❓ Hon. Norman Moore questions the Treasurer regarding the tender process for leased vehicle management, focusing on fairness, value for money, and consultation with client agencies. The questions suggest concerns about the selected tenderer and the evaluation process.
AnsweredQoN 2062Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to the tender announced on the website of the Department of Treasury and Finance on May 28 2004 granted to Commonwealth Fleet Lease and Easifleet for the management of leased vehicles on behalf of a number of Government client agencies including the Ministry of Justice, Police Service, Disability Services Commission, CALM and the Fire and Emergency Services Authority, which closed on January 29 2004 -
(1) Why were tenderers including Fleetcare not given the opportunity to present the contents of their tender to the Evaluation Committee?
(2) Was the primary reason that it was deemed unnecessary or inappropriate to request Eastern States based tenderers to fly their executives to Western Australia?
(3) Given the protracted time from tender lodgement to the announcement of the decision and the fact that the companies carrying out this work for the client agencies until May 25 were long serving contractors why, as a common courtesy at least, was there no formal periodic announcement to all tenderers on progress?
(4) Why were there no questions to the tenderers about their bids, particularly to determine whether they met the ‘value for money’ criterion, as outlined in the Tender Specifications?
(5) Did a fully convened Tenders Committee of the State Supply Commission ratify the decision, and if so, what was the date of that meeting?
(6) To what extent were client agencies consulted on their needs and preference for a fleet manager before a decision was taken?
(7) What was the forum for any such consultation and, specifically, which client agencies were consulted?
(8) If client agencies previously had divested their internal fleet management resources, what measures have been put in place to enable them to cope with the transition to a new contractor?
(9) Will these agencies be required to supplement reduced services from the new contractor with their own internal resources?
(10) How has the Tender Evaluation Committee fully considered the risks associated with accepting a bargain price, not necessarily the best value tender, that confront the client agencies with respect to their operational requirements?
(11) Why was a bargain price approach applied, yet in pre-tender briefings and in the Tender Specification it was made clear that a true value for money analysis would be conducted?
(12) How was this value for money assessment conducted, when at least one current contractor was eliminated ostensibly on the grounds of value for money, but was not asked one single question about their bid?
(13) What are the details of the methodology used to evaluate the Value for Money component of the bids?
(14) As demonstrated capacity to deliver was rated at 50% of the selection criteria, what emphasis was placed on -
(a) the savings to the State including the things that State Fleet does not currently influence at all, like tight refurbishment controls, tight maintenance and repairs authorisation, strict fuel management, reductions in Fringe Benefits Tax obligations, strong controls on non-mandatory accessories and fit-out, on line reporting, on line whole of life cost comparisons and internal administration savings;
(b) demonstrated capacity to handle the more complex, larger and diverse fleets;
(c) the current level of local staff resourcing to meet the varying demands of the client Government Agencies;
(d) a true 24/7 service to the customer that goes to people based here in Western Australia rather than to call centres in other parts of the country or the world;
(e) direct customer feedback (not surveys) on the more important asset management aspects;
(f) the ability to provide multiple fuel cards through a single system and for remote areas maintaining accounts with small suppliers who do not accept cards;
(g) the ability to harness suppliers to ensure timely delivery and when needs change, having orders cancelled and vehicles swapped at no cost to the State; and
(h) plans for improvement and development?
(15) As both selected fleet managers do not currently manage the bigger or more diverse portion of the Government fleet, what evidence is there that these two tenderers do not pose a risk to the State in having limited experience and resources due to tendering bargain pricing?
(16) Is it correct that shortly after the tender announcement the selected fleet managers were encouraged to approach those not selected with a view to recruiting their experienced staff to enable them to meet their new obligations properly?
(17) What are the details of the way in which the Buy Local content policy was applied to this tender, considering that two tenderers were 100% owned and based here in Western Australia and both support other Western Australian businesses and the Western Australian community?
(18) What consideration was given during tender evaluation to the buy-out by Super Group through Fleet Australia of Commonwealth Fleet Lease half way through the tender process and, specifically, what impact did this have on the Buy Local content analysis?
(19) Are either or both of the successful tenderers foreign-owned and, if so, was a 10% ‘price preference’ applied to the bids of the local tenderers?
(20) To ensure proper and comprehensive tender assessment, were the line agencies (not the central Contract Managers) for the Commonwealth or Tasmanian Governments contacted to ascertain any shortcomings of up-front, bargain shopping in the fleet management arena?
(21) Is it correct that under the respective Commonwealth and Tasmanian contract arrangements the fleet manager essentially charges an administration fee while the risks and costs remain in Government, meaning that savings are not realised?
(22) As the statement published on May 28 2004 by the Department of Treasury and Finance claims that significant fleet management fee savings would be achieved through this tender, what was the value of such savings?
(23) Is it correct that management costs represent just 3% of the fleet’s overall operating costs?
(24) Was this considered in the tender evaluation process?
(25) What plans are in place to immediately tackle the remaining 97% of fleet operating costs?
(26) What was the specific estimate of the switching or transitional costs associated with changing contractors and how were these costs incorporated into the tender evaluation process?
(1) Why were tenderers including Fleetcare not given the opportunity to present the contents of their tender to the Evaluation Committee?
(2) Was the primary reason that it was deemed unnecessary or inappropriate to request Eastern States based tenderers to fly their executives to Western Australia?
(3) Given the protracted time from tender lodgement to the announcement of the decision and the fact that the companies carrying out this work for the client agencies until May 25 were long serving contractors why, as a common courtesy at least, was there no formal periodic announcement to all tenderers on progress?
(4) Why were there no questions to the tenderers about their bids, particularly to determine whether they met the ‘value for money’ criterion, as outlined in the Tender Specifications?
(5) Did a fully convened Tenders Committee of the State Supply Commission ratify the decision, and if so, what was the date of that meeting?
(6) To what extent were client agencies consulted on their needs and preference for a fleet manager before a decision was taken?
(7) What was the forum for any such consultation and, specifically, which client agencies were consulted?
(8) If client agencies previously had divested their internal fleet management resources, what measures have been put in place to enable them to cope with the transition to a new contractor?
(9) Will these agencies be required to supplement reduced services from the new contractor with their own internal resources?
(10) How has the Tender Evaluation Committee fully considered the risks associated with accepting a bargain price, not necessarily the best value tender, that confront the client agencies with respect to their operational requirements?
(11) Why was a bargain price approach applied, yet in pre-tender briefings and in the Tender Specification it was made clear that a true value for money analysis would be conducted?
(12) How was this value for money assessment conducted, when at least one current contractor was eliminated ostensibly on the grounds of value for money, but was not asked one single question about their bid?
(13) What are the details of the methodology used to evaluate the Value for Money component of the bids?
(14) As demonstrated capacity to deliver was rated at 50% of the selection criteria, what emphasis was placed on -
(a) the savings to the State including the things that State Fleet does not currently influence at all, like tight refurbishment controls, tight maintenance and repairs authorisation, strict fuel management, reductions in Fringe Benefits Tax obligations, strong controls on non-mandatory accessories and fit-out, on line reporting, on line whole of life cost comparisons and internal administration savings;
(b) demonstrated capacity to handle the more complex, larger and diverse fleets;
(c) the current level of local staff resourcing to meet the varying demands of the client Government Agencies;
(d) a true 24/7 service to the customer that goes to people based here in Western Australia rather than to call centres in other parts of the country or the world;
(e) direct customer feedback (not surveys) on the more important asset management aspects;
(f) the ability to provide multiple fuel cards through a single system and for remote areas maintaining accounts with small suppliers who do not accept cards;
(g) the ability to harness suppliers to ensure timely delivery and when needs change, having orders cancelled and vehicles swapped at no cost to the State; and
(h) plans for improvement and development?
(15) As both selected fleet managers do not currently manage the bigger or more diverse portion of the Government fleet, what evidence is there that these two tenderers do not pose a risk to the State in having limited experience and resources due to tendering bargain pricing?
(16) Is it correct that shortly after the tender announcement the selected fleet managers were encouraged to approach those not selected with a view to recruiting their experienced staff to enable them to meet their new obligations properly?
(17) What are the details of the way in which the Buy Local content policy was applied to this tender, considering that two tenderers were 100% owned and based here in Western Australia and both support other Western Australian businesses and the Western Australian community?
(18) What consideration was given during tender evaluation to the buy-out by Super Group through Fleet Australia of Commonwealth Fleet Lease half way through the tender process and, specifically, what impact did this have on the Buy Local content analysis?
(19) Are either or both of the successful tenderers foreign-owned and, if so, was a 10% ‘price preference’ applied to the bids of the local tenderers?
(20) To ensure proper and comprehensive tender assessment, were the line agencies (not the central Contract Managers) for the Commonwealth or Tasmanian Governments contacted to ascertain any shortcomings of up-front, bargain shopping in the fleet management arena?
(21) Is it correct that under the respective Commonwealth and Tasmanian contract arrangements the fleet manager essentially charges an administration fee while the risks and costs remain in Government, meaning that savings are not realised?
(22) As the statement published on May 28 2004 by the Department of Treasury and Finance claims that significant fleet management fee savings would be achieved through this tender, what was the value of such savings?
(23) Is it correct that management costs represent just 3% of the fleet’s overall operating costs?
(24) Was this considered in the tender evaluation process?
(25) What plans are in place to immediately tackle the remaining 97% of fleet operating costs?
(26) What was the specific estimate of the switching or transitional costs associated with changing contractors and how were these costs incorporated into the tender evaluation process?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
29 June 2004
Responded by
Minister for Housing and Works representing the Treasurer
Response time
26 days
(b) demonstrated capacity to handle the more complex, larger and diverse fleets; (c) the current level of local staff resourcing to meet the varying demands of the client Government Agencies; (d) a true 24/7 service to the customer that goes to people based here in Western Australia rather than to call centres in other parts of the country or the world; (e) direct customer feedback (not surveys) on the more important asset management aspects; (f) the ability to provide multiple fuel cards through a single system and for remote areas maintaining accounts with small suppliers who do not accept cards; (g) the ability to harness suppliers to ensure timely delivery and when needs change, having orders cancelled and vehicles swapped at no cost to the State; and (h) plans for improvement and development?
(c) the current level of local staff resourcing to meet the varying demands of the client Government Agencies; (d) a true 24/7 service to the customer that goes to people based here in Western Australia rather than to call centres in other parts of the country or the world; (e) direct customer feedback (not surveys) on the more important asset management aspects; (f) the ability to provide multiple fuel cards through a single system and for remote areas maintaining accounts with small suppliers who do not accept cards; (g) the ability to harness suppliers to ensure timely delivery and when needs change, having orders cancelled and vehicles swapped at no cost to the State; and (h) plans for improvement and development?
(d) a true 24/7 service to the customer that goes to people based here in Western Australia rather than to call centres in other parts of the country or the world; (e) direct customer feedback (not surveys) on the more important asset management aspects; (f) the ability to provide multiple fuel cards through a single system and for remote areas maintaining accounts with small suppliers who do not accept cards; (g) the ability to harness suppliers to ensure timely delivery and when needs change, having orders cancelled and vehicles swapped at no cost to the State; and (h) plans for improvement and development?
(e) direct customer feedback (not surveys) on the more important asset management aspects; (f) the ability to provide multiple fuel cards through a single system and for remote areas maintaining accounts with small suppliers who do not accept cards; (g) the ability to harness suppliers to ensure timely delivery and when needs change, having orders cancelled and vehicles swapped at no cost to the State; and (h) plans for improvement and development?
