❓ A parliamentary question probes the awarding and commencement of a cemeteries record system tender, focusing on the discrepancy between the contract start date and the formal award date, as well as transparency concerns. The Treasurer provides a detailed explanation of the timeline and justifications for the process.
AnsweredQoN 1511Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
I refer the Treasurer to tender No RFP85701 regarding a cemeteries record system awarded on 3 October 2003. (1) If the contract was not awarded until 3 October 2003, under whose authority was the contract started on 31 March 2003? (2) What was the cause of the delay between the start date of the tender and the date the tender was awarded? (3) Will the Treasurer table a list of the unsuccessful tenderers and the prices quoted? (4) If not, why not? (5) Were all tenderers advised of the start date of 31 March 2003? (6) Did any tenderers indicate that they would be disadvantaged by the start date? Hon NICK GRIFFITHS
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for some notice of this question. The Treasurer has provided the following response - (1) This contract was awarded by the Department of Treasury and Finance as contract principal. Written advice of the preferred tenderer status was issued on 13 February 2003, with a contract award subject to finalisation of a payment schedule; confirmation of required levels of insurance; confirmation of the resources that would be utilised on the project; confirmation of the project schedule; and finalisation of contractual arrangements for a strategic partnering in resourcing information technology, government information technology and communications - SPIRIT GITC - 4 WA contract. These matters were resolved to the satisfaction of the principal during March 2003. The formal contract commencement date was agreed between the parties as 31 March 2003. The contractor commenced work in April 2003. Formalisation of the contract documents then occurred, with the final signature by the principal’s representative on 3 October 2003. (2) The tender closed on 20 June 2002. Eighteen submissions were received. The principal to the contract issued written advice to all tenderers on 14 August 2002 to advise that, due to the number of submissions received, the evaluation process time frame had been extended. The evaluation panel took until November 2002 to complete its recommendation. The Metropolitan Cemeteries Board was required to obtain its board’s approval prior to submitting the recommendation to the principal for approval. This occurred at its December meeting. The recommendation report was then approved by the principal and was subsequently endorsed by the State Tenders Committee on 23 January 2003. The preferred tenderer advice was issued on 13 February 2003. (3) No. (4) It is State Supply Commission policy that public authorities do not publish the prices of unsuccessful tenderers; rather, public authorities are required to publish the contract value, name of the successful tenderer and the number of bids received on the government contracting information bulletin board. (5) No. (6) The principal is not aware of any tenderer expressing concern about the contract start date.
(1) If the contract was not awarded until 3 October 2003, under whose authority was the contract started on 31 March 2003? (2) What was the cause of the delay between the start date of the tender and the date the tender was awarded? (3) Will the Treasurer table a list of the unsuccessful tenderers and the prices quoted? (4) If not, why not? (5) Were all tenderers advised of the start date of 31 March 2003? (6) Did any tenderers indicate that they would be disadvantaged by the start date? Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The Treasurer has provided the following response - (1) This contract was awarded by the Department of Treasury and Finance as contract principal. Written advice of the preferred tenderer status was issued on 13 February 2003, with a contract award subject to finalisation of a payment schedule; confirmation of required levels of insurance; confirmation of the resources that would be utilised on the project; confirmation of the project schedule; and finalisation of contractual arrangements for a strategic partnering in resourcing information technology, government information technology and communications - SPIRIT GITC - 4 WA contract. These matters were resolved to the satisfaction of the principal during March 2003. The formal contract commencement date was agreed between the parties as 31 March 2003. The contractor commenced work in April 2003. Formalisation of the contract documents then occurred, with the final signature by the principal’s representative on 3 October 2003. (2) The tender closed on 20 June 2002. Eighteen submissions were received. The principal to the contract issued written advice to all tenderers on 14 August 2002 to advise that, due to the number of submissions received, the evaluation process time frame had been extended. The evaluation panel took until November 2002 to complete its recommendation. The Metropolitan Cemeteries Board was required to obtain its board’s approval prior to submitting the recommendation to the principal for approval. This occurred at its December meeting. The recommendation report was then approved by the principal and was subsequently endorsed by the State Tenders Committee on 23 January 2003. The preferred tenderer advice was issued on 13 February 2003. (3) No. (4) It is State Supply Commission policy that public authorities do not publish the prices of unsuccessful tenderers; rather, public authorities are required to publish the contract value, name of the successful tenderer and the number of bids received on the government contracting information bulletin board. (5) No. (6) The principal is not aware of any tenderer expressing concern about the contract start date.
