Facing the post-Brexit future: new trends in housing procurement
The last few years have been a turbulent time, with the housing sector particularly buffeted by the uncertainty of Brexit and its impact on how services are provided. The UK’s long protracted separation from the EU has, despite its seemingly never ending length, not created an instant era of clarity for many, especially as other pressures, including the COVID-19 pandemic, have left little time for reflection. But with Brexit now “done” what are the emerging trends for those charged in the public sector with procuring services for the future?
In many organisations, tighter budgets have led to reductions in procurement teams, with the result that many providers are often no longer ‘doing’ the buying for managers, but providing system support for the various portals being used. Senior staff are now often left on their own, probably, for example, not fully aware that the UK no longer uses OJEU and wondering what else might have changed as a result of Brexit. This is just one substantial issue, amongst many, that smaller teams now have to grapple with while at the same time attempting to do the day to day busy work of ensuring contracts are being procured properly.
In a perfect world, procurement starts with a clear strategy, developed in line with requirements around what is to be bought, market conditions and the organisation’s vision and objectives for purchasing the service, goods or works. However, we rarely have this luxury. More often a contract is coming to an end, a contractor is no longer performing as required, an urgent gap in service delivery is identified or a supplier is no longer available – all of a sudden something must be done.
Senior staff faced with the job of procurement might be frustrated by the range of options available, their complex range of advantages and disadvantages, and the range of rules, requirements and administration of any public sector purchasing. While we all understand the public purse must be protected, how on earth can this be navigated?
A first step is often be to decide between using a framework and going to market alone. The framework route has the advantage of already being compliant, is often able to benefit from purchasing power and economies of scale, and usually allows the purchasing body to either directly award contracts or to run mini-competitions to select the most appropriate supplier from the framework. This can also provide solutions relatively quickly and with the framework provider guiding the manager throughout the process.
Not all frameworks are equal and it is worth spending time researching specialisms, age of contracts, contract management arrangements and to seek legal advice as to how to access the framework in line with your own organisational governance.
The disadvantages of a framework include its general nature and not being bespoke for your needs. Prices and specifications are already in place, and amendment to these may or may not be possible. Arrangements are unlikely to be longer than 4 to 6 years.
The current trend to use frameworks can be seen as a way to manage the transition to fully post-Brexit procurement regulations and practice. As with all approaches to market, a clear strategy is needed, but perhaps less well defined than when going it alone.
However, what needs to be avoided in pursuing this route is doing it just because it is quick, easy to action and requires less internal resource. The apparent benefits will be quickly lost if it does not facilitate the organisation’s service objectives. If this is the outcome the consequences of not providing a bespoke solution will be felt for a long time.
Rebecca Shaw