Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Betteer Regulation PDF
Betteer Regulation PDF
et lamlioration
de la rglementation
Commission europenne
Better Regulation
simply explained
European Commission
Europe Direct is a service to help you nd answers
to your questions about the European Union
Freephone number (*):
00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11
(*) Certain mobile telephone operators do not allow access to 00 800 numbers
or these calls may be billed.
A great deal of additional information on the European Union is available on the
Internet. It can be accessed through the Europa server (http://europa.eu).
Cataloguing data can be found at the end of this publication.
Luxembourg: O ce for O cial Publications of the European Communities, 2006
ISBN 92-79-02465-5
European Communities, 2006
Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.
Printed in Belgium
PRINTED ON WHITE CHLORINE-FREE PAPER
European law is at the heart of what makes the European
Union special. Without it, we would rely on cooperation and
goodwill: essential components to make Europe work, but
not enough to guarantee the freedoms and rights enjoyed by
todays Europeans.
So we have to ensure that European laws and regulation are
well targeted, correctly implemented at the right level, and
proportionate to need.
Todays Europe moves quickly. To face up to the challenges
we face inside and outside Europe, policies, laws and
regulations need to adapt to the fast pace of technological
change, to foster innovation, to protect the welfare and safety
of Europeans. Public administrations need to be eective,
exible and focused. Tis is the standard which the European
Commission has set itself, and this is why we have made
Better Regulation one of our core priorities.
.
)osi Muii Bvvoso
President of the European Commission
Better Regulation
simply explained
Better Regulation simply explained 3
Better Regulation
Public autlorities regulate in tle public interest to aclieve a variety of goals to ensure
a fair and competitive market place, to protect lealtl, to provide safety, to stimulate in-
novation, to preserve tle natural environment. Regulation is a tool for delivering policies
and meeting citizens expectations. In designing policies, laws and regulations, govern-
ments are looking to do better to make sure tlat tley are using tle riglt tools to get
tle job done, tlat benets are maximised, wlile negative eects are minimised, tlat tle
voices of tlose aected are being leard.
Public autlorities tlrouglout Europe want to reduce red tape and get rid of unnecessary
bureaucracy. Te European level is no exception. Altlougl Brussels may be caricatured
as being tle source of burdensome regulation and red tape, tle reality is dierent. As tle
starting point for EU law, tle European Commission las a special responsibility to regu-
late better. It is devoting particular energy to improving tle quality of its legal proposals,
reducing unnecessary andior overlapping rules and generally making its proposals for
laws more understandable. It is committed to doing tlis in an open way, making its deci-
sion-making processes more accessible and involving a broad range of stakelolders in
policy development. Tese eorts are explained in more detail below.
Why do we regulate?
In an era of globalisation, in wlicl barriers to movement of goods, services and people
are falling, citizens expect tleir governments to ensure tleir safety and welfare. Busi-
nesses expect public autlorities to ensure a level playing eld and boost competitive-
ness.
Regulation is key to meeting tlese clallenges. It serves many purposes to protect
lealtl by ensuring food safety, to protect tle environment by setting air and water qual-
ity standards, to set rules for companies competing in tle marketplace to create a level
playing eld. Regulation is a necessary and accepted aspect of modern society. We regu-
late at all levels at local, national and international level.
4 Better Regulation simply explained
But poorly conceived and ill-considered regulation can prove to be excessive and go
beyond wlat is strictly necessary. Some regulation can be overly prescriptive, unjusti-
ably expensive or counterproductive. Layers of overlapping regulation can develop over
time, aecting businesses, tle voluntary sector, public autlorities and tle general pub-
lic. Regulation can also become quickly outdated. Rapid teclnological developments,
open and expanding global markets and ever-increasing access to information mean tlat
regulation las to be kept under constant review and adapted to keep pace witl tle fast
moving world.
Why do we regulate at European level?
Te European Union las many goals. Its Member States lave agreed to work togetler
tlrougl common policies to aclieve tlese goals. Tis means Europe-wide rules, nor-
mally proposed by tle Commission and agreed by national ministers in tle Council and
by members of tle European Parliament.
One of tle most important EU goals is free movement of goods, services, persons and
capital, and mucl of European legislation is aimed at making tlis single market work.
Laws are also made at European level in policy areas wlere EU Member States lave
agreed on common policies (agriculture, sleries, trade, customs) and in otler areas
wlere tley lave decided tlat tlere is added value in legislating at European level un-
der specic circumstances (environment, justice and lome aairs, lealtl and consumer
protection).
All of tlese policies lave brouglt freedoms to Europeans, created jobs and boosted
growtl but to work, tley need a set of agreed rules tlat are applied consistently
tlrouglout tle EU.
In most of tlese areas, tle European Commission is responsible for proposing tle poli-
cies and laws to aclieve agreed goals and witl making sure tlat tle laws are properly
applied. It pays special attention to tle need for its proposals to be proportionate to tle
problem at land, and for actions to be taken at tle riglt level: tle principles of propor-
tionality and subsidiarity two principles cemented in tle EU Treaty.
Better Regulation simply explained 5
European regulation the source of red tape?
Legislating at European level las reduced mucl red tape. One common rule to apply
in all Member States is mucl simpler and more e cient tlan a complex web of varying
rules on tle same subject matter at national and regional level. European legislation las
been eective in removing larmful barriers tlat distort competition and create conict
between dierent national systems.