(f) the ability to provide multiple fuel cards through a single system and for remote areas maintaining accounts with small suppliers who do not accept cards; (g) the ability to harness suppliers to ensure timely delivery and when needs change, having orders cancelled and vehicles swapped at no cost to the State; and (h) plans for improvement and development?
(g) the ability to harness suppliers to ensure timely delivery and when needs change, having orders cancelled and vehicles swapped at no cost to the State; and (h) plans for improvement and development?
(h) plans for improvement and development?
(1) The tender evaluation panel would request tenderers to conduct a face-to-face presentation under the following circumstances: (a) where the request was a proposal (rather than a tender) and a presentation would enable the tenderers to amplify or clarify their proposal; (b) where the services being requested are new and a presentation would enable the evaluation panel members to have a clear understanding of the type/s or scope of services being offered; and (c) where significant ambiguities are found in the tender responses and there is a need to seek confirmation or clarification from the tenderers as regards their offers. The tender evaluation panel was satisfied with the quality of the tender responses, fully understood what was being offered from the tender responses and was in a position to make an assessment of the bids. There had been extensive consultation with the then current fleet managers (including Fleetcare) during the development of the tender specifications and it was clear that the bidders also clearly understood what they were bidding for. Hence, the panel decided it was not appropriate or necessary to request a presentation; (2) No – see (1). (3) That would not be a normal practice. Tender evaluations – which must be confidential in nature - do not readily lend themselves to progress reports. (4) See (1) above. (5) Yes – 12 May 2004. (6)-(7) A broadly representative group of client agencies was consulted on the definition of fleet management services over a period prior to finalisation of the tender specifications. Consultation of the type outlined in the question would be incompatible with the confidentiality required at the tender evaluation stage. (8) State Fleet is working closely with the successful tenderers and client agencies on the transition arrangements and is providing coordination, support and guidance on the movement of portfolios relinquished by the two unsuccessful tenderers. (9) No. (10) Not applicable – the decision was made on the basis of best value for money for government. (11) Not applicable. (12) See (1) above. (13) The evaluation was undertaken by a panel, including client agency representatives, all of whom were experienced in fleet management matters. The process had three stages, which are common to all such tender assessments. Tenderers were first assessed against a set of compliance criteria. Any bid that failed to meet these criteria would not be further considered. Second, under a structured process, each bid was rated by the panel against a set of qualitative criteria that were clearly defined in the invitation to tender. This process produced an overall ranking of bids. Finally, attention was turned to the prices tendered, and the evaluation panel proceeded to make a recommendation as to which bids provided the best value for money to government taking account of both the qualitative rankings and prices. The recommendation underwent independent scrutiny by the State Tenders Committee before the recommendation was accepted and the contracts awarded. (14) It is not appropriate to release details of the deliberations of tender evaluation panels. (15) The evaluation panel was satisfied that the successful bidders had the necessary capability. (16) No. (17) See (14). (18)-(19) Local content is an important component of the evaluation and it is taken into consideration. Ownership, however, is but one aspect of the local content picture. While in this case the level of local content is very high, the application of the local content criteria cannot be a 100% criterion that eliminates all interstate or international bids or value for money would be severely compromised. It is important to note that the majority of fleet management services, by their nature, can only be delivered locally - where the cars are. Each fleet manager, regardless of their domicile, must employ local staff to deliver most of its services, and all of the flow-on services - maintenance, consumables, smash repair and the like - can only be provided within Western Australia. Further, a very high level of local service provision was a condition of the tender, and the new owner of Commonwealth Fleet Lease has fully committed to maintain that. (20) See (14). (21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(a) where the request was a proposal (rather than a tender) and a presentation would enable the tenderers to amplify or clarify their proposal; (b) where the services being requested are new and a presentation would enable the evaluation panel members to have a clear understanding of the type/s or scope of services being offered; and (c) where significant ambiguities are found in the tender responses and there is a need to seek confirmation or clarification from the tenderers as regards their offers. The tender evaluation panel was satisfied with the quality of the tender responses, fully understood what was being offered from the tender responses and was in a position to make an assessment of the bids. There had been extensive consultation with the then current fleet managers (including Fleetcare) during the development of the tender specifications and it was clear that the bidders also clearly understood what they were bidding for. Hence, the panel decided it was not appropriate or necessary to request a presentation; (2) No – see (1). (3) That would not be a normal practice. Tender evaluations – which must be confidential in nature - do not readily lend themselves to progress reports. (4) See (1) above. (5) Yes – 12 May 2004. (6)-(7) A broadly representative group of client agencies was consulted on the definition of fleet management services over a period prior to finalisation of the tender specifications. Consultation of the type outlined in the question would be incompatible with the confidentiality required at the tender evaluation stage. (8) State Fleet is working closely with the successful tenderers and client agencies on the transition arrangements and is providing coordination, support and guidance on the movement of portfolios relinquished by the two unsuccessful tenderers. (9) No. (10) Not applicable – the decision was made on the basis of best value for money for government. (11) Not applicable. (12) See (1) above. (13) The evaluation was undertaken by a panel, including client agency representatives, all of whom were experienced in fleet management matters. The process had three stages, which are common to all such tender assessments. Tenderers were first assessed against a set of compliance criteria. Any bid that failed to meet these criteria would not be further considered. Second, under a structured process, each bid was rated by the panel against a set of qualitative criteria that were clearly defined in the invitation to tender. This process produced an overall ranking of bids. Finally, attention was turned to the prices tendered, and the evaluation panel proceeded to make a recommendation as to which bids provided the best value for money to government taking account of both the qualitative rankings and prices. The recommendation underwent independent scrutiny by the State Tenders Committee before the recommendation was accepted and the contracts awarded. (14) It is not appropriate to release details of the deliberations of tender evaluation panels. (15) The evaluation panel was satisfied that the successful bidders had the necessary capability. (16) No. (17) See (14). (18)-(19) Local content is an important component of the evaluation and it is taken into consideration. Ownership, however, is but one aspect of the local content picture. While in this case the level of local content is very high, the application of the local content criteria cannot be a 100% criterion that eliminates all interstate or international bids or value for money would be severely compromised. It is important to note that the majority of fleet management services, by their nature, can only be delivered locally - where the cars are. Each fleet manager, regardless of their domicile, must employ local staff to deliver most of its services, and all of the flow-on services - maintenance, consumables, smash repair and the like - can only be provided within Western Australia. Further, a very high level of local service provision was a condition of the tender, and the new owner of Commonwealth Fleet Lease has fully committed to maintain that. (20) See (14). (21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(b) where the services being requested are new and a presentation would enable the evaluation panel members to have a clear understanding of the type/s or scope of services being offered; and (c) where significant ambiguities are found in the tender responses and there is a need to seek confirmation or clarification from the tenderers as regards their offers. The tender evaluation panel was satisfied with the quality of the tender responses, fully understood what was being offered from the tender responses and was in a position to make an assessment of the bids. There had been extensive consultation with the then current fleet managers (including Fleetcare) during the development of the tender specifications and it was clear that the bidders also clearly understood what they were bidding for. Hence, the panel decided it was not appropriate or necessary to request a presentation; (2) No – see (1). (3) That would not be a normal practice. Tender evaluations – which must be confidential in nature - do not readily lend themselves to progress reports. (4) See (1) above. (5) Yes – 12 May 2004. (6)-(7) A broadly representative group of client agencies was consulted on the definition of fleet management services over a period prior to finalisation of the tender specifications. Consultation of the type outlined in the question would be incompatible with the confidentiality required at the tender evaluation stage. (8) State Fleet is working closely with the successful tenderers and client agencies on the transition arrangements and is providing coordination, support and guidance on the movement of portfolios relinquished by the two unsuccessful tenderers. (9) No. (10) Not applicable – the decision was made on the basis of best value for money for government. (11) Not applicable. (12) See (1) above. (13) The evaluation was undertaken by a panel, including client agency representatives, all of whom were experienced in fleet management matters. The process had three stages, which are common to all such tender assessments. Tenderers were first assessed against a set of compliance criteria. Any bid that failed to meet these criteria would not be further considered. Second, under a structured process, each bid was rated by the panel against a set of qualitative criteria that were clearly defined in the invitation to tender. This process produced an overall ranking of bids. Finally, attention was turned to the prices tendered, and the evaluation panel proceeded to make a recommendation as to which bids provided the best value for money to government taking account of both the qualitative rankings and prices. The recommendation underwent independent scrutiny by the State Tenders Committee before the recommendation was accepted and the contracts awarded. (14) It is not appropriate to release details of the deliberations of tender evaluation panels. (15) The evaluation panel was satisfied that the successful bidders had the necessary capability. (16) No. (17) See (14). (18)-(19) Local content is an important component of the evaluation and it is taken into consideration. Ownership, however, is but one aspect of the local content picture. While in this case the level of local content is very high, the application of the local content criteria cannot be a 100% criterion that eliminates all interstate or international bids or value for money would be severely compromised. It is important to note that the majority of fleet management services, by their nature, can only be delivered locally - where the cars are. Each fleet manager, regardless of their domicile, must employ local staff to deliver most of its services, and all of the flow-on services - maintenance, consumables, smash repair and the like - can only be provided within Western Australia. Further, a very high level of local service provision was a condition of the tender, and the new owner of Commonwealth Fleet Lease has fully committed to maintain that. (20) See (14). (21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(c) where significant ambiguities are found in the tender responses and there is a need to seek confirmation or clarification from the tenderers as regards their offers. The tender evaluation panel was satisfied with the quality of the tender responses, fully understood what was being offered from the tender responses and was in a position to make an assessment of the bids. There had been extensive consultation with the then current fleet managers (including Fleetcare) during the development of the tender specifications and it was clear that the bidders also clearly understood what they were bidding for. Hence, the panel decided it was not appropriate or necessary to request a presentation; (2) No – see (1). (3) That would not be a normal practice. Tender evaluations – which must be confidential in nature - do not readily lend themselves to progress reports. (4) See (1) above. (5) Yes – 12 May 2004. (6)-(7) A broadly representative group of client agencies was consulted on the definition of fleet management services over a period prior to finalisation of the tender specifications. Consultation of the type outlined in the question would be incompatible with the confidentiality required at the tender evaluation stage. (8) State Fleet is working closely with the successful tenderers and client agencies on the transition arrangements and is providing coordination, support and guidance on the movement of portfolios relinquished by the two unsuccessful tenderers. (9) No. (10) Not applicable – the decision was made on the basis of best value for money for government. (11) Not applicable. (12) See (1) above. (13) The evaluation was undertaken by a panel, including client agency representatives, all of whom were experienced in fleet management matters. The process had three stages, which are common to all such tender assessments. Tenderers were first assessed against a set of compliance criteria. Any bid that failed to meet these criteria would not be further considered. Second, under a structured process, each bid was rated by the panel against a set of qualitative criteria that were clearly defined in the invitation to tender. This process produced an overall ranking of bids. Finally, attention was turned to the prices tendered, and the evaluation panel proceeded to make a recommendation as to which bids provided the best value for money to government taking account of both the qualitative rankings and prices. The recommendation underwent independent scrutiny by the State Tenders Committee before the recommendation was accepted and the contracts awarded. (14) It is not appropriate to release details of the deliberations of tender evaluation panels. (15) The evaluation panel was satisfied that the successful bidders had the necessary capability. (16) No. (17) See (14). (18)-(19) Local content is an important component of the evaluation and it is taken into consideration. Ownership, however, is but one aspect of the local content picture. While in this case the level of local content is very high, the application of the local content criteria cannot be a 100% criterion that eliminates all interstate or international bids or value for money would be severely compromised. It is important to note that the majority of fleet management services, by their nature, can only be delivered locally - where the cars are. Each fleet manager, regardless of their domicile, must employ local staff to deliver most of its services, and all of the flow-on services - maintenance, consumables, smash repair and the like - can only be provided within Western Australia. Further, a very high level of local service provision was a condition of the tender, and the new owner of Commonwealth Fleet Lease has fully committed to maintain that. (20) See (14). (21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
