Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
That’s an interesting idea, Sally. Social procurement programs don’t have to be in isolation from each other; I like how you’re combining programs to maximize the benefits that each is designed to create. My worry is the tracking, though. A baseline would need to be established showing where everything was before the combined program was launched, and then regular data analysis would be required to track any changes to the metrics being used. I’m sure that the results would be fascinating, but I’m wondering if most governments would put the time and effort into this (unless it directly related to a campaign promise or highly publicized program).
You ask some great questions, Chantal. I have seen some governments include social values in their solicitations for things such as Living Wage, apprenticeship programs, etc. Many years ago, I was involved in a solicitation for the bears sold at BC liquor stores every December where we included an independent inspection of the overseas factory to ensure no child labour and ethical working standards. We shortlisted two proponents, had their facilities inspected, and ultimately awarded to the one that had the better inspection report.
The bottom line is that any social or environmental considerations that are important to the buyer can be included in a solicitation. For price-based solicitations, it would usually be one of the specifications – i.e. a bidder not meeting the requirement is non-responsive and would not be considered. However, you could also structure a price-bid process where the buyer will award to the lowest priced bidder meeting the social requirements if that bid is priced within 10% of the lowest bid. For scored solicitations, it’s usually not mandatory, but rather worth a few points (e.g. 5%) which gives those vendors who can meet the requirement a slight advantage.
For those governments who see value in social objectives, their solicitations can encourage vendors to meet them as well without eliminating others or costing significantly more.
I think that you’ve hit on a good topic for this, Collin. One of the major issues for housing people is the enormously differing needs. Some may just need a little help for a few months to get back on their feet, but most have multiple barriers to housing and employment stability. Simply building more units won’t solve this all on its own; there are complexities that need to be addressed. I’d love to hear about the outcomes of a program (e.g. how long did someone remain housed during and after being in the program, the percentage of people in the program who had housing for a full year, percentage that gained housing independence, etc.) rather than just how many units a city may have.
I like your thinking on this, Monique, but how would you manage the challenges of irregular / unpredictable demand and contractor availability for snow removal? To explain what I mean, I’m sure there’s enough data available to know when services are likely to start and end, and average annual volumes that a community will need. However, what happens during a heavy snow storm? Presumably, a contractor would have more time to clear roads under these circumstances, but how are these longer time periods determined? What happens if the snow storm lasts for days? Also keep in mind that although a community may have lots of snow removal operators, all of them are going to be fully booked and then some during a prolonged heavy snow storm.
The concept is great, but as the saying goes, the devil is in the details lol!
That’s an interesting perspective, Andy. I like how you’ve looked at this from a different perspective. Rather than being the buyer of Fair Trade goods, you turned this around to show how becoming a Fair Trade supplier could benefit the community and Province economically, socially and environmentally. Well done!
I like your idea of reporting out on the social benefits of Fair Trade, April. My only worry is how reliable this reporting might be. Knowing that Fair Trade products can cost more (for all the reasons these posts mention), these manufacturers have an incentive to inflate or exaggerate the social benefits of their approach. How might that be managed?