(2) What was the cause of the delay between the start date of the tender and the date the tender was awarded? (3) Will the Treasurer table a list of the unsuccessful tenderers and the prices quoted? (4) If not, why not? (5) Were all tenderers advised of the start date of 31 March 2003? (6) Did any tenderers indicate that they would be disadvantaged by the start date? Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The Treasurer has provided the following response - (1) This contract was awarded by the Department of Treasury and Finance as contract principal. Written advice of the preferred tenderer status was issued on 13 February 2003, with a contract award subject to finalisation of a payment schedule; confirmation of required levels of insurance; confirmation of the resources that would be utilised on the project; confirmation of the project schedule; and finalisation of contractual arrangements for a strategic partnering in resourcing information technology, government information technology and communications - SPIRIT GITC - 4 WA contract. These matters were resolved to the satisfaction of the principal during March 2003. The formal contract commencement date was agreed between the parties as 31 March 2003. The contractor commenced work in April 2003. Formalisation of the contract documents then occurred, with the final signature by the principal’s representative on 3 October 2003. (2) The tender closed on 20 June 2002. Eighteen submissions were received. The principal to the contract issued written advice to all tenderers on 14 August 2002 to advise that, due to the number of submissions received, the evaluation process time frame had been extended. The evaluation panel took until November 2002 to complete its recommendation. The Metropolitan Cemeteries Board was required to obtain its board’s approval prior to submitting the recommendation to the principal for approval. This occurred at its December meeting. The recommendation report was then approved by the principal and was subsequently endorsed by the State Tenders Committee on 23 January 2003. The preferred tenderer advice was issued on 13 February 2003. (3) No. (4) It is State Supply Commission policy that public authorities do not publish the prices of unsuccessful tenderers; rather, public authorities are required to publish the contract value, name of the successful tenderer and the number of bids received on the government contracting information bulletin board. (5) No. (6) The principal is not aware of any tenderer expressing concern about the contract start date.
(3) Will the Treasurer table a list of the unsuccessful tenderers and the prices quoted? (4) If not, why not? (5) Were all tenderers advised of the start date of 31 March 2003? (6) Did any tenderers indicate that they would be disadvantaged by the start date? Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The Treasurer has provided the following response - (1) This contract was awarded by the Department of Treasury and Finance as contract principal. Written advice of the preferred tenderer status was issued on 13 February 2003, with a contract award subject to finalisation of a payment schedule; confirmation of required levels of insurance; confirmation of the resources that would be utilised on the project; confirmation of the project schedule; and finalisation of contractual arrangements for a strategic partnering in resourcing information technology, government information technology and communications - SPIRIT GITC - 4 WA contract. These matters were resolved to the satisfaction of the principal during March 2003. The formal contract commencement date was agreed between the parties as 31 March 2003. The contractor commenced work in April 2003. Formalisation of the contract documents then occurred, with the final signature by the principal’s representative on 3 October 2003. (2) The tender closed on 20 June 2002. Eighteen submissions were received. The principal to the contract issued written advice to all tenderers on 14 August 2002 to advise that, due to the number of submissions received, the evaluation process time frame had been extended. The evaluation panel took until November 2002 to complete its recommendation. The Metropolitan Cemeteries Board was required to obtain its board’s approval prior to submitting the recommendation to the principal for approval. This occurred at its December meeting. The recommendation report was then approved by the principal and was subsequently endorsed by the State Tenders Committee on 23 January 2003. The preferred tenderer advice was issued on 13 February 2003. (3) No. (4) It is State Supply Commission policy that public authorities do not publish the prices of unsuccessful tenderers; rather, public authorities are required to publish the contract value, name of the successful tenderer and the number of bids received on the government contracting information bulletin board. (5) No. (6) The principal is not aware of any tenderer expressing concern about the contract start date.
(4) If not, why not? (5) Were all tenderers advised of the start date of 31 March 2003? (6) Did any tenderers indicate that they would be disadvantaged by the start date? Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The Treasurer has provided the following response - (1) This contract was awarded by the Department of Treasury and Finance as contract principal. Written advice of the preferred tenderer status was issued on 13 February 2003, with a contract award subject to finalisation of a payment schedule; confirmation of required levels of insurance; confirmation of the resources that would be utilised on the project; confirmation of the project schedule; and finalisation of contractual arrangements for a strategic partnering in resourcing information technology, government information technology and communications - SPIRIT GITC - 4 WA contract. These matters were resolved to the satisfaction of the principal during March 2003. The formal contract commencement date was agreed between the parties as 31 March 2003. The contractor commenced work in April 2003. Formalisation of the contract documents then occurred, with the final signature by the principal’s representative on 3 October 2003. (2) The tender closed on 20 June 2002. Eighteen submissions were received. The principal to the contract issued written advice to all tenderers on 14 August 2002 to advise that, due to the number of submissions received, the evaluation process time frame had been extended. The evaluation panel took until November 2002 to complete its recommendation. The Metropolitan Cemeteries Board was required to obtain its board’s approval prior to submitting the recommendation to the principal for approval. This occurred at its December meeting. The recommendation report was then approved by the principal and was subsequently endorsed by the State Tenders Committee on 23 January 2003. The preferred tenderer advice was issued on 13 February 2003. (3) No. (4) It is State Supply Commission policy that public authorities do not publish the prices of unsuccessful tenderers; rather, public authorities are required to publish the contract value, name of the successful tenderer and the number of bids received on the government contracting information bulletin board. (5) No. (6) The principal is not aware of any tenderer expressing concern about the contract start date.
