« Euro perto de máximo histórico face ao dólar | Entrada | Irão aceita suspender totalmente enriquecimento de urânio »
novembro 15, 2004
Open and shut
Fonte: The Times
Open and shut
Competition in EU public procurement barely exists
Government contracts account for a huge slice of the European economy — some £1,040 billion a year in the pre-enlargement European Union. Under European Union law, these contracts should be as open to the refreshing breeze of international competition as any in the private sector.
That they should be so is to everyone’s benefit. Under open bidding that puts foreign firms on the same footing as domestic ones, taxpayers get better value for money, companies gain access to wider markets, and the European Union’s single market functions as intended, improving Europe’s international competitiveness. That Birmingham’s new Metro is Italian-made should be a source of satisfaction, not lamentations about “lost” British jobs.
Where anger about lost jobs is entirely justified is when British bidders are denied similarly fair and open treatment in other EU countries. Gordon Brown’s selection of Alan Wood, chief executive of Siemens UK, to investigate these complaints raised a few eyebrows when it was announced. Sir Alan, a passionate advocate of euro membership, was not expected to be over-hard on continental practices; but he has uncovered damning evidence of unfair treatment.
The Wood Review, to be released today, treads delicately across the political minefield. Where political favouritism and tricks obviously designed to bend the rules are at issue, it speaks of “cultural and political factors”. It would be interesting to learn what is meant by the advice to British companies, in an annexe to the report, to be “well-integrated within the local culture and business environment” and familiar “with informal problem-solving mechanisms ”. In Italy, such advice would mean only one thing: get out that brown envelope, and stuff it generously. But, however low-key its tone, the report clearly demonstrates that in France, Spain, Germany and Italy, to name the obvious offenders, open competition can barely be said to exist.
There are no fewer than ten EU directives on public procurement, all of them based on non-discrimination, equal treatment, transparency and mutual recognition of standards. According to the Office of Government Commerce which monitors procurement in Britain, these are “not prescriptive rules” but “broad principles, open to interpretation”. That cannot excuse awarding contracts according to political allegiance, requiring tenderers to manufacture locally, or using foreign bids as “false tenders” to beat down local suppliers who were always going to get the job — as a British company bidding for a German IT contract found when it offered a 50 per cent saving to the client, yet still lost out to the incumbent German supplier.
These examples are moreover drawn from only a tiny proportion of the procurement pot. Less than a fifth of public procurement tenders reach the international domain, with a mere 16 per cent published in the EU official journal; and defence, energy, transport and some services are still off-limits in many EU countries. The Chancellor intends to push this report hard at the Ecofin finance ministers’ meeting tomorrow, and insist on a fairer playing field. He will, rightly, demand clearer benchmarks from the Commission. The one thing Britain should not do is close its own market. Complain, by all means, when others cheat foreign firms and their own taxpayers; but their folly is no reason for the UK to throw public money down the drain.
Publicado por esta às novembro 15, 2004 12:42 PM