Award of Contract 2013

NIA-CON-046-2012

The PQQs were evaluated by the NIA on 10^th April 2013.  Following this, 3 compliant tender responses were received and evaluated from the following organisations:

1. Elcom Systems Ltd;

2. @UK PLC; and

3. EGS Solutions Ltd.

EGS Solutions Ltd and @UK PLC were unsuccessful and the contract was awarded to Elcom Systems Ltd.

All of the applicants involved have been consulted on the release of the information requested.  Based on responses from applicants, the NI Assembly has considered the information held.  Some of the information has not been provided because it is commercially sensitive.  A schedule of information held is attached at Appendix A.  The table sets out the information that has been withheld or redacted and that which has been released.  The reasons for withholding or redacting information are provided at Appendix B and are based on the application of the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

Details of the overall price of the contract has been published in the European Journal.  The value of the contract is £252, 000.

 Appendix A 

SCHEDULE OF INFORMATON CONSIDERED 

Elcom bid to include:

EGS bid to include:

 Appendix B

Details of information exempt under s43(2) are outlined in the table at Appendix A:

Section 43(2) of the FoI Act 2000 states:-

 “Information is exempt information if its disclosure under the Act would, or would be likely to, prejudice the commercial interests of any person (including the public authority holding it)”.

Information in the tender relating to pricing and the demonstration script has been withheld, as disclosure of this information has the potential to prejudice the commercial activities of the organisations involved within the terms of the s.43(2) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000.  This could impact on the ability of the companies involved to secure future business by allowing competitors access to their particular pricing and providing an opportunity to copy this, undercut their prices and provide contenders with competitive advantage. 

Details of the proposal, return on investment and escrow for the unsuccessful company have not been disclosed as this information is regarded as commercially sensitive.  This could impact on the ability of the companies involved to secure future business by allowing competitors access to their particular methodology and provide an opportunity to copy this and gain competitive advantage.  Given that there is no financial relationship between the NI Assembly and the unsuccessful organisation involved there is less public interest in the release of the information. 

If potential suppliers could not rely on the NI Assembly not to release any commercially sensitive information contained in tender responses it would make completion of a full, open and fair tender process unworkable for the NI Assembly.  This would adversely affect the NI Assembly’s position in relation to tender exercises. 

The Public Interest Test

S43(2) is a qualified exemption and therefore it is necessary to carry out a public interest test to identify whether the public interest in maintaining the exemption is greater than that in providing the information. 

The public interest in disclosure is as follows: 

• There is proper scrutiny of the NIA’s actions in carrying out procurement in accordance with published policy; 
• The NIA’s commercial activities, including the procurement process, are conducted in an open and honest way;
• Business can respond better to government opportunities;

However, there are a number of factors weighed against disclosure, as detailed below.

The public interest in non-disclosure is as follows:

• The NIA does not have a relationship with the unsuccessful companies or individuals and as there is no exchange of public money there is less public interest in disclosure of the requested information; 
• Disclosure of the winning tender’s pricing is likely to weaken their position in this small market place, providing competitors an opportunity to undercut their prices and therefore provide competitive advantage and secure future business; 
• Disclosure is likely to weaken an organisation’s position in a competitive environment by revealing market sensitive information or information of potential usefulness to its competitors; 
• Disclosure of such information would make it less likely for bidders to provide the Assembly with commercially sensitive information in the future, consequently reducing the quality of information received in tender responses and therefore undermining the Assembly’s ability to evaluate and select the best supplier in relation to quality and pricing;
• Disclosure is likely to prejudice the commercial interests of the NIA by adversely affecting its bargaining position which would result in the less effective use of public money.   

It is therefore considered that the public interest in withholding the information, as detailed in Appendix B, outweighs the release of the information, as its release could impact on the commercial interests of the companies involved.  Given that there is no financial relationship between the NI Assembly and the unsuccessful organisation involved there is less public interest in the release of the information. 

It is considered that the public interest in withholding pricing information and the demonstration script for the winning tender outweighs that of release at this present time as the information is significant and release could weaken the company’s position in this market place and provide competitors with an unfair advantage.