CHAPTER 5: Delivery on promises: Better
Regulation
44. The Minister highlighted better regulation
as one of the Government's top priorities out of those listed
by the Commission (Q 3). The better regulation agenda at
the EU level seeks to ensure that legislation is cost-effective
and that it meets its stated objectives without imposing disproportionate
burdens on public authorities and/or private operators. The
fact that "Better Regulation—Delivery on Promises and
Change of Regulatory Culture" is one of the Commission's
priorities for 2009, and features prominently in the APS, is welcome.[46]
45. The Annual Policy Strategy states that "Better
regulation is … a key component of the EU's response to globalisation".
The Commission says that it will take the lead in its efforts
to improve the regulatory environment, and in developing high
standards in areas such as health, safety and protection of the
environment, to help shape global regulation.[47]
The Commissioner told us that the Commission has "already
integrated better regulation into our daily work in the [Directorates
General] as part of our political priorities" (Q 44).
In 2009 the Commission will continue to look for new simplification
potential through the screening of the existing body of legislation,
implementation of the Action Programme to reduce Administrative
Burdens will be reviewed and progress in meeting the 25% reduction
target for 2012 will be assessed (p 14). While the Annual
Policy Strategy states that the Commission "intends to present
a substantial number of proposals in 2009 designed to reduce administrative
burdens", no detail about these proposals is provided in
the Annex.[48] It
is encouraging that the Commission seems to be integrating better
regulation more thoroughly into its work, and we look forward
to seeing the detail of the Commission's proposals for reducing
administrative burdens in the Annual Legislative and Work Programme.
46. The Minister for Europe told us that in his
opinion "the European Commission is making progress on better
regulation" (Q 21), which we find encouraging. He added:
"They have made, from a very low base … progress,
but not enough yet. With this Commission, from the President downwards,
there is a determination to make progress but … the Commission
is a reflection on occasion of the demands of Member States
and the 'something must be done' tendency … Now on occasion
nothing should be done" (Q 24). We urge the new Commission
which will begin its term in 2009 to build on the work of the
Barroso Commission by mainstreaming better regulation principles
in all its work and by resisting the "something must be done"
tendency. The Commission intends to propose that its successor
undertakes the exercise of testing proposals for legislation against
better regulation principles and withdrawing many of them (p 14):
this would be welcome, and we consider that all of the European
institutions have a role to play in ensuring that the EU improves
its regulatory performance consistently.
47. We welcome the Minister's statement that
"the United Kingdom government, along with a number
of other Member States, is genuinely passionate about this
… a better regulation agenda helps United Kingdom
plc achieve so much else and can help Europe as well achieve so
much more" (Q 22).
48. The Minister told us that the Commission's
"consultation has to be wider: it has to consult small businesses
much more effectively" (Q 21); we agree. We urge
the Commission to work towards drafting better EU legislation
in its priority areas through improving its consultation of citizens
and small businesses. This should also contribute to the Commission's
objective of "Communicating Europe".
49. The Commissioner told us that the Commission
will continue to strengthen its impact assessment system in 2009
(p 14). We congratulate the Commission on the increasing
level of impact assessment of proposed legislation. However,
the Minister commented that the Commission "has to ensure
that impact assessments are the norm" (Q 21). Impact
assessment should become standard practice for all proposals.
In particular, the level of impact assessment of European Parliament
and Council amendments should be increased.[49]
50. The Minister told us that the Commission
has to "have post-implementation assessments of the accuracy
of the impact assessments because … these things gain by
being revisited after three or five years to see whether they
were accurate predictions, because one can never make a judgment
as to whether these predictions are worth investing political
capital in and whether they are accurate" (Q 21). We
agree: an evaluation of the accuracy of the impact assessment
should be undertaken two to five years after each piece of legislation
is adopted.
51. We also agree with the Minister's suggestion
of including financial implications in the Commission's impact
assessments (Q 21), and we urge the Commission to work on
this suggestion.
46 Annual Policy Strategy pp 7-8 Back
47
Annual Policy Strategy pp 7-8 Back
48
Annual Policy Strategy p 7 Back
49
See European Union Committee, 22nd Report (2007-08): Initiation
of EU Legislation (HL 15), paras 62-63, 156. Back
| 
