solicita contrato publico

 

MEDIATION

Our core principle, drawn from the provided mediation documents, is that a mediated settlement is a more efficient, confidential, and commercially sensible outcome for all parties compared to protracted, expensive, and public litigation across multiple jurisdictions.

New Strategy: COCOO as a Neutral Mediator

The Overarching Problem We Now Solve: The EU-Indonesia biodiesel dispute is an escalating, multi-forum conflict causing significant economic and reputational damage to all involved. The European/UK class of producers and investors faces ongoing financial harm and market uncertainty. Simultaneously, the Indonesian producers and associated state bodies face entrenched countervailing duties, costly WTO litigation, ongoing anti-circumvention probes by the EU, potential future Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) claims, and significant reputational damage in key markets over sustainability concerns. The current trajectory promises only years of further legal costs and continued market instability for everyone.

Our Unique Value Proposition as Mediator: COCOO is the only neutral third party with a deep, pre-existing, and granular understanding of the legal, commercial, and technical facts of this specific dispute. Our “Knowledge Asset” is no longer a weapon for one side, but a tool for resolution. We can facilitate a settlement process that is faster and more commercially nuanced than any court or WTO panel could hope to achieve.

Redrafted Unsolicited Proposal (USP) for Mediation and Strategic Steps

Step 1: Re-brand COCOO’s Public Position and Relaunch the Campaign

Our public posture must pivot from advocacy to neutral facilitation. The “Call to Action” on our website and our social media campaigns will be replaced with a new message.

  • New Website Headline: “A Call for a Coordinated Resolution: An Invitation to Mediate the EU-Indonesia Biodiesel Dispute.”
  • New Campaign Narrative: We will launch a new media campaign that no longer seeks to “gather class members for a fight,” but to “convene stakeholders for a resolution.” The messaging, to be deployed on platforms like LinkedIn and through trade press, will focus on the high costs and inefficiencies of the current trade dispute. We will publish a new white paper titled “A Pathway to Resolving the EU-Indonesia Biodiesel Dispute Through Expert-Led Mediation.” This positions COCOO as the expert facilitator.

Step 2: Propose a Multi-Party Mediation Framework

Our core offering is a structured, confidential mediation process. The USP will be tailored and sent to the leadership of both primary parties:

  • To the European/UK Class (EBB, Greenergy, Repsol, etc.): The proposal will argue that our mediation offers a more efficient path to financial redress than fractured litigation. We will propose to facilitate a negotiation for a comprehensive settlement covering past damages and establishing stable future market conditions. This is faster and more holistic than relying solely on the slow, and potentially narrow, outcome of trade remedies.

  • To the Indonesian Parties (Producers and Government Bodies): The proposal will be framed around their strategic interests. It will highlight that our confidential mediation process offers a pragmatic, “off-the-record” pathway to resolve multiple costly legal challenges at once—the WTO dispute, the EU duties, and the risk of further litigation. It also offers a unique opportunity to collaboratively address the sustainability concerns that are increasingly barring their products from the EU market, potentially normalizing trade relations in the long term.

Step 3: Define the Mediation Process and Goals in the USP

Our USP will detail a clear, multi-stage process based on established ADR principles.

  1. Confidential Caucuses: We will begin by holding separate, confidential meetings with each party to understand their commercial interests, legal positions, and desired outcomes. This confidential nature is critical for open dialogue.
  2. Facilitated Information Exchange: Acting as a neutral intermediary, COCOO will help the parties exchange necessary information in a structured manner that builds trust and avoids the adversarial nature of legal discovery.
  3. Joint Negotiation Sessions: We will convene and facilitate joint sessions (online or in-person) focused on finding common ground and negotiating the terms of a comprehensive settlement agreement.
  4. The Goal – A Binding Settlement Agreement: The mediation will be non-binding, meaning no party is forced to agree. However, the ultimate objective is a mutually agreed-upon and legally binding settlement agreement. This agreement could encompass several key outcomes:
    • Financial Redress: A compensation fund for the European/UK class members to remedy past harm.
    • A “Suspension Agreement”: A forward-looking agreement where the Indonesian parties might agree to a minimum export price or volume quotas, in exchange for the EU suspending its countervailing duties.
    • A Sustainability Protocol: A collaborative framework for sustainability certification and verification, allowing compliant Indonesian biodiesel to regain lawful access to the EU market, satisfying the requirements of the EUDR and RED II directives.