The tender evaluation panel was satisfied with the quality of the tender responses, fully understood what was being offered from the tender responses and was in a position to make an assessment of the bids. There had been extensive consultation with the then current fleet managers (including Fleetcare) during the development of the tender specifications and it was clear that the bidders also clearly understood what they were bidding for. Hence, the panel decided it was not appropriate or necessary to request a presentation; (2) No – see (1). (3) That would not be a normal practice. Tender evaluations – which must be confidential in nature - do not readily lend themselves to progress reports. (4) See (1) above. (5) Yes – 12 May 2004. (6)-(7) A broadly representative group of client agencies was consulted on the definition of fleet management services over a period prior to finalisation of the tender specifications. Consultation of the type outlined in the question would be incompatible with the confidentiality required at the tender evaluation stage. (8) State Fleet is working closely with the successful tenderers and client agencies on the transition arrangements and is providing coordination, support and guidance on the movement of portfolios relinquished by the two unsuccessful tenderers. (9) No. (10) Not applicable – the decision was made on the basis of best value for money for government. (11) Not applicable. (12) See (1) above. (13) The evaluation was undertaken by a panel, including client agency representatives, all of whom were experienced in fleet management matters. The process had three stages, which are common to all such tender assessments. Tenderers were first assessed against a set of compliance criteria. Any bid that failed to meet these criteria would not be further considered. Second, under a structured process, each bid was rated by the panel against a set of qualitative criteria that were clearly defined in the invitation to tender. This process produced an overall ranking of bids. Finally, attention was turned to the prices tendered, and the evaluation panel proceeded to make a recommendation as to which bids provided the best value for money to government taking account of both the qualitative rankings and prices. The recommendation underwent independent scrutiny by the State Tenders Committee before the recommendation was accepted and the contracts awarded. (14) It is not appropriate to release details of the deliberations of tender evaluation panels. (15) The evaluation panel was satisfied that the successful bidders had the necessary capability. (16) No. (17) See (14). (18)-(19) Local content is an important component of the evaluation and it is taken into consideration. Ownership, however, is but one aspect of the local content picture. While in this case the level of local content is very high, the application of the local content criteria cannot be a 100% criterion that eliminates all interstate or international bids or value for money would be severely compromised. It is important to note that the majority of fleet management services, by their nature, can only be delivered locally - where the cars are. Each fleet manager, regardless of their domicile, must employ local staff to deliver most of its services, and all of the flow-on services - maintenance, consumables, smash repair and the like - can only be provided within Western Australia. Further, a very high level of local service provision was a condition of the tender, and the new owner of Commonwealth Fleet Lease has fully committed to maintain that. (20) See (14). (21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(2) No – see (1). (3) That would not be a normal practice. Tender evaluations – which must be confidential in nature - do not readily lend themselves to progress reports. (4) See (1) above. (5) Yes – 12 May 2004. (6)-(7) A broadly representative group of client agencies was consulted on the definition of fleet management services over a period prior to finalisation of the tender specifications. Consultation of the type outlined in the question would be incompatible with the confidentiality required at the tender evaluation stage. (8) State Fleet is working closely with the successful tenderers and client agencies on the transition arrangements and is providing coordination, support and guidance on the movement of portfolios relinquished by the two unsuccessful tenderers. (9) No. (10) Not applicable – the decision was made on the basis of best value for money for government. (11) Not applicable. (12) See (1) above. (13) The evaluation was undertaken by a panel, including client agency representatives, all of whom were experienced in fleet management matters. The process had three stages, which are common to all such tender assessments. Tenderers were first assessed against a set of compliance criteria. Any bid that failed to meet these criteria would not be further considered. Second, under a structured process, each bid was rated by the panel against a set of qualitative criteria that were clearly defined in the invitation to tender. This process produced an overall ranking of bids. Finally, attention was turned to the prices tendered, and the evaluation panel proceeded to make a recommendation as to which bids provided the best value for money to government taking account of both the qualitative rankings and prices. The recommendation underwent independent scrutiny by the State Tenders Committee before the recommendation was accepted and the contracts awarded. (14) It is not appropriate to release details of the deliberations of tender evaluation panels. (15) The evaluation panel was satisfied that the successful bidders had the necessary capability. (16) No. (17) See (14). (18)-(19) Local content is an important component of the evaluation and it is taken into consideration. Ownership, however, is but one aspect of the local content picture. While in this case the level of local content is very high, the application of the local content criteria cannot be a 100% criterion that eliminates all interstate or international bids or value for money would be severely compromised. It is important to note that the majority of fleet management services, by their nature, can only be delivered locally - where the cars are. Each fleet manager, regardless of their domicile, must employ local staff to deliver most of its services, and all of the flow-on services - maintenance, consumables, smash repair and the like - can only be provided within Western Australia. Further, a very high level of local service provision was a condition of the tender, and the new owner of Commonwealth Fleet Lease has fully committed to maintain that. (20) See (14). (21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(3) That would not be a normal practice. Tender evaluations – which must be confidential in nature - do not readily lend themselves to progress reports. (4) See (1) above. (5) Yes – 12 May 2004. (6)-(7) A broadly representative group of client agencies was consulted on the definition of fleet management services over a period prior to finalisation of the tender specifications. Consultation of the type outlined in the question would be incompatible with the confidentiality required at the tender evaluation stage. (8) State Fleet is working closely with the successful tenderers and client agencies on the transition arrangements and is providing coordination, support and guidance on the movement of portfolios relinquished by the two unsuccessful tenderers. (9) No. (10) Not applicable – the decision was made on the basis of best value for money for government. (11) Not applicable. (12) See (1) above. (13) The evaluation was undertaken by a panel, including client agency representatives, all of whom were experienced in fleet management matters. The process had three stages, which are common to all such tender assessments. Tenderers were first assessed against a set of compliance criteria. Any bid that failed to meet these criteria would not be further considered. Second, under a structured process, each bid was rated by the panel against a set of qualitative criteria that were clearly defined in the invitation to tender. This process produced an overall ranking of bids. Finally, attention was turned to the prices tendered, and the evaluation panel proceeded to make a recommendation as to which bids provided the best value for money to government taking account of both the qualitative rankings and prices. The recommendation underwent independent scrutiny by the State Tenders Committee before the recommendation was accepted and the contracts awarded. (14) It is not appropriate to release details of the deliberations of tender evaluation panels. (15) The evaluation panel was satisfied that the successful bidders had the necessary capability. (16) No. (17) See (14). (18)-(19) Local content is an important component of the evaluation and it is taken into consideration. Ownership, however, is but one aspect of the local content picture. While in this case the level of local content is very high, the application of the local content criteria cannot be a 100% criterion that eliminates all interstate or international bids or value for money would be severely compromised. It is important to note that the majority of fleet management services, by their nature, can only be delivered locally - where the cars are. Each fleet manager, regardless of their domicile, must employ local staff to deliver most of its services, and all of the flow-on services - maintenance, consumables, smash repair and the like - can only be provided within Western Australia. Further, a very high level of local service provision was a condition of the tender, and the new owner of Commonwealth Fleet Lease has fully committed to maintain that. (20) See (14). (21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(4) See (1) above. (5) Yes – 12 May 2004. (6)-(7) A broadly representative group of client agencies was consulted on the definition of fleet management services over a period prior to finalisation of the tender specifications. Consultation of the type outlined in the question would be incompatible with the confidentiality required at the tender evaluation stage. (8) State Fleet is working closely with the successful tenderers and client agencies on the transition arrangements and is providing coordination, support and guidance on the movement of portfolios relinquished by the two unsuccessful tenderers. (9) No. (10) Not applicable – the decision was made on the basis of best value for money for government. (11) Not applicable. (12) See (1) above. (13) The evaluation was undertaken by a panel, including client agency representatives, all of whom were experienced in fleet management matters. The process had three stages, which are common to all such tender assessments. Tenderers were first assessed against a set of compliance criteria. Any bid that failed to meet these criteria would not be further considered. Second, under a structured process, each bid was rated by the panel against a set of qualitative criteria that were clearly defined in the invitation to tender. This process produced an overall ranking of bids. Finally, attention was turned to the prices tendered, and the evaluation panel proceeded to make a recommendation as to which bids provided the best value for money to government taking account of both the qualitative rankings and prices. The recommendation underwent independent scrutiny by the State Tenders Committee before the recommendation was accepted and the contracts awarded. (14) It is not appropriate to release details of the deliberations of tender evaluation panels. (15) The evaluation panel was satisfied that the successful bidders had the necessary capability. (16) No. (17) See (14). (18)-(19) Local content is an important component of the evaluation and it is taken into consideration. Ownership, however, is but one aspect of the local content picture. While in this case the level of local content is very high, the application of the local content criteria cannot be a 100% criterion that eliminates all interstate or international bids or value for money would be severely compromised. It is important to note that the majority of fleet management services, by their nature, can only be delivered locally - where the cars are. Each fleet manager, regardless of their domicile, must employ local staff to deliver most of its services, and all of the flow-on services - maintenance, consumables, smash repair and the like - can only be provided within Western Australia. Further, a very high level of local service provision was a condition of the tender, and the new owner of Commonwealth Fleet Lease has fully committed to maintain that. (20) See (14). (21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(5) Yes – 12 May 2004. (6)-(7) A broadly representative group of client agencies was consulted on the definition of fleet management services over a period prior to finalisation of the tender specifications. Consultation of the type outlined in the question would be incompatible with the confidentiality required at the tender evaluation stage. (8) State Fleet is working closely with the successful tenderers and client agencies on the transition arrangements and is providing coordination, support and guidance on the movement of portfolios relinquished by the two unsuccessful tenderers. (9) No. (10) Not applicable – the decision was made on the basis of best value for money for government. (11) Not applicable. (12) See (1) above. (13) The evaluation was undertaken by a panel, including client agency representatives, all of whom were experienced in fleet management matters. The process had three stages, which are common to all such tender assessments. Tenderers were first assessed against a set of compliance criteria. Any bid that failed to meet these criteria would not be further considered. Second, under a structured process, each bid was rated by the panel against a set of qualitative criteria that were clearly defined in the invitation to tender. This process produced an overall ranking of bids. Finally, attention was turned to the prices tendered, and the evaluation panel proceeded to make a recommendation as to which bids provided the best value for money to government taking account of both the qualitative rankings and prices. The recommendation underwent independent scrutiny by the State Tenders Committee before the recommendation was accepted and the contracts awarded. (14) It is not appropriate to release details of the deliberations of tender evaluation panels. (15) The evaluation panel was satisfied that the successful bidders had the necessary capability. (16) No. (17) See (14). (18)-(19) Local content is an important component of the evaluation and it is taken into consideration. Ownership, however, is but one aspect of the local content picture. While in this case the level of local content is very high, the application of the local content criteria cannot be a 100% criterion that eliminates all interstate or international bids or value for money would be severely compromised. It is important to note that the majority of fleet management services, by their nature, can only be delivered locally - where the cars are. Each fleet