(5) Were all tenderers advised of the start date of 31 March 2003? (6) Did any tenderers indicate that they would be disadvantaged by the start date? Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The Treasurer has provided the following response - (1) This contract was awarded by the Department of Treasury and Finance as contract principal. Written advice of the preferred tenderer status was issued on 13 February 2003, with a contract award subject to finalisation of a payment schedule; confirmation of required levels of insurance; confirmation of the resources that would be utilised on the project; confirmation of the project schedule; and finalisation of contractual arrangements for a strategic partnering in resourcing information technology, government information technology and communications - SPIRIT GITC - 4 WA contract. These matters were resolved to the satisfaction of the principal during March 2003. The formal contract commencement date was agreed between the parties as 31 March 2003. The contractor commenced work in April 2003. Formalisation of the contract documents then occurred, with the final signature by the principal’s representative on 3 October 2003. (2) The tender closed on 20 June 2002. Eighteen submissions were received. The principal to the contract issued written advice to all tenderers on 14 August 2002 to advise that, due to the number of submissions received, the evaluation process time frame had been extended. The evaluation panel took until November 2002 to complete its recommendation. The Metropolitan Cemeteries Board was required to obtain its board’s approval prior to submitting the recommendation to the principal for approval. This occurred at its December meeting. The recommendation report was then approved by the principal and was subsequently endorsed by the State Tenders Committee on 23 January 2003. The preferred tenderer advice was issued on 13 February 2003. (3) No. (4) It is State Supply Commission policy that public authorities do not publish the prices of unsuccessful tenderers; rather, public authorities are required to publish the contract value, name of the successful tenderer and the number of bids received on the government contracting information bulletin board. (5) No. (6) The principal is not aware of any tenderer expressing concern about the contract start date.
(6) Did any tenderers indicate that they would be disadvantaged by the start date? Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The Treasurer has provided the following response - (1) This contract was awarded by the Department of Treasury and Finance as contract principal. Written advice of the preferred tenderer status was issued on 13 February 2003, with a contract award subject to finalisation of a payment schedule; confirmation of required levels of insurance; confirmation of the resources that would be utilised on the project; confirmation of the project schedule; and finalisation of contractual arrangements for a strategic partnering in resourcing information technology, government information technology and communications - SPIRIT GITC - 4 WA contract. These matters were resolved to the satisfaction of the principal during March 2003. The formal contract commencement date was agreed between the parties as 31 March 2003. The contractor commenced work in April 2003. Formalisation of the contract documents then occurred, with the final signature by the principal’s representative on 3 October 2003. (2) The tender closed on 20 June 2002. Eighteen submissions were received. The principal to the contract issued written advice to all tenderers on 14 August 2002 to advise that, due to the number of submissions received, the evaluation process time frame had been extended. The evaluation panel took until November 2002 to complete its recommendation. The Metropolitan Cemeteries Board was required to obtain its board’s approval prior to submitting the recommendation to the principal for approval. This occurred at its December meeting. The recommendation report was then approved by the principal and was subsequently endorsed by the State Tenders Committee on 23 January 2003. The preferred tenderer advice was issued on 13 February 2003. (3) No. (4) It is State Supply Commission policy that public authorities do not publish the prices of unsuccessful tenderers; rather, public authorities are required to publish the contract value, name of the successful tenderer and the number of bids received on the government contracting information bulletin board. (5) No. (6) The principal is not aware of any tenderer expressing concern about the contract start date.
Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The Treasurer has provided the following response - (1) This contract was awarded by the Department of Treasury and Finance as contract principal. Written advice of the preferred tenderer status was issued on 13 February 2003, with a contract award subject to finalisation of a payment schedule; confirmation of required levels of insurance; confirmation of the resources that would be utilised on the project; confirmation of the project schedule; and finalisation of contractual arrangements for a strategic partnering in resourcing information technology, government information technology and communications - SPIRIT GITC - 4 WA contract. These matters were resolved to the satisfaction of the principal during March 2003. The formal contract commencement date was agreed between the parties as 31 March 2003. The contractor commenced work in April 2003. Formalisation of the contract documents then occurred, with the final signature by the principal’s representative on 3 October 2003. (2) The tender closed on 20 June 2002. Eighteen submissions were received. The principal to the contract issued written advice to all tenderers on 14 August 2002 to advise that, due to the number of submissions received, the evaluation process time frame had been extended. The evaluation panel took until November 2002 to complete its recommendation. The Metropolitan Cemeteries Board was required to obtain its board’s approval prior to submitting the recommendation to the principal for approval. This occurred at its December meeting. The recommendation report was then approved by the principal and was subsequently endorsed by the State Tenders Committee on 23 January 2003. The preferred tenderer advice was issued on 13 February 2003. (3) No. (4) It is State Supply Commission policy that public authorities do not publish the prices of unsuccessful tenderers; rather, public authorities are required to publish the contract value, name of the successful tenderer and the number of bids received on the government contracting information bulletin board. (5) No. (6) The principal is not aware of any tenderer expressing concern about the contract start date.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. The Treasurer has provided the following response - (1) This contract was awarded by the Department of Treasury and Finance as contract principal. Written advice of the preferred tenderer status was issued on 13 February 2003, with a contract award subject to finalisation of a payment schedule; confirmation of required levels of insurance; confirmation of the resources that would be utilised on the project; confirmation of the project schedule; and finalisation of contractual arrangements for a strategic partnering in resourcing information technology, government information technology and communications - SPIRIT GITC - 4 WA contract. These matters were resolved to the satisfaction of the principal during March 2003. The formal contract commencement date was agreed between the parties as 31 March 2003. The contractor commenced work in April 2003. Formalisation of the contract documents then occurred, with the final signature by the principal’s representative on 3 October 2003. (2) The tender closed on 20 June 2002. Eighteen submissions were received. The principal to the contract issued written advice to all tenderers on 14 August 2002 to advise that, due to the number of submissions received, the evaluation process time frame had been extended. The evaluation panel took until November 2002 to complete its recommendation. The Metropolitan Cemeteries Board was required to obtain its board’s approval prior to submitting the recommendation to the principal for approval. This occurred at its December meeting. The recommendation report was then approved by the principal and was subsequently endorsed by the State Tenders Committee on 23 January 2003. The preferred tenderer advice was issued on 13 February 2003. (3) No. (4) It is State Supply Commission policy that public authorities do not publish the prices of unsuccessful tenderers; rather, public authorities are required to publish the contract value, name of the successful tenderer and the number of bids received on the government contracting information bulletin board. (5) No. (6) The principal is not aware of any tenderer expressing concern about the contract start date.
(1) This contract was awarded by the Department of Treasury and Finance as contract principal. Written advice of the preferred tenderer status was issued on 13 February 2003, with a contract award subject to finalisation of a payment schedule; confirmation of required levels of insurance; confirmation of the resources that would be utilised on the project; confirmation of the project schedule; and finalisation of contractual arrangements for a strategic partnering in resourcing information technology, government information technology and communications - SPIRIT GITC - 4 WA contract. These matters were resolved to the satisfaction of the principal during March 2003. The formal contract commencement date was agreed between the parties as 31 March 2003. The contractor commenced work in April 2003. Formalisation of the contract documents then occurred, with the final signature by the principal’s representative on 3 October 2003. (2) The tender closed on 20 June 2002. Eighteen submissions were received. The principal to the contract issued written advice to all tenderers on 14 August 2002 to advise that, due to the number of submissions received, the evaluation process time frame had been extended. The evaluation panel took until November 2002 to complete its recommendation. The Metropolitan Cemeteries Board was required to obtain its board’s approval prior to submitting the recommendation to the principal for approval. This occurred at its December meeting. The recommendation report was then approved by the principal and was subsequently endorsed by the State Tenders Committee on 23 January 2003. The preferred tenderer advice was issued on 13 February 2003. (3) No. (4) It is State Supply Commission policy that public authorities do not publish the prices of unsuccessful tenderers; rather, public authorities are required to publish the contract value, name of the successful tenderer and the number of bids received on the government contracting information bulletin board. (5) No. (6) The principal is not aware of any tenderer expressing concern about the contract start date.
