Australia: "Boosting Australian Industry Participation" policy
Description
On July 28, 2009 the Australian Government, the Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research released a "Boosting Australian industry participation" policy aimed to give Australian industry the best possible chance of winning new work – public sector and private sector. The policy requires tenderers for government work to specify the use of Australian suppliers in every bid. Thus all tenderers must disclose the suppliers they work with.
The Australian Government motivates the move with the fact, that since the government has invested 77 billion USD in shielding Australia from recession, it wants to see Australian companies benefit from these projects first. The Government wants to achieve this through increased transparency of the tenders and additionally increase the competitiveness of local suppliers in manufacturing, construction and services. Thus, the Australian Government will provide an extra $8.5 million over four years to the Industry Capability Network (ICN) through the Supplier Access to Major Projects (SAMP) program.
Additionally, according to the information from the government's website, "The Australian Government will provide $2.5 million over four years to apply the Australian Industry Participation National Framework to its own major procurement and infrastructure projects. Each of these projects will now require an Australian Industry Participation Plan setting out how those in charge will give Australian industry – particularly small and medium-sized firms – full, fair and reasonable opportunity to supply goods and services".
The government argues no preferences are given to local companies and that these measures only increase their competitiveness and transparency of tenders. In practice, the measures effectively might change the competition situation on the tenders market.
The scheme was formally implemented on 1 January 2010.
Any Evidence-Based Deliberation:
| Question | Result |
|---|---|
| Is there anything in the public record to suggest that evidence of the effectiveness of the proposed measure was considered during official deliberations? | |
| Is there any evidence that alternatives to the proposed measure were considered? | |
| Is there anything in the public record that suggests that empirical evidence informed the comparison across the alternatives available to government? | |
| Was such evidence identified? | |
| Is such evidence publicly available? | |
| Did the official decision-maker in question provide an explanation as to why a chosen measure was favoured over alternatives? | |
| Is there any evidence to suggest that potentially affected trading partners were consulted before the measures were taken? | |
| Is there any evidence that safeguards have been put in place to ensure that implementation of the initiative is transparent and non-discriminatory? | |
| Did the government state its intention to review the measure within one year of implementation? |
Date Discovered: 03/05/2010
Implemented: Yes
Date of inception: 10 Jan 2010
GTA Evaluation: Red
Source:
Boosting Australian industry participation
Australian Government website
http://minister.innovation.gov.au/Carr/Documents/A%20FAIRER%20GO%20FOR%2...
Australian Industry Participation Plans in Commonwealth Government Procurement .http://www.innovation.gov.au/INDUSTRY/AUSTRALIANINDUSTRYPARTICIPATION/Pages/CGPAIPplans.aspx
Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR)
The 2010 National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers (NTE)
Government Response:
- 511 reads