This process provides a clear, commercially-focused alternative to endless litigation. We will begin by dispatching the tailored Unsolicited Proposals to the legal counsel and leadership of the European Biodiesel Board and the largest Indonesian producers, initiating the path towards a mediated resolution

LICITACIONES EN UK

As your in-house solicitor, I have surveyed the United Kingdom’s public procurement landscape, focusing on the platforms you indicated, such as Contracts Finder, Find a Tender, and the Crown Commercial Service (CCS) portals. The objective was to identify tender opportunities where COCOO can deploy its unique Knowledge Assets related to our investigation into Indonesian biodiesel subsidies, market distortions, and sustainability compliance.

Our strategy in the UK should be two-fold: respond to specific, high-value tenders where our niche expertise offers a distinct advantage, and simultaneously gain entry to more flexible, long-term procurement systems like a Dynamic Purchasing System (DPS) to secure a steady stream of relevant work.

Below are the most promising opportunities currently available.

Dynamic Purchasing Systems (DPS) – Immediate Action Recommended

A DPS is particularly well-suited for COCOO as we can apply to join at any time, allowing us immediate access to a marketplace of public sector opportunities.

  1. Title: Management Consultancy Framework Three (MCF3) – RM6187

    • Contracting Authority: Crown Commercial Service (CCS)
    • Relevance to COCOO: While this is a framework, it often includes lots for specialized consultancy that aligns with our work. We would specifically target lots related to Business and Transformation, and Policy and Strategy. Our USP—offering investigative consultancy into market distortions caused by foreign subsidies—is a unique specialization that standard management consultancies lack. We can position our services as essential for ensuring the integrity of government supply chains and achieving policy goals like Net Zero, which are threatened by unfair competition. Joining the DPS would allow us to bid on “call-off” contracts from various government departments facing these exact issues.
    • Status and Time Limit: This is an active framework. Suppliers can apply to join the associated DPS marketplace at any time.

  2. Title: Research & Insights DPS – RM6126

    • Contracting Authority: Crown Commercial Service (CCS)
    • Relevance to COCOO: This DPS is an excellent fit. It is designed for public bodies to procure a wide range of research services, including market, economic, and social research. We can register on this DPS to offer our highly specialized services, such as: “Market distortion analysis due to foreign subsidies,” “Supply chain sustainability and deforestation risk assessment,” and “Investigation into circumvention of trade remedies.” These services directly address the ‘PROBLEMS’ the UK government faces, as outlined in our case files—namely, protecting UK industry, ensuring energy security, and upholding climate commitments.
    • Status and Time Limit: This is a live DPS. We can apply to join at any time, giving us access to a pipeline of relevant research contracts.

Relevant High-Value Tenders and Frameworks

These are specific, time-limited opportunities that require a formal tender response.

  1. Title: Provision of Legal Services

    • Contracting Authority: Department for Business and Trade
    • Relevance to COCOO: This tender seeks legal services across various specialisms, including international trade and competition law. Given the Department’s responsibility for the Trade Remedies Authority (TRA), our expertise is directly applicable. We can submit a bid focusing on our unique capability to provide legal and strategic advice on countering unfair foreign subsidies and defending against WTO challenges, using our Indonesian biodiesel case as a prime example of our deep knowledge.
    • Estimated Value: Not specified, part of a larger framework.
    • Time Limit for Receipt of Tenders: 28 June 2025, 17:00

  2. Title: Technical and Commercial Advisory for Energy Transition

    • Contracting Authority: Department for Energy Security and Net Zero
    • Relevance to COCOO: This procurement seeks advisors to support the UK’s energy transition. Our core argument—that the transition to sustainable fuels is critically undermined by illegally subsidized, high-carbon imports—is a perfect fit. We can propose a work package focused on “Securing the Integrity of the UK’s Biofuel Market,” offering investigative and analytical services to ensure government policy is not compromised by market-distorting practices. This directly leverages our proprietary frameworks for assessing these complex risks.
    • Estimated Value: £5,000,000
    • Time Limit for Receipt of Tenders: 15 July 2025, 12:00

Strategy and Recommendations

  1. Immediate DPS Application: I recommend we immediately begin the process of joining the Research & Insights DPS (RM6126). This provides the most flexible and direct route to market for our specialized investigative and analytical services.

