A large number of contributors argue against any Community initiative on IPPPs.
Some contributors consider an EC initiative redundant on the grounds that the existing public procurement rules provide sufficient clarity on setting up IPPPs. Conversely, some others believe that public procurement rules do not apply to IPPPs and therefore do not require clarification. Various contributors explain that under the subsidiarity principle the Community does not have a legal basis for such an initiative. Two contributors submit that IPPPs often originate from private initiatives. If, however, private participation in an IPPP was subject to prior competition, there would be less incentive for private parties to initiate IPPPs. Furthermore, a group of contributors argue that the existence of several hundred IPPPs in Germany proves, from a German perspective, that an EC initiative in this area is not needed. Some contributors say that no additional initiative should be taken in the energy sector, which is considered to be already overregulated.
The arguments made against an EC initiative on IPPPs are also procedural. So, for example, various contributors refer to the inappropriate timing of taking an initiative in this area now: prior to any Community initiative, the so-called Legislative Package16 needs to be well implemented in the Member States. Others are of the opinion that national IPPP practices (including economic and social aspects) need to be thoroughly assessed before a decision on an EC initiative in the IPPP area can be taken.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
16 Directive 2004/17/EC coordinating the procurement procedures of entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors and Directive 2004/18/EC on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts.