Marchés publics de défense. Les remarques des uns, des autres

Finalement il n'y aura pas eu que le Portugal à vouloir exprimer officiellement des remarques sur la directive marchés publics de défense, adoptée par les ambassadeurs des 27 le 1er juillet. Plusieurs pays (essentiellement des pays qui ne comptent pas de grosses industriels de défense - comme la France ou le Royaume-Uni - mais beaucoup de PME) ainsi que la Commission européenne ont tenu à inscrire des déclarations au procès-verbal de l'adoption de la directive.

A noter que ces remarques ont une valeur juridique diverse. Celles de la Commission ayant une valeur un peu supérieure aux autres (car c'est la Commission qui sera chargée ensuite d'interpréter et d'appliquer ces règles). Pour les Etats membres, ces remarques servent surtout de justification au plan national, ou en cas de futur litige devant la justice communautaire.

Pour le Portugal, c'est le manque d'accès pour ses PME qui le chagrine : "deeply regrets that this opportunity to establish fair terms of competition in defence equipment markets, with equal opportunities for Europe's small and medium-sized businesses, has been missed, particularly because measures required for progressive opening up of prime contractors' supply chains have not been considered." Et il souhaite que la Commission soumette une proposition permettant l'accès aux PME. "Portugal would therefore urge the Commission to submit legislative proposals, should the review under Article 73 of the Directive show that an internal market for supply chains, where small and medium-sized businesses are more involved, and the development of a European defence market underpinned by a sustainable European defence technological and industrial base have not been brought about by the Directive's application."

Les Pays-Bas souhaitent également une révision dans les cinq ans de l'article 73. "The Netherlands specifically calls on the European Commission to assess whether the European internal market for defence and security is working, both for prime contractors competing for public contracts and for subcontractors competing for supply contracts from prime contractors for performance of a public contract. The Netherlands calls on the European Commission to come up with effective (legislative) measures if the review of the Directive shows little or no internal market to have been opened up for Europe's small and medium-sized businesses operating as subcontractors in the European defence and security industry."

L'Autriche a un problème avec la déclaration de culpabilité d'une entreprise (qui l'exclut des marchés publics). "These may include the conditions whereby a candidate or tenderer (economic operator) can show that the grounds for a conviction referred to in Article 39(1) no longer obtain. Where an economic operator shows that the grounds for such a conviction no longer obtain, the contracting authority should not be required to exclude that candidate or tenderer".

La Pologne a fait une des déclarations les plus savoureuses.

Tout en saluant l'adoption de la directive, elle la regrette en fait. "L'adoption d'une directive devrait être précédée d'une analyse approfondie concernant l'évaluation de son impact en se concentrant en particulier sur la compétitivité, la participation des PME, le marché du travail comme la répartition géographique de la production d'équipement des défense dans l'UE". "We underline the fact that the adoption of a such directive regulating above mentioned issues should be preceded by thorough analysis concerning its impact assessment focusing in particular on its impact on competitiveness, security of supply, participation of Small and Medium-sized Enterprises, labour market as well as the geographical distribution of the defence equipment production among the European Union Member States. Elle craint les effets négatifs de la soumission à marchés publics pour son secteur de défense en pleine crise économique, avec des conséquences "comme la faillite des entreprises de défense, l'augmentation du taux d'emploi et d'un déclin du secteur national de défense." "The issue has become of even more importance in view of the economic and financial crisis that has occurred during the last phase of the legislative work on the directive and which concerns the defence sector in a particular manner. In Poland’s opinion there is a risk that the adoption of the Directive in its current wording would deepen the existing differences between national defence industries. This may lead to disadvantageous effects such as : bankruptcy of defence enterprises, unemployment rate increase and as a worst case scenario a decline of defence sector on a national level. Poland express its belief that the proposals aiming at limiting the possible consequences of above mentioned phenomena were not dealt with due concern during the legislative work on the directive. The Directive should not limit national rules on offset arrangements. Therefore, Poland would like to express its belief that the current proposal would neither lead to the creation of a level playing field and the increase of efficiency of national defence industries nor to the enhanced competitiveness of the European defence market."

On croit rêver. Non non ce n'est pas la France qui parle ainsi mais bien la Pologne, dirigée par un gouvernement libéral, pour l'ouverture du libre marché, qui parle ainsi. Du protectionnisme ... ou je me trompe. Aah l'Europe !

La Commission européenne aussi y va de ses commentaires.

Sur les marchés passés dans le cadre d'une opération PESD hors UE (normalement exclus de la directive, il est permis ainsi de conclure un marché localement... c'est mieux!), la Commission précise qu'il s'agit du pays où l'opération se déroule comme des pays avoisinants : "For the purposes of this Directive, ‘area of operation’ (Art. 13 (d)) should be understood as being the third country(ies) in which a defence or security operation is being undertaken, together with those third countries in the surrounding geographic zone."

Concernant les avis publiés de façon facultative (pour des marchés non soumis à cette obligation), la Commission précise le régime d'accès au public "Documents transmitted by Member States to the Commission as a result of obligations in this Directive will be treated, where relevant, in accordance with Commission's rules on security laid down in Decision 2001/844/EC. Requests for public access to these documents will be treated by the Commission in accordance with Articles 4(5) and 9 of Regulation 1049/2001."