Purchases – “pros” and “against” on the issue of free competition

by texasnews

Today, the procurement activities of a number of enterprises – both private and state – are aimed at solving a number of the most important problems. In particular, in accordance with the current legislation standards, regulatory acts governing procurement are aimed at creating optimal conditions for honest competition, and are also considered as a specific means of combating monopolistic phenomena. Nevertheless, unfortunately, even today a number of enterprises, formally working in accordance with applicable laws, still do not open up opportunities for free competition to participants. How does it happen?

Pretty rationale for pricing policy. As an argument for justifying the purchase price, data from commercial offers of certain organizations are given, which in fact may not exist at all. The purpose of such actions is to ensure the most favorable conditions for winning the competition of a particular participant.

The provision on the purchase of goods is not submitted on the website or the company does not have its own site at all. Sometimes such a phenomenon may be quite unintentional – for example, the company was not previously interested in creating a site as a public relations tool. However, from the point of view of antimonopoly policy, such a violation is extremely gross.

Incorrect indication of the name of the project. The purpose of the deliberate distortion of the name is the closure of the project from the search by interested parties. Simply put, potential participants physically do not have the opportunity to learn about the tender or competition and apply for a timely manner. Therefore, the victory of a particular participant is even more likely, which in every possible way contradicts the principles of free competition.

A fuzzy description of the requirements. The consequence of such an error can be both the filing of an excessive number of applications from the “inappropriate” participants, and, on the contrary, restriction of the number of participants. In the first case, the choice of the winner is more difficult and may be biased – which is quite profitable to the organizer, the purpose of which is to conclude a contract with a specific supplier of goods or services. In the second case, the restriction of freedom of competition is completely obvious.

Procurement methods are selected unconsciously. For example, by choosing a performer according to the auction system, the customer has the opportunity to get a cheaper offer. However, such a system is not always appropriate if it is, for example, about intellectual services, since here the price is far from a decisive factor that determines the degree of benefit of a particular offer.

So, often purchases aimed at developing and maintaining a competitive environment do not comply with this requirement. This means that modern legislation needs serious changes, which, in fact, have already begun in past years and continue to this day.

You may also like

© BelieveInTexas – believeintexas.com, 2017-2023.