manager, regardless of their domicile, must employ local staff to deliver most of its services, and all of the flow-on services - maintenance, consumables, smash repair and the like - can only be provided within Western Australia. Further, a very high level of local service provision was a condition of the tender, and the new owner of Commonwealth Fleet Lease has fully committed to maintain that. (20) See (14). (21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(6)-(7) A broadly representative group of client agencies was consulted on the definition of fleet management services over a period prior to finalisation of the tender specifications. Consultation of the type outlined in the question would be incompatible with the confidentiality required at the tender evaluation stage. (8) State Fleet is working closely with the successful tenderers and client agencies on the transition arrangements and is providing coordination, support and guidance on the movement of portfolios relinquished by the two unsuccessful tenderers. (9) No. (10) Not applicable – the decision was made on the basis of best value for money for government. (11) Not applicable. (12) See (1) above. (13) The evaluation was undertaken by a panel, including client agency representatives, all of whom were experienced in fleet management matters. The process had three stages, which are common to all such tender assessments. Tenderers were first assessed against a set of compliance criteria. Any bid that failed to meet these criteria would not be further considered. Second, under a structured process, each bid was rated by the panel against a set of qualitative criteria that were clearly defined in the invitation to tender. This process produced an overall ranking of bids. Finally, attention was turned to the prices tendered, and the evaluation panel proceeded to make a recommendation as to which bids provided the best value for money to government taking account of both the qualitative rankings and prices. The recommendation underwent independent scrutiny by the State Tenders Committee before the recommendation was accepted and the contracts awarded. (14) It is not appropriate to release details of the deliberations of tender evaluation panels. (15) The evaluation panel was satisfied that the successful bidders had the necessary capability. (16) No. (17) See (14). (18)-(19) Local content is an important component of the evaluation and it is taken into consideration. Ownership, however, is but one aspect of the local content picture. While in this case the level of local content is very high, the application of the local content criteria cannot be a 100% criterion that eliminates all interstate or international bids or value for money would be severely compromised. It is important to note that the majority of fleet management services, by their nature, can only be delivered locally - where the cars are. Each fleet manager, regardless of their domicile, must employ local staff to deliver most of its services, and all of the flow-on services - maintenance, consumables, smash repair and the like - can only be provided within Western Australia. Further, a very high level of local service provision was a condition of the tender, and the new owner of Commonwealth Fleet Lease has fully committed to maintain that. (20) See (14). (21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(8) State Fleet is working closely with the successful tenderers and client agencies on the transition arrangements and is providing coordination, support and guidance on the movement of portfolios relinquished by the two unsuccessful tenderers. (9) No. (10) Not applicable – the decision was made on the basis of best value for money for government. (11) Not applicable. (12) See (1) above. (13) The evaluation was undertaken by a panel, including client agency representatives, all of whom were experienced in fleet management matters. The process had three stages, which are common to all such tender assessments. Tenderers were first assessed against a set of compliance criteria. Any bid that failed to meet these criteria would not be further considered. Second, under a structured process, each bid was rated by the panel against a set of qualitative criteria that were clearly defined in the invitation to tender. This process produced an overall ranking of bids. Finally, attention was turned to the prices tendered, and the evaluation panel proceeded to make a recommendation as to which bids provided the best value for money to government taking account of both the qualitative rankings and prices. The recommendation underwent independent scrutiny by the State Tenders Committee before the recommendation was accepted and the contracts awarded. (14) It is not appropriate to release details of the deliberations of tender evaluation panels. (15) The evaluation panel was satisfied that the successful bidders had the necessary capability. (16) No. (17) See (14). (18)-(19) Local content is an important component of the evaluation and it is taken into consideration. Ownership, however, is but one aspect of the local content picture. While in this case the level of local content is very high, the application of the local content criteria cannot be a 100% criterion that eliminates all interstate or international bids or value for money would be severely compromised. It is important to note that the majority of fleet management services, by their nature, can only be delivered locally - where the cars are. Each fleet manager, regardless of their domicile, must employ local staff to deliver most of its services, and all of the flow-on services - maintenance, consumables, smash repair and the like - can only be provided within Western Australia. Further, a very high level of local service provision was a condition of the tender, and the new owner of Commonwealth Fleet Lease has fully committed to maintain that. (20) See (14). (21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(9) No. (10) Not applicable – the decision was made on the basis of best value for money for government. (11) Not applicable. (12) See (1) above. (13) The evaluation was undertaken by a panel, including client agency representatives, all of whom were experienced in fleet management matters. The process had three stages, which are common to all such tender assessments. Tenderers were first assessed against a set of compliance criteria. Any bid that failed to meet these criteria would not be further considered. Second, under a structured process, each bid was rated by the panel against a set of qualitative criteria that were clearly defined in the invitation to tender. This process produced an overall ranking of bids. Finally, attention was turned to the prices tendered, and the evaluation panel proceeded to make a recommendation as to which bids provided the best value for money to government taking account of both the qualitative rankings and prices. The recommendation underwent independent scrutiny by the State Tenders Committee before the recommendation was accepted and the contracts awarded. (14) It is not appropriate to release details of the deliberations of tender evaluation panels. (15) The evaluation panel was satisfied that the successful bidders had the necessary capability. (16) No. (17) See (14). (18)-(19) Local content is an important component of the evaluation and it is taken into consideration. Ownership, however, is but one aspect of the local content picture. While in this case the level of local content is very high, the application of the local content criteria cannot be a 100% criterion that eliminates all interstate or international bids or value for money would be severely compromised. It is important to note that the majority of fleet management services, by their nature, can only be delivered locally - where the cars are. Each fleet manager, regardless of their domicile, must employ local staff to deliver most of its services, and all of the flow-on services - maintenance, consumables, smash repair and the like - can only be provided within Western Australia. Further, a very high level of local service provision was a condition of the tender, and the new owner of Commonwealth Fleet Lease has fully committed to maintain that. (20) See (14). (21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(10) Not applicable – the decision was made on the basis of best value for money for government. (11) Not applicable. (12) See (1) above. (13) The evaluation was undertaken by a panel, including client agency representatives, all of whom were experienced in fleet management matters. The process had three stages, which are common to all such tender assessments. Tenderers were first assessed against a set of compliance criteria. Any bid that failed to meet these criteria would not be further considered. Second, under a structured process, each bid was rated by the panel against a set of qualitative criteria that were clearly defined in the invitation to tender. This process produced an overall ranking of bids. Finally, attention was turned to the prices tendered, and the evaluation panel proceeded to make a recommendation as to which bids provided the best value for money to government taking account of both the qualitative rankings and prices. The recommendation underwent independent scrutiny by the State Tenders Committee before the recommendation was accepted and the contracts awarded. (14) It is not appropriate to release details of the deliberations of tender evaluation panels. (15) The evaluation panel was satisfied that the successful bidders had the necessary capability. (16) No. (17) See (14). (18)-(19) Local content is an important component of the evaluation and it is taken into consideration. Ownership, however, is but one aspect of the local content picture. While in this case the level of local content is very high, the application of the local content criteria cannot be a 100% criterion that eliminates all interstate or international bids or value for money would be severely compromised. It is important to note that the majority of fleet management services, by their nature, can only be delivered locally - where the cars are. Each fleet manager, regardless of their domicile, must employ local staff to deliver most of its services, and all of the flow-on services - maintenance, consumables, smash repair and the like - can only be provided within Western Australia. Further, a very high level of local service provision was a condition of the tender, and the new owner of Commonwealth Fleet Lease has fully committed to maintain that. (20) See (14). (21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(11) Not applicable. (12) See (1) above. (13) The evaluation was undertaken by a panel, including client agency representatives, all of whom were experienced in fleet management matters. The process had three stages, which are common to all such tender assessments. Tenderers were first assessed against a set of compliance criteria. Any bid that failed to meet these criteria would not be further considered. Second, under a structured process, each bid was rated by the panel against a set of qualitative criteria that were clearly defined in the invitation to tender. This process produced an overall ranking of bids. Finally, attention was turned to the prices tendered, and the evaluation panel proceeded to make a recommendation as to which bids provided the best value for money to government taking account of both the qualitative rankings and prices. The recommendation underwent independent scrutiny by the State Tenders Committee before the recommendation was accepted and the contracts awarded. (14) It is not appropriate to release details of the deliberations of tender evaluation panels. (15) The evaluation panel was satisfied that the successful bidders had the necessary capability. (16) No. (17) See (14). (18)-(19) Local content is an important component of the evaluation and it is taken into consideration. Ownership, however, is but one aspect of the local content picture. While in this case the level of local content is very high, the application of the local content criteria cannot be a 100% criterion that eliminates all interstate or international bids or value for money would be severely compromised. It is important to note that the majority of fleet management services, by their nature, can only be delivered locally - where the cars are. Each fleet manager, regardless of their domicile, must employ local staff to deliver most of its services, and all of the flow-on services - maintenance, consumables, smash repair and the like - can only be provided within Western Australia. Further, a very high level of local service provision was a condition of the tender, and the new owner of Commonwealth Fleet Lease has fully committed to maintain that. (20) See (14). (21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(12) See (1) above. (13) The evaluation was undertaken by a panel, including client agency representatives, all of whom were experienced in fleet management matters. The process had three stages, which are common to all such tender assessments. Tenderers were first assessed against a set of compliance criteria. Any bid that failed to meet these criteria would not be further considered. Second, under a structured process, each bid was rated by the panel against a set of qualitative criteria that were clearly defined in the invitation to tender. This process produced an overall ranking of bids. Finally, attention was turned to the prices tendered, and the evaluation panel proceeded to make a recommendation as to which bids provided the best value for money to government taking account of both the qualitative rankings and prices. The recommendation underwent independent scrutiny by the State Tenders Committee before the recommendation was accepted and the contracts awarded. (14) It is not appropriate to release details of the deliberations of tender evaluation panels. (15) The evaluation panel was satisfied that the successful bidders had the necessary capability. (16) No. (17) See (14). (18)-(19) Local content is an important component of the evaluation and it is taken into consideration. Ownership, however, is but one aspect of the local content picture. While in this case the level of local content is very high, the application of the local content criteria cannot be a 100% criterion that eliminates all interstate or international bids or value for money would be severely compromised. It is important to note that the majority of fleet management services, by their nature, can only be delivered locally - where the cars are. Each fleet manager, regardless of their domicile, must employ local staff to deliver most of its services, and all of the flow-on services - maintenance, consumables, smash repair and the like - can only be provided within Western Australia. Further, a very high level of local service provision was a condition of the tender, and the new owner of Commonwealth Fleet Lease has fully committed to maintain that. (20) See (14). (21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(13) The evaluation was undertaken by a panel, including client agency representatives, all of whom were experienced in fleet management matters. The process had three stages, which are common to all such tender assessments. Tenderers were first assessed against a set of compliance criteria. Any bid that failed to meet these criteria would not be further considered. Second, under a structured process, each bid was rated by the panel against a set of qualitative criteria that were clearly defined in the invitation to tender. This process produced an overall ranking of bids. Finally, attention was turned to the prices tendered, and the evaluation panel proceeded to make a recommendation as to which bids provided the best value for money to government taking account of both the qualitative rankings and prices. The recommendation underwent independent scrutiny by the State Tenders Committee before the recommendation was accepted and the contracts awarded. (14) It is