Public RFPs are at least something you can sue over if your competitor gets too brazen benefits. More transparency into them for the general public would be nic

Public RFPs are at least something you can sue over if your competitor gets too brazen benefits. More transparency into them for the general public would be nice, FOIA (or equivalent) requests help a bitbut then often come to late to intervene, just can bring it to light afterwards. > As a citizen, I would like to see a “fair” bidding process where the “best” supplier wins. Defining what is "best" is of course the biggest challenge. In many jurisdictions, it can deviate from "cheapest wins", but then needs pre-defined criteria for evaluation, and any judgement factor of course can go both ways - it can be used to protect from a costly mistake and to give a benefit to a inferior proposal. But such criteria can at least be used to push it out from cheapest-wins, and make it easier to attack the decision to attempt to compensate for bias. A big problem IMHO are follow-up RFPs where the initial one didn't ensure their viability. E.g. once a company has won "implement system X", all RFPs that require "integrate with system X" or "maintain system X" are on one hand formally ok because doing so is actually needed, but unfair because if system X is sufficiently proprietary, the first company obviously has a massive advantage.