is in no-one's interests and I hope Printweek will make that point loudly and clearly. Perhaps we can persuade some of the employer organisations to do likewise.
I notice that your headline above contrasts sharply with the headline now running over on the Daily Telegraph's website which reads:
"Plans to give small business a bigger share of public sector contracts rejected "
martin whetton - 03 December 2008
About time too...
The current system is deeply flawed, how many SME's have the time to wade through hundreds of pages of politically correct tripe, put together 19 different policies \(diversity, enviromental, etc..)?
All that happens at present is the big PM's put one of their teams on it, they win the work then give it to the same SME's that could not even get on the tender list.
DM DEESON - 03 December 2008
I have no faith at all that anything will significantly change from the current appalling system which is a travesty of good business practice. A test will be to see how many small businesses will be asked to help shape this new website or how the system works. Government say that they want to help small businesses through the recession but to do that they have got to understand how we work and what goes on in the 'real world'. At the moment, they don't have a clue.
Bill Cheesman - 03 December 2008
That reads absolutely right to me DM. I expect the whole thing is a done deal by now and not one small business owner will have been consulted much less had any input.
Lena Johansson - 03 December 2008
Yes the current system is deeply flawed, so any moves which are made to improve or reform it is surely a positive thing. A free portal is a good start.
Gary Smith - 03 December 2008
I have to say this is an improvement, but doesn't go as far as it could do. As we're approved for Supply London and Supply2gov the most work, and days of valuable time, goes into filling in the tender each time. What is needed is a centralised website where suppliers can enter and upload any supporting PQQ docs to the site, thereafter, you should not have to go through the hassle filling in the same questions time after time. Once pre qualified clients can look up your details and answers from a centralised portal, so if you tender for something they can get your PQQs immediately, and download it along with your insurance docs etc, and suppliers should only have to update it as they acquire more accreditations etc or annually. It could also be divisioned by sector or type of job to make it easier for the buyer.
The benefit for the client is that everyone who tenders would already be qualified to do so. But as we all know at the end of the day, clients will always want to build relationships so even once approved on above suggestions you 'll still need to get through the door, getting on a Framework is no gaurantee of getting work out of it.
WOuld this mean I would get a refund on my etnder subs then? - Dream on!
Gary Smith - Redactive Print Management
Mick Hart - 03 December 2008
Changing the media used won't make the system any fairer, the simple fact is that grouping many small jobs together into massive contracts and frameworks, cuts out SME companies, and doing this on-line instead of out in the open will make matters even worse. Problem is that the few big players won't be the ones affected, and as they are the ones with the influence \(please note who carried out the study), the rest of us have no hope!
Our opinions, advice and demands have been, as usual, ignored and mis-represented. Merry Christmas to you too HM Gov.uk
Simon Franklin - 03 December 2008
I have to agree with everyone above. This won't fix any problems or make it easier for SME's to get on government frameworks. There are too many online procurement sites for the public sector with no general rules. Some advertise on supply2gov, TED, etendering.com etc. I spend many hours each day searching all these sites and seem to get no where.
To make the task harder, the tenders aren't specific enough, you have to supply all or nothing rather than just one element. How does this help?
Malcolm Hackman - 04 December 2008
Where do we start? As has been said the Government already has web based tendering sites - all they have to do is remove the charges imposed on them. How can that take till 2010? Also, if they are really serious about SME involvement, then debundle the tenders. There is one going the rounds for the Forestry Commission for Design, Branding, Literature and Outdoor Signage amongst others. This is only open to large management companies who will sub contract the work and then refuse to pay!
Malcolm Hackman - HSW Print
Alan Partridge - 04 December 2008
These tendering sites I have always found to be a complete waste of time, and the irony of it is that neither the buyer or the company pitching actually wins.
The last one I looked at a year or so ago, was about 40 pages long, and, if we'd been successful would have been worth a measly £15-25,000 a year. I'm guessing \(if I'd bothered to waste my time with it), it would have taken about 5 full days of my time to complete.
Going slightly off the point slightly I know, but to think that tax payers money is actually paying for someone to sit there putting these ridiculous documents together? Amazing. The real irony is in the fact that the only thing achieved by such an exercise, is that much of the time the successful bidder is chosen based on them meeting a long string of fairly meaningless criteria, rather than them being able to actually deliver a good job on time, and above all deliver good value.
Last time I checked, it wasn't that hard to deliver £20grands worth of 4pp leaflets per year without the need for a string of pointless accreditation documents proving I can do the job. \(which, guess what, they don't prove that anyway).
The world is going mad....
Phil - 04 December 2008
Alan,
The world is not going mad, its always has been mad.
The Govenrment have procurement guys who do not have a clue about the really world - and they really do not care about protecting the public purse they just spend spend spend,
I have worked on many Government jobs on a Adhoc Basis and the Govenrment buyers do not care - if you quote a job for £1000 and it only cost £100 to produce they will order and the company who you work for have made £900 profit - because the company has produced the work for many years - so buyers in the government cant be botherd sending it out to other pint companys for comprasions.
This maynot be the case with all Government buyers but it is with some departments.
Should this not be tender? you would think so really.....
I have loads of examples where this has hapened and still happening today. Its a crazy world......
Alan Partridge - 04 December 2008
Thanks for the correction Lmao - I actually noticed my error after I'd posted my comment...
Richard Head - 04 December 2008
The real driver in this is CYA management. Cover Your A%*.
I worked with the communications directorate of a leading government office for about 10 years.
In my experience the 'professionals' in whitehall where a bunch of pencil pushers who do not have a clue and not one drop of commercial savvy.
They are all paralysed with fear that any decision they make will be subject to politcal correctness and criticism.
With this in mind they try and cover every angle hence all the drawn out criteria on their tender documents.
This is bad for the public purse but for successful businesses can mean huge payouts and very high margins ... i know this firsthand.
Speaking to you from my own privately bought and paid for Island in the Sun
Dick
To post comments please log in here