❓ Question regarding a State Supply Commission tender for student notebook computers at John Willcock College, focusing on the evaluation process, the exclusion of a local business (Mitchell and Brown), and the 'buy local' policy. The Treasurer's answer indicates a review is underway and the results will be made public.
AnsweredQoN 2269Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
In relation to the State Supply Commission contract tender for the provision of student notebook computers and related services at John Willcock College (Geraldton), I ask -
(1) Can the Treasurer explain why price and value adding is not considered in the initial tender evaluation?
(2) Why is price not given the highest priority and weighting in the initial evaluation?
(3) Does such a situation not lend itself to the situation where the cheapest contractor is excluded at the expense of the community and taxpayers?
(4) If Mitchell and Brown did not provide enough detail in the tender document what effort was provided to assist them and/or what documents were provided to give them an indication on the level of detail required -
(a) and if none, why not?
(5) Does the onus of detail represent a fundamental flaw in the buy local policy i.e. a small local business does not have the access to expertise or the resources required to provide the level of detail required to compete?
(a) If not, why not?
(6) How does the Government intend to overcome this fundamental flaw to improve the buy local policy so that regional and rural businesses can compete, especially when their tender is the lowest in price?
(7) Given the level of detail provided by Mitchell and Brown, what were the precise reasons why their tender contract was not considered detailed enough for each section 3.3.2.1 through to section 3.3.2.3?
(8) Why would a company that offers the cheapest bid, employs 50 local staff and offered $500,000 worth of free internet not be short listed?
(9) Is the State Supply Commission undergoing an investigation of this matter and will the Treasurer make any and all processes and findings public in the interest of open and transparent government and in the best interest of parties concerned?
(1) Can the Treasurer explain why price and value adding is not considered in the initial tender evaluation?
(2) Why is price not given the highest priority and weighting in the initial evaluation?
(3) Does such a situation not lend itself to the situation where the cheapest contractor is excluded at the expense of the community and taxpayers?
(4) If Mitchell and Brown did not provide enough detail in the tender document what effort was provided to assist them and/or what documents were provided to give them an indication on the level of detail required -
(a) and if none, why not?
(5) Does the onus of detail represent a fundamental flaw in the buy local policy i.e. a small local business does not have the access to expertise or the resources required to provide the level of detail required to compete?
(a) If not, why not?
(6) How does the Government intend to overcome this fundamental flaw to improve the buy local policy so that regional and rural businesses can compete, especially when their tender is the lowest in price?
(7) Given the level of detail provided by Mitchell and Brown, what were the precise reasons why their tender contract was not considered detailed enough for each section 3.3.2.1 through to section 3.3.2.3?
(8) Why would a company that offers the cheapest bid, employs 50 local staff and offered $500,000 worth of free internet not be short listed?
(9) Is the State Supply Commission undergoing an investigation of this matter and will the Treasurer make any and all processes and findings public in the interest of open and transparent government and in the best interest of parties concerned?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
12 June 2007
Response time
34 days
The results of this review are to be made available to the public and will provide the information that the member is seeking.
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.