Advertisement

May 25, 2013

The UK's Defense Department turns to the private sector

As a general rule, high-value government contracts in the EU must not be awarded by public authorities without first complying with the detailed EU procurement rules designed to ensure non-discriminatory access to such contracting opportunities and“value-for-money” for public authorities and, ultimately, EU taxpayers. However, due to national sensitivities in the EU Member States, the defence procurement market was traditionally largely exempt from the EU public procurement regime. That position changed in August 2011 when the EU's newly liberalised defence procurement regime officially opened for business.

It is still too early to judge whether the reforms are having the desired effect - namely to increase the level and intensity of international competition for the EU's estimated annual defence spend of over €170 billion. Ultimately the success of the initiative will depend on the confluence of two phenomena: (i) total commitment on the part of national contract authorities to look beyond their "national champions" to the better deals being offered by foreign suppliers; and (ii) enthusiastic engagement by foreign suppliers in the new market(s). Should either fail to materialise then the market opening will almost certainly be deemed a damp squib.

On the latter score, opportunities would appear to be opening up in the UK. The UK government, keen to find defence budget savings in the current macro-economic climate, recently announced plans to reduce regular forces numbers from 102,000 to 82,000. To fill the resulting capability deficit the UK government is planning to plug gaps by contracting out more to the private sector. Among the outsourcing projects being considered is a $22 billion tender for the provision of procurement and support service functions. The overwhelming majority of such contracts will have to be let via the EU's general procurement system described above.

This system is, for the most part, open to contractors based outside of the EU.

©2013 Greenberg Traurig, LLP. All rights reserved.

About the Author

Shareholder

Stephen Tupper specialises in EU and competition law. He has been practising law for more than 20 years, including working in New York, Washington, D.C. and in Brussels for 10 years. He has handled a range of significant competition law and merger control cases/filings and has particular expertise in the water, energy, shipping and chemical sectors. Best known, perhaps, for his work with water companies, Stephen has represented three of them before the Competition Appeal Tribunal and, more recently, represented Bristol Water in front of the Competition Commission during a full price...

+44 (0)203 349 8729

About the Author

Chair, Government Contracts Practice

Jacob B. Pankowski is Chair of the firm’s Government Contracts Practice Group. His practice spans nearly 30 years of experience and is focused on representing government contractors and subcontractors of all sizes in their dealings and disputes with federal, state, and local governments. Mr. Pankowski’s government contracts practice covers a broad range of areas and concentrates in contract and subcontract performance issues, claims analysis and preparation, federal supply schedule issues, information technology issues, rights in technical data and intellectual property, and...

202-331-3100

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.