|
Editorial: Is It Good Or Bad News?
Oscar Wilde said something to the effect that the only thing worse than being talked about was not being talked about. How’s that for a sweeping generalization? For one thing, while Oscar was (in)famously unafraid of the bright glare of public scrutiny, I think most of us are probably well to the shy side of the standard he set. That aside, on a less intimate, much more public level the bright glare of publicity is becoming a real presence in the working lives of many public-sector buyers these days.
Most notably, we have the federal “Sponsorship scandal” that continues to unfold in Ottawa. Most of you probably know the details, but for our purposes here what’s especially interesting is that contract award practices by the federal government have become a focal point of the public inquiry, with reports going back at least to 1996 claiming that there were serious ‘irregularities’ in how public works contracts were awarded. At the core of the affair is some $100 million that was paid to communication agencies to promote federalism, but that according to the federal Auditor General “broke just about every rule in the book” in terms of established contract award practices. Recently (as we went to press, that is) we’ve heard that the 1996 report was allegedly watered down by the auditors before being presented to the government officials who had requested it. The auditors say they can’t remember why they changed the report.
Then, of course, there’s the computer leasing inquiry in Toronto. In this case, the recently amalgamated “megacity” issued an RFQ for a large-scale computer systems acquisition in 1999. The contract was awarded to MFP Financial Services. After that, the original contract amount apparently doubled, the lease terms for the computer equipment ballooned, and a further acquisition of 10,000 Oracle database licences - also from MFP - proved to be a “serious overestimate of the city’s actual needs.”
Since a formal inquiry was launched by city council in 2002, testimony has alleged that there were improper financial relations between MFP’s lead salesman (who happens to be the brother of a Toronto Maple Leafs player, just to add to the unreal, ‘bright lights’ aspect of the proceedings) and a city councillor, complete with alleged parking-lot meetings, possible improper access to confidential documents, and downright bizarre cash flows.
On top of that there’s been news south of the border about a deal between Boeing and the U.S. Air Force to the tune of US$23 billion. The Air Force’s procurement strategy has taken a hit and heads have rolled.
In the coverage of these stories procurement has been front and centre, an unusual position for it to be in - even in the organizations where it takes place, let alone the papers.
Of course most of the attention has been negative, but I’m wondering if there isn’t an up side to it all. For one thing, as our cover story suggests, the inquiries and reports are likely to yield suggestions for how procurement can be improved and tightened up. These could be just as applicable to the private sector as they are to the public.
And as I see it, the increased attention underlines the importance of procurement. In this respect, I think Oscar was right. Simply hearing more about purchasing and purchasers - whatever they were or weren’t up to - has to bring home the point that the process and the profession are non-trivial and deserve to be rescued from back-office obscurity.
So... “someday we’ll laugh about it”?
Andrew Brooks
Editor
|
