PUBLIC SECTOR PROCUREMENT
(21471)
10345/00
COM(00) 275
|
Draft Directive on the co-ordination of procedures for the award of
public supply contracts, public service contracts and public works
contracts.
|
| Legal base:
| Articles 47(2), 55 and 95 EC, co-decision, QMV
|
| |
| Document originated:
| 10 May 2000 |
| Forwarded to the Council:
| 11 July 2000 |
| Deposited in Parliament:
| 27 July 2000 |
| Department: |
Trade and Industry |
| Basis of consideration:
| EM of 3 October 2000 |
| Previous Committee Report:
| None but see paragraph 20.1 below
|
| To be discussed in Council:
| 30 November 2000 |
| Committee's assessment:
| Politically important |
| Committee's decision:
| Cleared |
Background
20.1 On 29April 1998, we reported[52]
on a Commission Communication on public procurement which set
out the Commission's intentions to bring forward amending Directives.
The document
20.2 The purpose of the proposal is to simplify
and clarify three existing Directives (93/36/EEC on supplies contracts,
93/37/EEC on works contracts and 92/50/EEC on public service contracts,
all as amended by Directive 97/52/EC) and to bring them up-to-date,
for example, to take account of market changes such as e-commerce
and developments in best practice. In addition, the Commission
proposes to consolidate the changes into a single codified text
covering supplies, works and service contracts to replace the
three existing Directives.
20.3 In her Explanatory Memorandum of 3 October
2000, the Minister for Energy and Competitiveness in Europe at
the Department of Trade and Industry (The Rt. Hon. Helen Liddell)
summarises the main changes as follows:
"— more scope
for electronic purchasing methods, with commensurate reductions
in minimum timescales for responses when electronic communications
are used;
"— a more flexible procedure allowing
'competitive dialogue' with bidders in the award of 'particularly
complex' contracts, for which the contracting authority is unable
to specify all the technical, financial or contractual terms for
simple competitive tendering to be appropriate;
"— express provisions on the use of
'framework agreements' and the re-opening of competition at the
call-off stage;
"— modification of the rules on 'technical
specifications' to give greater emphasis to the principle of mutual
recognition and the need to consider offers of equivalent goods
or services, if they meet the user's needs;
"— a strengthening of the requirement
to make the relative weighting of 'award criteria' known in advance
and a similar requirement on criteria for the selection of participants
in contract award procedures;
"— an obligation to exclude candidates
convicted of organised crime, corruption or fraud against the
Community;
"— express provision on environmental
characteristics to be taken into account in assessing the economic
advantage of bids;
"— a radical simplification of the
financial thresholds above which the Directives apply; and
"— the introduction of a new EC nomenclature
(the Common Procurement Vocabulary (CPV)) for classifying goods,
works and services".
20.4 The Minister also notes that the Commission's
proposals in respect of procurement by utilities in the water,
energy, transport and telecommunication sectors are the subject
of a separate Explanatory Memorandum. We report on that document
in paragraph 21of this Report.
The Government's view
20.5 The Minister says:
"The Government supports the Commission's proposals
to simplify and clarify the Directives. In particular, it welcomes
the proposal to consolidate them. The Government will, however,
wish to ensure that unintended changes are not made and that unjustified
differences in the treatment of supplies, works and service contracts
are resolved. The Government welcomes the proposal to put electronic
documents on a par with written documents and the proposed provision
for environmental characteristics to be included in the criteria
for establishing the economic advantage of offers.
"The Government also welcomes the Commission's
other proposals for modernising the Directives, save to the extent
that the results in relation to competitive dialogue, framework
agreements and selection and award criteria are not yet as flexible
as they need to be to ensure that value for money can be secured
efficiently. Care will also be needed to ensure that accompanying
proposals for the adoption of the CPV nomenclature and for the
Commission to take decisions on the format of notices do not result
in unauthorised sub-delegation. Care will also be needed to ensure
that the proposed mandatory exclusion of candidates convicted
of organised crime, corruption or fraud against the Community
is proportionate, easy to implement and suitable for enforcement
by suppliers.
"Generally speaking, however, the proposals
are consistent with the Government's policy of seeking value for
money through competition in open markets. They are also consistent
with the Government policy of seeking EC and international measures
which are effective in opening markets without imposing unnecessary
burdens or constraints. When adopted, the Directive will also
be in line with the Government's targets on developing e-commerce
in public procurement and the Lisbon Council's conclusion that
Community and Member States procurement should be on-line by 2003".
"A Regulatory Impact Assessment is not required.
The proposals do not place any burdens directly on suppliers (including
service providers and contractors). On the contrary, greater flexibility
to use framework agreements, dialogue with suppliers, electronic
commerce, shorter time-scales, standard notices and a Common Procurement
Vocabulary should improve efficiency for both purchasers and suppliers,
including small and medium sized enterprises for whom ready access
to usable market data and inexpensive communication systems are
recognised as being very important.
Conclusion
20.6 We note the Government's general support
for these proposals and its specific points of concern which will
no doubt be followed up in the Council discussions. We expect
that we will see a revised version of this document in due course,
at which stage we will examine how far these concerns have been
dealt with. But at this stage we have no questions to raise and
clear the document accordingly.
52 (18975) 6927/98; see HC 155-xxvi (1997-1998), paragraph
12. Back
| 