not appropriate to release details of the deliberations of tender evaluation panels. (15) The evaluation panel was satisfied that the successful bidders had the necessary capability. (16) No. (17) See (14). (18)-(19) Local content is an important component of the evaluation and it is taken into consideration. Ownership, however, is but one aspect of the local content picture. While in this case the level of local content is very high, the application of the local content criteria cannot be a 100% criterion that eliminates all interstate or international bids or value for money would be severely compromised. It is important to note that the majority of fleet management services, by their nature, can only be delivered locally - where the cars are. Each fleet manager, regardless of their domicile, must employ local staff to deliver most of its services, and all of the flow-on services - maintenance, consumables, smash repair and the like - can only be provided within Western Australia. Further, a very high level of local service provision was a condition of the tender, and the new owner of Commonwealth Fleet Lease has fully committed to maintain that. (20) See (14). (21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(14) It is not appropriate to release details of the deliberations of tender evaluation panels. (15) The evaluation panel was satisfied that the successful bidders had the necessary capability. (16) No. (17) See (14). (18)-(19) Local content is an important component of the evaluation and it is taken into consideration. Ownership, however, is but one aspect of the local content picture. While in this case the level of local content is very high, the application of the local content criteria cannot be a 100% criterion that eliminates all interstate or international bids or value for money would be severely compromised. It is important to note that the majority of fleet management services, by their nature, can only be delivered locally - where the cars are. Each fleet manager, regardless of their domicile, must employ local staff to deliver most of its services, and all of the flow-on services - maintenance, consumables, smash repair and the like - can only be provided within Western Australia. Further, a very high level of local service provision was a condition of the tender, and the new owner of Commonwealth Fleet Lease has fully committed to maintain that. (20) See (14). (21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(15) The evaluation panel was satisfied that the successful bidders had the necessary capability. (16) No. (17) See (14). (18)-(19) Local content is an important component of the evaluation and it is taken into consideration. Ownership, however, is but one aspect of the local content picture. While in this case the level of local content is very high, the application of the local content criteria cannot be a 100% criterion that eliminates all interstate or international bids or value for money would be severely compromised. It is important to note that the majority of fleet management services, by their nature, can only be delivered locally - where the cars are. Each fleet manager, regardless of their domicile, must employ local staff to deliver most of its services, and all of the flow-on services - maintenance, consumables, smash repair and the like - can only be provided within Western Australia. Further, a very high level of local service provision was a condition of the tender, and the new owner of Commonwealth Fleet Lease has fully committed to maintain that. (20) See (14). (21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(16) No. (17) See (14). (18)-(19) Local content is an important component of the evaluation and it is taken into consideration. Ownership, however, is but one aspect of the local content picture. While in this case the level of local content is very high, the application of the local content criteria cannot be a 100% criterion that eliminates all interstate or international bids or value for money would be severely compromised. It is important to note that the majority of fleet management services, by their nature, can only be delivered locally - where the cars are. Each fleet manager, regardless of their domicile, must employ local staff to deliver most of its services, and all of the flow-on services - maintenance, consumables, smash repair and the like - can only be provided within Western Australia. Further, a very high level of local service provision was a condition of the tender, and the new owner of Commonwealth Fleet Lease has fully committed to maintain that. (20) See (14). (21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(17) See (14). (18)-(19) Local content is an important component of the evaluation and it is taken into consideration. Ownership, however, is but one aspect of the local content picture. While in this case the level of local content is very high, the application of the local content criteria cannot be a 100% criterion that eliminates all interstate or international bids or value for money would be severely compromised. It is important to note that the majority of fleet management services, by their nature, can only be delivered locally - where the cars are. Each fleet manager, regardless of their domicile, must employ local staff to deliver most of its services, and all of the flow-on services - maintenance, consumables, smash repair and the like - can only be provided within Western Australia. Further, a very high level of local service provision was a condition of the tender, and the new owner of Commonwealth Fleet Lease has fully committed to maintain that. (20) See (14). (21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(18)-(19) Local content is an important component of the evaluation and it is taken into consideration. Ownership, however, is but one aspect of the local content picture. While in this case the level of local content is very high, the application of the local content criteria cannot be a 100% criterion that eliminates all interstate or international bids or value for money would be severely compromised. It is important to note that the majority of fleet management services, by their nature, can only be delivered locally - where the cars are. Each fleet manager, regardless of their domicile, must employ local staff to deliver most of its services, and all of the flow-on services - maintenance, consumables, smash repair and the like - can only be provided within Western Australia. Further, a very high level of local service provision was a condition of the tender, and the new owner of Commonwealth Fleet Lease has fully committed to maintain that. (20) See (14). (21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(20) See (14). (21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(26) See (14).
(c) the current level of local staff resourcing to meet the varying demands of the client Government Agencies; (d) a true 24/7 service to the customer that goes to people based here in Western Australia rather than to call centres in other parts of the country or the world; (e) direct customer feedback (not surveys) on the more important asset management aspects; (f) the ability to provide multiple fuel cards through a single system and for remote areas maintaining accounts with small suppliers who do not accept cards; (g) the ability to harness suppliers to ensure timely delivery and when needs change, having orders cancelled and vehicles swapped at no cost to the State; and (h) plans for improvement and development?
(d) a true 24/7 service to the customer that goes to people based here in Western Australia rather than to call centres in other parts of the country or the world; (e) direct customer feedback (not surveys) on the more important asset management aspects; (f) the ability to provide multiple fuel cards through a single system and for remote areas maintaining accounts with small suppliers who do not accept cards; (g) the ability to harness suppliers to ensure timely delivery and when needs change, having orders cancelled and vehicles swapped at no cost to the State; and (h) plans for improvement and development?
(e) direct customer feedback (not surveys) on the more important asset management aspects; (f) the ability to provide multiple fuel cards through a single system and for remote areas maintaining accounts with small suppliers who do not accept cards; (g) the ability to harness suppliers to ensure timely delivery and when needs change, having orders cancelled and vehicles swapped at no cost to the State; and (h) plans for improvement and development?
(f) the ability to provide multiple fuel cards through a single system and for remote areas maintaining accounts with small suppliers who do not accept cards; (g) the ability to harness suppliers to ensure timely delivery and when needs change, having orders cancelled and vehicles swapped at no cost to the State; and (h) plans for improvement and development?
(g) the ability to harness suppliers to ensure timely delivery and when needs change, having orders cancelled and vehicles swapped at no cost to the State; and (h) plans for improvement and development?
(h) plans for improvement and development?
(1) The tender evaluation panel would request tenderers to conduct a face-to-face presentation under the following circumstances: (a) where the request was a proposal (rather than a tender) and a presentation would enable the tenderers to amplify or clarify their proposal; (b) where the services being requested are new and a presentation would enable the evaluation panel members to have a clear understanding of the type/s or scope of services being offered; and (c) where significant ambiguities are found in the tender responses and there is a need to seek confirmation or clarification from the tenderers as regards their offers. The tender evaluation panel was satisfied with the quality of the tender responses, fully understood what was being offered from the tender responses and was in a position to make an assessment of the bids. There had been extensive consultation with the then current fleet managers (including Fleetcare) during the development of the tender specifications and it was clear that the bidders also clearly understood what they were bidding for. Hence, the panel decided it was not appropriate or necessary to request a presentation; (2) No – see (1). (3) That would not be a normal practice. Tender evaluations – which must be confidential in nature - do not readily lend themselves to progress reports. (4) See (1) above. (5) Yes – 12 May 2004. (6)-(7) A broadly representative group of client agencies was consulted on the definition of fleet management services over a period prior to finalisation of the tender specifications. Consultation of the type outlined in the question would be incompatible with the confidentiality required at the tender evaluation stage. (8) State Fleet is working closely with the successful tenderers and client agencies on the transition arrangements and is providing coordination, support and guidance on the movement of portfolios relinquished by the two unsuccessful tenderers. (9) No. (10) Not applicable – the decision was made on the basis of best value for money for government. (11) Not applicable. (12) See (1) above. (13) The evaluation was undertaken by a panel, including client agency representatives, all of whom were experienced in fleet management matters. The process had three stages, which are common to all such tender assessments. Tenderers were first assessed against a set of compliance criteria. Any bid that failed to meet these criteria would not be further considered. Second, under a structured process, each bid was rated by the panel against a set of qualitative criteria that were clearly defined in the invitation to tender. This process produced an overall ranking of bids. Finally, attention was turned to the prices tendered, and the evaluation panel proceeded to make a recommendation as to which bids provided the best value for money to government taking account of both the qualitative rankings and prices. The recommendation underwent independent scrutiny by the State Tenders Committee before the recommendation was accepted and the contracts awarded. (14) It is not appropriate to release details of the deliberations of tender evaluation panels. (15) The evaluation panel was satisfied that the successful bidders had the necessary capability. (16) No. (17) See (14). (18)-(19) Local content is an important component of the evaluation and it is taken into consideration. Ownership, however, is but one aspect of the local content picture. While in this case the level of local content is very high, the application of the local content criteria cannot be a 100% criterion that eliminates all interstate or international bids or value for money would be severely compromised. It is important to note that the majority of fleet management services, by their nature, can only be delivered locally - where the cars are. Each fleet manager, regardless of their domicile, must employ local staff to deliver most of its services, and all of the flow-on services - maintenance, consumables, smash repair and the like - can only be provided within Western Australia. Further, a very high level of local service provision was a condition of the tender, and the new owner of Commonwealth Fleet Lease has fully committed to maintain that. (20) See (14). (21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(a) where the request was a proposal (rather than a tender) and a presentation would enable the tenderers to amplify or clarify their proposal; (b) where the services being requested are new and a presentation would enable the evaluation panel members to have a clear understanding of the type/s or scope of services being offered; and (c) where significant ambiguities are found in the tender responses and there is a need to seek confirmation or clarification from the tenderers as regards their offers. The tender evaluation panel was satisfied with the quality of the tender responses, fully understood what was being offered from the tender responses and was in a position to make an assessment of the bids. There had been extensive consultation with the then current fleet managers (including Fleetcare) during the development of the tender specifications and it was clear that the bidders also clearly understood what they were bidding for. Hence, the panel decided it was not appropriate or necessary to request a presentation; (2) No – see (1). (3) That would not be a normal practice. Tender evaluations – which must be confidential in nature - do not readily lend themselves to progress reports. (4) See (1) above. (5) Yes – 12 May 2004. (6)-(7) A broadly representative group of client agencies was consulted on the definition of fleet management services over a period prior to finalisation of the tender specifications. Consultation of the type outlined in the question would be incompatible with the confidentiality required at the tender evaluation stage. (8) State Fleet is working closely with the successful tenderers and client agencies on the transition arrangements and is providing coordination, support and guidance on the movement of portfolios relinquished by the two unsuccessful tenderers. (9) No. (10) Not applicable – the decision was made on the basis of best value for money for government. (11) Not applicable. (12) See (1) above. (13) The evaluation was undertaken by a panel, including client agency representatives, all of whom were experienced in fleet management matters. The process had three stages, which are common to all such tender assessments. Tenderers were first assessed against a set of compliance criteria. Any bid that failed to meet these criteria would not be further considered. Second, under a structured process, each bid was rated by the panel against a set of qualitative criteria that were clearly defined in the invitation to tender. This process produced an overall ranking of bids. Finally, attention was turned to the prices tendered, and the evaluation