Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1995 Week 8 Hansard (26 October) . . Page.. 2079 ..

MR WHITECROSS (continuing):

under the heading "Open and Effective Competition", is that there should be a clear expression of the needs in purchasing documentation. What was the purchasing documentation? Is that purchasing documentation? A handwritten piece of paper, which contains a factual error that the tender closes on 29 October.

Mr De Domenico: What happened last year when you were in government? The same thing.

MR WHITECROSS: Mr De Domenico, what we are talking about now is whether the tender process was appropriate under your Government. We have purchasing documentation that says that it should be clearly expressed in documentation. What we have is a handwritten piece of paper that does not contain the facts about the date the tender closed. Mr De Domenico just said a moment ago in relation to this tender that one of the requirements of the tender was that people put in a flat price for an auctioneer alone. There is nothing about this in the tender documentation. It is not mentioned. It is not there. How do you conduct a tender process on the basis of that?

Mr De Domenico says, "Our tender process was better than last year's because last year you invited only three; this year we invited seven". The effectiveness of a tender process, the propriety of a tender process, the appropriateness of a tender process, is not how many people you invite to tender but the quality of the tender, and it is the quality of the tender that we are going to. I have already touched on the failure of the documentation to mention the fact that all they wanted was a bare voice and a flat rate charge. But it goes further.

Mr De Domenico in the Assembly last week was given plenty of opportunity to explain this. "What were the criteria for selection of the successful tenderer?", we asked. Mr De Domenico said, "It was the lowest price". We said, "Did you not take anything else into account?". "No, it was the lowest price", he said. The purchasing guidelines say:

Achievement of value for money to the ACT Government requires the maximisation of the benefits from a purchase, compared to the cost of the purchase, taking into account all the potential costs associated with the purchasing.

Best value for money - - -

Mr De Domenico: Flat rate, lowest price is always the best value, Mr Whitecross. If you knew anything about business you would know that.

MR WHITECROSS: Mr De Domenico compounds his error by telling us that the lowest price is the best value for money, showing once again - - -

Mr De Domenico: If you ask for a flat rate, it has to be.

MR WHITECROSS: Mr De Domenico has had his say. That shows once again that Mr De Domenico does not understand government purchasing. Now let me give a little bit of history on this. The Federal Government got themselves into a spot of bother a few years ago when they let a contract for a private company to undertake coastal surveillance

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .