22 Amendments of Sergio Gaetano COFFERATI related to 2011/2048(INI)
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Emphasises that public procurement rules need to be simplified and made more flexible so that public service obligations can be fulfilled; insists that the amendment of procurement rules must remain neutral as regards private versus public ownership in accordance with Article 345 of the TFEU;
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Recognises the importance of decent work principles being respected in public procurement within the EU and calls on the EU Commission to include reference to a wide range of ILO Labour Standards to be included in the Articles in any revision of the procurement Directives;
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Notes that 11 EU Member States have ratified ILO C94 on labour clauses in public contracts and calls on the Commission to encourage ratification of this Convention by all EU Member States to mitigate the unwelcome effects of recent ECJ court cases in this respect;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. Calls on the Commission formally to recognise other modalities for the selection of providers, such as ‘in-house’ and ‘service concession’ methods, and explicitly to accord equal value to all options for the contracting and financing of SSGI; calls for the expansion of the ‘in-house’ method to include service providers who meet specific general interest criteria;
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 d (new)
Paragraph 2 d (new)
2d. Insists that the directive should encourage and explicitly allow contracting authorities to refer to horizontal policy objectives, such as sustainable development criteria in the subject-matters of tenders;
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 e (new)
Paragraph 2 e (new)
2e. Considers that it should be explicitly stated in the revised Directive that “invisible” characteristics are also production characteristics and may be referred to in the technical specifications of tenders; emphasizes that whether a product or service is sustainably produced should be appropriately considered as a characteristic of the product or service being contracted, rather than an aspect of the contract performance;
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Underlines that any revision of the Directives must reflect the provisions of the Lisbon Treaty, in terms of commitments to full employment, a social market economy, and the responsibilities relating to quality public services and the freedom of public authorities and Member States to decide on the financing, organisation and delivery of public services; this includes respect for the choice of public authorities to provide these services “in-house”, or through inter-municipal (public-public) co- operation, which should also be outside of the Public Procurement Directives;
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Supports the normative anchoring of a practical ‘in-house’ tendering option for SSGI, based on the model of the revised Regulation 1370/2007 on public passenger transport services by rail and road, which would provide that any competent local authority may decide to provide services itself or to award public service contracts to a legally distinct entity over which the competent local authority exercises control similar to that exercised over its own department;
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. Considers that the existing Most Economically Advantageous Tender (MEAT) award criteria should be replaced by the Sustainably Most Advantageous Rated Tender (SMART) as a way to drive markets to supply more socially, economically, and environmentally sustainable products and services;
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 d (new)
Paragraph 3 d (new)
3d. Considers that a maximum weighting should be set for the price criterion where public contracts are awarded on the basis of the economically most advantageous tender;
Amendment 34 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Underlines the importance of including skills and training requirements in contract specifications as a long term strategy; stresses however, that these actions must be relevant to the subject matter of the contract, be proptake into account the total life cost; calls on the Commission to put forward a proposal for a European corporate social responsibility certification system and takes the view that, once such a system has been introduced, it should be possible for contracting authoritionate, economically advantageous and take into account the total life costes to include among the selection criteria for public procurement procedures the requirement that companies must have such certification or other forms of EU quality or environmental certification (or certification from other countries recognised as equivalent by the EU);
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Amendment 50 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Calls for redefinition of the concept of ‘most economically advantageous offer’ so as to make national and local social and quality criteria for the delivery of SSGI an obligatory requirement in procurement contracts, including subcontracts;
Amendment 61 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Underlines the importance of ensuring high quality social services and goods when public money is spent and recognizing that contracting on the basis of lowest price will not achieve this; calls on the Commission to remove lowest price as an award criterion;
Amendment 67 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Considers that contracting authorities should be able to impose penalties for failing to deliver on sustainable development objectives in accordance with the criteria indicated in the tender, including in the case of sub-contracting;
Amendment 68 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 c (new)
Paragraph 6 c (new)
6c. Takes the view, furthermore, that in connection with SSGIs it should be possible for contracting authorities to reserve specific contracts for non-profit organisations which specialise in providing social services;
Amendment 71 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Recognises the role the EU can play in facilitating the development of successful Public Private PartnershipsTakes the view that Public Private Partnerships do not represent a good contracting model; such partnerships have often ended disastrously to the massive cost of the taxpayer;
Amendment 76 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Recognises that public procurement, if used effectively, could be a real driver to promoting quality jobs, wages and conditions, equality, developing skills, training, promoting environmental policies, and providing incentives for research and innovation;
Amendment 80 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Regrets that the Green Paper does not use the opportunity to clarify the divergent views on public procurement in relation to the posting of workers1 ; takes the view, in this connection, that the EU should lay down general legal provisions governing working conditions during the performance of contracts which apply to both contractors and sub-contractors;
Amendment 83 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Calls on the Commission to make sustainable procurement a core focus of public procurement rules by introducing a new SMART (Sustainably most advantageously rated tender) award criterion to replace most economically advantageous tender to reflect the importance of taking social and environmental considerations into account in public contracting;
Amendment 84 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. Calls on the Commission to remove, or make considerably more flexible, the link to the subject matter of the contract to allow more effective social and environmental procurement choices, which will make public contracting more transparent;
Amendment 85 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 c (new)
Paragraph 8 c (new)
8c. Stresses that it is essential to ensure that all the terms – in particular those covering working conditions and environmental and quality requirements – that contractors must meet are also met by sub-contractors; considers, furthermore, that a chain of liability should be established, under which contractors are held liable for any breaches by sub- contractors, in particular in connection with working conditions, on the basis of a principle of joint and several liability between contractors and subcontractors;