Maintaining public orders

 Amongst the new provisions of the act, there will be a raising of the threshold for the value of contracts above which they have to be strictly supervised by the Urząd Zamówień Publicznych (Public Procurements Office) from EUR 10 mln to EUR 20 mln. To discuss the implications of the act in more detail, ‘Eurobuild Poland’ spoke to Grzegorz Paprotny, deputy business development director of Budimex Dromex.

 Nathan North, ‘Eurobuild’:  However, it was the process of parliamentary auto-amendments and the general elections in Poland, that were the reasons why these amendments came into force as late as May 5th 2006.

What problems had been caused by the situation before the changes in the law?

 As well as the problems I have already referred to, the principal ones were: the blocking of final decisions of granting orders, prolonging the contract granting procedures, and, in some cases, the forfeiting of awarded finance (including that from the EU), which should have been spent in a pre-set specific period.

How will the change in the law affect Budimex? And how will it affect the construction industry in general?

 In our opinion, the amendments to the Public Orders Law should result in the greater predictability of tender procedures. As regards our company, the important thing is the raising of the threshold for construction contracts to EUR 20 mln, that is, when all the obligations stemming from the Public Procurements Act are applicable. It is also important that the amendment allows demands to be issued to contractors to present lacking declarations and required documents, or to correct errors in such documents and statements, or else for the ordering party to demand explanations from the contractor both as regards objective and subjective documents.

Is the change in the law enough, or do more changes need to be made in future? If so, what kind of changes?

 Our company sees the amendment of the Public Orders Law as a move in the right direction through procedure simplifications, the possibility of correcting small errors, the provision of additional explanations whenever the ordering party so demands, etc. But we feel the amendments should go even further, toward attempting to make the final value and term of completion more realistic for an investment for which an order has been granted. This is due to the fact that situations very frequently occur when, due to the absence of adequate formal, legal and financial requirements which the contractors are set, in relation to the value and technical complexity of an investment, the outcome is that companies which differ greatly in terms of technical and financial potential can effectively compete for an order.