Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-01-16-Speech-3-152"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020116.11.3-152"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, I too join my colleagues in congratulating you on your re-election as Vice-President. I also wish to congratulate the rapporteur and all the draftsmen on their work on what may appear to be a very simple topic but, when you get into the detail and analysis of it, proves extremely difficult. Rather than repeating what has been said already, I would like to deal with three particular points.
Firstly, with regard to raising the limits on when tenders have to be put out for consultation, looking for the 50% increase is important because it has already been proven that the present limits do not allow for greater cross-border interaction between companies and between companies and agencies. This is because the contract limit is too small and the economic reality underlying this is that to move your operation into another Member State requires extra money and a more valuable contract to make such a move profitable. There is no point in saying that we should be spending public money merely to prop up a failing or ageing system. We should be using the money properly – of course to increase infrastructure, to provide better services and to increase local employment as much as possible – but it should not be used merely as a substitute for private and other investments or for other initiatives to create local employment.
The second area, concerning environmental considerations, is another very important question. It is one in which each and every one of us would agree that certain minimum standards have to be laid down. We have to learn from the mistakes of the past and ensure that we put in place proper controls and mechanisms to guarantee that what we pass on to future generations is in a better condition than that in which we received it. However, that should not be used as an obstacle or a block to development. There is a happy medium and a balance between both, which must be maintained.
My third point concerns social obligations, and in particular I agree fully with the Members who said that there must be a social return for the contracting authority and its area from the awarding of the contract. However, it should not be used to prevent the contracts from going ahead or as an extra bureaucratic layer to be put in place to prevent the best possible price from being brought forward.
My last point concerning the qualitative selection criteria. Of course we must have protections in place to ensure that those who are guilty of wrongdoing, fraud, racketeering and of interfering with Community assets and finances should be excluded from public contracts. However, I have one concern with regard to the question of a judgment that is not yet final: we are acting as judge and jury in denying somebody a right to be an applicant for a tender without having a final decision or analysis made as to whether that person is guilty of a crime or not. This is something we must be very careful of.
In conclusion, it is about time that these directives were brought together, that the texts were clarified and that greater certainty was put into the legislative framework under which people have to operate. But, most importantly of all, it must be seen as a move towards guaranteeing better public services for all people."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples