The announcement was welcomed and rightly so as the project will allow for much-needed improvements to transport links between Manchester, Sheffield, Rochdale, Halifax, Bradford, Bolton, Preston and Blackpool. It will also increase capacity on the Hope Valley line between Manchester and Sheffield, thus enabling the number of fast trains to double. All-in-all it was good news for the North of England.

Mr Osborne also announced that further investment will be made in London transport, despite the fact that the Government already spends more money on transport projects for London than on those for the rest of the country combined.

The Institute for Public Policy Research North says £2,700 is spent per person in London compared with just £5 per head in the north east of England – a staggering figure. Suddenly, the ‘subject to value for money’ part of the Northern Hub investment feels a bit cheap.
The Department for Transport (DfT) spends more money on Network Rail than any other transport supplier. Figures supplied by Tracker Spend Analysis reveal that since all spend over £500 was first published on 1 April 2011, the DfT has spent £4,019,129,791 on Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd; £646,250,000 on Crossrail Limited; £148,289,768 on London and South Eastern Railway; £113,213,288 on Northern Rail Ltd; and £107,156,746 on Transpennine Express.

These companies are the top five suppliers to the DfT and it is worth noting that they are all rail suppliers.

Network Rail, the DfT’s top supplier, spent £4,019,196,126 on projects in Inner London West and £12,192,731 in Inner London East, reaching a combined figure of £4,031,388,857 for Inner London alone. Medway, in the South East of England, was third in the top five areas of Network Rail spend, with £1,593,427 being invested in the region. The remaining two areas in the top five were Coventry with £916,247 and Leicester with £528,228. Meanwhile, Network Rail’s combined spend in the region that will be developed in the Northern Hub rail scheme was an estimated £303,576. So, the extra £130 million for the Northern Hub announced by Mr Osborne is really just a drop in the ocean when compared to London spend since April 2011.

Notable Network Rail areas of spend since April 2011:

During the same period, Crossrail spent £646,660,721 in London with Coventry, the only area outside the capital receiving investment, getting £270,612. London and South Eastern Railway’s entire spend was, unsurprisingly, in the south of England, but with £148,309,868 spent in London and a mere £530 spent in Kent. Even Northern Rail spent £113,213,288 in Inner London West, which was their top region for spend, with Northumberland coming second receiving spend worth £122,774, Cheshire third with £81,135, followed by Lancashire with £81,020 and Hartlepool and Stockton-on-Tees with £48,706.

Inner London West was also Transpennine Express’s top area for spend at £107,156,746 while Durham County Council saw projects worth £3,156 and South Teeside £1,750.

The estimated combined London investment across the top five suppliers to the DfT is around £5,046,729,480. It is an eye-watering figure when compared to spend in the Northern Hub region.

There are approximately eight million people living in Greater London, so it is logical that such a high population density in one area needs money spent on transport and obviously, transport spending in London doesn’t just benefit local residents. Investment in London transport also benefits all the people who commute to work in London every day, as well as the many tourists, students and visitors to theatres and galleries, not to mention those travelling through to other destinations.

However, it is clear that the disproportionate spending on transport, and in this instance rail, in the capital is grossly unfair.

So, is the extra £130 million that will be invested in the Northern Hub rail scheme enough to justify London’s rail spend? And more importantly, can the Government and Mr Osborne justify whatever further investments in the capital they have planned off the back of these unbelievable figures?

More details will be announced in the summer as part of the five-year investment plan for the railway in London. Let’s see how much ‘value for money’ they get for their spend.

Just last week, the government promised to help build up to 16,000 new homes as part of a £400 million drive to enliven the economy and help first-time buyers. It is a move that will let developers bid for funding, and allow them to build new housing from next July. Further to that, an extra £50 million has also been set aside to refurbish empty homes and the government will also underwrite 100,000 mortgages for new-build homes.

The announcement is one that won’t be shunned by construction companies even though it may fall short of a massive investment push needed to get Britain building. You know the saying: every little helps. It certainly helped share prices as on the back of the announcement shares in Persimmon, Britain’s biggest house builder, were up 3 percent, with Barratt Developments rising 4 percent, Taylor Wimpey up 4 percent, Bellway up 3 percent and Berkeley rising 1 percent.

