Benefits of such a system would be to ensure that:

1. competitive rates and levels of service are maintained;

2. relationships are maintained at a professional level and do not move into the dangerous territory of "jobs for the boys";

3. expenditure is open to public scrutiny.

You suggest that my submissions are rooted in self interest.  While I have made no secret of my interest in tendering for services there is probably an insignificant chance of my succeeding following my raising of these issues today.  

In any case if the tender is available to other law firms, if my firm could win the tender on cost and performance then what is your problem?  How could that situation possibly harm the Australian Domain Space.  Further, if performance and cost is subject to regular review then at least the community would be guaranteed that any funds are dispensed in accordance with best practice.

James Guy
Principal
Guy & Associates Solicitors

>  --- jamesguy <jamesguy&#167;guyassociates.com.au> wrote: > It
> is simply good policy and if raised as an issue for an
> > organisation of this type it should be discussed by
> > member.  
> 
> > I have proposed auDA as being a suitable organisation for
> > a legal panel mechanism with a transparent and
> > accountable appointment system if one does not already
> > exist.  
> 
> So if I reckon my mother's branch of the CWA should have a
> "transparent and accountable appointment system", then they
> should have one? Come off it! It may be good policy in some
> respects, but are there going to be benefits? Surely it's
> up to auDA to decide within the laws for their type of
> organisation.
>  
> > What are your grounds for disputing this proposal.
> 
> That your proposal is quite probably rooted in some form of
> self-interest, and not that of the Australian domain space.
> 
> David