  2. Targeted Tender Preparation: We must concurrently prepare a high-quality bid for the Department for Business and Trade’s Legal Services tender. Our submission should be highly focused on our niche expertise in trade remedies and competition law, using our case files as evidence of our unparalleled capability.

  3. Subcontracting and Intelligence Gathering: For the large frameworks like MCF3, we should identify the currently appointed suppliers. The user’s provided information notes that subcontracting is a viable strategy. We can approach these primary suppliers, offering our niche investigative services as a subcontractor. This not only provides a potential revenue stream but also serves as a crucial intelligence-gathering exercise, helping us understand the competitive landscape for future bids.

  4. Leverage Low-Value Purchases: We must not neglect the Low Value Purchase System. This is the ideal route for proposing the tightly-scoped, sub-threshold “Scoping Studies” that form a key part of our USP tactic. We can directly approach relevant departments with a proposal for a £9,500 contract to produce a report on a specific risk, such as “Vulnerability of the UK Used Cooking Oil (UCO) market to subsidy circumvention,” making it easy for them to say yes and get our foot in the door.

By pursuing these parallel avenues, we can effectively translate our deep knowledge of the perpetrators’ illegal conduct into tangible procurement opportunities, positioning COCOO as the essential partner for the UK public sector in navigating these complex challenges.

LICITACIONES EN EU

As your in-house solicitor, I have conducted a targeted search of the European Union’s public procurement portal, Tenders Electronic Daily (TED), to identify open and forthcoming tender opportunities that align with our strategic objectives. The search focused on contracts for services that match our unique capabilities in legal analysis, market investigation, and sustainability consultancy, particularly in areas relevant to our ongoing case against Indonesian biodiesel subsidies.

Below are the most relevant tender offers that present an opportunity for COCOO to secure a contract with EU institutions. I have included the time limits for each offer to ensure we can prepare our submissions accordingly.

Highly Relevant Open Tender Opportunities

  1. Title: Framework contract for the provision of evaluation services in the fields of trade and development

    • Contracting Authority: European Commission, Directorate-General for Trade (DG TRADE)
    • Relevance to COCOO: This framework contract is exceptionally relevant. DG TRADE is the primary body responsible for the EU’s trade defense, including the countervailing duties at the heart of our case. The tender seeks expertise to evaluate the impact of trade policies, including their social and environmental effects. This directly aligns with our proprietary “Non-Visible Wealth Impact Assessment (NVWIA) Toolkit” and our expertise in analyzing the harm caused by unfair subsidies. Securing a place on this framework would position us as a trusted advisor to DG TRADE, creating a direct channel to influence policy and secure further work.
    • Estimated Value: Not specified in the notice, as it is a multiple-award framework contract.
    • Time Limit for Receipt of Tenders: 05/08/2025

  2. Title: Framework contract for the provision of services in the area of competition policy

    • Contracting Authority: European Commission, Directorate-General for Competition (DG COMP)
    • Relevance to COCOO: This is another prime opportunity. The tender seeks external expertise to support DG COMP with economic and legal analysis for competition cases. Our arguments regarding the distortive effects of foreign subsidies and the anti-competitive practices of importers fall directly within this scope. Winning a lot under this framework would enable us to directly apply our investigative findings and legal strategies, particularly in urging DG COMP to use the new Foreign Subsidies Regulation.
    • Estimated Value: The overall value of the framework is substantial.
    • Time Limit for Receipt of Tenders: 19/06/2025

  3. Title: Study on the environmental, social and economic impacts of EU trade policy

    • Contracting Authority: European Commission
    • Relevance to COCOO: This tender for a specific study is a perfect fit. It calls for analyzing the real-world impacts of EU trade policy, with a focus on sustainability. Our case against Indonesian biodiesel, which links unfair trade to environmental damage (deforestation) and social harm (undermining domestic green jobs), serves as a powerful case study. We can propose a study module focused specifically on the impact of trade defense measures on the renewable energy sector, leveraging our extensive research.
    • Estimated Value: 600,000 EUR
    • Time Limit for Receipt of Tenders: 25/07/2025

Forthcoming and Recurring Opportunities to Monitor

While the above tenders are live, it is also critical to monitor recurring contracts. My search identified several recently closed or recurring tenders that indicate a consistent need for our services, for which we must prepare.

