Estimated Completion, December 2017
May 9, 2017
Companies and individuals known to be involved with corruption all too easily slip through the global net unnoticed. A corruption conviction in one country is no deterrent or prevention to acting corruptly elsewhere. Criminal sanctions are costly and risky to apply – but administrative sanctions are not.
The threat of exclusion from public contracts is a significant deterrent for companies: a contractor may be more likely to turn away from corruption, fraud, waste and abuse at the start of a bidding process, or decline to bid entirely if that contractor cannot safely and ethically bid for and perform the contract. A debarment sanction can bar a contractor that has already engaged in corruption during a contract from the procurement process for a specified period of time. Excluding corrupt bidders from public procurement is a significant aspect of clean contracting.
At the Anti-Corruption Summit the UK committed to “introduce a conviction check process to prevent corrupt bidders with relevant convictions from winning public contracts, and is committed to exploring ways of sharing such information across borders”.
In the UK’s Anti-Corruption Strategy 2017-2022 reiterates this commitment, stating that a new conviction check would “complement existing provisions in the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 requiring proof that bidders don’t have relevant convictions.”
Transparency International UK has not seen public evidence that the Crown Commercial Service has delivered on this commitment. TI-UK notes that the Crown Commercial Service’s Annual Report and Accounts 2017/18 does not mention a conviction check process being introduced or in progress.