Page 2893 - Week 07 - Thursday, 7 June 2012
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
government has attempted to socially procure in several recent tenders. However, the tenders have not led to a contract with social clauses. The government will therefore amend the contracts register to reflect the efforts that are being made to add social value—that is, in effect, social procurements—as well as the results, or social contracts.
The Assembly resolution asked the government to create stronger requirements for government agencies to follow social procurement guidelines, including having to report on social procurement outcomes in their annual reports. The annual report directions include the requirement for agencies to report on their social procurements in the 2011-12 annual reports.
The government has considered strengthening the requirements for agencies to pursue social benefit within their procurements and has decided not to take this approach at this time. Social Ventures Australia and Social Traders Ltd have recommended to Shared Services Procurement that a case by case approach to social procurement is preferable to pursuing any mandated approach. Social procurement tends to be more complex and time consuming in the planning stage than other types of procurement. It can also be challenging in the contract management phase, as it entails providing employment to people who face barriers entering the workforce and who have yet to acquire or develop robust skills, knowledge or a track record of performance.
It must be said that effective social procurements should aim to have a long-term positive outcome for people with employment disadvantage, rather than raising unrealistic hopes which may result in disappointment and disillusionment down the track. Shared Services Procurement has drawn on the extensive experiences of Kevin Robbie from Social Ventures Australia, Jeremy Nicholls, head of the Social Return on Investment Network, and Mark Daniels of Social Traders Ltd, who have told of overseas examples of social procurement project failures.
For these reasons the government is avoiding rushing into poorly selected social procurement projects which might not be sustainable. Instead, over the next year we will again expect to foster a few viable new social procurement projects, noting that these require considerable investment of time to achieve win-win-win outcomes for all concerned. A further three successful social procurements would be a good outcome for the financial year ahead, given the government’s limited resources and the need to foster sustainable value for money results and to develop these as positive case studies.
It is worth noting that the social enterprise sector for supporting people with employment disadvantage in Canberra is still developing. The ACT Social Enterprise Hub, which the ACT government partly funds, offers an incubator service with a limited range of businesses that it is presently assisting and promoting that offer goods or services suitable to government’s requirements. Shared Services Procurement has been meeting regularly with representatives of this organisation and is assisting to promote the ventures being fostered through the hub to directorates.
I think we can say that over the last 12 months the government’s awareness of, and comfort with, social procurement has continued to grow and there is steady progress
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video