  • Legal Services related to Anti-Dumping and Anti-Subsidy: The Commission regularly procures external legal services to assist in WTO disputes and EU court cases related to trade remedies. Given Indonesia’s ongoing WTO challenge to the EU’s biodiesel duties, we must watch for tenders from the Legal Service of the Commission for representation or advisory services on this exact matter.
  • Consultancy for DG Energy (ENER): DG ENER frequently issues tenders for studies on the renewable energy market, energy security, and the implementation of the Renewable Energy Directive (RED II/III). This is highly relevant as our case argues that illegal subsidies for unsustainable biofuels threaten the EU’s energy security and climate goals. We can propose studies on how to safeguard the EU’s sustainable biofuel supply chain from these external shocks.
  • Services for the European Parliament: The Parliament, particularly the Committee on International Trade (INTA) and the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (ENVI), commissions studies and expert workshops. We should monitor their calls for expertise to present our findings on the intersection of trade, competition, and environmental policy.

Strategy and Next Steps:

  1. Prioritize Live Tenders: We must immediately begin preparing our responses for the DG TRADE and DG COMP framework contracts, as these have the nearest deadlines. Success here would be a strategic breakthrough. We will also prepare a strong bid for the specific study on trade policy impacts.
  2. Utilize EU Tools: In preparing our bids, we will use SIMAP to ensure we use the correct standard forms and the European Single Procurement Document (ESPD) to streamline our self-declaration. We will use eCertis to ensure we have the necessary certifications.
  3. Form a Consortium: For larger framework contracts, we should consider forming a consortium with a Brussels-based public affairs firm or a specialized economic consultancy. This would enhance our bidding power and local presence, while we provide the unique investigative and legal-strategic expertise that sets our bid apart.
  4. Proactive Engagement: We will continue our strategy of proactive engagement, using the intelligence from these tender notices to refine our Unsolicited Proposals to specific DGs, demonstrating that we understand their needs and can offer a unique, value-added solution that aligns with their stated objectives.

LICITACIONES EN ESPANA

Based on my search of the Plataforma de Contratación del Sector Público, I have identified several types of tenders and specific examples that, while not a perfect match for our unique proprietary frameworks, represent the closest and most promising opportunities for COCOO to engage with the Spanish public sector.

Consultancy for Energy and Sustainability:

There are frequent tenders for consultancy services related to the energy transition and sustainability. These are highly relevant as our case against Indonesian biodiesel is framed within the context of protecting sustainable, domestic biofuel producers.

  • A notable example is the recently awarded contract by COFIDES (a state-owned enterprise under the Ministry of Economy, Commerce, and Enterprise) for “Servicios profesionales de asesoramiento y consultoría en materia de energía sostenible y transición energética”. With a budget of 180,000 Euros, this type of contract is well within our target range. Although this specific tender is closed, its existence confirms that the government is actively seeking external expertise to which we can tailor our Unsolicited Proposal. We can argue that a fair energy transition is impossible without addressing market distortions from illegal foreign subsidies, a niche that the larger bidders may overlook.
  • Another example is a contract from the Ayuntamiento de San Fernando for a “Servicio de consultoría y gestión energética para mejorar la eficiencia energética”. This shows that even municipal governments are procuring services in this area. Our angle would be to propose a “scoping study” that demonstrates how reliance on volatile and unsustainably produced international biofuels undermines municipal climate goals and energy security, a risk that our proprietary analytical tools are uniquely positioned to assess.

Market Studies and Competition Analysis:

Public bodies occasionally tender for market studies to understand competitive landscapes. This is a direct match for our capabilities.

  • A past tender by Mercapalma for the “Elaboración de un estudio de mercado junto con un plan de comercialización” included requirements for a DAFO analysis (SWOT), analysis of competition, and market trends. This is precisely the type of analytical work COCOO performs. We can proactively approach similar public entities that oversee commodity markets (food, energy, etc.) and propose a market study focused on the distorting impact of foreign subsidies, a topic of which they may be unaware.

Anti-Fraud and Compliance Services:

While my search for “defensa comercial” (trade defense) yielded no direct public tenders, searches for “lucha contra el fraude” (anti-fraud) revealed opportunities. This aligns with our work in uncovering circumvention of trade duties.

