22 Amendments of Jens ROHDE related to 2011/2048(INI)
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Appeals to the European Commission to present a thoroughgoing legislative initiative on public procurement which will bring mor and in-depth reform of the existing public procurement directives which should simplify procedures and increase flexibility, transparency and certainty to the sectorfor both parties to procurement and thus avoid frequent reforms in the future, which is the main reason for high costs and administrative burdens for participants, which significantly and disproportionately narrow SME access to public contracts;
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 a (new)
Citation 6 a (new)
- having regard to the Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA),
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 14 a (new)
Citation 14 a (new)
- having regard to the Council Decision 2010/48, on the Conclusion of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities which entered into force on 22nd January 2011, that identifies public procurement directives as community acts which refer to matters governed by the Convention,
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Notes that the objective of this reform should be to return to the original purpose of public procurement, i.e. ensuring competition in the market and value for money; believes that the current regime can hamper the actual competition in the market due to unforeseen barriers created by excessive administrative rules and procedures, in particular discouraging SMEs from participating in public procurement;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Urges the Commission to prioritise the de-bureaucratisation and simplification of the different procedures for public procurement both in terms of reducing the overall number of procedures and streamlining the processes of the respective procedures; believes open competitions should remain the cornerstone of public procurement but should be simplified in particular by allowing a higher degree of functionality- based award criteria instead of overly detailed technical specifications thus leaving it to the potential suppliers to define the specific methods, material, technologies etc. to be used; furthermore, believes administrative burdens could be reduced by allowing a higher degree of simultaneous assessment of selection and award criteria and by allowing flexibility in cases of lacking compliance with format requirements, e.g. allow bidders to subsequently submit missing forms; notes that particularly SMEs suffer from a lack of flexibility being disqualified on minor and non-intentional procedural errors;
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Furthermore, urges the Commission to conduct a survey across the 27 Member States to assess the rate for cross-border bids with a view to evaluating the pertinence of current thresholds and potentially raise the thresholds to make cross-border bidding more attractive;
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 d (new)
Paragraph 1 d (new)
1d. Recognises that the current distinction between "A" and "B" services is out-of- date as some of the B services clearly are of cross-border interest, e.g. water and rail transport, recruitment and security services; thus invites the Commission to revise the annexes in its reform of public procurement rules; however, believes core social services should remain a "B" service exempt from EU public procurement rules;
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes that introducingHowever, cautions the Commission not to implement any new criteria in a manner that would create new administrative burdens, mandatory prescriptions for innovation or excessively detailed technical specifications regarding the energy performance of the subject; Believes that a shift to life-cycle costs promises the greatest potential to ensure both value for money and the delivery of a public contract risk restricting competition and the choices of contracting authoritiespolicy goals, in particular regarding the energy performance of the subject of a public contract;
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Asks for clarification and clear delineation of the scopes of the directives 2004/17/EC and 2004/18/EC; recalls that the main purpose of public procurement is the purchase of goods, works and services by public authorities to accommodate the needs of their citizens; points out that there must be a direct benefit for the contracting authority in order for a procedure to qualify as and that the main purpose of EU public procurement rules is to ensure equal treatment, non- discrimination, mutual recognition, proportionality and transparency by guaranteeing the opening-up of public procurement to competition;
Amendment 35 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recognises that the up-front cost of energy-efficient products or services may come inat first glance appear to conflict with public procurement rules concerning the use of the ‘lowest price’ criterion in the award of contracts, but considers that simplified rules could be introduced to; therefore urges the Commission to ensure best-case practice sharing and to introduce simplified rules that would allow contracting authorities to measure costs in relation to the energy- saving potential of a given product or service, i.e. applying life-cycle costs when evaluating each offer;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls for clarification of the definitions in the directives – for example the definition of a ‘body governed by public law’ – in line with the jurisprudence of the ECJ and without reducing the scope of EU public procurement rules;