panel proceeded to make a recommendation as to which bids provided the best value for money to government taking account of both the qualitative rankings and prices. The recommendation underwent independent scrutiny by the State Tenders Committee before the recommendation was accepted and the contracts awarded. (14) It is not appropriate to release details of the deliberations of tender evaluation panels. (15) The evaluation panel was satisfied that the successful bidders had the necessary capability. (16) No. (17) See (14). (18)-(19) Local content is an important component of the evaluation and it is taken into consideration. Ownership, however, is but one aspect of the local content picture. While in this case the level of local content is very high, the application of the local content criteria cannot be a 100% criterion that eliminates all interstate or international bids or value for money would be severely compromised. It is important to note that the majority of fleet management services, by their nature, can only be delivered locally - where the cars are. Each fleet manager, regardless of their domicile, must employ local staff to deliver most of its services, and all of the flow-on services - maintenance, consumables, smash repair and the like - can only be provided within Western Australia. Further, a very high level of local service provision was a condition of the tender, and the new owner of Commonwealth Fleet Lease has fully committed to maintain that. (20) See (14). (21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(b) where the services being requested are new and a presentation would enable the evaluation panel members to have a clear understanding of the type/s or scope of services being offered; and (c) where significant ambiguities are found in the tender responses and there is a need to seek confirmation or clarification from the tenderers as regards their offers. The tender evaluation panel was satisfied with the quality of the tender responses, fully understood what was being offered from the tender responses and was in a position to make an assessment of the bids. There had been extensive consultation with the then current fleet managers (including Fleetcare) during the development of the tender specifications and it was clear that the bidders also clearly understood what they were bidding for. Hence, the panel decided it was not appropriate or necessary to request a presentation; (2) No – see (1). (3) That would not be a normal practice. Tender evaluations – which must be confidential in nature - do not readily lend themselves to progress reports. (4) See (1) above. (5) Yes – 12 May 2004. (6)-(7) A broadly representative group of client agencies was consulted on the definition of fleet management services over a period prior to finalisation of the tender specifications. Consultation of the type outlined in the question would be incompatible with the confidentiality required at the tender evaluation stage. (8) State Fleet is working closely with the successful tenderers and client agencies on the transition arrangements and is providing coordination, support and guidance on the movement of portfolios relinquished by the two unsuccessful tenderers. (9) No. (10) Not applicable – the decision was made on the basis of best value for money for government. (11) Not applicable. (12) See (1) above. (13) The evaluation was undertaken by a panel, including client agency representatives, all of whom were experienced in fleet management matters. The process had three stages, which are common to all such tender assessments. Tenderers were first assessed against a set of compliance criteria. Any bid that failed to meet these criteria would not be further considered. Second, under a structured process, each bid was rated by the panel against a set of qualitative criteria that were clearly defined in the invitation to tender. This process produced an overall ranking of bids. Finally, attention was turned to the prices tendered, and the evaluation panel proceeded to make a recommendation as to which bids provided the best value for money to government taking account of both the qualitative rankings and prices. The recommendation underwent independent scrutiny by the State Tenders Committee before the recommendation was accepted and the contracts awarded. (14) It is not appropriate to release details of the deliberations of tender evaluation panels. (15) The evaluation panel was satisfied that the successful bidders had the necessary capability. (16) No. (17) See (14). (18)-(19) Local content is an important component of the evaluation and it is taken into consideration. Ownership, however, is but one aspect of the local content picture. While in this case the level of local content is very high, the application of the local content criteria cannot be a 100% criterion that eliminates all interstate or international bids or value for money would be severely compromised. It is important to note that the majority of fleet management services, by their nature, can only be delivered locally - where the cars are. Each fleet manager, regardless of their domicile, must employ local staff to deliver most of its services, and all of the flow-on services - maintenance, consumables, smash repair and the like - can only be provided within Western Australia. Further, a very high level of local service provision was a condition of the tender, and the new owner of Commonwealth Fleet Lease has fully committed to maintain that. (20) See (14). (21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(c) where significant ambiguities are found in the tender responses and there is a need to seek confirmation or clarification from the tenderers as regards their offers. The tender evaluation panel was satisfied with the quality of the tender responses, fully understood what was being offered from the tender responses and was in a position to make an assessment of the bids. There had been extensive consultation with the then current fleet managers (including Fleetcare) during the development of the tender specifications and it was clear that the bidders also clearly understood what they were bidding for. Hence, the panel decided it was not appropriate or necessary to request a presentation; (2) No – see (1). (3) That would not be a normal practice. Tender evaluations – which must be confidential in nature - do not readily lend themselves to progress reports. (4) See (1) above. (5) Yes – 12 May 2004. (6)-(7) A broadly representative group of client agencies was consulted on the definition of fleet management services over a period prior to finalisation of the tender specifications. Consultation of the type outlined in the question would be incompatible with the confidentiality required at the tender evaluation stage. (8) State Fleet is working closely with the successful tenderers and client agencies on the transition arrangements and is providing coordination, support and guidance on the movement of portfolios relinquished by the two unsuccessful tenderers. (9) No. (10) Not applicable – the decision was made on the basis of best value for money for government. (11) Not applicable. (12) See (1) above. (13) The evaluation was undertaken by a panel, including client agency representatives, all of whom were experienced in fleet management matters. The process had three stages, which are common to all such tender assessments. Tenderers were first assessed against a set of compliance criteria. Any bid that failed to meet these criteria would not be further considered. Second, under a structured process, each bid was rated by the panel against a set of qualitative criteria that were clearly defined in the invitation to tender. This process produced an overall ranking of bids. Finally, attention was turned to the prices tendered, and the evaluation panel proceeded to make a recommendation as to which bids provided the best value for money to government taking account of both the qualitative rankings and prices. The recommendation underwent independent scrutiny by the State Tenders Committee before the recommendation was accepted and the contracts awarded. (14) It is not appropriate to release details of the deliberations of tender evaluation panels. (15) The evaluation panel was satisfied that the successful bidders had the necessary capability. (16) No. (17) See (14). (18)-(19) Local content is an important component of the evaluation and it is taken into consideration. Ownership, however, is but one aspect of the local content picture. While in this case the level of local content is very high, the application of the local content criteria cannot be a 100% criterion that eliminates all interstate or international bids or value for money would be severely compromised. It is important to note that the majority of fleet management services, by their nature, can only be delivered locally - where the cars are. Each fleet manager, regardless of their domicile, must employ local staff to deliver most of its services, and all of the flow-on services - maintenance, consumables, smash repair and the like - can only be provided within Western Australia. Further, a very high level of local service provision was a condition of the tender, and the new owner of Commonwealth Fleet Lease has fully committed to maintain that. (20) See (14). (21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
The tender evaluation panel was satisfied with the quality of the tender responses, fully understood what was being offered from the tender responses and was in a position to make an assessment of the bids. There had been extensive consultation with the then current fleet managers (including Fleetcare) during the development of the tender specifications and it was clear that the bidders also clearly understood what they were bidding for. Hence, the panel decided it was not appropriate or necessary to request a presentation; (2) No – see (1). (3) That would not be a normal practice. Tender evaluations – which must be confidential in nature - do not readily lend themselves to progress reports. (4) See (1) above. (5) Yes – 12 May 2004. (6)-(7) A broadly representative group of client agencies was consulted on the definition of fleet management services over a period prior to finalisation of the tender specifications. Consultation of the type outlined in the question would be incompatible with the confidentiality required at the tender evaluation stage. (8) State Fleet is working closely with the successful tenderers and client agencies on the transition arrangements and is providing coordination, support and guidance on the movement of portfolios relinquished by the two unsuccessful tenderers. (9) No. (10) Not applicable – the decision was made on the basis of best value for money for government. (11) Not applicable. (12) See (1) above. (13) The evaluation was undertaken by a panel, including client agency representatives, all of whom were experienced in fleet management matters. The process had three stages, which are common to all such tender assessments. Tenderers were first assessed against a set of compliance criteria. Any bid that failed to meet these criteria would not be further considered. Second, under a structured process, each bid was rated by the panel against a set of qualitative criteria that were clearly defined in the invitation to tender. This process produced an overall ranking of bids. Finally, attention was turned to the prices tendered, and the evaluation panel proceeded to make a recommendation as to which bids provided the best value for money to government taking account of both the qualitative rankings and prices. The recommendation underwent independent scrutiny by the State Tenders Committee before the recommendation was accepted and the contracts awarded. (14) It is not appropriate to release details of the deliberations of tender evaluation panels. (15) The evaluation panel was satisfied that the successful bidders had the necessary capability. (16) No. (17) See (14). (18)-(19) Local content is an important component of the evaluation and it is taken into consideration. Ownership, however, is but one aspect of the local content picture. While in this case the level of local content is very high, the application of the local content criteria cannot be a 100% criterion that eliminates all interstate or international bids or value for money would be severely compromised. It is important to note that the majority of fleet management services, by their nature, can only be delivered locally - where the cars are. Each fleet manager, regardless of their domicile, must employ local staff to deliver most of its services, and all of the flow-on services - maintenance, consumables, smash repair and the like - can only be provided within Western Australia. Further, a very high level of local service provision was a condition of the tender, and the new owner of Commonwealth Fleet Lease has fully committed to maintain that. (20) See (14). (21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(2) No – see (1). (3) That would not be a normal practice. Tender evaluations – which must be confidential in nature - do not readily lend themselves to progress reports. (4) See (1) above. (5) Yes – 12 May 2004. (6)-(7) A broadly representative group of client agencies was consulted on the definition of fleet management services over a period prior to finalisation of the tender specifications. Consultation of the type outlined in the question would be incompatible with the confidentiality required at the tender evaluation stage. (8) State Fleet is working closely with the successful tenderers and client agencies on the transition arrangements and is providing coordination, support and guidance on the movement of portfolios relinquished by the two unsuccessful tenderers. (9) No. (10) Not applicable – the decision was made on the basis of best value for money for government. (11) Not applicable. (12) See (1) above. (13) The evaluation was undertaken by a panel, including client agency representatives, all of whom were experienced in fleet management matters. The process had three stages, which are common to all such tender assessments. Tenderers were first assessed against a set of compliance criteria. Any bid that failed to meet these criteria would not be further considered. Second, under a structured process, each bid was rated by the panel against a set of qualitative criteria that were clearly defined in the invitation to tender. This process produced an overall ranking of bids. Finally, attention was turned to the prices tendered, and the evaluation panel proceeded to make a recommendation as to which bids provided the best value for money to government taking account of both the qualitative rankings and prices. The recommendation underwent independent scrutiny by the State Tenders Committee before the recommendation was accepted and the contracts awarded. (14) It is not appropriate to release details of the deliberations of tender evaluation panels. (15) The evaluation panel was satisfied that the successful bidders had the necessary capability. (16) No. (17) See (14). (18)-(19) Local content is an important component of the evaluation and it is taken into consideration. Ownership, however, is but one aspect of the local content picture. While in this case the level of local content is very high, the application of the local content criteria cannot be a 100% criterion that eliminates all interstate or international bids or value for money would be severely compromised. It is important to note that the majority of fleet management services, by their nature, can only be delivered locally - where the cars are. Each fleet manager, regardless of their domicile, must employ local staff to deliver most of its services, and all of the flow-on services - maintenance, consumables, smash repair and the like - can only be provided within Western Australia. Further, a very high level of local service provision was a condition of the tender, and the new owner of Commonwealth Fleet Lease has fully committed to maintain