This “brand” was “developed within the framework of the tasks assumed by the Luxembourg state in the field of waste management”, says SuperDrecksKëscht on its website. Its missions include waste prevention via an education and awareness programme as well as the recovery, recycling and disposal of waste material.

Private company Oeko-Service Luxembourg SA runs the SuperDrecksKëscht as a “very lucrative activity” according to Reporter.lu, referring to an 11-year contract worth some €97 million signed in 2018 by environment minister Carole Dieschbourg (Déi Gréng). However, the article suggests there was a distortion of competition in the tender that Oeko-Service won, which is based on a 2005 law. For example, the tender excluded companies that also offer waste transport.

The investigation also criticises privileged links between German entrepreneur Hans-Peter Walter, co-owner of the company, and Robert Schmit, director of the environmental administration. It questions the real responsibility of the steering committee, composed of the director of the environment administration, representatives from the Chamber of Trade and the Chamber of Commerce, and Hans-Peter Walter.

The article also highlights the question of horizontal monopoly, since the entrepreneur has majority stakes in several recycling companies, such as CCN SA, which is active in Luxembourg. As a consequence, SuperDrecksKëscht consultants could advise property managers on the implementation of collection points, for example.

Parliament reactions

CSV deputies Paul Galles and Léon Gloden have submitted a series of parliamentary questions on the subject. TGloden says that, “for me, the two most important points are: were the rules of the public market respected or not? And what were the criteria for the post of director of the SuperDrecksKëscht Academy?” That role was given to Robert Schmit's son, another piece of information revealed by Reporter.lu.

The MPs are waiting for answers from the government. If their suspicions that Oeko-Service is a monopoly situation are confirmed, they believe that “the contract will have to be cancelled, then a new call for tenders at the European level will have to be made.”

“It is the same problem as always: a complete lack of transparency”, Sven Clement, MP for the Pirates, said. “For me, this is a serious matter […] Why isn't the government the main shareholder of the company?” With profits of several million euros per year for the private company, partly “at the expense of the taxpayer”, the contract also provides for a budget overrun if necessary, based on invoices. Sven Clement would like to check that these are not being addressed to other branches of the company. Other doubts remain, such as “why was a company that transports waste not eligible for the tender? It's still very odd.”

Clement, who obtained access for MPs to the contract between RTL and the state after taking the matter to court, is now demanding access to the contract between the government and Oeko-Service.

“There is not a single minister responsible for this”, he added. The contract has been renewed from year to year, so that “the four major parties, in one way or another, are involved.” According to him, the affair raises another problem: “the civil servants who remain in influential positions for decades”, referring to the suggested links between the German entrepreneur and Robert Schmit.

On RTL, Fred Keup (ADR) talked about “wasting tax-payers’ money”, while David Wagner (déi Lénk) says he is waiting for answers to questions that arise after reading the article.

Is the situation legal?

The Luxembourg Association for Environmental Law could not shed any light on the legality of the tender and the situation of Oeko-Service with its holdings in various companies.

Article 3 of the law of 23 October 2011 on competition states that “all agreements between companies, all decisions by associations of companies and all concerted practices which have the object or effect of preventing, restricting or distorting competition on a market are prohibited.”

The law of 8 April 2018 on public procurement, which provides for numerous exceptions (contracts related to energy distribution, water, transport, defence, etc.), nevertheless confirms in its basic principles that “a market may not be designed with the intention [...] of artificially limiting competition.” This is the case "when a market is designed with the intention of unduly favouring or disadvantaging certain economic operators”. The selection criteria may relate to the suitability to carry out the professional activity, economic and financial capacity and professional technical capability.

What does the ministry of the environment say?

When asked by Paperjam, the environment ministry confirmed the amount of the contract. In the Reporter.lu article, Robert Schmit denied Oeko-Service was a the monopoly, explaining the exclusion of companies that transport waste by the fact that “the latter would eventually have a competitive advantage, because they would advise companies and transport waste at the same time.” This is a view repeated by the ministry. “The goal was certainly not to privilege Oeko-Service”. The ministry says that the tender was a call for candidates carried out at the European level. "The entire procurement procedure (from drawing up the specifications to the conclusion of the contract) was accompanied by an ad hoc committee made up of representatives from the ministry of the environment, the environmental administration, the Chamber of Trades and the Chamber of Commerce. Only one company submitted an application.”

The ministry says that up until now no irregularities have been brought to its attention that would merit an audit or any other form of control. “The SuperDrecksKëscht action represents a set of very precise services, which is entrusted to a single service provider through a European public contract, for a period of 11 years. The steering committee is perfectly in line with the practices laid down by law." However, the ministry did say that the candidacy of Robert Schmit's son for the position of academy director would be submitted to a vote "in order to clear up any suspicion”.

In their parliamentary questions, the CSV MPs ask how SuperDrecksKëscht will evolve following the new bill on waste. “The position does not change,” says the ministry. “The action continues in the same way under the new waste law. At the end of the present contract, a new call for tenders will be organised according to the modalities foreseen by the law”.

This article was first published on Paperjam.lu in French. It has been translated and edited for Delano.lu