  • The Agencia de Prevención y Lucha contra el Fraude y la Corrupción de la Comunitat Valenciana recently procured software to aid in its work. This indicates a focus on anti-fraud measures. We can approach this and similar agencies with a proposal for investigation and consultancy services focused on a specific type of fraud they may not be equipped to handle: the circumvention of international trade remedies and the import of illegally subsidized goods. This is a high-value, specialized service that falls squarely within our expertise.

Strategy and Recommendations:

  1. Direct Monitoring: We must continuously monitor the Plataforma de Contratación del Sector Público for keywords such as “consultoría,” “estudio de mercado,” “sostenibilidad,” and “competencia.”

  2. Proactive Unsolicited Proposals (USPs): The most effective strategy is not to wait for the perfect tender but to create the need for our services. Based on these findings, we will draft targeted USPs to relevant public bodies like the CNMC, MITECO, and state-owned energy or trade companies.

  3. Leverage the “Low-Value” Tactic: We will frame our initial proposals as low-value “Estudios de Mercado” or “Asistencias Técnicas” (Technical Assistance), keeping the budget under the threshold for a full public tender where possible. The justification for a direct award will be, as planned, our unique intellectual property and deep, pre-existing knowledge of the specific market distortions affecting their jurisdiction, making a competitive tender a “false economy.”

By using these examples as a template, we can demonstrate to Spanish public bodies that a problem exists which they have overlooked and that COCOO is uniquely, and immediately, positioned to provide the solution.

To effectively build our case and identify the class of victims harmed by the conduct of the Indonesian perpetrators, it is essential to map out the relevant commercial ecosystem. Based on the case documents and industry classification codes, I have identified the key sectors and specific companies within the European, UK, and Spanish markets that are either direct competitors, business users, or otherwise operate in sectors overlapping with the perpetrators’ activities.

First, it is important to define the industrial and market sectors central to our case. The Indonesian perpetrators are primarily active in the manufacturing of biofuels. This activity corresponds to specific industry codes which help us identify other players in the same field. In Europe, the relevant NACE (Nomenclature of Economic Activities) code is 20.14, for the manufacture of other organic basic chemicals, which commonly includes biodiesel production. The equivalent UK standard, the SIC (Standard Industrial Classification) code, is also 20140. A broader, related category is NACE code 19.20 (SIC: 19200), for the manufacture of refined petroleum products, as many companies in this sector are also major players in biofuels. For the upstream activities, the production of the raw material falls under NACE 10.41 (SIC: 10410), the manufacture of oils and fats. Downstream, the key business users are classified under NACE 46.71 (SIC: 46719), the wholesale of solid, liquid, and gaseous fuels and related products. The ICB (Industry Classification Benchmark) system further refines this, placing these activities within the 1300 (Oil & Gas) or the more specific 1353 (Oil & Gas Exploration & Production) and potentially the 60101020 (Renewable Energy) sectors.

With these classifications, I have identified the following companies as key competitors and business users who are potentially harmed and could serve as collaborators or class members in our actions.

In the United Kingdom:

Two direct competitors, explicitly named as being injured by Indonesian imports in our case files, are Greenergy and Argent Energy.

  • Greenergy International Ltd: A major UK importer, distributor, and producer of biofuels. Their activities fall under SIC code 82990 (Other business support service activities not elsewhere classified) for their international operations, though their core business is fuel wholesale and production. As a key UK producer, they are a primary competitor harmed by artificially low-priced imports. Their contact information is available on their website for business inquiries.
  • Argent Energy: This company is a prominent UK producer of waste-based biodiesel, a key sustainable alternative to palm-oil biodiesel. Their focus on UCO (Used Cooking Oil) makes them a direct competitor whose business model is existentially threatened by cheaper, less sustainable imports.
  • BP p.l.c.: A multinational oil and gas company with significant operations in the UK. BP has a specific division, BP Biofuels, and is a major blender and distributor of fuels. As such, they are a primary business user of biodiesel. While they may have benefited from cheaper Indonesian imports in the short term, the case documents argue that long-term supply chain instability and the reputational and legal risks associated with unsustainable palm oil make them a potential victim and a crucial party to engage. Contact can be made via their UK head office or their specific customer care lines.
  • Shell UK Ltd: Similar to BP, Shell is a major fuel producer and distributor and a key business user of biodiesel for blending into their retail fuels. They are exposed to the same long-term risks regarding supply security and the sustainability of their product mix.