Meanwhile in Scotland, a second wave of housing plans to be launched under the National Housing Trust initiative has now seen councils inviting bids from house builders and developers to build affordable homes worth £300m. It is a scheme that allows developers and local authorities to jointly fund home building projects with local authority loans that are being underwritten by the Scottish Government.

These announcements aren’t going to pound the industry into a Popeye-like resurgence from the brink but it is pleasing that some muscles are flexing in the public sector. Perhaps more importantly, there are sounds of shovels on dirt coming from the private sector as Swedish-founded contractor Skanska announced plans to build 800 UK homes a year by 2015.

Skanska are said to have spotted an opportunity during the financial crisis to enter house building, having spent the past decade developing its construction business in the UK, and have done so with a plan that is set to make Skanska one of the top 20 house builders in the country.

Then Mersea Homes and Countryside Properties announced plans to build more than 2,200 homes and community facilities on north Colchester countryside. Home Group also announced plans to build 4000 homes in 4 years. Further to that, Procure Plus has unveiled a £136m new homes programme in Manchester.

There is another saying that goes along the lines of throwing enough money at a problem can make it disappear. The question is who will throw the money? It has been a positive couple of weeks for housing, but is it a signal that it is the private sector that will step up and bring about growth. Or will the public sector have to do more?

Procurex Scotland 2011 was buzzing as Halls 1 and 2 in Glasgow’s SECC were packed to the rafters for the conference where over 70 exhibitors were showcasing their products.

A wide range of exhibitors covered a variety of different markets and commodities and included the likes of ADT Fire and Security, Avendris, Scottish Government, Oracle, Office Depot, Net-Defence and Kainos. The conference was also visited by three delegates from the United Republic of Tanzania Government Procurement Services Agency. It seems word gets around!

Procurex Scotland is the only event in the annual procurement calendar designed exclusively for the Scottish public sector buyer and supplier community with the intention to give suppliers the opportunity to showcase their capabilities, products and services to public sector buyers. The event was certainly a successful one and the buzz on the exhibition floor was positive. The exhibitors at the stand for safety compliance firm Calbarrie said: “It has been an excellent day. In fact, we may sign up for Procurex National as we’ve been so successful today.”

The 20-minute sessions with PASS consultants proved popular with visitors as did the GO Networking Zone, which was constantly busy and full of chatter and discussion. Skills Development Zone 1 featured presentations by the likes of Senior PASS Consultant Eddie Regan, Cara Williams from Birds Eye and the impressive ‘Using Online Video to Win Contracts’ presentation delivered by Gillian O’Neil of Moviecom.tv and 29studios. Afterwards, Gillian said:

“We always learn something at Procurex Scotland. We’ve also been to Procurex National before and this is our third year here at the conference in Glasgow. We’ll be back next year; it’s a really worthwhile event.”

Over in Skills Development Zone 2, Stephen McAinsh and Margaret-Ann McKeown from the Scottish Government were speaking, as were Bryan Leslie from Edinburgh Chamber of Commerce and Alan Mackie from Sadler Training. Both Zones proved so popular that people found themselves having to stand to listen.

Aside from the networking and learning possibilities, it was a conference that also brought with it some fun. The sight of a line of managers and directors, dressed to impress, taking the opportunity to ‘aim for success with BiP Solutions‘ to win an Xbox Kinect in a ‘Procurex Kinect Sports’ competition was more than worth turning up for at the BiP Solutions stand. Overall, it was an event that delivered and there were plenty opportunities for networking and learning that all the exhibitors and visitors could benefit from.

And now the countdown to Procurex National 2012 in March begins!

Imagine there was a free event dedicated to Scottish public sectorprocurement. Imagine it was called Procurex Scotland 2011 and that it was taking place on Tuesday 25 October at the SECC in Glasgow.

I imagine that if you’re interested in public sector procurement and would like a larger share of Scotland’s £9 billion public sector spend, then an event like Procurex Scotland 2011 would offer the perfect opportunity to be in the thick of the action.
Got the hint?