that. (20) See (14). (21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(3) That would not be a normal practice. Tender evaluations – which must be confidential in nature - do not readily lend themselves to progress reports. (4) See (1) above. (5) Yes – 12 May 2004. (6)-(7) A broadly representative group of client agencies was consulted on the definition of fleet management services over a period prior to finalisation of the tender specifications. Consultation of the type outlined in the question would be incompatible with the confidentiality required at the tender evaluation stage. (8) State Fleet is working closely with the successful tenderers and client agencies on the transition arrangements and is providing coordination, support and guidance on the movement of portfolios relinquished by the two unsuccessful tenderers. (9) No. (10) Not applicable – the decision was made on the basis of best value for money for government. (11) Not applicable. (12) See (1) above. (13) The evaluation was undertaken by a panel, including client agency representatives, all of whom were experienced in fleet management matters. The process had three stages, which are common to all such tender assessments. Tenderers were first assessed against a set of compliance criteria. Any bid that failed to meet these criteria would not be further considered. Second, under a structured process, each bid was rated by the panel against a set of qualitative criteria that were clearly defined in the invitation to tender. This process produced an overall ranking of bids. Finally, attention was turned to the prices tendered, and the evaluation panel proceeded to make a recommendation as to which bids provided the best value for money to government taking account of both the qualitative rankings and prices. The recommendation underwent independent scrutiny by the State Tenders Committee before the recommendation was accepted and the contracts awarded. (14) It is not appropriate to release details of the deliberations of tender evaluation panels. (15) The evaluation panel was satisfied that the successful bidders had the necessary capability. (16) No. (17) See (14). (18)-(19) Local content is an important component of the evaluation and it is taken into consideration. Ownership, however, is but one aspect of the local content picture. While in this case the level of local content is very high, the application of the local content criteria cannot be a 100% criterion that eliminates all interstate or international bids or value for money would be severely compromised. It is important to note that the majority of fleet management services, by their nature, can only be delivered locally - where the cars are. Each fleet manager, regardless of their domicile, must employ local staff to deliver most of its services, and all of the flow-on services - maintenance, consumables, smash repair and the like - can only be provided within Western Australia. Further, a very high level of local service provision was a condition of the tender, and the new owner of Commonwealth Fleet Lease has fully committed to maintain that. (20) See (14). (21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(4) See (1) above. (5) Yes – 12 May 2004. (6)-(7) A broadly representative group of client agencies was consulted on the definition of fleet management services over a period prior to finalisation of the tender specifications. Consultation of the type outlined in the question would be incompatible with the confidentiality required at the tender evaluation stage. (8) State Fleet is working closely with the successful tenderers and client agencies on the transition arrangements and is providing coordination, support and guidance on the movement of portfolios relinquished by the two unsuccessful tenderers. (9) No. (10) Not applicable – the decision was made on the basis of best value for money for government. (11) Not applicable. (12) See (1) above. (13) The evaluation was undertaken by a panel, including client agency representatives, all of whom were experienced in fleet management matters. The process had three stages, which are common to all such tender assessments. Tenderers were first assessed against a set of compliance criteria. Any bid that failed to meet these criteria would not be further considered. Second, under a structured process, each bid was rated by the panel against a set of qualitative criteria that were clearly defined in the invitation to tender. This process produced an overall ranking of bids. Finally, attention was turned to the prices tendered, and the evaluation panel proceeded to make a recommendation as to which bids provided the best value for money to government taking account of both the qualitative rankings and prices. The recommendation underwent independent scrutiny by the State Tenders Committee before the recommendation was accepted and the contracts awarded. (14) It is not appropriate to release details of the deliberations of tender evaluation panels. (15) The evaluation panel was satisfied that the successful bidders had the necessary capability. (16) No. (17) See (14). (18)-(19) Local content is an important component of the evaluation and it is taken into consideration. Ownership, however, is but one aspect of the local content picture. While in this case the level of local content is very high, the application of the local content criteria cannot be a 100% criterion that eliminates all interstate or international bids or value for money would be severely compromised. It is important to note that the majority of fleet management services, by their nature, can only be delivered locally - where the cars are. Each fleet manager, regardless of their domicile, must employ local staff to deliver most of its services, and all of the flow-on services - maintenance, consumables, smash repair and the like - can only be provided within Western Australia. Further, a very high level of local service provision was a condition of the tender, and the new owner of Commonwealth Fleet Lease has fully committed to maintain that. (20) See (14). (21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(5) Yes – 12 May 2004. (6)-(7) A broadly representative group of client agencies was consulted on the definition of fleet management services over a period prior to finalisation of the tender specifications. Consultation of the type outlined in the question would be incompatible with the confidentiality required at the tender evaluation stage. (8) State Fleet is working closely with the successful tenderers and client agencies on the transition arrangements and is providing coordination, support and guidance on the movement of portfolios relinquished by the two unsuccessful tenderers. (9) No. (10) Not applicable – the decision was made on the basis of best value for money for government. (11) Not applicable. (12) See (1) above. (13) The evaluation was undertaken by a panel, including client agency representatives, all of whom were experienced in fleet management matters. The process had three stages, which are common to all such tender assessments. Tenderers were first assessed against a set of compliance criteria. Any bid that failed to meet these criteria would not be further considered. Second, under a structured process, each bid was rated by the panel against a set of qualitative criteria that were clearly defined in the invitation to tender. This process produced an overall ranking of bids. Finally, attention was turned to the prices tendered, and the evaluation panel proceeded to make a recommendation as to which bids provided the best value for money to government taking account of both the qualitative rankings and prices. The recommendation underwent independent scrutiny by the State Tenders Committee before the recommendation was accepted and the contracts awarded. (14) It is not appropriate to release details of the deliberations of tender evaluation panels. (15) The evaluation panel was satisfied that the successful bidders had the necessary capability. (16) No. (17) See (14). (18)-(19) Local content is an important component of the evaluation and it is taken into consideration. Ownership, however, is but one aspect of the local content picture. While in this case the level of local content is very high, the application of the local content criteria cannot be a 100% criterion that eliminates all interstate or international bids or value for money would be severely compromised. It is important to note that the majority of fleet management services, by their nature, can only be delivered locally - where the cars are. Each fleet manager, regardless of their domicile, must employ local staff to deliver most of its services, and all of the flow-on services - maintenance, consumables, smash repair and the like - can only be provided within Western Australia. Further, a very high level of local service provision was a condition of the tender, and the new owner of Commonwealth Fleet Lease has fully committed to maintain that. (20) See (14). (21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(6)-(7) A broadly representative group of client agencies was consulted on the definition of fleet management services over a period prior to finalisation of the tender specifications. Consultation of the type outlined in the question would be incompatible with the confidentiality required at the tender evaluation stage. (8) State Fleet is working closely with the successful tenderers and client agencies on the transition arrangements and is providing coordination, support and guidance on the movement of portfolios relinquished by the two unsuccessful tenderers. (9) No. (10) Not applicable – the decision was made on the basis of best value for money for government. (11) Not applicable. (12) See (1) above. (13) The evaluation was undertaken by a panel, including client agency representatives, all of whom were experienced in fleet management matters. The process had three stages, which are common to all such tender assessments. Tenderers were first assessed against a set of compliance criteria. Any bid that failed to meet these criteria would not be further considered. Second, under a structured process, each bid was rated by the panel against a set of qualitative criteria that were clearly defined in the invitation to tender. This process produced an overall ranking of bids. Finally, attention was turned to the prices tendered, and the evaluation panel proceeded to make a recommendation as to which bids provided the best value for money to government taking account of both the qualitative rankings and prices. The recommendation underwent independent scrutiny by the State Tenders Committee before the recommendation was accepted and the contracts awarded. (14) It is not appropriate to release details of the deliberations of tender evaluation panels. (15) The evaluation panel was satisfied that the successful bidders had the necessary capability. (16) No. (17) See (14). (18)-(19) Local content is an important component of the evaluation and it is taken into consideration. Ownership, however, is but one aspect of the local content picture. While in this case the level of local content is very high, the application of the local content criteria cannot be a 100% criterion that eliminates all interstate or international bids or value for money would be severely compromised. It is important to note that the majority of fleet management services, by their nature, can only be delivered locally - where the cars are. Each fleet manager, regardless of their domicile, must employ local staff to deliver most of its services, and all of the flow-on services - maintenance, consumables, smash repair and the like - can only be provided within Western Australia. Further, a very high level of local service provision was a condition of the tender, and the new owner of Commonwealth Fleet Lease has fully committed to maintain that. (20) See (14). (21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(8) State Fleet is working closely with the successful tenderers and client agencies on the transition arrangements and is providing coordination, support and guidance on the movement of portfolios relinquished by the two unsuccessful tenderers. (9) No. (10) Not applicable – the decision was made on the basis of best value for money for government. (11) Not applicable. (12) See (1) above. (13) The evaluation was undertaken by a panel, including client agency representatives, all of whom were experienced in fleet management matters. The process had three stages, which are common to all such tender assessments. Tenderers were first assessed against a set of compliance criteria. Any bid that failed to meet these criteria would not be further considered. Second, under a structured process, each bid was rated by the panel against a set of qualitative criteria that were clearly defined in the invitation to tender. This process produced an overall ranking of bids. Finally, attention was turned to the prices tendered, and the evaluation panel proceeded to make a recommendation as to which bids provided the best value for money to government taking account of both the qualitative rankings and prices. The recommendation underwent independent scrutiny by the State Tenders Committee before the recommendation was accepted and the contracts awarded. (14) It is not appropriate to release details of the deliberations of tender evaluation panels. (15) The evaluation panel was satisfied that the successful bidders had the necessary capability. (16) No. (17) See (14). (18)-(19) Local content is an important component of the evaluation and it is taken into consideration. Ownership, however, is but one aspect of the local content picture. While in this case the level of local content is very high, the application of the local content criteria cannot be a 100% criterion that eliminates all interstate or international bids or value for money would be severely compromised. It is important to note that the majority of fleet management services, by their nature, can only be delivered locally - where the cars are. Each fleet manager, regardless of their domicile, must employ local staff to deliver most of its services, and all of the flow-on services - maintenance, consumables, smash repair and the like - can only be provided within Western Australia. Further, a very high level of local service provision was a condition of the tender, and the new owner of Commonwealth Fleet Lease has fully committed to maintain that. (20) See (14). (21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(9) No. (10) Not applicable – the decision was made on the basis of best value for money for government. (11) Not applicable. (12) See (1) above. (13) The evaluation was undertaken by a panel, including client agency representatives, all of whom were experienced in fleet management matters. The process had three stages, which are common to all such tender assessments. Tenderers were first assessed against a set of compliance criteria. Any bid that failed to meet these criteria would not be further considered. Second, under a structured process, each bid was rated by the panel against a set of qualitative criteria that were clearly defined in the invitation to tender. This process produced an overall ranking of bids. Finally, attention was turned to the prices tendered, and the evaluation panel proceeded to make a recommendation as to which bids provided the best value for money to government taking account of both the qualitative rankings and prices. The recommendation underwent independent scrutiny by the State Tenders Committee before the recommendation was accepted and the contracts awarded. (14) It is not appropriate to release details of the deliberations of tender evaluation panels. (15) The evaluation panel was satisfied that the successful bidders had the necessary capability. (16) No. (17) See (14). (18)-(19) Local content is an important component of the evaluation and it is taken into consideration. Ownership, however, is but one aspect of the local content picture. While in this case the