Public procurement in the UK is increasingly being treated as more than an administrative function. It is now being framed as a lever for improving competition, widening access for smaller firms, and using the state’s purchasing power more deliberately to support innovation and better public services.
That broader ambition was the focus of a closed-door roundtable at Parliament hosted by HCLTech and The Entrepreneurs Network. The discussion examined whether recent procurement...
Continue Reading This Article
Enjoy this article as well as all of our content, including reports, news, tips and more.
By registering or signing into your SRM Today account, you agree to SRM Today's Terms of Use and consent to the processing of your personal information as described in our Privacy Policy.
reform is changing who gets to do business with government, and whether the public sector is making enough use of the new tools available to it.
The exchange took place against the backdrop of the Procurement Act 2023, which came into force on 24 February 2025 and replaced the older EU-derived regime that had governed UK public contracts for years. Government guidance says the new framework is intended to simplify bidding, open up frameworks to new entrants, improve transparency and strengthen feedback to suppliers, while also extending 30-day payment terms across a wider range of contracts. Local government guidance has also pointed to the scale of the market, noting that around £385 billion is spent each year on essential goods and services.
At the roundtable, opening remarks came from Sam Ulyatt, chief executive of the Crown Commercial Service, Caroline Gorski, director of the Digital Commercial Centre of Excellence, and Dr Ravinder Singh, head of the Digital and Systems Team in the Government Commercial Function. Their presence underlined a central point of the discussion: procurement reform is not only about new rules, but also about whether commercial teams across the state are ready to use them.
The overall judgement from participants was cautiously optimistic. The direction of travel was seen as positive, but speakers also acknowledged that implementation is still at an early stage. Existing frameworks are only gradually being migrated into the new regime, and the flexibility built into the legislation has not yet been fully exploited. How far the system changes in practice will depend on how quickly buyers become comfortable with the options now available to them.
One of the clearest themes to emerge was the cost of fragmentation. Public sector buying remains split across numerous organisations, often with departments procuring similar technology separately, at different times, and under different requirements. That fragmentation weakens the government’s ability to act as a single customer, even though its collective purchasing power is substantial.
Cloud infrastructure was used as an example of where a more coordinated approach could make a difference. If demand is brought together, government can negotiate from a stronger position and potentially address wider priorities at the same time, including security, skills, infrastructure and investment. The same logic applies to many routine technology purchases. Commercial and digital teams, the discussion suggested, need to collaborate more closely to identify what can be bought once and used more widely.
That kind of coordination matters because procurement is increasingly being asked to serve wider economic and policy goals, not just immediate service delivery needs. The government’s ability to use purchasing strategically may determine not only what it buys, but which suppliers can realistically compete for work in the first place.
Supplier diversity was another major topic. The roundtable distinguished between gaining a place on a framework and actually winning work through it. The two are not the same. Formal access to a procurement route gives smaller businesses the chance to compete, but it does not automatically alter established buying habits. Without a change in behaviour from public buyers, new entrants can remain locked out at the point where contracts are awarded.
Smaller firms often bring specialist expertise, speed and fresh approaches to longstanding public sector problems. Yet buyers responsible for critical services understandably tend to rely on familiar suppliers, especially where failure would carry serious operational consequences. The challenge, then, is not simply opening the door, but creating commercial conditions in which new suppliers can prove themselves without standards being diluted.
The discussion also touched on the role procurement can play in shaping the market over time. Participants explored how buying decisions might help strengthen domestic supply chains and give UK-based technology companies a fairer opportunity to scale. In markets dominated by a small number of suppliers, competition does not emerge on its own. It has to be developed deliberately, through procurement routes that are flexible enough to encourage broader participation and market engagement that begins before specifications are fixed.
Paul Montgomery, vice-president and head of public services, aerospace and defence Europe at HCLTech, said during the roundtable: “For companies like us, it’s about engagement. If you can engage with people to understand the problems on the ground, what you’re trying to achieve and where you’re trying to get to, that’s where you can bring your experience to bear.”
His comments reflected a broader concern that procurement based too heavily on rigid written specifications can advantage those already versed in how government buys, while making it harder for less established suppliers to demonstrate relevant expertise. Early engagement, by contrast, allows public bodies to understand the market before narrowing the requirement.
Montgomery also pointed to the significance of the new regime’s openness. “Transparency is becoming key, so everybody knows the basis on which they’re entering into procurements. The flexibility of the Procurement Act 2023 is also helping companies like us,” he said.
That flexibility, however, will only matter if it is matched by cultural change inside government. The roundtable identified internal silos, duplicated contracts and limited visibility over existing assets as practical barriers to better procurement. In some cases, organisations continue to buy technologies or licences that already exist elsewhere in the public sector simply because ownership and access are poorly joined up.
The broader lesson from the discussion was that procurement reform cannot be left to legislation alone. New procedures, open frameworks and greater transparency will not automatically deliver better outcomes unless they are backed by a more collaborative way of working across departments and a willingness to use procurement as a strategic capability.
If that happens, the benefits could be significant: stronger collective bargaining power for government, a wider pool of suppliers, and a more deliberate link between commercial decisions and public service outcomes.
Source: Noah Wire Services