In Spain and the broader EU Market:

The Spanish market has a significant number of biodiesel plants that were directly impacted by the import surge prior to the imposition of duties.

  • Repsol: A major Spanish multi-energy company and a key producer and blender of biofuels in Spain. They are a direct competitor to Indonesian imports and a primary business user. They are a critical stakeholder to engage regarding the market distortion. Their corporate headquarters are in Madrid, and contact information is publicly available.
  • Cepsa: Another leading Spanish energy company heavily invested in second-generation biofuels and sustainable aviation fuel (SAF). Their strategy is directly undermined by the import of cheap, unsustainable biodiesel. They have publicly committed to producing 2.5 million tons of biofuel by 2030 and are a crucial ally and victim class member.
  • Masol Iberia Biofuel S.L.: This Spanish company is identified in trade data as having imported products from Indonesia, making them a business user. Their position is nuanced; while they may have used cheaper imports, they are also part of the domestic market and subject to its instability. Engaging them could provide valuable insights into the import supply chain.
  • Abengoa Bioenergía S.A.: A Spanish company with operations in the biofuels sector. As a domestic producer, they are a competitor directly harmed by the price suppression caused by subsidized imports. Their corporate email is abengoabioenergy@abengoa.com.
  • Neste Corporation: A Finnish company that is a global leader in producing renewable diesel and SAF from waste and residues. As a major player in the EU sustainable fuels market, they are a key competitor whose high-quality, sustainable products are undercut by the Indonesian subsidies.
  • ENI S.p.A.: The Italian multinational energy company has a dedicated business unit, ENI Trade & Biofuels S.p.A., which is active in the European market. They are a major producer and blender and thus a key competitor and business user in the EU market. Their media relations email is ufficio.stampa@eni.com.
  • Saras S.p.A.: An Italian oil refiner with a Spanish subsidiary, Saras Energia SA, making them a relevant player in the Spanish market. As refiners and distributors, they are key business users of biodiesel. Their general contact email is info@saras.it, and their Spanish office contact is atencionalcliente@sarasenergia.com.

Finally, a crucial collaborator will be the European Biodiesel Board (EBB), the industry association that represents biodiesel producers in the EU. The EBB filed the original complaint that led to the 2019 countervailing duties and is a central party in the ongoing expiry review. Their membership includes many of the companies harmed by this conduct. We can engage with their policy and legal teams, whose contact emails are publicly listed, such as Secretary General Xavier Noyon (xavier.noyon@ebb-eu.org) and Policy Director Domenico Mininni (domenico.mininni@ebb-eu.org). Building a coalition with the EBB and its members will be a cornerstone of our collective action strategy.

The primary product that is the subject of our cause of action is biodiesel produced in Indonesia, which is predominantly derived from palm oil. A defining characteristic of this product is that it is exported and sold into the EU and UK markets at artificially low prices, frequently below the production costs of European and British producers. This is made possible by a comprehensive state-orchestrated support scheme, which is integral to the product’s offering. The scheme functions as a service that confers an unlawful advantage, involving an export levy on crude palm oil (CPO) which finances a public fund (BPDPKS) that, in turn, pays direct subsidies to the biodiesel producers. Furthermore, the state support includes obligatory domestic blending mandates, such as the current B35 (35% biodiesel), which create a captive domestic market for these producers, shielding them from risk and guaranteeing sales.

The service extends to how this product is delivered to our markets. The subsidized biodiesel is imported into the European Union either directly into Spain or indirectly through other hubs like the ports in the Netherlands, from where it is distributed into the Spanish market. The immediate customers of this subsidized product are fuel distributors and major oil companies in Spain and the UK, who blend the cheaper biodiesel to meet renewable energy obligations. The core of our legal complaint is the effect of this service: the product consistently undercuts biodiesel manufactured in the EU by an average of approximately 7%, forcing local producers to either lose sales or sell at a loss, leading to severe financial distress.

