This article explains how consultation feedback is challenging the proposed Act’s legal structure and what that could mean for future EU procurement rules.
The consultation is testing the Act’s legal foundation
Feedback to the proposed EU Public Procurement Act is focusing not only on the substance of future rules, but also on the legal instrument used to introduce them. A submission identified as F33581451 argues that the process should not necessarily be handled through a single instrument. It proposes a short regulation dealing with the digital ecosystem, while moving third-country access rules to a revision of the International Procurement Instrument. It also proposes resubmitting a new directive, unless there is sufficient support for leaving the procurement rules unrevised and instead making significant investments in procurement capacity. The submission presents this as an initial, high-level assessment rather than a complete review.
Why the choice of instrument matters
The legal form is part of the procurement mechanism under discussion. The proposal would determine whether different policy issues are addressed together in a Public Procurement Act or separated across instruments with distinct purposes. The submission’s suggested split would place digital ecosystem provisions in a regulation, address third-country access through the International Procurement Instrument, and use a new directive for the wider procurement framework. That structure would give the legislative process a choice about how closely these subjects should be connected. For contracting authorities and businesses, the practical significance is that the architecture of the rules may shape how future requirements are organised and reviewed.
The detailed review remains selective
The submission also examines the content of the proposed Public Procurement Act and flags issues that, in its view, would require reconsideration during the legislative process. Those concerns are presented as relevant regardless of which legal instrument is ultimately chosen. The author makes clear that the text is not comprehensive: it concentrates on issues regarded as most problematic or as requiring significant development. That makes the consultation a route for identifying areas for further drafting and debate, rather than a final assessment of the proposal. Other participants can therefore add to the record with comments on provisions or mechanisms not covered in this initial submission.
IN NUMBERS
The public consultation remains open until 24 December. Feedback such as submission F33581451 can inform the choice between a single framework and a split legal approach, as well as the development of the proposed rules themselves. The source submission invites further comments and makes its full text available for review.
Reported from howtocrackanut.com, 2026-11-04. The Tender Wire is published by Otnox.
