The National Audit Office's report on labor law conditions in public procurement
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
M believes that the government has implemented concrete measures by gathering expertise, increasing resources, and improving control against crime in the labor market 1. S argues that the authorities make questionable interpretations, that labor law requirements are missing in high-risk industries, and that the government does not prioritize the conditions for follow-up 2. C believes that the government has allocated funds to follow the Swedish National Audit Office's views and that procuring authorities have their own responsibility 3. V argues that the system does not work, that tax money risks going towards wage dumping, and that concrete measures are required 4. V wants to stop the model where the lowest price wins, wants collective agreements to be the norm, and that tax money goes to serious companies 4.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Adam Reuterskiöld (M)
Madam Speaker! We shall now debate the Committee on Finance's report FiU28, which deals with the National Audit Office's report on labor law conditions in public procurement. It is an important review, because this ultimately concerns how we use the taxpayers' money and the trust in the entire procurement system.
Public procurement generates over 1,000 billion kronor every year. These are funds that must be used efficiently but also responsibly. We must have good competition, high quality, and really good conditions. We must also ensure that the companies that win contracts actually follow laws and regulations.
Madam Speaker! The National Audit Office points to a number of areas with potential for improvement. This concerns, in particular, the application of labor law conditions and the follow-up of those. It is serious, because requirements that are not followed up risk becoming empty words. The problem today is rarely that rules are lacking, but rather the problem is that the rules are not always applied consistently and that the follow-up is deficient. That is why the government has focused on getting the systems to work in practice.
During the mandate period, the government has implemented several concrete measures to strengthen public procurement. A central reform is that parts of Kammarkollegiet have been transferred to Upphandlingsmyndigheten, which is a structural change that strengthens the state's collective procurement competence. Instead of the responsibility being split, we are now gathering the knowledge, guidance, and methodological support in one agency. This provides clearer responsibility, better quality, and stronger support to all procuring authorities in the country.
Madam Speaker! The Government has also strengthened the resources for the National Agency for Public Procurement. It is about concrete measures: more and better guidance regarding labor law conditions, developed support for risk-based follow-up, and educational initiatives for procurers throughout the country. This makes a difference in everyday life, where the procurement is actually carried out.
We have also strengthened the work against crime in the labor market. Through increased resources for agency cooperation, the inspections have become more numerous and better. Agencies such as Skatteverket, Polismyndigheten, and Arbetsmiljöverket now work more closely together to identify unscrupulous actors. This applies in particular to companies that attempt to win public contracts by dumping conditions or breaking rules. This is crucial to provide protection against unscrupulous companies.
The government has also improved the possibilities to control suppliers. Contracting authorities today have better support to verify that taxes and fees are paid, identify risk companies, and set relevant and proportionate requirements. This reduces the risk of unscrupulous actors being let into the system.
Another important part is digitalization. The government has allocated funds to develop digital solutions in public administration. This also includes procurement. It simplifies the bidding processes, improves information exchange, and makes it easier to follow up on contracts. It also reduces administration while increasing control.
Madam Speaker! We have more clearly linked procurement to preparedness and robustness. It is about ensuring that suppliers are capable of delivering even in a crisis, so that we do not just procure the lowest price but also obtain reliability and long-term perspective. It strengthens both the state and society.
Let me also say something about what the government will do moving forward, Madam Speaker. The work to simplify the procurement regulations continues. It is being reviewed how the requirements can become more proportionate and how small and medium-sized enterprises can participate. Support for follow-up is also being developed; that is where much of the problem lies today. Furthermore, the government continues to strengthen the work against labor market crime so that more unscrupulous actors are stopped before they gain access to public contracts.
The opposition often demands more rules and sharper wording, but more rules do not solve the problem if they are not followed up. The government's line is clear. It is through better compliance, stronger control, clearer responsibility, and higher competence that we achieve real change.
Madam Speaker! Public procurement shall be characterized by order and clarity. Serious companies shall win procurements, not those that cheat or dump conditions. By pooling expertise, strengthening the authorities, improving controls, and developing follow-up, the government is taking concrete steps in that direction. It is not just about ambitions, but it is about reforms that are implemented here and now and that will continue to be developed.
