Seanad debates

Wednesday, 18 May 2022

Quality in Public Procurement (Contract Preparation and Award Criteria) Bill 2021: Committee Stage

 

10:30 am

Photo of Frances BlackFrances Black (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister of State to the House and I support this Bill. I want to express my respect and admiration for my Civil Engagement Group colleague, Senator Higgins, for the diligent research and massive effort that went into the Bill.

I want to speak to this section, which details a procedure for the Minister to produce guidelines for the qualitative, environmental and social human rights and equality considerations that arise in procurement for use by bodies that would be regulated by this Bill. It would be a welcome antidote to the narrow focus on cost that defines current procurement procedures. Section 42 of the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission Act 2014 imposes an equality duty on public sector bodies. This means concerns around human rights and non-discrimination must play a role in their strategic outlook and that they must detail the steps taken to comply with this duty in their annual reports. There is a clear intention to place an ethical responsibility on public bodies, and this is understandable. We should hold those who are tasked with improving the lives of Irish people to high standards and they should endeavour to conduct themselves in a way that respects human rights and the value of equality. However, the area of public procurement elides this duty and it is a major oversight this Bill rightly rectifies.

I will give a practical example of how low-cost tendering has injured a valuable public body. We can look at the National Gallery of Ireland, for example, which is the largest art institution in Ireland and one that provides a wonderful public service. Art has immense social and political weight and the National Gallery of Ireland has reflected that with an exhibition in 2020 containing artwork from current and former asylum seekers. This is what made outrageous the National Gallery of Ireland's decision to award the contract for its café to the multinational catering conglomerate, Aramark, which is involved in running several direct provision centres in the country.I do not need to list the many outrageous elements of the direct provision system to the Chamber. I know that the Government has expressed a desire to take action on this issue and I hope that it will be resolved along with the many concerns that have been raised by asylum seekers, and those who support them.

The reputation of the National Gallery has been damaged by this controversy. Its staff are embarrassed and demoralised, and several prominent artists have requested that their work is removed from the walls of the gallery. This is the sort of damage that the narrow "cost above all else" model of public procurement, which ties the hands of public bodies, can cause. While this Bill is not about excluding any firms from the tender process, it does empower public bodies to make decisions that make sense from both an economic and a public policy point of view. This Bill will allow public bodies to consider social factors that are clearly relevant to the value created by firms bidding for the tender. These social factors could include whether the applicants recognise their workers' trade union, whether they pay their workers a living wage, whether they employ environmentally sustainable production methods and many more worthy considerations. A more holistic model of public procurement would extend the spirit of the public sector equality duty into all aspects of public service provision. It would also enable public bodies to maximise the positive impacts that they can achieve with the resources that are available to them.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.