Beyond the primary product, our cause of action also encompasses related products and services designed to circumvent existing trade remedies. The documents highlight a significant concern with Indonesian-origin biodiesel being transshipped through third countries, such as China and the United Kingdom, to disguise its origin and evade the EU’s countervailing duties. Another product variation used for circumvention is the practice of re-labeling Indonesian biodiesel as “renewable diesel”, which is a chemically distinct product and not subject to the same duties. Looking forward, the documents also identify a potential future threat, suggesting that Indonesia’s subsidy framework could be extended to sustainable aviation fuel (SAF), which would disrupt the emerging European market for this crucial green technology with a product that is neither sustainable nor fairly priced. The manipulation of raw material markets is also a key element; this includes restricting exports of used cooking oil (UCO) and palm fatty acid distillate (PFAD) to depress domestic feedstock prices, giving Indonesian producers another layer of unfair cost advantage.

 

Our approach will be to meticulously create a recognised problem for the target government body. The campaign will frame the issues of financial mismanagement and procurement irregularities as a significant, ongoing, and embarrassing problem. We will achieve this by using persistent, evidence-based public communications, with our formal notices and claims serving as the foundation. We will build upon this with a series of reports, white papers, and press releases that will starkly highlight the direct financial losses to the public budget and the harm caused to legitimate suppliers.

To generate the necessary political and public will, we will ensure that this problem lands on the desks of those with the power to act. Our campaign will target parliamentary scrutiny bodies, such as the Public Accounts Committee in the UK or the Committee on Budgetary Control in the EU. These committees are designed to scrutinise government spending and are empowered to demand answers and action. Our carefully compiled findings will provide the perfect basis for their inquiries. Simultaneously, we will cultivate media scrutiny, aiming for consistent, negative headlines in reputable media outlets to create pressure on ministers and senior civil servants to be seen to be taking action. We will also mobilise the victims we have identified, such as the excluded suppliers and business federations. When these stakeholders begin to complain to the government body and their political representatives, it will significantly amplify our message.

Once the senior decision-makers acknowledge the problem, they will be compelled to instruct their departments to find a solution to mitigate the political damage and address the operational failings. This is the crucial turning point where the problem we have created requires a solution. This solution will then become a procurement need. A government body cannot simply hire COCOO because we have pointed out the problem. To ensure fairness and to defend against any accusations of improper conduct, they must formalise their need. Their internal process will logically lead them to the conclusion that they have a recognised weakness in their financial oversight and that they have a need for external expertise to help them design and implement a new assurance framework. This formally defined need will then be passed to the commercial and procurement department, which is obligated by public contract regulations to run a competitive process to acquire the service. The success of our campaign will not be in forcing them to hire us directly, but in forcing them to define a need that COCOO is uniquely placed to fulfil.

To capitalise on this, we will employ a below-threshold direct award tactic. This is a plausible but difficult approach that requires careful execution. While the rules do allow for direct awards for low-value contracts, public officials are still bound by a duty to demonstrate Value for Money and may be hesitant to make direct awards to an entity that has been publicly criticising them, as it could be misconstrued as ‘hush money’ or favouritism. To overcome this, our Unsolicited Proposal (USP) will build an undeniable case that COCOO is the only logical choice for this initial work. The justification for a direct award will be based on our unique expertise and proprietary intellectual property.

Our argument will be that the specific analytical methodologies and the ‘Non-Visible Wealth Impact Assessment (NVWIA) Toolkit’ that we have developed are unique. We will assert that no other supplier possesses this intellectual property or the deep situational knowledge that we have gained from our investigations. Therefore, a competitive process would be an ineffective ‘false economy’ for this initial, highly specialised scoping phase. We will recommend a tightly scoped, low-value ‘Scoping Study’ or ‘Feasibility Assessment.’ For example, we could propose a £9,500 contract to produce a detailed report mapping the agency’s specific failures against our POPIA Framework and providing a high-level implementation plan. This presents a low-risk first step for them to take, which will get our foot in the door.

Our USP will contain a detailed ‘Statement of Work’ or ‘Project Proposal’. This document will be robust and professional. It will include a clear definition of the problem we are solving, referencing their specific issues. It will detail our proposed solution, the POPIA Framework, and will list specific, measurable deliverables and activities. It will also contain an indicative timeline, an outline of the project team and their expertise, and a clear pricing structure or indicative budget, such as a fixed price for the sub-£10,000 scoping study. We will conclude the proposal with a clear statement of our readiness to formalise the proposal using their standard contractual terms. For example: “COCOO is prepared to engage with your commercial department to capture this scope of work within the appropriate government service contract.”

HTML Snippets Powered By : XYZScripts.com