Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-10-24-Speech-1-097-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20111024.14.1-097-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, I would like to express my warmest thanks to the Commissioner for the fact that he wishes to incorporate our comments into the revision and take them into consideration. I would also like to thank everybody for their comments this evening. I would specifically like to mention one point. In 2004, we also set ourselves the objective of simplifying the public procurement directives. Unfortunately, the result was not what we were aiming for. This was not just because the wording of the legislation at European level was highly complex, but also because the complexity was increased still further in the course of implementation in the Member States. We need to work on that if we really want to simplify things this time. It is not just a matter of the European public procurement directives being clear, simple and flexible; it also matters that, when implementing them in national law, the Member States must not make the rules more complicated than necessary and do not impose additional requirements. That is also important and is something that we need to take into consideration.
I would also like to mention one other point that I feel is particularly important in this debate. If we want to give the contracting authorities and small and medium-sized enterprises more room for manoeuvre, then we need to make sure that we do not impose new set requirements. A couple of times during this debate, we heard people mention quotas. I consider that extremely difficult. Set requirements will tend to increase bureaucracy, because in some Member States, they will be easy to achieve, and in others more difficult. In the end, we would then need a compromise that is very difficult to implement. That is why I am resisting this. I have always said quite clearly in this report that we do not want set requirements. What we want is greater local democracy, better access for small and medium-sized enterprises and simplified procedures, but no additional regulations.
That is the first point. One further point that is very important to me is that we have said that we do not want the cheapest offer, but rather the economically most advantageous offer. Further evidence for this was provided in Kraków. During the debate, the Polish representative said that because the wording of the European public procurement directives was unclear, 80% of contracts in Poland were awarded to the cheapest bid and not to the economically most advantageous offer. That is the direction we want to go in, and I consider this to be important. If we move in this direction, however, it is essential that we do not create additional bureaucratic requirements here, but instead facilitate and simplify matters, provide more assistance, and have greater exchange of best practice."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples