Video | Agriculture | Confidence | Economy | Energy | Employment | Finance | Media | Property | RBNZ | Science | SOEs | Tax | Technology | Telecoms | Tourism | Transport | Search

 

Waitangi Park costs: Value better than lowest cost

1 March, 2006 NEWS RELEASE

Waitangi Park cost merry go round:
Best value better aim than lowest cost in contract letting

A need for contracting procurement procedures to be focussed on obtaining “best value” rather than lowest cost outcomes is highlighted by Wellington’s Waitangi Park problems, says the Chairman of the Construction Industry Council, John Pfahlert.

“The contracting dispute on the park site is an excellent example of the need for companies and organisations involved in contract letting to follow best practice guidelines. These establish methods for avoiding traps inherent in an approach to obtain the lowest cost, come what may.”

The initial tender accepted for the development at Waitangi Park was $2.1 million less than the estimated cost of the project, and at least $2.6million below tenders from two other companies.

Mr Pfahlert said research carried out internationally on behalf of the CIC to establish its own guidelines of Principles of Best Practice for Procurement in the construction sector made it clear that the lowest cost approach is fraught with dangers to management, tenderers and end users of a project.”

He said the CIC document was available to all involved in project tendering. While the document is more applicable to major or complex projects, the guidelines present an approach to contract letting that could be of value across the board in competitive bidding situations. “We believe that the availability of these principles in document form can go a long way toward avoiding such instances as the Waitangi Park problem. Widely used they can help to significantly lift standards.”

The principles aim to eliminate
* Hidden maintenance costs and health and safety risks
* Compromising design quality and integrity, health and safety, training, the environment, and innovation
* Bidders pricing at unsustainable levels
* Risks being inappropriately allocated or transferred to suppliers/providers who are not always in a position to control, manage or minimise the cost of these risks
* Increased costs as suppliers/providers seek to cover the increased risks.

The CIC is convinced that a selection process aimed at minimising cost attracts long-term costs that erode value.” - ends

ENDS

© Scoop Media

 
 
 
Business Headlines | Sci-Tech Headlines

 

Ground Rules: Government Moves To Protect Best Growing Land

“Continuing to grow food in the volumes and quality we have come to expect depends on the availability of land and the quality of the soil. Once productive land is built on, we can’t use it for food production, which is why we need to act now.” More>>

ALSO:

Royal Society: Calls For Overhaul Of Gene-Technology Regulations

An expert panel considering the implications of new technologies that allow much more controlled and precise ‘editing’ of genes, has concluded it’s time for an overhaul of the regulations and that there’s an urgent need for wide discussion and debate about gene editing... More>>

ALSO:

Retail: Card Spending Dips In July

Seasonally-adjusted electronic card spending dipped in July by 0.1 percent after being flat in June, according to Stats NZ. Economists had expected a 0.5 percent lift, according to the median in a Bloomberg poll. More>>

ALSO:

Product Stewardship: Govt Takes More Action To Reduce Waste

The Government is proposing a new way to deal with environmentally harmful products before they become waste, including plastic packing and bottles, as part of a wider plan to reduce the amount of rubbish ending up in landfills. More>>

ALSO:

Earnings Update: Fonterra Sees Up To $675m Loss On Writedowns

“While the Co-op’s FY19 underlying earnings range is within the current guidance of 10-15 cents per share, when you take into consideration these likely write-downs, we expect to make a reported loss of $590-675 million this year, which is a 37 to 42 cent loss per share." More>>

ALSO: