Activities of Jana TOOM related to 2021/2166(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Better regulation: joining forces to make better laws (debate)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on Better regulation: Joining forces to make better laws
Amendments (13)
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Considers, as the only committee mostin directly and constant engagedment with the public, that a democratic approach and political accountability remain the strongest control mechanisms in any constitutional democracy, including in the EU;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls that continuous attentive review of citizens’ petitions presents great opportunities to make better regulation more inclusive and efficient and to improve policymakers’ understanding of local and regional realities, and of citizens’ concerns and priorities;
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Calls for more transparency from all European institutions, in particular the Council in order to ensure better law- making and to guarantee citizens´ rights of public access to documents and access to the right information;
Amendment 46 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Stresses the role of specific tools, such as the European Citizens’ Initiative and the European Ombudsman, in improving Commission regulation; recalls thatwelcomes the launch of the Conference on the Future of Europe should be continuously improved in order for the citizens to communicate the real impacts of legislation at national, local and regional level and to make suggestions on how to achieve better law-making; notes that the Commission should develop new toolsunderlines the fact that the Conference can bring a fresh impetus to the European discussion to facilitate the process of public participation; notes that the Commission should focus on making existing participatory tools more efficient to give citizens direct access to and involvement in EU policy-making ; insists that the Commission should seek the opinion of citizens and more importantly, take their views into account;
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Strongly believes that all Europeans must be able to follow the EU legislative process; Welcomes the Commission’s initiative to make the ‘Have your say’ web portal more accessible to people with disabilities and to consolidate public consultations into a single ‘call for evidence’; calls for all related documents, questionnaires and contributions to be available in all EU official languages; calls for greater transparency on how replies are taken into account and, whenever appropriate, greater clarity on why replies are not taken into account; notes that the design and choice of consultation has a significant effect on the type of input received and the outcome itself; urges the Commission to ensure that all calls for evidence it launches are neutral and unbiased, including by employing questionnaires that are designed in a factual and evidence-based manner;
Amendment 71 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the Commission’s commitment to more actively publicising consultations in order to reach more citizens, stakeholders and local and regional authorities; calls on the Member States to contribute to this process by promoting the consultations within their territories; notes that some stakeholders with higher financial resources can have a more prominent role in contributing their input to consultations; believes that the input collected needs to reflect a balanced view of the stakeholder landscape and this requires facilitating the collection of input from stakeholders with fewer resources, such as citizens and citizens’ representatives;
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls for impact assessments to be performed on all acts, without exception; regrets that this was not the case for several politically sensitive proposals in the past; recalls that on several occasions Parliament has carried out its own impact assessments in replacement of the Commission’s; calls for sufficient amount of time and resources to be allocated to impact assessments in order to ensure their quality; nevertheless, recalls that impact assessments help to inform but do not replace political decision-making;
Amendment 109 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Stresses that transparency from the European Institutions is key to the legislative process as citizens have a right to know how laws affecting them are made; welcomes the Council’s joining of the EU Transparency register; regrets that despite their role as co-legislators, the Council’s decision process lacks the degree of transparency of European Parliament’s; urges the Council to increase the number and type of documents they make public, in particular the positions expressed by the member states on the legislative proposals they are considering;
Amendment 119 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9 a. Believes that EU institutions should draw on expertise from different policy areas in order to ensure optimal decision making and adopt highly- effective measures; calls on all three EU Institutions to improve the coordination between their internal bodies and avoid working in silos;
Amendment 122 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Believes that effective regulation must strike a balance between short-term needs and long-term challenges; Underlines that ‘strategic foresight’ could play a key role in helping to future- proof EU policy-making by ensuring that assessments of new initiatives are grounded in a longer-term perspective, emphasising the added value of quality legislation as an investment in the future; welcomes the integration of ‘foresight elements’ into the Commission’s better regulation agenda in impact assessments and evaluations; considers, however, that the Commission’s methodology for quantifying costs, deciding on trade-offs and implementing strategic foresight remains unclear, and that practice will allow assessment of how these approaches have been followed in practice; encourages the Commission to look into innovative cost assessment tools;
Amendment 131 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Takes note of the involvement of the Regulatory Scrutiny Board in impact assessments, fitness checks, and major evaluations of current legislation; notes, however, that that the Regulatory Scrutiny Board can play a role in ensuring an unbiased and high quality level of work from the Commission; stresses that the Regulatory Scrutiny Board can only provide an effective check on the Commission’s work if its independence and impartiality are indisputably established; calls, in this regard, for the transparency of the Regulatory Scrutiny Board on meetings with stakeholders, reviews, recommendations and opinions shouldto be significantly improved, including through mandating the use of the transparency register for members of the board; underlines that the work of the Board should not ultimately affect the Commission’s capacity to propose legislation or unduly delay the adoption of legislative proposals; considers that all the Board’s opinions should always be made public immediately after adoption without any exception;
Amendment 144 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12 a. Stresses that trust in the enforcement of regulation plays an important role in the legitimacy of European legislation; calls on the Commission to increase their efforts in enforcing the EU laws and effectively address all breaches of EU law;
Amendment 153 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13 a. Stresses that the Conference on the Future of Europe is an unparalleled initiative of directly engaging with the EU citizens in order to hear about their perspective on European policy making; believes that following the conclusion of the Conference, an evaluation must be made to explore the possibility of implementing practices that can increase citizen participation in the legislative process;