Te body of European law las expanded over tle past two decades. Te objective of
creating a single market by 1992 generated a wave of European legislation Europe-
wide standards tlat replaced tle complex set of national rules. Legislation las also been
agreed in otler areas witl a cross-border dimension, sucl as tle environment, lealtl
and consumer protection. Increasingly, Member States seek a Europe-wide response,
wletler tlrougl legislation or otlerwise, to new and emerging transnational clallenges
sucl as lealtl pandemics, drug tra c and illegal migration. New teclnologies tel-
ecoms, medicines, bioteclnology are recognised as needing common rules to develop
on a European scale.
Witl tlis expansion of EU legislation, some areas of overlap and duplication were inevi-
table. Te means and instruments closen for certain policies may not always lave been
strictly proportionate to tle aims. Certain series of European laws and regulations wlicl
lave developed over time oer scope for simplication to eliminate any unnecessary lay-
ers. Tere is also a need to look at tle cumulative burden of dierent laws and reduce any
redundant, overlapping requirements.
However, tle perception tlat EU laws are particularly responsible for red tape is wrong.
Some claims of Brussels bureaucracy turn out to lave national laws as tleir source. Te
EU often pursues its objectives by adopting directives setting out broad principles and
objectives and leaving implementation to be dened by tle Member States. Member
States can tlen cloose low to meet tle goals of tle directive, adapting to tleir own
institutional and administrative cultures. It is often at tlis stage tlat embellislments and
renements, not prescribed by EU law, are introduced. Tese can go well beyond tle
requirements set out in EU law, resulting in extra costs and burdens. Tis is sometimes
referred to as gold plating.
6 Better Regulation simply explained
Indeed, surveys consistently slow tlat, in tle minds of citizens and businessmen, red
tape is associated witl areas of regulation tlat are not primarily dealt witl at European
level sucl as taxation, labour laws, and planning and construction permits.
Is the EU responsible? From see-saws to chocolate cigarettes
In 2005, it was claimed that the EU had forced local authorities to remove see-saws
from childrens playgrounds. In fact, there were no EU measures in this area. There
are some standards set by the European Committee for Standardisation (CEN), a
voluntary organisation made of national standards bodies. These sought to limit the
height from which children could fall, by specifying the maximum height for seats
and stands, and by fxing standards for hand supports and footrests. Manufacturers
could choose whether to follow these standards, which carried the advantage of
being able to export across Europe, instead of having to apply for certifcation in
each country.
Another often cited example is chocolate cigarettes. Ending the sale of sweets in
the form of cigarettes is an idea championed by the World Health Organisation
with the sensible intention of preventing the spread of a smoking culture in
the young. This was taken up in a Council recommendation, a non-legally binding
recommendation which simply invites Member States to take action.
What is the European Commission
doing to reduce red tape?
Te European Commission las embarked on an ambitious Better Regulation exercise.
A far-reacling programme was launcled in 2002 to simplify and generally improve tle
regulatory environment. It is designed to cut red tape, improve tle quality of regulation
and design better laws for consumers and business alike.
Tis means taking action at dierent stages in tle policy cycle: looking at new initiatives,
proposals still under negotiation and legislation already on tle books. Te Better Regula-
tion programme tlerefore included a mix of dierent actions:
introducing a system for assessing tle impact and improving tle design of major Com-
mission proposals,
implementing a programme of simplication of existing legislation,
Better Regulation simply explained 7
testing Commission proposals still being looked at by tle Council of Ministers and tle
European Parliament, to see wletler tley slould be witldrawn,
factoring consultation into all Commission initiatives,
looking at alternatives to laws and regulations (sucl as self-regulation, or co-regula-
tion by tle legislator and interested parties).
All of tlese actions are delivering positive results.
1. Analysing impacts
An important part of making better laws is laving a full picture of tleir impacts. Propo-
sals can tlen be tailored to lave tle best eect, and to minimise negative side-eects. Te
Commission is committed to examining tle economic, social and environment impacts
of its proposals. It las made impact assessment compulsory for major policy proposals
and, since 2003, tle Commission las completed over 150 impact assessments. Te result
las been a marked clange in low policy is slaped inside tle European Commission. It is
a knowledge-based approacl aimed at ensuring tlat decisions on wletler and low to
proceed witl an initiative are based on solid evidence and a tlorougl analysis of options.
One of tle options wlicl is now routinely assessed is tle option of taking no action at
EU level. Tis allows tle Commission to take decisions from a range of options, eacl
witl tleir corresponding benets and costs.
Impacts of improving air quality
The impact assessment underpinning the air quality thematic strategy, adopted in
2005, allowed the Commission to take a decision on the right level of ambition for
European air quality policy, based on the best analysis available.
The sixth environment action programme, adopted in 2002 by the Council and the
European Parliament, asks the Commission to put policies in place to ensure good
air quality by 2020.
The impact assessment looked at how to close the gap between the projections for
2020 if no further measures are taken, and the maximum improvement possible in
2020 if all technically feasible measures are applied. It looked at costs and benefts
of diferent scenarios and aimed to provide the most cost-efective solution for
reaching the objectives chosen. The detailed economic modelling done in the
impact assessment showed that the benefts of further action clearly outweigh the
costs.
The impact assessment also looked at simplifying and streamlining current air
quality legislation, thus contributing to Better Regulation, by combining all