EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/397

(2004/C 78 E/0420)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2143/03

by Gabriele Stauner (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(26 June 2003)

Subject: Commission contracts with the Planistat Group

According to the information provided on its own website (www.planistat.fr), Planistat Europe SA has contracts with the Commission for a ‘value added statistical information service’ (service d'information statistique à valeur ajoutée) dating back to 1996 and due to run until the end of 2003. Can the Commission say how many contracts have been concluded in this connection and supply me with copies of the texts?

Can the Commission specify for each individual contract what award procedure was used, whether there were tenders from other tenderers, what procedures were used to assess the tenders, and why Planistat won the contracts? Can it supply copies of the supporting documents that provided the justification for the appropriate Eurostat authorising officers to sign the contracts?

Can the Commission produce a complete detailed list of the payments that it has made in connection with these contracts? Can it supply me with copies of Planistat records indicating what income the firm has earned by marketing and selling Eurostat data?

When and how has the Commission examined the truth of the firm's statements on the above subject? Have contracts also been concluded with other firms for the purpose of marketing Eurostat data, and, if applicable, can the Commission send me copies of those contracts?

Does the Commission still think it proper and necessary that the statistics which it compiles as a public institution can be marketed by private firms for profit?

When answering my question, can the Commission pay full heed to Article 197, third paragraph, and Article 287 of the EC Treaty?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(5 September 2003)

The Honourable Member's request to access the documents to which she refers will be treated in accordance with European Parliament and Council Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (1).

Since the contracts in question were concluded with Planistat as part of a ‘value added statistical information service’, it is important to emphasise that they have been or are still the subject of various audits and controls conducted by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF), the Commission's Internal Audit Service and Eurostat's internal auditing capacity. This answer is based therefore on current knowledge of the situation and is given without prejudice to any new facts that the investigations in progress might reveal or to future developments to which they could give rise.

As part of the ‘value added statistical information service’, six contracts were concluded with Planistat between 1996 and 1999 and four framework contracts between 1999 and 2003. In each case, the contract was awarded through competitive tendering.

With regard to the tender issued in 1995, ten bids were submitted for lot 1 (services supplied in connection with the management of Data Shop Luxembourg) and seven for lot 2 (services supplied in connection with the management of Data Shop Brussels and information about the Data Shop network). The contract was awarded to the bid judged to be the economically most advantageous in terms of technical merit and price. In both cases, Planistat's bid had the most technical merit and was also the lowest. The bid received a favourable opinion from the Advisory Committee on Procurements and Contracts (ACPC). In accordance with the tender specifications, the contract was renewed twice for each of the two lots and thus covered a total period of three years.

In 1999 a new tender was issued. Two bids were submitted for lot 1 (services supplied in connection with the management of Data Shop Luxembourg), two for lot 2 (services supplied in connection with the management of Data Shop Brussels), one for lot 3 (services supplied in connection with the management of Data Shop Madrid), and one for lot 4 (support for the Data Shop network). The company accepted for the four lots was Planistat, which had submitted the bid considered to be the most economically advantageous. Since this decision had received an unfavourable opinion from the ACPC, inasmuch as the category of service and the description of the subject of the contract did not correspond to the exact nature of the services and hence made it impossible to attract the interest of bidders who could meet the requirements, a second tender was published in 1999. The new tender notice and the specifications were submitted for the prior approval of the ACPC. The first three lots (Data Shops in Luxembourg, Brussels and Madrid) were amalgamated, and the second lot concerned support. For each lot there was a single bid, which came from Planistat. The bids were accepted on the basis of the quality of services offered and because they were considered economically advantageous. The ACPC delivered a favourable opinion concerning the award of the contract.

With regard to the tender in 2002, a single bid was submitted for each lot (lot 1: services supplied in connection with Data Shop management; lot 2: network support). Although there was only a single bid, the technical and financial analysis and the market assessment indicated that it was acceptable. The main reasons are as follows: appropriate specifications and advertising (a survey conducted prior to the ACPC decision among the companies which had requested the specifications but had not put in a bid showed that the reasons for not replying did not concern the specifications); good-quality technical offers; and an acceptable financial offer compared with the previous contract. The ACPC delivered a favourable opinion concerning the award of the contract.

Concerning the sale of publications (paper and CD-ROM), each publication ordered by the contractor from the Publications Office was systematically invoiced to it. As regards the database extraction service or the sales of files in PDF format, Planistat provided Eurostat, every month from 2000, with the extracts from the sales journal together with the invoices arranged in sequence. The list of payments made in connection with these contracts and the details of the revenue amounts as described in the monthly reports on the contract are being sent direct to the Honourable Member and Parliament's Secretariat.

Lastly, with regard to the dissemination of statistical information and, in particular, possible participation in it by commercial firms, it should be emphasised that, since dissemination is an integral part of the production of Community statistics as defined in Article 2 of Council Regulation (EC) No 322/97 of 17 February 1997 on Community Statistics (2), it falls within a strategy worked out in close coordination with the Member States and especially with national statistical institutes.

The Data Shops thus contribute directly to Eurostat's fulfilment of its public distribution service remit, within the framework of the agreement for the distribution of statistics. They have to supply a suitable answer to any requests submitted to them and are required to provide all Eurostat information on an impartial basis. Agreements on the distribution of statistics have been signed with national statistical institutes in many European countries, and an agreement has been drawn up entrusting a company with the management of the Data Shop in New York.

Licences for the redissemination of data for commercial purposes have been signed with a series of firms specialising in the information market. The distribution of certain data for commercial purposes in connection with the supply of value-added information products is designed to satisfy other considerations: its aim is to serve certain groups of special users who require Eurostat data with added value. These specialised, professional information services are clearly not part of Eurostat's general statistical distribution remit. This approach is consistent with that set out in the Commission's communication ‘eEurope 2002: Creating an EU framework for the exploitation of public sector information’ (3) and with the proposal for a European Parliament and Council Directive on the re-use and commercial exploitation of public sector documents (4).

(1) OJ L 145, 31.5.2001.

(2) OJ L 52, 22.2.1997.

(3) COM(2001) 607 final.

(4) COM(2002) 207 final.