SKL covers up previous open procurements
The secrecy that characterizes procurements worth four billion carried out under the auspices of SKL Kommentus Inköpscentral is a fundamental problem. Previously they were transparent, now they are closed. But transparency must apply to whoever is procuring, as it promotes competition, strengthens legal certainty and counteracts corruption, write five procurement experts.
Sweden's public administration has one characteristic that we can be proud of: our transparency. This is manifested, for example, in the fact that tenderers and the general public can inspect the tenders received and other material after the procurement process has been completed. For a long time this was taken for granted, but this is no longer the case.
On 1 January 2011, SKL Kommentus Inköpscentral AB was established as a subsidiary of SKL Kommentus AB, which in turn is owned by the Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions (SKL). The main task of the purchasing center is, among other things, to coordinate procurements for municipalities and county councils. According to their website, they now participate in around 60 procurements per year and procure for just over SEK 4 billion. A significant addition to the procurement world. Unfortunately, some negative side effects have become apparent over time.
One of these is that a policy decision has been taken not to disclose tenders received after completed procurements. Through a loophole in the law, they have also obtained a ruling that they are not subject to the principle of public access to official records and can therefore choose what to do. The problem is that this is not about law, but about the transparency that is one of the cornerstones of our view of public procurement. Transparency that promotes competition, strengthens legal certainty and combats corruption. As more and more procurements are carried out by central purchasing bodies, instead of individual contracting authorities, this means that documents that were public yesterday are not public today.
Long-term good business relationships are based on trust and openness, but the path they have taken instead signals secrecy and distrust. Although the procurement reports are detailed, they can never replace the transparency that companies and the public gain by being able to see the original tenders. It all seems very contradictory if you consider that SKL claims to have four special characteristics: initiative, credibility, openness and job satisfaction, and its mission statement is described as A question of democracy.
The central purchasing body defends itself by saying that it is withholding tenders because the contracting authorities want it that way. Despite this, it is currently difficult to find any representatives of contracting authorities who support this decision.
The central purchasing body has completely missed the fundamentally important part of this discussion, the question is whether it is unable or unwilling to understand. The same transparency must apply whether it is individual contracting authorities that are procuring or a central purchasing body.
We are now wondering what the SKL Board's position is on this issue, which is so important for credibility. Because this is a question of democracy.
Therese Klaar, Head of Procurement, Ekerö Municipality
Niklas Fyhr, Business Policy Expert, IT&Telecom companies within Almega
Johan Almesjö, Director, Inköp Gävleborg
Birgitta Laurent, Expert on procurement and competition issues, Confederation of Swedish Enterprise
Ulrica Dyrke, Procurement Expert, Företagarna