Early progress
Although it's early days, progress has been made on a number of issues. According to managing director of Queensland-based integrator Data #3, John Grant, who is also chairman of the AIIA, the industry is focusing on a number of key issues in an attempt to make the process of supplying to government less costly, more streamlined and more accessible to smaller operators.
Working in conjunction with the Australian Procurement and Construction Council (APCC), and a series of state and federal government procurement representatives, the AIIA has just completed the framework for what will become a standard government procurement contract designed to operate across state and federal boundaries. "The first item on the agenda is the way contracts are drafted, and the way they deal with intellectual property and liability, because these have been serious roadblocks, especially for smaller contractors who in some cases face losing their company if a contract fails to go according to plan," Grant said. "It's a long way off but we now have agreement on the framework of a single government procurement contract which, if it were adopted by all state and federal governments, would significantly streamline the whole process of working with government across different jurisdictions."
Following this, the AIIA is also tackling issues around the actual procurement process, and the extent to which it includes or excludes different companies. While the third area focuses on education and the technical capabilities of government procurement officials.
"We want to ensure that all the individuals involved are sure of their own capabilities and working toward common goals, rather than coming to the negotiation table with a combative attitude," Grant said.
Federal waiting game
Having worked on both sides of the fence, director of government procurement research agency Intermedium, Judy Hurditch, suggested resellers also need to understand the level of review which government officials are subjected to, and the gravity of spending taxpayers' money.
"Companies, especially those not used to tendering to government, see the process as bureaucratic, time-consuming and costly, because they do not fully appreciate the level of accountability that bureaucrats must have for their procurement decision making," she said.
While a single, standardised approach to government procurement and the selection of government supply panels remains a long way off, the actual approach to procurement is quite different in each state and at federal level.
Following the Howard Government's disastrous flirtation with whole of government outsourcing at the turn of the century, federal procurement has largely been left to the whims of individual agencies, for better and for worse. The challenge of the Federal Government's procurement system is that it needs to cover vastly different departments and agencies. Individual departments such as Defence, Centrelink and Australia Post represent some of the largest consumers of ICT in Australia, while the requirements of smaller agencies are more in line with local government contracts.
However, according to Intelligent Business Research Services analyst, Guy Cranswick, much of Federal Government's departmental procurement is currently in a holding pattern, awaiting the outcome of Sir Peter Gershon's Review of government ICT procurement, which is expected to recommend efficiency gains by adopting a more centralised and streamlined approach.
"Given what it has achieved in Britain, the Gershon approach is a good working template for government ICT in Australia as well," Cranswick said. "Fundamentally, it is designed to deliver cost savings, while improving frontline capabilities, by rationalising procurement and consolidating back office functions."
Critics of the current federal system charge that, by devolving ICT procurement back to individual departments and agencies, the government has failed to take advantage of its overall buying power to win better prices from vendors, and lost the opportunity to take advantage of economies of scale, especially on standard back-office functions.
"It all changed when the previous government decided to get rid of centralised purchasing, and as soon as it was taken down all those efficiencies disappeared," Dataflex's Evans said. "I believe the Gershon Review will bring them all back again and we'll see a more centralised approach, simply because it makes sense."
