我國行政法人制度對政府採購之影響

本文擬探討我國行政法人制度對我國之政府採購之影響。採購之核心乃「物有所值」。由國內、外採購相關理論與實務之探討，以釐清我國行政法人制度對政府採購發展之影響。
所有採購制度之最終理想皆在達到「物有所值」，為達成此目的，國際間公認之方法是透過建立公開、透明與不歧視之公平競爭之市場環境。並經由建立公開、透明與不歧視之採購制度以達成該目的。
政府本應規劃完善之政府採購制度，以使政府採購達成「物有所值」。但我國政府自「機關營繕工程及購置定製變賣財物稽察條例」時期之政府採購相關規定的缺失造成政府採購一直為人詬病。及至政府採購法制定使政府採購得以改善過往之缺失。
目前行政法人採購制度之法制存在與過去舊採購制度相同或更有利該等缺失發展之條件，致過去舊制度之缺失，將發生在行政法人採購作業。
本文認為，行政法人的採購法制，有再行檢討必要，其屬一般庶務性之採購仍應回歸適用政府採購法，至於其具特殊性之採購，在符合政府採購協定之前提下，如無全國一致性者，或可留其自行訂定採購規章加以規範，但應加強監督及救濟機制；其有全國一致性者，例如藝文採購則應統一適用主管機關訂定之規範。但同樣必須有合理救濟機制。

This article intends to explore the impact of Taiwan’s non-departmental public bodies system on Taiwan’s government procurement . The core of procurement is“value for money”. This article discusses the theory and practice related to domestic and foreign procurement to clarify the impact of Taiwan’s non-departmental public bodies system on the development of government procurement.
The ultimate ideal of all procurement systems is to achieve“value for money”. To achieve this goal, the internationally recognized method is to establish an open, transparent and non-discriminatory fair competition market environment. This goal is also achieved by establishing an open, transparent and non-discriminatory procurement system.
The government should have planned a complete government procurement system to achieve“value for money”in government procurement. However, the lack of relevant regulations on government procurement in Taiwan since the inspection regulations period has caused criticisms against governmental procurement. With the enactment of the Government Procurement Law, government procurement can improve the shortcomings of the past.
The legal system of the current non-departmental public bodies procurement system has conditions that are comparable but more conducive to the development of these deficiencies in comparison with the old procurement system. As a result, the deficiencies of the old system will also occur in the non-departmental public bodies procurement operations.
This article believes that the procurement legal system of non-departmental public bodies needs to be reviewed again. Its general procurement should still return to the application of the government procurement law. Special procurement should be premised on complying with the government procurement agreement, If there is no national consistency, it may be left to them to formulate their own procurement rules and regulations, but supervision and relief mechanisms should be strengthened; If there is national consistency, such as art and cultural procurement, the regulations set by the competent authority should be uniformly applied, but there must also be a reasonable remedy mechanism.