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Recalls its resolution of May 2010 on recent developments in public procurement, which took note of the ECJ case-law and took the view that public- public cooperation was not subject to public procurement rules as long as the following criteria were met: that the purpose of the partnership was the provision of a public-service task conferred on all the local authorities concerned and, that the task was carried out solely by the public authorities concerned, i.e. without the involvement of private capital; underlines that those clarifications should be codified in the procurement directives; individuals or undertakings, and that the activity involved is essentially performed on behalf of the public authorities concerned; points out that furthermore, according to the ECJ, such cooperation must be governed solely by considerations and requirements relating to the pursuit of objectives in the public interest and respect the principle of equal treatment of the persons concerned, referred to in Directive 92/50, so that no private undertaking is placed in a position of advantage vis-à-vis competitors; calls on the Commission to produce comprehensive guidelines on the conditions for public-public cooperation, drawing on the conclusions of existing case law;
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Underlines that there is a difference between "horizontal" public-public cooperation and the direct award of a contract to an "in-house" operator, for which different criteria apply according to ECJ case law; asks for the inclusion of a mandatory prior notification by procurement authorities in case of an envisaged public-public cooperation or "in-house" procurement to improve transparency;
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Emphasises that the current classification of A and B service categories should be maintained in so far as ‘lighter’ provisions for B services have their justification in their characteristics as mainly locally or regionally provided services; however calls on the Commission to re-assess the classification of certain services which have increasingly developed a cross-border nature, e.g. energy and transport services; asks the Commission to clarify the criteria underlying the current selection of all B services and the scope of each category; asks to make the list in Annex II B of directive 2004/18/EC exhaustive by transferring the category "other services" to Annex II A;
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Takes the view that, in order to develop the full potential of public procurement, the standard criterion ofor the lowest price should be removed, and that in principle there should be only one optaward of a contract should be the "most economically advantageous tender", subject to the apply or explain principle; underlines that this would not exclude the lowest price as the decisive criterion forin the award of contracts: the most economically advantageous tender – including the entirecase of standardised goods or services; where relevant and proportionate, the evaluation of the tenders should take into account the total life- cycle costs; calls ofn the relevant goods, servicCommission to develop a common methodology and guidelines for works – should be chthis purposen;
Amendment 86 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Points out that within the current legal framework, public procurers can already apply additional award criteria in support of the EU2020 objectives, provided that such criteria are linked to the subject-matter of the contract, do not confer an unrestricted freedom of choice on the contracting authority, are expressly mentioned and comply with the fundamental principles of equal treatment, the non-discrimination, mutual recognition, proportionality and transparency; asks the Commission to give procurement bodies further guidance to make better use of these possibilities;
Amendment 106 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Points out that increased awareness of the environmental and climate impact of products and activities means that the possibility for public authorities to favour local suppliers should be considered, and the extent to which internal market rules allow this examinedprocurement authorities should include environmental costs in their assessment of the "most economically advantageous offer" and their calculation of life-cycle costs;
Amendment 129 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Points out that in order to ensure that public procurement contributes to ensuring further accessibility for persons with disabilities and reducing fragmentation of the internal market, accessibility criteria for persons with disabilities should be part of selection and execution criteria of the public procurement processes. This should apply for goods, services and public works purchased by governments and public utilities. This should apply as well to services delivered through the use of information and communication technologies and particularly when the procurement processes refer to the use of European funds such as Structural Funds and research funds;
Amendment 135 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Points out that the directives are often perceived as too detailed and have become increasingly technical and complex, at the same time the legal risk of non-compliance with these rules has increased considerably for contracting authorities and suppliers alike; notes that the fear of challenge leads to a risk-averse approach, which stifles innovation and sustainable development, resulting far too often in the cheapest price being opted for instead of the best value;
Amendment 140 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Advocates clear and simple rules with a reduction in the level of detail and greater reliance uponwhere this is possible without undermining the general principles of transparency, equal treatment and non- discrimination or the EU's obligations under the plurilateral Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA);
Amendment 153 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Advocates that negotiated procedures with prior announcement be allowed as a standard procedure; tTakes the view that further safeguards against abuse should be introduced in the form of requirements for written documentation; urges the Commission to includnegotiated procedure in the mfore flexible provisions for framewm of requirements for priork agreements in the directivesnnouncement and written documentation;
Amendment 160 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18