WRITTEN QUESTION E-1786/99

by Ingo Friedrich (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(11 October 1999)

Subject: Procedure for reaching decisions on the award of TACIS-funded projects

1. Are current TACIS formalities (written tender, interview, financial offer) adequate for deciding which tenderer should be awarded a contract, e.g. for a project valued at 12,8 million?

2. What is done to ensure that the information supplied to the evaluation panel in the written tender and at the interview is accurate and also that obligations are fulfilled once a contract has been signed?

3. What is done to check the accuracy of the CVs of long- and medium-term experts (experience, qualifications, etc.) that are attached to tenders submitted in response to invitations to tender for TACIS projects?

4. What would happen if, in the case of the MTP tender, it was found, after the contract had been signed or during project implementation, that the successful candidate had supplied incorrect details with his tender or was not fulfilling the undertakings he had given? What precautions are taken, or are built in, at the contract-signing stage to limit the material and political damage that could be done in such a case (MTP tender, contract value 12,8 million)?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(2 December 1999)

1. Under current TACIS rules the tendering procedures differ according to the sum involved in the project.

Programmes involving sums in excess of 10 million are publicised via what is known as the open tender procedure. A description of the project is published in the Official journal and on the internet so as to reach as large an audience as possible. A preliminary list of suitable tenderers is very carefully selected by a committee of at least three people who work to published criteria. Generally, the jury taking the final decision includes two in-house and two external members as well as representatives of the beneficiary country. Extremely thorough and detailed checks are carried out at every stage of a tender (written tender, interview, financial offer) to ensure that the offer provides what is called for in the tender. The contract is awarded to the tender with the best combination of quality and value for money.

2. There are monitoring offices in each of the New Independent States. Projects and the services provided by firms that have been awarded contracts are subject to continuous joint monitoring by the staff of the respective delegations and task managers in Brussels.

3. The first check on any curriculum vitae submitted takes place during a preliminary interview. Where long-term experts with an important role in a project do not attend this interview, their credentials are checked by staff from the delegations and the task managers. This is particularly important in the case of projects mainly involving expertise, transfer of know-how or training.

4. If, between the conclusion of a contract and the start of work, it transpired that the company concerned had provided incorrect information or had not fulfilled its undertakings, the first step would be to investigate the immediate circumstances. If suspicions were confirmed and action was required, the cancellation clauses in the contract could be applied. Should it come to this, a new tender would be published and the contract awarded to another company to ensure that the project could go ahead and to limit damages. If cancellation resulted in financial damage, the Commission would pursue claims for damages.