(2) The tender closed on 20 June 2002. Eighteen submissions were received. The principal to the contract issued written advice to all tenderers on 14 August 2002 to advise that, due to the number of submissions received, the evaluation process time frame had been extended. The evaluation panel took until November 2002 to complete its recommendation. The Metropolitan Cemeteries Board was required to obtain its board’s approval prior to submitting the recommendation to the principal for approval. This occurred at its December meeting. The recommendation report was then approved by the principal and was subsequently endorsed by the State Tenders Committee on 23 January 2003. The preferred tenderer advice was issued on 13 February 2003. (3) No. (4) It is State Supply Commission policy that public authorities do not publish the prices of unsuccessful tenderers; rather, public authorities are required to publish the contract value, name of the successful tenderer and the number of bids received on the government contracting information bulletin board. (5) No. (6) The principal is not aware of any tenderer expressing concern about the contract start date.
(3) No. (4) It is State Supply Commission policy that public authorities do not publish the prices of unsuccessful tenderers; rather, public authorities are required to publish the contract value, name of the successful tenderer and the number of bids received on the government contracting information bulletin board. (5) No. (6) The principal is not aware of any tenderer expressing concern about the contract start date.
(4) It is State Supply Commission policy that public authorities do not publish the prices of unsuccessful tenderers; rather, public authorities are required to publish the contract value, name of the successful tenderer and the number of bids received on the government contracting information bulletin board. (5) No. (6) The principal is not aware of any tenderer expressing concern about the contract start date.
(5) No. (6) The principal is not aware of any tenderer expressing concern about the contract start date.
(6) The principal is not aware of any tenderer expressing concern about the contract start date.
(1) If the contract was not awarded until 3 October 2003, under whose authority was the contract started on 31 March 2003? (2) What was the cause of the delay between the start date of the tender and the date the tender was awarded? (3) Will the Treasurer table a list of the unsuccessful tenderers and the prices quoted? (4) If not, why not? (5) Were all tenderers advised of the start date of 31 March 2003? (6) Did any tenderers indicate that they would be disadvantaged by the start date? Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The Treasurer has provided the following response - (1) This contract was awarded by the Department of Treasury and Finance as contract principal. Written advice of the preferred tenderer status was issued on 13 February 2003, with a contract award subject to finalisation of a payment schedule; confirmation of required levels of insurance; confirmation of the resources that would be utilised on the project; confirmation of the project schedule; and finalisation of contractual arrangements for a strategic partnering in resourcing information technology, government information technology and communications - SPIRIT GITC - 4 WA contract. These matters were resolved to the satisfaction of the principal during March 2003. The formal contract commencement date was agreed between the parties as 31 March 2003. The contractor commenced work in April 2003. Formalisation of the contract documents then occurred, with the final signature by the principal’s representative on 3 October 2003. (2) The tender closed on 20 June 2002. Eighteen submissions were received. The principal to the contract issued written advice to all tenderers on 14 August 2002 to advise that, due to the number of submissions received, the evaluation process time frame had been extended. The evaluation panel took until November 2002 to complete its recommendation. The Metropolitan Cemeteries Board was required to obtain its board’s approval prior to submitting the recommendation to the principal for approval. This occurred at its December meeting. The recommendation report was then approved by the principal and was subsequently endorsed by the State Tenders Committee on 23 January 2003. The preferred tenderer advice was issued on 13 February 2003. (3) No. (4) It is State Supply Commission policy that public authorities do not publish the prices of unsuccessful tenderers; rather, public authorities are required to publish the contract value, name of the successful tenderer and the number of bids received on the government contracting information bulletin board. (5) No. (6) The principal is not aware of any tenderer expressing concern about the contract start date.
(2) What was the cause of the delay between the start date of the tender and the date the tender was awarded? (3) Will the Treasurer table a list of the unsuccessful tenderers and the prices quoted? (4) If not, why not? (5) Were all tenderers advised of the start date of 31 March 2003? (6) Did any tenderers indicate that they would be disadvantaged by the start date? Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The Treasurer has provided the following response - (1) This contract was awarded by the Department of Treasury and Finance as contract principal. Written advice of the preferred tenderer status was issued on 13 February 2003, with a contract award subject to finalisation of a payment schedule; confirmation of required levels of insurance; confirmation of the resources that would be utilised on the project; confirmation of the project schedule; and finalisation of contractual arrangements for a strategic partnering in resourcing information technology, government information technology and communications - SPIRIT GITC - 4 WA contract. These matters were resolved to the satisfaction of the principal during March 2003. The formal contract commencement date was agreed between the parties as 31 March 2003. The contractor commenced work in April 2003. Formalisation of the contract documents then occurred, with the final signature by the principal’s representative on 3 October 2003. (2) The tender closed on 20 June 2002. Eighteen submissions were received. The principal to the contract issued written advice to all tenderers on 14 August 2002 to advise that, due to the number of submissions received, the evaluation process time frame had been extended. The evaluation panel took until November 2002 to complete its recommendation. The Metropolitan Cemeteries Board was required to obtain its board’s approval prior to submitting the recommendation to the principal for approval. This occurred at its December meeting. The recommendation report was then approved by the principal and was subsequently endorsed by the State Tenders Committee on 23 January 2003. The preferred tenderer advice was issued on 13 February 2003. (3) No. (4) It is State Supply Commission policy that public authorities do not publish the prices of unsuccessful tenderers; rather, public authorities are required to publish the contract value, name of the successful tenderer and the number of bids received on the government contracting information bulletin board. (5) No. (6) The principal is not aware of any tenderer expressing concern about the contract start date.