The Finance Committee's assessment is that the government's work is moving in the right direction. The Swedish National Audit Office's observations are important, and they are met with concrete measures. I therefore move for approval of the committee's proposal for a decision.
Gunilla Carlsson (S)
Madam Speaker! For us Social Democrats, it is important to have order and clarity in public finances. This means, among other things, that money intended for the public sector must be used in a correct manner. It must definitely not go towards criminal activity or fraud. One should also not be able to take out large profits from the resources that are to be used for the common welfare and for building a strong Sweden.
We do not want procurements to be won by companies that dump wages and thumb down the working conditions for the employees. Every year, procurements are made to a value of over 1,000 billion kronor. Politics has a great responsibility to ensure that these billions are used in a wise and responsible manner from many different perspectives.
The National Audit Office has, in this report, looked at whether the state authorities in their procurements take into account whether the workers have good labor law conditions and whether they at all set such requirements in the request for procurement. Unfortunately, Madam Speaker, it is a sad reading. Labor law requirements are missing in two out of three procurements in risk industries. The authorities also make questionable interpretations of the legislation and often use general phrasing instead of specifying wages, working hours, and vacation. This makes the requirements very unclear for those who submit or receive tenders. It also makes it very difficult to follow up on them.
The report also shows that the authorities are poor at following up on whether what they have procured actually delivers what has been stated. Without follow-up, the compliance, as stated, risks becoming low.
Madam Speaker! In 2017, decisions were made regarding changes in the procurement legislation which meant that the approximately 3,800 contracting authorities and entities were given the opportunity, and sometimes even the obligation, to set and follow up on requirements linked to labor law conditions in certain procurements. It was an important first step to guarantee that public procurement contributes to good working conditions.
At the same time, we can unfortunately see that there is much left to be desired when it comes to labor law conditions and requirements in public procurement, which the Riksrevisionen's audit clearly shows.
For us Social Democrats, it is obvious that there should be good working conditions in Swedish workplaces and that public procurement should contribute to this. Therefore, we are pushing for conditions according to collective agreements to apply in public procurement. We want to change EU law so that requirements for collective agreements can be set in public procurement.
We Social Democrats also want to limit the number of subcontractor links to two in risk industries. Follow-up becomes significantly much more difficult at a workplace where long and complex subcontractor chains occur. We see how people shift the blame and do not take responsibility for those who are in the links all the way at the bottom.
We cannot have it this way. One way to get at some of the shell companies is to limit this.
To make it harder to cheat, we also want to increase the supervision of high-risk industries and strengthen the joint work between authorities against crime in the labor market. We want to see that companies that cheat should be able to be blacklisted.
In light of the National Audit Office's review, it becomes even clearer that this is truly needed. We believe that the government must act forcefully and solve the problems with that which today does not work at all.
To address the fact that far too few contracting authorities today set labor law requirements, the government must be clear in the regulatory letters to those authorities that conduct extensive public procurement. It must be ensured that reasonable working conditions for employees in publicly procured operations are secured and that reporting back is required. This was last done in 2018, Madam Speaker.
It is actually completely unacceptable that this is not being controlled. The government has these possibilities, and it should be a matter of course. Unfortunately, the government does not seem to prioritize this.
I cannot interpret it in any other way, Madam Speaker, than that the government does not want to do anything active to prevent this development. It is written that contracting authorities need to receive support from Upphandlingsmyndigheten, but one is not prepared to create real conditions for this.
Madam Speaker! People are being, or risk being, exploited and forced to work under poor working conditions for dumped wages. Our common tax money goes to criminals. Furthermore, more and more serious companies choose not to submit bids; they do not think it is any idea. They know that they can never get the assignments, because they do not want to compete on those terms. This poses a risk to the entire procurement system.
We Social Democrats want to strengthen workers' conditions. There should be fair wages and secure working conditions in Swedish workplaces. We want to stop criminals from taking a share of the common tax money. We shall use that money to build Sweden stronger, and one way is to organize it so that the authorities use procurement in the right way. This should actually be completely obvious.
Madam Speaker! I stand behind all Social Democratic reservations but move for approval of reservation number 1.
Anders Karlsson (C)
Madam Speaker! We are now debating the Committee on Finance's report FiU28, the National Audit Office's report on labor law conditions in public procurement.
