Submission on the Draft Building and Construction Procurement Guide

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Additionally, if contractors are asked to tender to particular technical specifications they will do so, as failure to do so will result in a non-conforming tender. This approach stifles innovation and does not lead to the best outcomes and as noted previously there can be real issues in relation to risk allocation. (e) Other principles We do not wish to add any further commentary as these principles are sound and are reflected in the CCF Best Practice Guide. 2.3.2 Other factors In other factors we note the following statement in the draft guide: “ Opportunities for bundling of multiple projects into a single contract should also be considered, where this is likely to deliver efficiencies at a program level.” 22 We are not supportive of this comment without qualification. It is our strong view that too often contracts are let to market as one large project when it is possible to consider breaking such projects into smaller component parts. Governments and Government Agencies should be required to give consideration to unbundling of major projects. For example a project could provide for the use of larger and smaller contracts - an illustration might be like the a road authority using prequalified contractors under the Austroads NPS – requiring R5 contractors to team with one or more R2/3/4 contractors. CCF believes that a level playing field which allows contractors to truly compete will lead to better outcomes for the community providing strong value for money. By truly supporting competition small to medium sized operators will have the opportunity to compete and in turn grow and develop capacity. It will also support skills development with small to medium sized businesses being key trainers of civil skills as well as regional employers. 22 See 6.6 of the draft guide 17
3 Conclusion CCF is generally supportive of the Guide however we are concerned that there are now a number of such documents available and yet contractors continue to experience the problems of variability in contract documentation and management, inappropriate risk allocation, variable and inefficient procurement practices which the Guide seeks to address. What is really needed is further work on best practice models and more in depth “how to” support particularly in local government. Whilst we support harmonisation in principle we are always concerned about what this means in practice on the ground as a “one size fits all” approach does not in our view lead to outcomes which support particularly our small to medium sized members. We are also of the view that a number of difficult structural issues such as risk allocation practices and contract administration will need to be addressed if real progress is to be both made and maintained. As always we would welcome discussing our submission as appropriate. 18
Page 1 and 2: Submission on the
Page 3 and 4: 1 An introduction As noted the CCF
Page 5 and 6: Not all of this cost can be passed
Page 7 and 8: 2.1.3 Contract administration issue
Page 9 and 10: This also raises a connection with
Page 11 and 12: It is our view that Government and
Page 13 and 14: the prequalification system and the
Page 15 and 16: The general principles we consider
Page 17: way in which procurement takes plac

Submission on the Draft Building and Construction Procurement Guide

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?