Page 618 - Week 02 - Thursday, 24 March 2022
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Separately, and as discussed at the 2020-21 annual reports hearings, the Head of Service recently commissioned an independent review of Procurement ACT, in 2021, to establish whether it is delivering its role effectively and efficiently. The review was conducted by Renée Leon, currently Vice-Chancellor of Charles Stuart University and previously a departmental secretary in the commonwealth government.
Together, these reviews have provided government with a comprehensive view of current practices and processes related to procurement across the ACT government, as well as opportunities to continue strengthening these. To correct the incorrect assertions made by the Leader of the Opposition, I can foreshadow amendments that note that this will be tabled with the government’s response to the Auditor-General.
Undertaking a full audit of all ACT government procurements over the past five years would be a substantial undertaking. There are generally over 1,000 notifiable contracts, valued at $25,000 or more, entered into across the ACT government each year. Documents for each procurement would need to be manually examined for the information requested. There are also many other contracts that fall below the notification threshold for which records are not currently held centrally. The significant investment of time, staffing resources and costs required to undertake this task would be unlikely to deliver a comparable level of benefit in improving procurement outcomes.
The ACT government monitors and enhances the procurement framework and the training and support provided to agencies on an ongoing basis to improve procurement practices and build procurement capability across the ACT public service. In January 2021 the ACT government released the Probity in Procurement Guide, which provides guidance on probity and how to maintain probity in ACT government procurement processes. The guide was reviewed and updated in May 2021 and again in February 2022. The guide has been put in place since the procurement process for the Campbell Primary School modernisation project commenced. It establishes probity risk indicators and suggests risk treatments, including the following.
Where the estimated total cost of the procurement is high or the procurement process has a higher level of complexity—for example, multi-stage or interactive or best and final offers—the procurement would be identified as medium risk and therefore the appointment of an internal or external probity adviser would be recommended. Where there are political sensitivities or areas of keen public interest; where the procurement involves significant intellectual property; where the procurement process involves a significant negotiation phase; or where there is a higher level of supplier engagement through the procurement process, a more detailed probity plan is strongly recommended to ensure an appropriate level of governance and application of the guide and to address any specific probity risks.
The guide also establishes that, where a territory entity decides not to follow probity advice, the territory entity should fully document the decision and the reasons, along with any alternative action it takes to address the probity risks or risks identified. Procurement guidance documentation and associated templates have also been updated to reflect the guide.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video