The National Audit Office has done a good job. I also note that the government has allocated funds so that the National Audit Office's observations shall be followed up.
Among other things, the Swedish National Audit Office recommends that the National Agency for Public Procurement develop risk analyses. Those who procure publicly should think through the procurement, because as I see it, one has a personal responsibility when entering a procurement. There are several tools available.
Large procurements can be a risk for smaller actors. In that case, it can be simpler with a split procurement to get better control. When it comes to, for example, preschools, the procurement does not need to cover four of them; instead, they can be procured two by two to bring in actors that one has better control over locally. This possibility exists.
The National Audit Office also recommends that the Competition Authority should be given expanded supervision over authorities and also increase its support to procuring authorities.
The government has, as said, allocated more money, and that is good. If they had not done so, it would have been difficult to achieve an effect on these specific points.
It is also important to use the legislation that exists, the Public Procurement Act, LOU, and the Act on Choice Systems, LOV. LOV is possible to use as an instrument in procurements where several actors are to perform the same assignment in a municipality or region.
The National Audit Office's criticism regarding the lack of follow-up on labor law conditions is serious. Even here, however, the one procuring has a responsibility to check whether the bids are serious. At the same time, I know that the possibility of doing so when the bids are received is limited. It is, however, excellent that the National Audit Office addresses this in its report.
Ciczie Weidby (V)
Madam Speaker! We are now debating the Committee on Finance's report on labor law conditions in public procurement. It does not sound very fun, but it is incredibly important, because this is an issue that goes straight to the core of what politics is actually about, that is to say, what we use our common resources for and what conditions we accept on the Swedish labor market.
The National Audit Office's review is clear: The system does not function as intended. Only one-third of the reviewed procurements contain labor law conditions, despite the legislation requiring it in high-risk industries.
This is not a small technicality; it is a systemic flaw. What does that mean in practice? Yes, it means that tax revenue risks going to companies that suppress wages, bypass rules, and create insecure working conditions. It means that serious companies are competed out, and it means that we in this chamber accept that the public sector contributes to wage dumping.
Madam Speaker! It is difficult to imagine anything more fundamental than that public funds should never be used to dump conditions on the labor market. But that is precisely what risks happening today. The National Audit Office points out why: the legislation is difficult to apply, the support to the authorities is insufficient, and the follow-up is severely lacking.
Unfortunately, it is not small adjustments that are needed, because it is about the system not delivering. Still, the committee majority lands on that one should wait and see. They do not want to anticipate the government's work, and they want to await further investigations, further assignments, and further processes. But it is not enough, because in the meantime, the problems continue. Unserious actors continue to win procurements, and the workers pay the price.
Concrete measures are required here and now. Firstly, the support to procuring authorities must be truly strengthened. It must not be optional or unclear how labor law conditions are to be applied. It must be easy to do right and difficult to do wrong.
Secondly, the follow-up must be tightened. To set requirements without checking that they are followed in practice is, of course, completely futile. The Swedish National Audit Office shows that in-depth follow-ups almost never occur. That is really not sufficient. Vänsterpartiet wants to see a clear development towards centralized and resource-strong follow-up so that the control actually works for real, not just on paper.
For the third, we must put a stop to the model where the lowest price always wins and decides the procurement. When the price is pressed without sufficient requirements and controls, it only leads to a race to the bottom. It is not a functioning market, but rather a market that rewards cheating.
Madam Speaker! Public procurement in Sweden covers around 900 billion kronor every year. It is an enormous sum of money and an enormous economic force. Should that force be used to press down the conditions or to raise them? For Vänsterpartiet, the answer is obvious. We want public procurement to be a tool for order on the labor market. We want collective agreements to be the norm. We want tax money to go to serious companies, not to those who compete with worse conditions.
Madam Speaker! I move for the approval of reservation 3 in the report. Vänsterpartiet wants the government to give a clear mandate to Upphandlingsmyndigheten to strengthen the support for follow-up. We also want the government to promptly return with concrete proposals on how the follow-up can be centralized and streamlined.
Madam Speaker! It is fundamentally about respect, respect for the people who go to work every day, respect for the companies that do the right thing, and respect for how we use our common resources. Tax funds should not finance poor working conditions.
The deliberation was hereby concluded.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.