European Commission: Better regulation for better results - An EU agenda

Support our work: become a Friend of Statewatch from as little as £1/€1 per month.

"In particular, we are calling on the European Parliament and the Council to: Carry out an impact assessment on any substantial amendments the Parliament or Council propose during the legislative process. Where the Parliament and the Council find an agreement significantly different from the initial Commission proposal, they should assess the likely impact and regulatory burden before any final decision" [COM 215-15] and

"The three institutions will ensure an appropriate degree of transparency of the legislative process, including of trilateral negotiations between the three institutions."
[emphasis added] The question is how will "appropriate" be defined?

See the full text: Better regulation for better results - An EU agenda (COM 215-15 Final, pdf)

And see earlier draft: COMMUNICATION:
Better Regulation For Better Results - An EU Agenda (pdf)

Proposal for an Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Regulation (COM 216-15, pdf)

The Commission goes big on downsizing - Frans Timmermans presents his plan for cutting red tape. But it's already undergoing an impact assessment of its own (Politico, link) and EU to shed light on law-making 'kitchen' (euobserver, link): "The European Commission on Tuesday (19 May) presented plans designed to rid itself of its image as of an out-of-touch and overactive bureaucracy.... A regulatory scrutiny board of seven members including three from outside the commission will replace the impact assessment board created in 2006. It will be chaired by a person independent of the commission hierarchy."towards an Investment Court"

Our work is only possible with your support.
Become a Friend of Statewatch from as little as £1/€1 per month.


Spotted an error? If you've spotted a problem with this page, just click once to let us know.

Report error