Requirements of the Public Procurement Act are not applicable and should be waived for all hospitals built and equipped with 100% private capital, the Governing Board of the National Association of Private Hospitals requested at the beginning of the discussion on the new sector legislation.
We firmly declare our position that hospitals with 100% private property capital must not be required to purchase goods and services only after carrying out a tender under the Public Procurement Act, stated representatives of the Association. Their opinion is that the application of these legal rules is illogical and impractical even for private hospitals that have more than 30% of their revenue formed from public services. According to them, from a legal point of view, the payment for services of private hospitals coming from the Healthcare Fund is neither a subsidy nor aid, but a payment for services that have already been provided. After receiving the funds from the state, private hospitals transform them into capital that they spend according to their needs, officials from the Association believe. Another argument is that the way they use the money does not affect the budget of the healthcare institution.
According to the private clinics they are commercial companies which are governed by the logic of the market, and this does not involve an abusive quality-price relationship. The purchase of more expensive drugs, supplies and other goods to enhance the quality of service is borne solely by the owner of the private hospital. Consequently, the performance of the contract can not affect in any way the use of public means, the Association pointed out.
Private hospitals fear that such statutory procedures can be expensive for smaller ones, and may burden them with unnecessary bureaucracy. One of the largest private hospitals – Trimontsium in Plovdiv, has already asked the Ombudsman Konstantin Penchev to put forward the matter to the Constitutional Court, which on its turn to decide whether the law violates the constitutional right of free enterprise and the rights of patients to choose the best treatment for them.
The BANKER
