Brussels, 21/06/2007 (Agence Europe) - Making the award of public contracts more ethical by reducing risks of fraud and corruption. That is the aim of the review of European rules (directives 89/665/EEC and 92/13/EEC) which put in place appeals procedures for companies which feel they have been wronged in the award of public contracts (see EUROPE 9190). On Thursday 21 June, the European Parliament endorsed the informal interinstitutional compromise on the text in question (see EUROPE 9446), thereby opening the way for a first reading adoption of European legislation.
“The final text confirms the main objective of the reform: to retain candidates' appeals arrangements by suspending the market in due course and setting up a range of sanctions to avoid abuses,” said rapporteur French Socialist MEP Jean-Claude Fruteau during the plenary debate. Mr Fruteau noted that member states already had a set of arrangements which allowed companies to launch appeals when they felt wronged by the award of public contracts. “However, the fact that there are no coordinated rules on timescales for appeals during the period before contracts are signed has contributed to a race to sign contracts being allowed to develop, with the result that, once contracts have been signed, it is very difficult to make challenges,” he said. The directive, then, brings in, at European level, a minimum period of ten days (15 days under certain conditions) during which time the awarding authority will not be able to sign the contract, so as to leave sufficient time for an unsuccessful tenderer to appeal. It is “much more useful” to challenge the award of a contract than to be awarded damages once the contract has been signed, said Jacques Toubon (EPP-ED, France). While supporting the compromise, the ALDE and Greens/EFA groups would have preferred a longer time between the award and signing of contracts. Speaking for the PES group, German Social Democrat Evelyne Gebhardt criticised the attitude of the Council which “did not want a simple solution”.
With regard to the sanctions a national authority can apply to irregularities in the award of public contracts, Mr Fruteau said he thought that the “compromise has taken on board the EP's concern to have a range of strong sanctions, adapted to the realities facing authorities”. “Serious breaches of the rules”, such as illegal private contracts, infringements of framework agreement rules or restricting the chances of a tenderer winning the contract “will result in the annulment of the contract,” he added. He went on to say, “Annulment of contracts will not be compulsory for minor infringements”, which will have “alternative sanctions”. (mb)