Experience in adopting framework agreements

1
Experience in adopting framework agreements
EU Learning Lab 2006-11-10
Urbain BRUGGEMAN Head of the Belgian Consultancy
and Policy Office on Federal Public Procurement
2
Summary

• Introduction
• Questionnaire
• Reactions of the members
• Conclusions

3
1. Introduction

• EU Directive 2004/18/EG of 31 March 2004
• Framework Agreements (FA) possible for classic
  public sector
• Many new possibilities for the public purchase
  services

4
2. Questionnnaire

• Questionnaire sent to all the EU Learning Lab
  members
• Aims
• Collect information about application of FA
• Share good practices
• Belgium leader of this project

5
3. Reactions of the members

• Completed questionnaire received from
• France
• Ireland
• Italy
• Denmark
• Cyprus
• Hungary
• Latvia
• Sweden

6
3. Reactions of the members

• Probable reason for not receiving any reaction of
  the other countries
• Directive not yet transposed in many EU countries
  (Belgium)
• Too early for communicating experiences on FA

7
3. Reactions of the members

• Cyprus
• Didnt conclude yet FA for the 4 options
• Intention to establish a working group with
• representatives of main purchasers of the
  government sector
• representatives of PPD

8
3.1. General Information
8
2. Reaction of the members
9
3.2. Options already adopted
9
2. Reaction of the members
10
3.3. Details about option 2
10
2. Reaction of the members
11
3.4.1. Details about option 3 Questions not
answered
Not answered for option 3

• Hungary
• Cyprus
• Latvia
• Italy
• Belgium

11
2. Reaction of the members
12
3.4.2. Details about option 3 Questions answered
12
2. Reaction of the members
13
3.4.2. Details about option 3 Questions answered
13
2. Reaction of the members
14
3.4.2. Details about option 3 Questions answered
14
2. Reaction of the members
15
3.4.2. Details about option 3 Questions answered
15
2. Reaction of the members
16
3.4.4. Details about option 4 Questions not
answered
Not answered for option 4

• Hungary
• Cyprus
• Latvia
• Italy
• Belgium
• Ireland

16
2. Reaction of the members
17
3.4.4. Details about option 4 Questions answered
17
2. Reaction of the members
18
3.4.4. Details about option 4 Questions answered
18
2. Reaction of the members
19
3.4.4. Details about option 4 Questions answered
19
2. Reaction of the members
20
3.4.4. Details about option 4 Questions answered
20
2. Reaction of the members
21
3.4.4. Details about option 4 Questions answered
21
2. Reaction of the members
22
3.4.4. Details about option 4 Questions answered

• Only Sweden applies the following system
• Central Purchasing body selects more than one
  offer in the first stage of the procedure
• The customers of the CPB the selected
  firms,receive the definitive offer of the
  selected firms,evaluate the offers and award the
  contract.

22
2. Reaction of the members
23
3.4.5. Details about the case Questions not
answered
The following countries did not give an answer
for thequestions mentioned on the questionnaire
for the case

• Hungary
• Cyprus
• Italy
• Belgium

23
2. Reaction of the members
24
3.4.5. Details about the case Questions answered
24
2. Reaction of the members
25
3.4.5. Details about the case Questions answered
25
2. Reaction of the members
26
3.4.5. Details about the case Questions answered
26
2. Reaction of the members
27
3.4.5. Details about the case Questions answered
27
2. Reaction of the members
28
4. Conclusions

• A part of the EU Llab members already awarded FA
• The duration of the FA is adapted according to
  the advantage they can obtain from FA
• By choosing the products/services they evaluate
  the estimated added value of a FA