Session 7 Regulation

8/6/2019 Session 7 Regulation

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/session-7-regulation 1/18



PPPUE/Capacity 2015 PPP tr ainingJanuary 26, 2006

Laws related to PPPs The Constitution of the country;

legislative division of responsibility for serviceamong national, regional and local governments;

contr act law;

employment law; public sector borrowing rules;

access and right of usage rules;

related natur al resour ce, e.g. water resour ces

management law; health and safety laws and regulations and

environmental laws and regulations; and

social policy matters, such as the provision of subsidies.




Alternative regulatory

arrangements1. Setting up a single national regulator covering an entire

sector with responsibility for a number of private sector providers

PROS: ensuring universality and consistency of standards;

comparisons between providers; and

extensive customer involvement, in order to show how wellutilities are meeting targets and the service levels that can beachieved.

CONS: can be relatively inflexible and cumbersome for the one-off PPP contr acts that are used frequently in theECIS region




Alternative regulatory

arrangements2. Creating separate regulators on a contr act-by-contr act basis

E.g. national legislation covers service standards or customer protection, the contr act will define the obligations of each par tner and the regulatory mechanisms.

CROS: relatively easy to implement can be tailored to specific cir cumstances and is therefore more easily

able to accommodate local needs and priorities.

CONS: it can result in greater focus on inter preting and applying contr act terms

r ather than pursuing the wider regulatory principles;

the smaller scale of local regulatory oper ations can result in institutionalconstr aints and insufficient attention being directed to secondary issues,such as protecting vulner able groups or the poor;

Impossible for regulator to benchmark with similar utilities performance




European Union 1/2 There is no uniform PPP definition for the

EU, nor a wide policy

Common char acteristics Utilization not only private sector ability to

r aise finances but also its management andexperience

Risks are allocated to the par ty better equipped to manage them

Need to combine the EU funding and privatefinance




European Union 2/2 Changes in legislation and institutional

suppor t on the level of each member state

PPPs are established as one of the tools

which are available to the government

Still poor level of understanding of PPPs

among public sector officials




In EU countries PPP initiatives

star t w/: changes in legislation to f acilitate the

development of PPPs (Italy)

the establishment of public sector

advisory groups (UK) and

the set up of dedic

ated teams inside keyministries or depar tments (Holland, IT, UK)




Important

changes expe

cted

PPP Green Paper http://europa.eu.int/eur -

lex/en/com/gpr/2004/com2004_0327en01.

pdf

Repor t on Public Consultation on the

mentioned PPP Green Paper (May 2005)

http://europa.eu.int/comm/internal_market/publicprocurement/docs/ppp/ppp-

report _en.pdf




PPP institutional models on the

degree of centr alization of PPP

institutions in the over all state

structure1.

Highly centr alized (Canada) ± SuperBuildCor por ation and Ministries

2. Highly decentr alized (Fr ance, Por tugal) ±PPPs ± individual government

depar tments and local authoritiesresponsibility, although informalcoordination IS taking place




PPP institutional models3. Mixed centralized and decentralized

(Ireland, UK, Italy, Netherlands)

central body, which coordinates anddevelops policies (usually is located infinance ministries)

with individual Äspending³ departments

having PPP Units, which are mainlyfocused on project development andprocurement




PPP institutional development in EU Member states (Adapted from PwC Repor t 2004, WB Repor t 2004)

Country PPP Unit PPP Law Relative PPP experience (water and wastewater secto r)

Austria - Belgium Denmark - -Finland -

France -German Greece -Ireland Ital Luxembourg - - -

Netherlands - Norwa not EU - -Portugal Spain - Sweden - - -UK -




Legend

Need f t dent f ed nd e t ns t en nl y

egional ni t available)

PPP ni t in ogress or exist ing bu t in urely onsul t at ive apaci t y)

PPP uni t exist ing ac t ively involved in PPP promot ion)

egislat ion being proposed

omprehensive legislat ion being draft ed/some sec t or speci f ic

legislat ion in place

omprehensive legislat ion in place

Discussions ongoing

Projec t s in procurement

Many procured projec t s, some projec t s closed

Subst ant ial number of closed projec t s

Subst ant ial number of closed projec t s, number of t hem in operat ion




PPP institutional development inEU New Member states (Adapted from PwC Repor t 2004,

WB Repor t 2004)

Count r ni t

t ive exper ience t er nd t ewat er ec t or)

Cypr us - - Czech epublic E st onia - -

Hungar y Lat via -Li t huania - - -Mal t a - -Poland

lovakia - - lovenia - -

Bulgar ia Romania T ur key -

A pplicant count r ies




EU Accession countries 1/2

High degree of public servicesdecentr alization creates challenges with unclear distribution of

competencies between the municipalitiesleading towards conflicts between local andregional tiers

Turkey enjoys the best legal PPPfr amework among the accession

countries. It star ted fin 1994 and went through the

Constitution amendments and structur alreforms of the key public sectors.




EU Accession countries 2/2 Romania has developed legislation to entrust private

sector with public assets management throughconcession, asset management, public - private

par tnership and rental. Specific PPP law defines five types of contr acts (BOT, DBO, BOR,

LDO, ROT).

Bulg aria has the weakest PPP legislation, yet moreadvanced then other countries in the region.

National Str ategy for Bulgaria's regional development for 2005-2015

Some PPP forms between municipalities and privatecompanies: contr acting

establishment of joint venture or shareholding companies

concession of municipal proper ty or the rights to build and/or use.




Western Balkans 1/

3

Clear publicly available policy promoting or restrictingPPP is absent

This impedes the effective application of the existingenabling legislation, such as Concession Law and Public Procurement Law.

Public Procurement Law is being dr af ted andimplemented in recent years in all western Balkancountries. Yet, it has issues: lack of implementability for tr ansparency and non-discrimination

policies;

objectivity of the procurement processes; and

in gener al presence of too many possibilities to shif t to non-competitive procedures.




Western Balkans: Challenges 2/3

The lack of a seamless, tr ansparent, and predictable legaland regulatory fr amework very complex and challenging

fr agmented and in many ways inconsistent

The lack of consistent and tr ansparent regulations andadministr ative procedures

The lack of effective, efficient, and adequately fundedadministr ative and judicial systems administr ation, law enfor cement, and the judiciary are marked by a

lack of impar tiality, accountability, and tr ansparency

cour t proceedings are very lengthy, unpredictable and costly

rife political interference in cour t decisions




Western Balkans 3/3

most local infr astructure rehabilitation andconstruction is carried out under contr actsto local/intern. construction companies

solid waste collection, maintenance of

green areasm management of public lightning are delivered by private providers(under competitive bidding procedures)

most big and medium size cities are

privatizing service delivery; some assets of those services remain state-owned

private sector involvement legislation isbeing developed with the help of EU funds

Documents

Session 7 Regulation