Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

HS2 boss defends procurement strategy in face of High Court battle

Old oak common 2

High Speed 2 Ltd (HS2 Ltd) chief operating officer Richard Robinson has hit back at accusations that the project’s procurement strategy is encouraging a “race to the bottom”.

Robinson defended HS2 Ltd’s procurement strategy stressing that the delivery body awards contracts to “the best teams for the job” not the lowest bidder, while speaking at the ACE Future of Consultancy conference.

His comments come amid a High Court battle with Bechtel, after the contractor lodged a legal challenge claiming that HS2 Ltd accepted an “abnormally low bid” when it awarded its £1bn contract for Old Oak Common construction partner contract to a joint venture between Balfour Beatty Group, Vinci Construction and Systra (BBVS).

HS2 Ltd’s official defence document submitted to the court denies “each and every allegation” in Bechtel’s claim. In particular it says that there is no basis for identifying BBVS’ tender as abnormally low.

Likewise, while not directly referring to the High Court appeal, Robinson said that HS2 Ltd has “never” awarded a contract solely because it was the lowest bid.

“What we are looking for is the best team for the job, and that is the simple answer from a procurement stand point, because the best team will give us the best result, and the best result is the [bid that provides the] most value,” Robinson said. “We always have that in mind when we are looking at the future of HS2 and who we are working with.

“When I look at our procurement – and I have previously been on the other side of the table bidding for things on HS2 in the past – I don’t see any examples of when HS2 [Ltd] has procured simply on cost alone, that simply is not true.”

Robinson added that he believes procurement models and project delivery is shifting, calling for more prominence to be given to consultants.

“We could see a lot more from consultants working with us at the top table, not content to be tucked away beneath the contractor,” Robinson said.

“Before design and build [contracts], consultants would work hand-in-hand with clients.

“Then someone had the whizzy idea of design and build and that led to contractors becoming much more prominent […] and then the result was for consultants to drop down the value chain.”

He added: “Contractors operating on small margins are squeezing costs wherever they can, rather than focussing on the best outcome.

“However, this is changing and there’s some trends across the whole industry. If you look at the way we are creating delivery teams to carry out design and construction, that represents a fantastic opportunity for consultants to get back at the top table with the client and that is a good thing and something the industry should grab with both hands.”

HS2 Ltd has previously faced challenges over contract awards. In April 2017 Mace objected to HS2 Ltd’s decision to award the phase 2b development partner role to CH2M. Mace was acting on a whistleblower’s information which highlighted a conflict of interest involving former HS2 Ltd employee and now CH2M employee, Christopher Reynolds who was involved in CH2M’s bid.

Mace had threatened to take HS2 Ltd to court but withdrew its objections after CH2M withdrew from the role. That contract was then handed to next in line Bechtel.

Spanish manufacturer Talgo also launched legal action last year after what it claims was a “botched procurement” process over HS2 Ltd’s plans to buy £2.8bn of trains.

  • To get the full update on what’s happening in the rail sector join us at New Civil Engineer’s Future of Rail conference 26-27 June 2019. Call Ben Joudar on 020 3953 2623 to find out more.

Like what you’ve read? To receive New Civil Engineer’s daily and weekly newsletters click here.

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions. Please note comments made online may also be published in the print edition of New Civil Engineer. Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.