Despite talks of „lessons learned“ the grants through the European programmes by 2020 will be distributed under almost the same rules as before. So the obvious confusion, bureaucratic paperwork and many uncertainties arising during the past seven years, will continue in the future. At least that is the first impression one gets from the government decrees which determine the order for receiving money from the Structural and Cohesion Funds and the conditions for the selection of contractors by the beneficiaries. Both documents were published for public comment last week and all stakeholders can express their views on them until March 11. The practice so far has shown, however, that these efforts are completely irrelevant because the government did not pay any attention to the comments, and vote only on what they have in mind. It may sound absurd, but instead of facilitating the burden, in some cases the state is introducing new administrative barriers. The rules for the selection of contractors say that the required minimum turnover of a candidate can be up to three times larger than the estimated value of the project. Such restrictive condition seems rather strange amid the current move and the proposed by government amendments to the Law on Public Procurement with which to end the vicious practice of eliminating the small businesses out of the game.
Rules for the previous programming period did pose such a requirement, but officials have implemented a strict method of „copy/paste“ for most of the other provisions. Thanks to their efforts the e-tendering is entirely absent, and the only way remains to be the sealed envelopes. Opportunities for annexation of existing contracts remain.
The same situation is with the decree laying down the procedures for the allocation of funds through the European programmes. Although the first and foremost principle says that „in the application, granting and reporting of grants, the managing authority can not require applicants/beneficiaries to provide information and documents that are available to the authority or to another primary data controller.“ If it all ended there, it would be great, but a little further down the text includes a long list of circumstances for which it is expressly stated that official documents issued by the competent authority or certified copies thereof may be asked.
The BANKER
