WRITTEN QUESTION E-3220/98

by Laura González Álvarez (GUE/NGL) and Pedro Marset Campos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(26 October 1998)

Subject: Irregularities in the awarding of a construction contract in Cerceda, La Coruña (Galicia, Spain)

Sogama S.A. is a publicly-owned Galician company active in the field of environmental management set up by the autonomous authorities as a means of carrying out their responsibilities in this field. In order to carry out its activities, the company published an invitation to tender for the construction of a thermoelectric waste treatment plant in the municipality of Cerceda (La Coruña) which will receive financial support from the Community. The call for tender resulted in tenders from various companies. The initial selection process did not result in the awarding of a contract. Subsequently, at some point not known to the unions, and without the publication of any announcement, the contract was awarded to a company based outside the autonomous community. Some important public offices, including the Galician Ombudsman, publicly criticised the awarding of the contract since it appeared that the administrative rules laid down had not been complied with. The regional authorities were even accused of having created the limited liability company in order to circumvent control by public authorities.

Workers active in the sector have initiated legal proceedings in Spain through their Union representatives.

1. Since this construction project receives Community financial support, can the Commission call on the competent authorities to initiate an investigation to look into the accusations levelled by Spanish trade unions?

2. Given that Galicia is among the European regions with the highest rates of unemployment, does the Commission not think that European funds allocated to the abovementioned construction project would fulfil their objective better if the companies concerned were based in Galicia or had factories there?

3. In what manner can the Commission intercede before the Spanish authorities in order to guarantee compliance with Community legislation on the environment and, more specifically, with (a) Directive 91/156/EEC(1) on waste, (b) Directive 85/337/EEC(2) on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment and (c) Directive 90/313/EEC(3) on the freedom of access to information on the environment.

4. As the guardian of the Treaties, to what extent does the Commission consider that workers employed by Galician companies have been discriminated against by the awarding of the contract to a non Galician company?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(14 January 1999)

1. On 7 May 1998, the Commission approved part-financing by the Cohesion Fund of the waste management project in Galicia. This project involved the construction of the thermoelectric plant mentioned by the Honourable Members.

The Commission was not aware of any irregularities in the award of the public contract referred to by the Honourable Members, and it is difficult to deal with this case on the basis of the information provided. The Commission would therefore ask the Honourable Members for more details on this matter in order to justify its making an approach to the Spanish Government in order to check whether there has been an infringement of Community public procurement legislation. These details should focus on the following aspects: the statutes of Sogama S.A. (the extent of the administration's holding in the company, its management or administrative, managerial or supervisory structures, the reason why this company was set up); any available documents concerning the initial procedure which failed to produce a result (contract notice, invitation to tender, specifications, evaluation report) and any information concerning possible irregularities which may have been committed in the course of this procedure; and any information concerning the procedure by which the contract was finally awarded, as well as any details on possible infringements of Community public procurement legislation.

2. and 4. The Community Directives relating to the coordination of procedures for the award of public service contracts(4) assist in the completion of the internal market through provisions aimed at ensuring compliance with the principles of transparency, non-discrimination and equal treatment. It would be incompatible with these principles, and with the EC Treaty itself, to establish any form of preferences, including regional, which would favour certain tenderers over others.

3. Compliance with Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment(5) and Council Directive 91/156/EEC of 18 March 1991 amending Directive 75/442/EEC on waste(6), and with several other provisions concerning atmospheric emissions, is a precondition for the adoption of decisions concerning the financing of waste management projects under the Cohesion Fund. As regards Council Directive 90/313/EEC of 7 June 1990 on the freedom of access to information on the environment in particular(7), the Commission is not aware of any infringements having been committed.

(1) OJ L 78, 26.3.1991, p. 32.

(2) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40.

(3) OJ L 158, 23.6.1990, p. 56.

(4) Directives 93/36/EEC, 93/37/EEC and 93/38/EEC of 14 June 1993 (OJ L 199, 9.8.1993), and Directive 92/50/EEC of 18 June 1992 (OJ L 209, 24.7.1992).

(5) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985.

(6) OJ L 78, 26.3.1991.

(7) OJ L 158, 23.6.1990.