WRITTEN QUESTION E-2095/02 by Michiel van Hulten (PSE)and Diana Wallis (ELDR) to the Commission. Multiple framework contracts for translation services.
Date: 2002-07-16
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU institution, award of contract, contract, contract terms, invitation to tender, provision of services, translation

C 192 E/50

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

14.8.2003

Funding has been allocated under the European Initiative for Democracy and Human Rights (Chapter B7-7
of the Community budget) for projects tackling the issue of trafficking, child labour and slavery. For
example, under
la
Cooperazione Internazionale e l’Aiuto Umanitario) to promote children’s rights and to combat child
trafficking, modern forms of slavery and the exploitation of minors in Gabon, Benin, Togo and Nigeria.
Such support complements the assistance which is channelled through country-specific programmes.

the 2001 budget, EUR 1 252 375 was allocated to Alizei

(Associazione per

As far as co-operation with West Africa is concerned, the ongoing 9th European Development Fund (EDF)
programming exercise has indeed looked into the issues of conflict prevention and human being
trafficking. It is envisaged to support Ecowas through specific actions in those areas.

The human rights clause, which is included in all co-operation agreements between the Community and
third countries, defines respect for human rights as an essential element of the agreement. Core labour
standards, as set out in the eight key standard International Labour Organisation (ILO) Conventions
(including those on forced and child labour) fall within the remit of this clause, which provides a basis for
raising such concerns with third countries and for procedures (cid:1) including ultimately the suspension of the
co-operation agreement (cid:1) in the event that human rights’ abuses continue.

(2003/C 192 E/048)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2095/02

by Michiel van Hulten (PSE)
and Diana Wallis (ELDR) to the Commission

(16 July 2002)

Subject: Multiple framework contracts for translation services

Can the Commission confirm that the conclusion of multiple framework contracts for translation

1.
services is fully justified in the light of:

(a)

(b)

the impossibility of determining any but the most general aspects of the service required at the
moment of award of the contracts (specifically neither volume nor deadline can be specified) and

the urgency with which the service is required and that, in the case of translation services, multiple
framework contracts do not constitute an exception but are accepted as the norm?

Can the Commission confirm that, given the legal framework, there are no legal grounds to prevent
2.
authorising officers managing multiple framework contracts for translation services from operating a
system of on-going assessment of the quality of service actually offered during the contract period, with
the ranking of contractors being adjusted to reflect the actual quality, subject to announcement (in
accordance with Article 98a (3)(b) and (4) of the Implementing Rules for the Financial Regulation) of the
intention to operate such a system in the contract notice, tender specification and framework contract?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(8 October 2002)

It should be noted that each Institution as an independent contracting authority is solely responsible for
applying the procedures for the award of public procurement contracts and the management of such
contracts in the general framework of the Financial Regulation.

In the Commission, the conclusion of ‘multiple standard-form general contracts’ is possible only if:

(cid:1) the undifferentiated nature of the services does not allow subdivision of the contract into lots,

(cid:1) security of supply might not be guaranteed otherwise (scale of requirement compared with the market

capacity) or urgency and extremely short response is required, and

(cid:1) the work to be done cannot be defined precisely when the contract is awarded.

The Commission can assure the Honourable Members that authorising officers managing multiple
framework contracts for translation services have a legal obligation to assess the quality of service actually
provided during the contract period in order to verify the proper execution of the contract (Articles 1(2)
and 68 of
the Financial Regulation of
21 December 1977).

the Rules for the implementation of certain provisions of

14.8.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 192 E/51

Under a multiple framework contract the authorising department may call the second contractor on the
list, rather than the contractor heading the list, and then, if necessary the third, and so on, if the preceding
contractors are unable to fulfil the order for reasons that do not entail termination of the contract.

In some exceptional cases, in particular for certain services falling under annex 1B of Directive 92/50/EC
on the coordination of procedures for the award of public service contracts, the Commission may find it
possible to accept multiple framework contracts according to the provisions of which the ranking of the
contractors can be readjusted. This is only accepted on a case by case basis, after a thorough analysis of all
the documents submitted and subject to prior announcement of the intention to operate such a system in
justification has to provided by the authorising
the documentation of the invitation to tender. Full
department.

(2003/C 192 E/049)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2110/02

by Ioannis Marínos (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(17 July 2002)

Subject: Absence of statistics for Greece

Euro-Indicators No 48/2002, published by Eurostat, lists internal trade and total exports for the Member
States of the Union. The figures produced are complete and highly informative and cover the period up to
January 2002 even in respect of countries which are not members of the Union, such as Russia, Poland,
Turkey and others. Surprisingly, however, there are no statistics for Greece or Luxembourg (EU Member
States) for 2002 in respect of their total imports and exports and their balance of trade.

What are the reasons for this absence of statistics? With particular reference to Greece, is the Commission
satisfied with the flow and quality of statistics from the Greek authorities? Has it encountered problems
with delays in the notification of statistics to its departments and Eurostat and with which particular data?
Are there more general problems associated with the reliability of the data and, if so, what are they?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(17 September 2002)

1. With regard to Luxembourg, the absence of data for January 2002 in Euro-Indicators No 48/2002
was caused by a delay in the transmission of the data to Eurostat, resulting from a change in the data
processing application at the beginning of 2002. This problem has since been resolved and the data
transmission deadlines are now being respected.

In the case of Greece, a delay in the transmission of data to Eurostat also explains the absence of data for
January 2002. There are two main reasons for the frequent delays:
the significant proportion of
declarations transmitted on paper, and the lack of suitable resources to process these declarations.

The Commission (Eurostat) is not happy with the transmission of data by Greece, as it is failing to
2.
meet the regulatory deadlines. Eurostat has drawn the attention of the Greek authorities to this matter on a
number of occasions.

Eurostat considers the quality of the Greek data to be comparable to that of most other Member States.

3.
The Commission (Eurostat) has identified delays in the transmission of both intra-Community and
extra-Community statistics by Greece. With regard to the latter, it should be emphasised that the statistical
declarations are collected and processed by the customs authority (Ministry of Finance), and then validated
and transmitted to Eurostat by the Greek Statistical Office.