(3) Will the Treasurer table a list of the unsuccessful tenderers and the prices quoted? (4) If not, why not? (5) Were all tenderers advised of the start date of 31 March 2003? (6) Did any tenderers indicate that they would be disadvantaged by the start date? Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The Treasurer has provided the following response - (1) This contract was awarded by the Department of Treasury and Finance as contract principal. Written advice of the preferred tenderer status was issued on 13 February 2003, with a contract award subject to finalisation of a payment schedule; confirmation of required levels of insurance; confirmation of the resources that would be utilised on the project; confirmation of the project schedule; and finalisation of contractual arrangements for a strategic partnering in resourcing information technology, government information technology and communications - SPIRIT GITC - 4 WA contract. These matters were resolved to the satisfaction of the principal during March 2003. The formal contract commencement date was agreed between the parties as 31 March 2003. The contractor commenced work in April 2003. Formalisation of the contract documents then occurred, with the final signature by the principal’s representative on 3 October 2003. (2) The tender closed on 20 June 2002. Eighteen submissions were received. The principal to the contract issued written advice to all tenderers on 14 August 2002 to advise that, due to the number of submissions received, the evaluation process time frame had been extended. The evaluation panel took until November 2002 to complete its recommendation. The Metropolitan Cemeteries Board was required to obtain its board’s approval prior to submitting the recommendation to the principal for approval. This occurred at its December meeting. The recommendation report was then approved by the principal and was subsequently endorsed by the State Tenders Committee on 23 January 2003. The preferred tenderer advice was issued on 13 February 2003. (3) No. (4) It is State Supply Commission policy that public authorities do not publish the prices of unsuccessful tenderers; rather, public authorities are required to publish the contract value, name of the successful tenderer and the number of bids received on the government contracting information bulletin board. (5) No. (6) The principal is not aware of any tenderer expressing concern about the contract start date.
(4) If not, why not? (5) Were all tenderers advised of the start date of 31 March 2003? (6) Did any tenderers indicate that they would be disadvantaged by the start date? Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The Treasurer has provided the following response - (1) This contract was awarded by the Department of Treasury and Finance as contract principal. Written advice of the preferred tenderer status was issued on 13 February 2003, with a contract award subject to finalisation of a payment schedule; confirmation of required levels of insurance; confirmation of the resources that would be utilised on the project; confirmation of the project schedule; and finalisation of contractual arrangements for a strategic partnering in resourcing information technology, government information technology and communications - SPIRIT GITC - 4 WA contract. These matters were resolved to the satisfaction of the principal during March 2003. The formal contract commencement date was agreed between the parties as 31 March 2003. The contractor commenced work in April 2003. Formalisation of the contract documents then occurred, with the final signature by the principal’s representative on 3 October 2003. (2) The tender closed on 20 June 2002. Eighteen submissions were received. The principal to the contract issued written advice to all tenderers on 14 August 2002 to advise that, due to the number of submissions received, the evaluation process time frame had been extended. The evaluation panel took until November 2002 to complete its recommendation. The Metropolitan Cemeteries Board was required to obtain its board’s approval prior to submitting the recommendation to the principal for approval. This occurred at its December meeting. The recommendation report was then approved by the principal and was subsequently endorsed by the State Tenders Committee on 23 January 2003. The preferred tenderer advice was issued on 13 February 2003. (3) No. (4) It is State Supply Commission policy that public authorities do not publish the prices of unsuccessful tenderers; rather, public authorities are required to publish the contract value, name of the successful tenderer and the number of bids received on the government contracting information bulletin board. (5) No. (6) The principal is not aware of any tenderer expressing concern about the contract start date.