In the current ever-changing marketplace, effective and efficient procurement is vitally important in the delivery of public services and events such as Procurex Scotland are important to keep abreast of current affairs in procurement and, even more so, to learn about the market.

Procurex Scotland is the only event in the annual procurement calendar designed exclusively for the Scottish public sector buyer and supplier community with the intention to give suppliers the opportunity to showcase their capabilities, products and services to public sector buyers.

At Procurex Scotland there is the chance to network directly with the Scottish Government, Scotland Excel, NHS National Services Scotland, Advanced Procurement for Universities and Colleges, Fire and Rescue and Police Services. There will also be free training and seminars as well as opportunities to ask for tendering advice.

Furthermore, the event offers buyers and suppliers the chance to learn from each other, which will be crucial with the Sustainable Procurement Bill on the horizon as well as the changes occurring in procurement law on a European level.

Speaking of learning, there will be two training zones with sixteen workshops on the go including “Adding Value to Your Tender”, “Implications of Legal Judgments” and “Selecting Award Criteria”. There will also be legal seminars covering a whole range of procurement issues. Keynote speakers include Alex Neil MSP, John F McClelland CBE, Alastair Merrill and John Colington, so it all adds up to a more than worthwhile.

Whether you are looking for a platform for personnel development or just looking to get your networking hat on, Procurex Scotland 2011 will deliver in bringing together buyers and suppliers from across the country to share ideas, knowledge and best practice. Imagine what you might miss if you don’t go. Registration is free at www.procurexscotland.co.uk

This year has seen a plethora of ministers and politicians espousing their opinions on procurement-related matters, without, in many instances, any clear understanding of what the implications of their pontificating might be.

Back in February 2011, David Cameron announced his plans for the Big Society, stating that: “We’re sweeping away ridiculous rules and bureaucracy and seeking to eliminate, for smaller contracts, assessment hurdles at the beginning of the process”, but forgot to confirm that the EU and UK procurement rules would still apply across the board. He further declared: “We need to make the system much more open, competitive and transparent”, forgetting to add that this is exactly what the EU Treaty principles require it to be, before continuing, “wherever possible, we’re going to break up large contracts into smaller elements, so that SMEs can make a bid and get involved”, so long as we aren’t looking at breaching the EU disaggregation laws along the way, one presumes.

Meanwhile, Cabinet Office Minister Francis Maude initiated an, on the face of it, laudable renegotiation process with major suppliers to central government, pushing for price reductions in contracts. However, did anyone consider that this could be tantamount to Material Contract Variation and in clear breach of the Remedies Directive?

Come June, we had multiple politicos frothing at the mouth, complaining about Siemens (a German company) stealing British jobs from Bombardier (a Canadian company, incidentally) and promising that it would never happen again, we would be protecting jobs in the UK, etc. Yet again, there appears to be a clear breakdown in their understanding of the EU Treaty, which enshrines the Freedoms; of Establishment; to Provide Services; of Movement of People; and of Movement of Goods; and which provides us with a market which constitutes 40% of our exports. Any form of protectionism would automatically lead to action by the European Commission and a date to visit the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). Indeed, come July we even had a Commons debate where suggestions were made that the National Audit Office should look closely at the procurement exercise, criticism was heaped on the Department for Transport and accusations of parochialism were raised against other EU countries.

On to September and it was the turn of Labour leader Ed Milliband to suggest that the public sector should look at distinguishing between ethical and non-ethical companies. While the idea of ethical procurement is one to be applauded, the unfortunate reality is that there is a real chance of breaching the EU principles when trying to determine how to procure ethically sourced products and services. Indeed, we have been there already with the well-meaning but flawed ‘Food Miles’ programme. The simple truth is that ethical procurement, without sound policy and detail, can be discriminatory in the extreme.

And so to October and the latest political foray into the procurement arena, as the Minister of State for Universities and Science, David Willetts, suggested that there is a benefit to be derived by universities when government funding is effectively reduced with additional income now to be derived from student tuition fees. Mr Willetts intimated that, when their direct funding from government is cut to 40%, universities will be exempt from EU procurement rules, since these have a public funding test of 50%.and above. Unfortunately, no consideration seems to have been given to all the other sources of public funding that universities currently receive, such European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) grants, research grants and so forth. Add these back into the equation and suddenly the funding percentage could well rise back over 50%.

