It is not every day that Danish LEFT-Group MEP Per Clausen (the Red-Green Alliance) welcomes a legislative proposal from the European Commission, but today, Wednesday, July 9, that is exactly what happened. The reason for the warm welcome is the long-awaited proposal for a reform of the Union’s outdated public procurement rules. Although Per Clausen is happy to see the draft act, he also underlines that many changes will be needed:

I am quite happy to finally see the proposal in front of us. This is something we have been waiting for, for a long time. In fact, reforming the Public Procurement rules, it is something we have been fighting for in both the Red-Green Alliance and the LEFT-group since before I became an MEP. Having said that, it is also clear that there is a lot of work ahead of us, to pull it in the right direction.

Can become an important tool for the EU

For Per Clausen, it is not difficult to explain why the proposal is so important – because these are rules, that can help to move things forward in everything from digital sovereignty and working conditions to environmental and climate policy:

One of the reasons why this issue is so important is how much money is involved. Public procurement in the EU is approaching 15% of our total GDP, and thus the potential to really strengthen our policies and make a real difference to improving the working conditions of the ordinary person is also absolutely enormous.

He continues:

It is clear that we can – and should – use public procurement to ensure greener solutions for everything from construction to purchase of supplies. At the same time, we should only award public contracts to companies that do not abuse their employees, just as we should prefer European innovative companies over, for example, American ones. The opportunities are enormous, and that is why it is also frustrating that we are only getting started now.

Includes key demands

Among the positive aspects of the proposal that the Danish LEFT MEP emphasizes, is that it moves away from the principle of only looking at the lowest price. This was one of the things the European Parliament had previously fought for, and which he is pleased to see in the proposal:

It is super important that something real happens when it comes to replacing the principle of the lowest price, with the so-called BPQR – or best price-quality ratio as the standard award method.

It is absolutely crucial that we now include it, and that a minimum weighting for quality of 30% is proposed, but that it can be increased to at least 50% for labour-intensive contracts. I fought hard to achieve that in the Employment Committee.

A good starting point, but many changes are needed

Unfortunately, the EU proposal is far from being a cakewalk, and Per Clausen has a number of specific points he wants to fight to change:

If you look at what is said about collective agreements, it is unfortunately clear that what is included is not good enough – so we need to strengthen that considerably.

If you look at what is said about socially responsible public procurement, I believe that we must ensure a clear reference to collective negotiations and agreements. It is fine that “high-quality jobs” are included as a separate point, but the problem is that the proposal neither defines nor specifies what actually constitutes a high-quality job. They inherently create enormous legal uncertainty. So, I would like to see if we should include it in the definition section of the regulation, or, alternatively, create a section that clearly describes what is meant by “high-quality jobs”.

The situation is somewhat similar with the issue of subcontractors. Because it is good that it is now stated that an entire tender cannot be given to one company when the reality is that the work is done by someone else, orby several others. BUT, to be effective, we need to tighten it up, and for example, demand that the main contractor carry out the central parts of the tender, and we should also limit the subcontractor chain.

Labour crime must also be recognized. I also believe that, in line with what the European Parliament has already said, companies that repeatedly violate labour law should be automatically excluded from public tenders. Then it will be made clear, that this kind of thing is not profitable. I will propose amendments to that effect.

Finally, it is honestly crazy that you do not go all the way when it comes to excluding companies in tax havens, with convictions for tax fraud, or for organized crime, from participating in public tenders. Because companies like that should not be able to profit from public tenders or public money, so I will of course also propose amendments here.

Quality must be given more weight than price

Despite the many points of criticism, Per Clausen is still positive about large parts of the proposal, including not least the fact that the most problematic principles in the procurement directives are being changed:

All the caveats aside, it is good to see the European Commission starting to do what we on the Left have advocated in decades: move away from tenders focusing solely on the lowest price, without any other considerations.

He concludes:

We must also remember that we have seen many examples of how wrong it can go when we continue to choose developers based solely on price in public construction projects. Delays, fraud and budget overruns are the price we all too often pay for this prevailing practice. We must get rid of that.

More on the topic

You can read more on the topic, and Per Clausen’s take, here:

• Politico Pro Fair Play, 10th of September, 2026: PPA: The day after