RESTRICTED
WORLD TRADE GPA/W/14
8May1996
ORGANIZATION(96-1797)
Original: English Committee onGovernment Procurement
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
Communication from Norway
Thefollowing communication fromthedelegation ofNorway, dated 22April 1996, hasbeen
received withtherequest thatitbedistributed tothemembers oftheCommittee.
_______________
Atpresent, information technology doesnotplayamajor roleinpublic procurement inNorway,
nor,asfarasweknow, inmostother Parties. Thiswillprobably change inthecourse ofsome years.
Indocument GPA/IC/W/36, theUnited States mentions thefollowing three points onwhich
discussion concerning possible amendments oftheAgreement could begin:
1. selective tendering procedures under Article X;
2. areas ofambiguity suchasArticle XIIIandArticle IX;
3. deadlines under Article IX.
1. Selective tendering procedures under Article X
Itisassumed thatinformation technology willenhance thenumber ofbidders tosuchalarge
extent thatentities willprefer touseselective tendering instead ofopenprocedures. Webelieve this
might bethecaseforsome types ofproducts, butnotforallproducts. Wedohowever, asalready
mentioned, nothavethesame experience withelectronic commerce asforinstance theUnited States.
Weagree withtheUnited States thatitwillbenecessary tofindways ofensuring foreign suppliers
equal access todomestic markets inselective tendering procedures inconnection withelectronic
commerce. Wewould liketoemphasize thatwefindalarge number oftenders tobethebestway
ofachieving realcompetition.
2. Concerning areas ofambiguity suchasArticle XIIIandArticle IX
Concerning these articles, theymight havetobeamended tofacilitate electronic commerce.
3. Deadlines under Article IX
Ifthedeadlines forresponding toinvitations totender areshortened, itisimportant toensure
thattheelectronictenderingsystemsinusearetransparent,compatibleandreadilyaccessibletosuppliers
ofallParties. Otherwise, onecanexperience asituation where domestic suppliers arefavoured. In
ouropinion, itcould hence benecessary tokeeplonger deadlines toensure thatcontracts areeffectively
opentointernational competition.
./.GPA/W/14
Page2
Concerningcompatibility,therearetwodifferenttechnicalstandardsthatareinuseforelectronic
commerce intheUnited States andEurope atpresent. Inaddition, other systems maybeinusein
other Parties. InEurope weuseEDIFACT andX.400 whereas theUScontracting authorities use
ANSI X12.Atpresent, theses different systems arenotcompatible.
Wewould liketoemphasize thatallamendments thatshallbemade totheGPAtotakeaccount
oftechnological progress mustbebased onagenuine principle ofnon-discrimination which goesbeyond
theconcept ofnational treatment. Webelieve thatitisimportant tomake surethatanyamendments
totheAgreementaimingattakinginformationtechnologyintoaccountdonotunderminethetransparency
andinternational opening-up ofprocurement intheParties.