2. Where a framework agreement includes both direct award and mini-assistance, the framework agreement shall contain the objective criteria defining the method to be applied and when (see Rule 33(9)(a)). I would have said that this has always been the case, but most of the buying club executives I meet seem to assume that the client has a free choice. “. contracting authorities which, from the outset, are parties to a specific framework agreement should be clearly indicated, either by name or by other means, such as for example. B by referring to a particular category of contracting authorities in a clearly defined geographical area, so that the contracting authorities concerned can be easily and clearly identified`; 3. There is no agreement on the functioning of the `lots` in the framework contract in relation to the category of `compatible` suppliers. In the case of a call for tenders in lots, a separate contract shall be concluded for each lot. If `lots` are tendered, why should not all lots lead to a separate framework agreement? Since their recognition in the 2004 Public Sector Directive, framework agreements have become a very popular instrument for public procurement in the European Union.
In the meantime, there has been much discussion about the need to offset the benefits of these agreements. These benefits include efficiency through economies of scale (since a procedure can be used later to assign multiple contacts) and administrative efficiency. It is also important to take into account the risk associated with framework agreements, such as .B. the significant risk to competition and the lack of transparency in the procurement procedure. This last point will be at the heart of this document. Throughout the document, the author argues that the rules on framework agreements do not ensure sufficient transparency in the on-demand procurement procedure. The latter requirement, which reflects similar wording in the 2006 RCP, has raised concerns about the way in which a contracting authority may apply different weightings, or even different criteria from those defined in the specifications of the Framework Agreement, during its mini-competitions. Unfortunately, the 2015 PCR does not resolve this issue. The provisions on framework agreements in the Public Procurement Regulations 2015 (PCR 2015) do not deviate radically from the regulation of the regulation of public contracts 2006 (PCR 2006). But they shed some light on these delicate areas. Does this mean that all contracts are a framework agreement that limits them to four years, with all expiry contracts covered by this definition? As in the past, contracting authorities must publish contract notices when concluding a framework agreement.
However, there are some subtle changes compared to the 2006 RCP: Regs s.33 (2) provides that `in these regulations` `framework agreement` means an agreement between one or more contracting authorities and one or more economic operators the objective of which is to define the conditions applicable to contracts to be awarded during a given period, in particular as regards the price and, where appropriate, the quantity provided. ». Hello, I am a subcontractor of the Navy. I rely on the publication of public contracts in order to be able to contact winning bidders and even losing bidders. I do not like the framework conditions, because they were largely designed to conceal public procurement activities. Once a framework has been established, it is not necessary to publish subsequent contracts awarded to economic operators (sic). This is unhealthy because it hides the contract, its reasons, costs and practices from other contractors and public and administrative control. This is why executives are so popular with governments and authorities, who are desperate because they justify, cost and have to do demanding work with the public. So much openness and transparency! Mini-competitions must be based on the same conditions as for the award of the framework agreement and: another important clarification is that contracting authorities may award a contract to a central purchasing body to conclude contracts and conclude framework agreements to which they can access without going through a contract award for that contract (Rule 37, paragraph 8). PCR 2015).
. . .