(5) Were all tenderers advised of the start date of 31 March 2003? (6) Did any tenderers indicate that they would be disadvantaged by the start date? Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The Treasurer has provided the following response - (1) This contract was awarded by the Department of Treasury and Finance as contract principal. Written advice of the preferred tenderer status was issued on 13 February 2003, with a contract award subject to finalisation of a payment schedule; confirmation of required levels of insurance; confirmation of the resources that would be utilised on the project; confirmation of the project schedule; and finalisation of contractual arrangements for a strategic partnering in resourcing information technology, government information technology and communications - SPIRIT GITC - 4 WA contract. These matters were resolved to the satisfaction of the principal during March 2003. The formal contract commencement date was agreed between the parties as 31 March 2003. The contractor commenced work in April 2003. Formalisation of the contract documents then occurred, with the final signature by the principal’s representative on 3 October 2003. (2) The tender closed on 20 June 2002. Eighteen submissions were received. The principal to the contract issued written advice to all tenderers on 14 August 2002 to advise that, due to the number of submissions received, the evaluation process time frame had been extended. The evaluation panel took until November 2002 to complete its recommendation. The Metropolitan Cemeteries Board was required to obtain its board’s approval prior to submitting the recommendation to the principal for approval. This occurred at its December meeting. The recommendation report was then approved by the principal and was subsequently endorsed by the State Tenders Committee on 23 January 2003. The preferred tenderer advice was issued on 13 February 2003. (3) No. (4) It is State Supply Commission policy that public authorities do not publish the prices of unsuccessful tenderers; rather, public authorities are required to publish the contract value, name of the successful tenderer and the number of bids received on the government contracting information bulletin board. (5) No. (6) The principal is not aware of any tenderer expressing concern about the contract start date.
(6) Did any tenderers indicate that they would be disadvantaged by the start date? Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The Treasurer has provided the following response - (1) This contract was awarded by the Department of Treasury and Finance as contract principal. Written advice of the preferred tenderer status was issued on 13 February 2003, with a contract award subject to finalisation of a payment schedule; confirmation of required levels of insurance; confirmation of the resources that would be utilised on the project; confirmation of the project schedule; and finalisation of contractual arrangements for a strategic partnering in resourcing information technology, government information technology and communications - SPIRIT GITC - 4 WA contract. These matters were resolved to the satisfaction of the principal during March 2003. The formal contract commencement date was agreed between the parties as 31 March 2003. The contractor commenced work in April 2003. Formalisation of the contract documents then occurred, with the final signature by the principal’s representative on 3 October 2003. (2) The tender closed on 20 June 2002. Eighteen submissions were received. The principal to the contract issued written advice to all tenderers on 14 August 2002 to advise that, due to the number of submissions received, the evaluation process time frame had been extended. The evaluation panel took until November 2002 to complete its recommendation. The Metropolitan Cemeteries Board was required to obtain its board’s approval prior to submitting the recommendation to the principal for approval. This occurred at its December meeting. The recommendation report was then approved by the principal and was subsequently endorsed by the State Tenders Committee on 23 January 2003. The preferred tenderer advice was issued on 13 February 2003. (3) No. (4) It is State Supply Commission policy that public authorities do not publish the prices of unsuccessful tenderers; rather, public authorities are required to publish the contract value, name of the successful tenderer and the number of bids received on the government contracting information bulletin board. (5) No. (6) The principal is not aware of any tenderer expressing concern about the contract start date.
Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The Treasurer has provided the following response - (1) This contract was awarded by the Department of Treasury and Finance as contract principal. Written advice of the preferred tenderer status was issued on 13 February 2003, with a contract award subject to finalisation of a payment schedule; confirmation of required levels of insurance; confirmation of the resources that would be utilised on the project; confirmation of the project schedule; and finalisation of contractual arrangements for a strategic partnering in resourcing information technology, government information technology and communications - SPIRIT GITC - 4 WA contract. These matters were resolved to the satisfaction of the principal during March 2003. The formal contract commencement date was agreed between the parties as 31 March 2003. The contractor commenced work in April 2003. Formalisation of the contract documents then occurred, with the final signature by the principal’s representative on 3 October 2003. (2) The tender closed on 20 June 2002. Eighteen submissions were received. The principal to the contract issued written advice to all tenderers on 14 August 2002 to advise that, due to the number of submissions received, the evaluation process time frame had been extended. The evaluation panel took until November 2002 to complete its recommendation. The Metropolitan Cemeteries Board was required to obtain its board’s approval prior to submitting the recommendation to the principal for approval. This occurred at its December meeting. The recommendation report was then approved by the principal and was subsequently endorsed by the State Tenders Committee on 23 January 2003. The preferred tenderer advice was issued on 13 February 2003. (3) No. (4) It is State Supply Commission policy that public authorities do not publish the prices of unsuccessful tenderers; rather, public authorities are required to publish the contract value, name of the successful tenderer and the number of bids received on the government contracting information bulletin board. (5) No. (6) The principal is not aware of any tenderer expressing concern about the contract start date.