level of local content is very high, the application of the local content criteria cannot be a 100% criterion that eliminates all interstate or international bids or value for money would be severely compromised. It is important to note that the majority of fleet management services, by their nature, can only be delivered locally - where the cars are. Each fleet manager, regardless of their domicile, must employ local staff to deliver most of its services, and all of the flow-on services - maintenance, consumables, smash repair and the like - can only be provided within Western Australia. Further, a very high level of local service provision was a condition of the tender, and the new owner of Commonwealth Fleet Lease has fully committed to maintain that. (20) See (14). (21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(10) Not applicable – the decision was made on the basis of best value for money for government. (11) Not applicable. (12) See (1) above. (13) The evaluation was undertaken by a panel, including client agency representatives, all of whom were experienced in fleet management matters. The process had three stages, which are common to all such tender assessments. Tenderers were first assessed against a set of compliance criteria. Any bid that failed to meet these criteria would not be further considered. Second, under a structured process, each bid was rated by the panel against a set of qualitative criteria that were clearly defined in the invitation to tender. This process produced an overall ranking of bids. Finally, attention was turned to the prices tendered, and the evaluation panel proceeded to make a recommendation as to which bids provided the best value for money to government taking account of both the qualitative rankings and prices. The recommendation underwent independent scrutiny by the State Tenders Committee before the recommendation was accepted and the contracts awarded. (14) It is not appropriate to release details of the deliberations of tender evaluation panels. (15) The evaluation panel was satisfied that the successful bidders had the necessary capability. (16) No. (17) See (14). (18)-(19) Local content is an important component of the evaluation and it is taken into consideration. Ownership, however, is but one aspect of the local content picture. While in this case the level of local content is very high, the application of the local content criteria cannot be a 100% criterion that eliminates all interstate or international bids or value for money would be severely compromised. It is important to note that the majority of fleet management services, by their nature, can only be delivered locally - where the cars are. Each fleet manager, regardless of their domicile, must employ local staff to deliver most of its services, and all of the flow-on services - maintenance, consumables, smash repair and the like - can only be provided within Western Australia. Further, a very high level of local service provision was a condition of the tender, and the new owner of Commonwealth Fleet Lease has fully committed to maintain that. (20) See (14). (21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(11) Not applicable. (12) See (1) above. (13) The evaluation was undertaken by a panel, including client agency representatives, all of whom were experienced in fleet management matters. The process had three stages, which are common to all such tender assessments. Tenderers were first assessed against a set of compliance criteria. Any bid that failed to meet these criteria would not be further considered. Second, under a structured process, each bid was rated by the panel against a set of qualitative criteria that were clearly defined in the invitation to tender. This process produced an overall ranking of bids. Finally, attention was turned to the prices tendered, and the evaluation panel proceeded to make a recommendation as to which bids provided the best value for money to government taking account of both the qualitative rankings and prices. The recommendation underwent independent scrutiny by the State Tenders Committee before the recommendation was accepted and the contracts awarded. (14) It is not appropriate to release details of the deliberations of tender evaluation panels. (15) The evaluation panel was satisfied that the successful bidders had the necessary capability. (16) No. (17) See (14). (18)-(19) Local content is an important component of the evaluation and it is taken into consideration. Ownership, however, is but one aspect of the local content picture. While in this case the level of local content is very high, the application of the local content criteria cannot be a 100% criterion that eliminates all interstate or international bids or value for money would be severely compromised. It is important to note that the majority of fleet management services, by their nature, can only be delivered locally - where the cars are. Each fleet manager, regardless of their domicile, must employ local staff to deliver most of its services, and all of the flow-on services - maintenance, consumables, smash repair and the like - can only be provided within Western Australia. Further, a very high level of local service provision was a condition of the tender, and the new owner of Commonwealth Fleet Lease has fully committed to maintain that. (20) See (14). (21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(12) See (1) above. (13) The evaluation was undertaken by a panel, including client agency representatives, all of whom were experienced in fleet management matters. The process had three stages, which are common to all such tender assessments. Tenderers were first assessed against a set of compliance criteria. Any bid that failed to meet these criteria would not be further considered. Second, under a structured process, each bid was rated by the panel against a set of qualitative criteria that were clearly defined in the invitation to tender. This process produced an overall ranking of bids. Finally, attention was turned to the prices tendered, and the evaluation panel proceeded to make a recommendation as to which bids provided the best value for money to government taking account of both the qualitative rankings and prices. The recommendation underwent independent scrutiny by the State Tenders Committee before the recommendation was accepted and the contracts awarded. (14) It is not appropriate to release details of the deliberations of tender evaluation panels. (15) The evaluation panel was satisfied that the successful bidders had the necessary capability. (16) No. (17) See (14). (18)-(19) Local content is an important component of the evaluation and it is taken into consideration. Ownership, however, is but one aspect of the local content picture. While in this case the level of local content is very high, the application of the local content criteria cannot be a 100% criterion that eliminates all interstate or international bids or value for money would be severely compromised. It is important to note that the majority of fleet management services, by their nature, can only be delivered locally - where the cars are. Each fleet manager, regardless of their domicile, must employ local staff to deliver most of its services, and all of the flow-on services - maintenance, consumables, smash repair and the like - can only be provided within Western Australia. Further, a very high level of local service provision was a condition of the tender, and the new owner of Commonwealth Fleet Lease has fully committed to maintain that. (20) See (14). (21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(13) The evaluation was undertaken by a panel, including client agency representatives, all of whom were experienced in fleet management matters. The process had three stages, which are common to all such tender assessments. Tenderers were first assessed against a set of compliance criteria. Any bid that failed to meet these criteria would not be further considered. Second, under a structured process, each bid was rated by the panel against a set of qualitative criteria that were clearly defined in the invitation to tender. This process produced an overall ranking of bids. Finally, attention was turned to the prices tendered, and the evaluation panel proceeded to make a recommendation as to which bids provided the best value for money to government taking account of both the qualitative rankings and prices. The recommendation underwent independent scrutiny by the State Tenders Committee before the recommendation was accepted and the contracts awarded. (14) It is not appropriate to release details of the deliberations of tender evaluation panels. (15) The evaluation panel was satisfied that the successful bidders had the necessary capability. (16) No. (17) See (14). (18)-(19) Local content is an important component of the evaluation and it is taken into consideration. Ownership, however, is but one aspect of the local content picture. While in this case the level of local content is very high, the application of the local content criteria cannot be a 100% criterion that eliminates all interstate or international bids or value for money would be severely compromised. It is important to note that the majority of fleet management services, by their nature, can only be delivered locally - where the cars are. Each fleet manager, regardless of their domicile, must employ local staff to deliver most of its services, and all of the flow-on services - maintenance, consumables, smash repair and the like - can only be provided within Western Australia. Further, a very high level of local service provision was a condition of the tender, and the new owner of Commonwealth Fleet Lease has fully committed to maintain that. (20) See (14). (21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(14) It is not appropriate to release details of the deliberations of tender evaluation panels. (15) The evaluation panel was satisfied that the successful bidders had the necessary capability. (16) No. (17) See (14). (18)-(19) Local content is an important component of the evaluation and it is taken into consideration. Ownership, however, is but one aspect of the local content picture. While in this case the level of local content is very high, the application of the local content criteria cannot be a 100% criterion that eliminates all interstate or international bids or value for money would be severely compromised. It is important to note that the majority of fleet management services, by their nature, can only be delivered locally - where the cars are. Each fleet manager, regardless of their domicile, must employ local staff to deliver most of its services, and all of the flow-on services - maintenance, consumables, smash repair and the like - can only be provided within Western Australia. Further, a very high level of local service provision was a condition of the tender, and the new owner of Commonwealth Fleet Lease has fully committed to maintain that. (20) See (14). (21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(15) The evaluation panel was satisfied that the successful bidders had the necessary capability. (16) No. (17) See (14). (18)-(19) Local content is an important component of the evaluation and it is taken into consideration. Ownership, however, is but one aspect of the local content picture. While in this case the level of local content is very high, the application of the local content criteria cannot be a 100% criterion that eliminates all interstate or international bids or value for money would be severely compromised. It is important to note that the majority of fleet management services, by their nature, can only be delivered locally - where the cars are. Each fleet manager, regardless of their domicile, must employ local staff to deliver most of its services, and all of the flow-on services - maintenance, consumables, smash repair and the like - can only be provided within Western Australia. Further, a very high level of local service provision was a condition of the tender, and the new owner of Commonwealth Fleet Lease has fully committed to maintain that. (20) See (14). (21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(16) No. (17) See (14). (18)-(19) Local content is an important component of the evaluation and it is taken into consideration. Ownership, however, is but one aspect of the local content picture. While in this case the level of local content is very high, the application of the local content criteria cannot be a 100% criterion that eliminates all interstate or international bids or value for money would be severely compromised. It is important to note that the majority of fleet management services, by their nature, can only be delivered locally - where the cars are. Each fleet manager, regardless of their domicile, must employ local staff to deliver most of its services, and all of the flow-on services - maintenance, consumables, smash repair and the like - can only be provided within Western Australia. Further, a very high level of local service provision was a condition of the tender, and the new owner of Commonwealth Fleet Lease has fully committed to maintain that. (20) See (14). (21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(17) See (14). (18)-(19) Local content is an important component of the evaluation and it is taken into consideration. Ownership, however, is but one aspect of the local content picture. While in this case the level of local content is very high, the application of the local content criteria cannot be a 100% criterion that eliminates all interstate or international bids or value for money would be severely compromised. It is important to note that the majority of fleet management services, by their nature, can only be delivered locally - where the cars are. Each fleet manager, regardless of their domicile, must employ local staff to deliver most of its services, and all of the flow-on services - maintenance, consumables, smash repair and the like - can only be provided within Western Australia. Further, a very high level of local service provision was a condition of the tender, and the new owner of Commonwealth Fleet Lease has fully committed to maintain that. (20) See (14). (21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(18)-(19) Local content is an important component of the evaluation and it is taken into consideration. Ownership, however, is but one aspect of the local content picture. While in this case the level of local content is very high, the application of the local content criteria cannot be a 100% criterion that eliminates all interstate or international bids or value for money would be severely compromised. It is important to note that the majority of fleet management services, by their nature, can only be delivered locally - where the cars are. Each fleet manager, regardless of their domicile, must employ local staff to deliver most of its services, and all of the flow-on services - maintenance, consumables, smash repair and the like - can only be provided within Western Australia. Further, a very high level of local service provision was a condition of the tender, and the new owner of Commonwealth Fleet Lease has fully committed to maintain that. (20) See (14). (21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(20) See (14). (21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(21) I am not aware of the fleet contract arrangements in the Commonwealth and Tasmania. (22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(22) Savings across the three contracts are estimated at $1.036 million a year, of which $718,000 arises from savings in fleet management fees. (23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(23) Yes. (24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(24) See (14). (25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(25) An ongoing process of continual improvement, that will be further facilitated by the new fleet management contracts. (26) See (14).
(26) See (14).
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.