Water & Wastewater Treatment Magazine
Issue link: https://fhpublishing.uberflip.com/i/762480
www.wwtonline.co.uk | WWT | JANUARY 2017 | 19 "If there are ways in which it can be made more straightforward to work your way through, particularly for smaller businesses, then we should look for those opportunities, while not losing the spirit that it's good to get competition and be transparent." One specific criticism of the rules is that they encourage water companies and others to package work and supply arrangements into frameworks, to avoid having to repeatedly run a full procurement process; this creates barriers to entry for SMEs and new entrants. If EU regulations were taken out of the equation then direct procurement might become more common in some fields, providing more opportunities for the supply chain and cutting down inefficiency for the client. "Avoiding the possibility of being taken to court by someone who appeals a procurement decision is an obsession of water companies," says one senior water industry engineer. "Any appeal would be costly and delay decisions and investment. So in practice, clients create systems to manage the OJEU rules via frameworks and the framework procurement processes. If water companies were free of EU utility directives than their procurement processes could be simplified, creating opportunities and efficiencies." The EU regulations have, of course, been written into UK law – originally in 2006 and then through an updated regulation which came into force in April this year – and there is no obligation on the UK government to change this law when Brexit takes effect. Industry insiders say their assumption is that the rules will stay in place for the next five years, even if the eventual intention is to change them. It is a "realistic possibility" that the UK could conclude a trade agreement with the EU which would preserve public and utility procurement regulations as they are, according to Sue Arrowsmith, Professor of Public Procurement Law at the University of Nottingham and an advisor to procurement specialists Achilles. However, as an alternative to entirely going it alone, the UK could join the Government Procurement Agreement (GPA), a World Trade Organisation agreement which includes other major trading partners such as USA Japan and Canada. This regulates public procurement, but interestingly, allows privately-owned utilities a free hand. "In my view using the GPA's more flexible model for award procedures opens up a golden opportunity to design a single, simple and much improved system for the UK," writes Arrowsmith in a recent analysis. "However, whether the UK would take that opportunity is open to debate." Clearly these outcomes are political decisions for the future and are also dependent on what the coming negotiations bring. In the meantime many in the supply chain have more pressing unanswered questions surrounding possible cross-border tariffs. "Clarity from Government on the process of exiting the European Union is important to give confidence to the construction sector through this period of change," says Mark Esling, Business Development Director Saint-Gobain PAM UK. "Indeed, it's an impossible task to say with certainty how the water industry landscape is going to look once the government has come to the end of the process of sorting out the practical details of Brexit." Eight most common complaints about infrastructure procurement (source: CECA) 1.Information requirements disproportional to bid value 2.Lack of client engagement during process 3.Too many bidders 4.Poor tender documents 5.Frameworks that deliver less than forecasted revenue and/or include secondary competition 6.Poor management of the procurement process 7.Quality of feedback post- tender 8.Lack of checking and enforcement of undertakings made by contractors in tender documents