The reality is that, when politicians make pronouncements on procurement issues, their views, although well meaning, can often present a real risk to the public sector and land public procurement with the impossible task of trying to satisfy political aspirations, while remaining compliant with both the European and UK procurement rules.

What are your views? – Join the debate by hitting the comment button below

However, before we can get to that happy place, buyers and suppliers need to work out what they can find out from the vast quantities of available data, using services such as Tracker Spend Analysis.

Tracker Spend Analysis contains spend data from all kinds of public sector organisations – from local authorities to education providers, from the NHS and emergency services to other government agencies.

Here are my top twenty suggested questions that Tracker Spend Analysis can answer for suppliers and buyers:

Suppliers
1. How much has my local council spent on the type of services I provide?
2. Is the amount they are spending increasing or decreasing?
3. Which suppliers have they spent the most with?
4. What share of their business has my company achieved, versus my competitors?
5. Are my competitors who I thought they were; or do I have some new ones?
6. What other public sector business opportunities are my competitors winning?
7. What are other public bodies in my area spending on the services that my company provides
– for example the NHS, emergency services or other government agencies?
8. Is demand for what my company provides increasing or decreasing locally, regionally and nationally?
9. Are there other services for which demand appears to be increasing that my company could provide?
10.How much is my local council spending with suppliers outside the local area? Are they supporting their
local SMEs?

Buyers
1. How much is my organisation spending on particular services?
2. Who are my top suppliers, both by total spend and the number of transactions?
3. Is too much of my organisation’s spend on a particular service tied up with too few suppliers, creating risk?
4. Do I have too many suppliers, creating inefficiency?
5. How large a part of my suppliers’ turnover comes from my organisation, and how much from other public
sector bodies?
6. What are other organisations like mine spending on particular services, and does it appear that I am
achieving best value?
7. Is there scope for collaboration with other organisations that have the same purchasing requirements and
profile as mine?
8. How much of my organisation’s spend is with local businesses?
9. How much of my organisation’s spend is with SMEs?
10.Are there other suppliers of my requirements that I should be considering in future, and are there
opportunities to negotiate better deals with the suppliers I already have?

To find out the answers to these questions and more – sign up for FREE today

What would this powerful insight into UK public sector spend data mean for your organisation? Join the debate by hitting the comment button below.

For businesses, the release of all types of government data should be seen as enormously positive. However, the sheer volume of data now available can sometimes be more of a hindrance than a help. We’re all familiar with the expression ‘paralysis through analysis’; well, this has now been joined by ‘data asphyxiation’ – the suffocating feeling of just too much information.

Public sector spend data could easily fall into this category. Government is doing its utmost to publish details of all transactions with a value of over £500 in a bid to increase transparency. For a local authority, this can mean thousands of individual line items of spend being published every single month. Multiply this across all government bodies and, over the course of a year, you end up with millions of line items of spend data.

For businesses (and, in fact, for government itself) there is huge value in this data. It can help to identify potential customers and competitors, to show which industry sectors are hot and which regions of the UK are hives of spending activity (or not). Government buyers can also use the data to track their own spending activity, and to identify opportunities and threats in their supply chain.

This is all positive stuff, but spend data in its rawest form – basically a spreadsheet consisting of spend requirements, values and supplier names – is not that helpful. Converting it from interesting information into actionable intelligence is the key. This is where new services such as Tracker Spend Analysis come to the fore.

Tracker Spend Analysis soaks up all published spend data, cleansing, classifying and categorising it and then allowing users to interrogate it to find out pretty much anything they need to know – about their customers, their competitors and even themselves. So, far from being smothered by too much information, users of this service can turn information to their advantage – being selective about what they want to know, and using the intelligence provided to make smart, informed and effective decisions for the future.

As more information becomes available, so the importance of services such as Tracker Spend Analysis increases. The ability to convert information into intelligence has never been so precious; and in the future it will be those organisations that use information to their advantage that will enjoy success.

Find out more about what Tracker Spend Analysis can deliver for your organisation – sign up for FREE today