International

If, after a good election result in the local elections on 3rd March, we find ourselves in the ruling coalitions in a number of councils, but also if we are working from a position of opposition, seeking and maintaining contact with the SP's group in the European Parliament can be useful: many subjects are now determined by European rules and we can sometimes help people to deal with these rules or, where necessary, to change them. We hope then to have even more contacts with SP branches in the years to come than has already been the case.

At first sight local authorities in the Netherlands and the SP's European group in Brussels are far apart. Nevertheless, there are often local problems which can be traced, directly or indirectly, to Brussels' rules. Take public procurement. Many local authorities find it difficult to carry through their social plans when they are forced to put everything out to tender on the open market. It appeared for a long time, for instance, that an unemployment scheme in Amsterdam, which planned to employ jobless people to manage a bicycle parking facility, would not be able to continue because the facility would have to be put out to tender. In that case the offer which came in at the lowest price, rather than the one which was the most socially advantageous, would have won the contract. A solution was found in this instance, but the public procurement procedures emanating from Brussels continue to be a burden on many local authorities. Not only are these procedures by definition to the advantage of a market-based approach and of major commercial concerns, but they are, moreover, extremely time-consuming and for that reason cost a great deal of labour power and a great deal of money.

These European rules on tendering and public procurement are currently the subject of a critical study by the European Parliament. The approach of the SP European Parliament group is to try to ensure that these rules are no longer applied – or rarely so – to local authorities, and in addition to shift the focus from 'the cheapest tender wins' to 'the tender which best fulfils social and environmental criteria' wins'. That would in itself be of considerable importance. Beyond that, we want to make it possible for public authorities to divide orders, so that small and medium-sized enterprises can tender. Smaller firms are often unable to do so because they do not have the capacity for mega-projects typical of those which authorities currently put out to tender. If these could be divided into smaller part-projects, not only would authorities run less of a risk of complete failure, but the small or medium-sized firms could more easily subscribe.

This is just an example, but there are many more matters in which Brussels, directly or indirectly, plays a role. Take Natura 2000, the nature protection rules which play an enormous part in spatial planning; or approaches to international criminal activities such as those of gangs from eastern Europe who descend on shops in certain towns like so many locusts, moving freely through the whole of Europe. All of these are matters in which the EU has influence. At the same time right wing local authorities also sometimes unjustly blame things on European rules. I'll repeat it here just one more time: the home help service does not have to be put out to tender as a result of any Brussels diktat! Those who say it does are wrong.

My colleague in the SP group in the European Parliament Kartika Liotard and I wish all SP branches participating in the local elections every success. We're looking forward to the results on 3rd March!