Europa & Europäische Union

Against the backdrop of global competitive challenges, simple and comprehensible standardisation is an essential locational advantage. Citizens' acceptance of the EU will also be increased if it is characterised by a lean, unbureaucratic and comprehensible set of standards. In social policy, this also includes ensuring that EU legislative procedures - and trilogue negotiations in particular - become more transparent: Negotiation dates, agendas and minutes must be accessible in a timely manner.

The inter-institutional agreement on better regulation concluded between the EU Parliament, the Council and the Commission clearly acknowledges the importance of impact assessments. It pays particular attention to competitiveness, the reduction of red tape, especially in relation to small and medium-sized enterprises, and the digital dimension. It should also be emphasised that it explicitly recognises the expertise and representativeness of social partner agreements in EU legislation. The EU Commission has publicly committed itself to carrying out and does carry out impact assessments for its legislative proposals. A greater commitment by the Council and the EU Parliament to impact assessments would be desirable, also precisely because these institutions can amend legislative proposals of the EU Commission.

"One in, One out" is to become part of the Better Regulation agenda. Under this agenda, transparency, sound evidence and the views of the public and stakeholders will be emphasised in the preparation and evaluation of EU legislation and policies. The agenda covers all policy areas and aims to ensure targeted legislation that goes no further than necessary and achieves the desired objectives at the lowest possible cost. The methodology of one-in, one-out is to require legislators to quantify the compliance burden of new legislation and compensate for the increase in the same amount elsewhere. In this way, the total bureaucratic burden on citizens and business does not increase. The quantification of the burden could take place within the impact assessment.

Of great importance, especially in the case of voluntary commitments by the EU institutions, is the control of the quality of impact assessments and the suitability test of the legislation. The EU Commission has taken a step in this direction in the form of the Regulatory Scrutiny Boards. Unlike the previously existing Impact Assessment Board, the new Board is nominally independent. Some of the members are recruited from outside the EU institutions.

Gold plating describes the "saddling on" of additional national requirements not required by European regulation when EU Member States transpose European standards into national law. As this can lead to an undermining of the level playing field in the internal market, there is a need for action here. An obligation should be introduced to declare over-fulfilment of EU requirements to the EU Commission ("comply or explain"). This will promote a uniform regulatory framework in a common internal market.