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. The Treasurer has provided the following response - (1) This contract was awarded by the Department of Treasury and Finance as contract principal. Written advice of the preferred tenderer status was issued on 13 February 2003, with a contract award subject to finalisation of a payment schedule; confirmation of required levels of insurance; confirmation of the resources that would be utilised on the project; confirmation of the project schedule; and finalisation of contractual arrangements for a strategic partnering in resourcing information technology, government information technology and communications - SPIRIT GITC - 4 WA contract. These matters were resolved to the satisfaction of the principal during March 2003. The formal contract commencement date was agreed between the parties as 31 March 2003. The contractor commenced work in April 2003. Formalisation of the contract documents then occurred, with the final signature by the principal’s representative on 3 October 2003. (2) The tender closed on 20 June 2002. Eighteen submissions were received. The principal to the contract issued written advice to all tenderers on 14 August 2002 to advise that, due to the number of submissions received, the evaluation process time frame had been extended. The evaluation panel took until November 2002 to complete its recommendation. The Metropolitan Cemeteries Board was required to obtain its board’s approval prior to submitting the recommendation to the principal for approval. This occurred at its December meeting. The recommendation report was then approved by the principal and was subsequently endorsed by the State Tenders Committee on 23 January 2003. The preferred tenderer advice was issued on 13 February 2003. (3) No. (4) It is State Supply Commission policy that public authorities do not publish the prices of unsuccessful tenderers; rather, public authorities are required to publish the contract value, name of the successful tenderer and the number of bids received on the government contracting information bulletin board. (5) No. (6) The principal is not aware of any tenderer expressing concern about the contract start date.
(1) This contract was awarded by the Department of Treasury and Finance as contract principal. Written advice of the preferred tenderer status was issued on 13 February 2003, with a contract award subject to finalisation of a payment schedule; confirmation of required levels of insurance; confirmation of the resources that would be utilised on the project; confirmation of the project schedule; and finalisation of contractual arrangements for a strategic partnering in resourcing information technology, government information technology and communications - SPIRIT GITC - 4 WA contract. These matters were resolved to the satisfaction of the principal during March 2003. The formal contract commencement date was agreed between the parties as 31 March 2003. The contractor commenced work in April 2003. Formalisation of the contract documents then occurred, with the final signature by the principal’s representative on 3 October 2003. (2) The tender closed on 20 June 2002. Eighteen submissions were received. The principal to the contract issued written advice to all tenderers on 14 August 2002 to advise that, due to the number of submissions received, the evaluation process time frame had been extended. The evaluation panel took until November 2002 to complete its recommendation. The Metropolitan Cemeteries Board was required to obtain its board’s approval prior to submitting the recommendation to the principal for approval. This occurred at its December meeting. The recommendation report was then approved by the principal and was subsequently endorsed by the State Tenders Committee on 23 January 2003. The preferred tenderer advice was issued on 13 February 2003. (3) No. (4) It is State Supply Commission policy that public authorities do not publish the prices of unsuccessful tenderers; rather, public authorities are required to publish the contract value, name of the successful tenderer and the number of bids received on the government contracting information bulletin board. (5) No. (6) The principal is not aware of any tenderer expressing concern about the contract start date.
(2) The tender closed on 20 June 2002. Eighteen submissions were received. The principal to the contract issued written advice to all tenderers on 14 August 2002 to advise that, due to the number of submissions received, the evaluation process time frame had been extended. The evaluation panel took until November 2002 to complete its recommendation. The Metropolitan Cemeteries Board was required to obtain its board’s approval prior to submitting the recommendation to the principal for approval. This occurred at its December meeting. The recommendation report was then approved by the principal and was subsequently endorsed by the State Tenders Committee on 23 January 2003. The preferred tenderer advice was issued on 13 February 2003. (3) No. (4) It is State Supply Commission policy that public authorities do not publish the prices of unsuccessful tenderers; rather, public authorities are required to publish the contract value, name of the successful tenderer and the number of bids received on the government contracting information bulletin board. (5) No. (6) The principal is not aware of any tenderer expressing concern about the contract start date.
(3) No. (4) It is State Supply Commission policy that public authorities do not publish the prices of unsuccessful tenderers; rather, public authorities are required to publish the contract value, name of the successful tenderer and the number of bids received on the government contracting information bulletin board. (5) No. (6) The principal is not aware of any tenderer expressing concern about the contract start date.
(4) It is State Supply Commission policy that public authorities do not publish the prices of unsuccessful tenderers; rather, public authorities are required to publish the contract value, name of the successful tenderer and the number of bids received on the government contracting information bulletin board. (5) No. (6) The principal is not aware of any tenderer expressing concern about the contract start date.
(5) No. (6) The principal is not aware of any tenderer expressing concern about the contract start date.
(6) The principal is not aware of any tenderer expressing concern about the contract start date.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.