The ACT’s Integrity Commission is looking into allegations of improper influence in school tenders. 

The ACT Integrity Commission is investigating claims that a local union approached the ACT Education Minister regarding a disputed refurbishment tender for Campbell Primary School. 

The commission is focusing on whether the awarding of the $18.8 million tender to Lendlease was conducted fairly and transparently by ACT Education Directorate officials.

The commission has been told that local firm Manteena submitted a proposal that outshone its competitor, Lendlease, with a significantly higher rating and a notably cheaper bid. However, Lendlease emerged as the chosen contractor.

An Education Directorate official, identified as “John Green”, testified that he had been informed by Education Minister Yvette Berry's chief of staff that “Manteena is not to get it”, alluding to concerns about Manteena's “industrial relations performance”.

Green further alleged that the Construction Forestry Maritime Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) had reservations about Manteena due to its direct negotiations with workers and the absence of a union agreement.

Counsel Assisting Callan O'Neil informed the commission that during the tender decision phase, rumours circulated that unions had questioned the Education Minister about Manteena's repeated victories in tenders. 

This speculation hinted at the possibility that the alleged union inquiry played a role in Manteena's failure to secure the tender.

The Integrity Commission is scrutinizing the initial assessment process, which saw Manteena receive a superior score of 79 out of 100 and a low-risk rating compared to Lendlease's score of 52 and a medium-risk rating. The Tender Evaluation Team (TET) recommended Manteena for the project.

However, both bids exceeded the budget, leading to a “Best And Final Offer” (BAFO) stage to reduce costs. Disagreements among the original TET members prompted the formation of a second evaluation team in April 2020.

“Members of the TET maintain their view that the appropriate recommendation was for the project to be awarded to Manteena with de-scoping – that is, negotiation to reduce the scope of works and save cost,” Mr O'Neil said.

“Evidence before the commission indicates that such an approach was entirely conventional.”

Contrary to the initial team's three-month assessment period, the second team produced its report within ten days. 

This swift evaluation lowered Manteena's score to 69 out of 100 and increased Lendlease's to 68 out of 100. Remarkably, the Manteena bid still remained $897,000 more economical.

The hearings continue.