Vjesnik public procurement procedure done in line with law and set criteria

Following appeals against the selection of a company to remove the Vjesnik tower and allegations the contract was rigged, Minister Branko Bačić said on Thursday the procedure was conducted in line with the law and set criteria that prioritised the most economically advantageous offer rather than the lowest price alone.

On Thursday, Minister Bačić held a press conference on sectoral legislative proposals, after which the reporters asked him to clarify issues surrounding the tender for the removal of the Vjesnik building, which was damaged by fire, including why a company specialising in the production and installation of steel structures, with no apparent experience in demolition, had been invited to bid.

The Minister explained that after a preliminary information procedure and market research, conducted in accordance with the Public Procurement Act, five companies were selected and sent the documentation required to prepare bids.

"We said we would select the project designer and works contractor on the basis of the most economically advantageous offer, which is not the cheapest offer. We defined four criteria, each of which carried a certain weighting in the final decision on the most favourable bidder,” Bačić explained.

Asked whether the authorities were aware that the selected company, EURCO, with which a contract is planned, had previously been involved in the demolition of the Marjan Hotel in Split, where it failed to complete the job properly and another company, previously disqualified by the Ministry, had to be called in to finish the work, Bačić said the process around Vjesnik had been handled transparently from the outset, including three press conferences held.

He said the Ministry had engaged the Croatian Centre for Earthquake Engineering and waited for its report on the condition of the structure following the fire, which concluded that the building's stability had been compromised and that it needed to be removed as soon as possible.

“This is why we initiated such a procedure, which is faster, based on the Public Procurement Act, and we carried out the procedure,” he clarified.

He also recalled that judicial authorities and the State Inspectorate had also needed to carry out investigations and that, following the Inspectorate's decision, a negotiated procedure was launched immediately. He added that the state was not the sole owner of the building and that other co-owners had also taken part in the process.

Some data cannot be published until the appeal process is completed

Because of the ongoing appeals procedure, Bačić said the Ministry could not disclose information that might influence the decision of the State Commission for the Supervision of Public Procurement Procedures.

"Others may talk, disclose what they want. We have the responsibility, as the public contracting authority, not to jeopardise the procedure by any wrongdoing. The State Commission has the final say. When it will issue a decision is up to them, and under the law we expect this to be within 30 days,” Bačić stated, adding that he would provide the information to the press after this timeframe.

On the selection of invited companies, Bačić said the Ministry relied on data from the Croatian Chamber of Commerce on companies with relevant references in Croatia. Companies which were not listed in these data were not included in the tender. He emphasised that the price was not the key factor, but rather proof that the company can carry out the project. The final selection was determined by points awarded under tender documentation.

"Price was not the most important factor but rather convincing the contracting authority that the company is capable and qualified to carry out the job. All invited companies could be selected as contractors based on these references," Minister Bačić said.

Responding to further questions, State Secretary Tonči Glavinić said the criteria had been clearly defined and the selection was made according to the overall number of points.

“With regard to the very Marjan Hotel, this reference was listed by the selected EURCO company, but it was not taken into account,” Glavinić stated.

In respect of criteria, the price accounted for 30% and the remaining 70% related to experience, including the credentials of the project designer and site engineer, the execution timetable, completion of the first phase and remediation of deficiencies, and final completion, including the removal of debris.

State Secretary Glavinić stated that only complete offers were considered.

“Only bids containing absolutely everything were considered, including details of the project documentation, the demolition method - whether mechanical or by blasting - and the transport of materials. The companies we had invited met the criteria,” he pointed out.

Source: HINA/MPGI

News | Information