Activities of Arlene McCARTHY related to 2010/2016(INI)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on guaranteeing independent impact assessments PDF (232 KB) DOC (162 KB)
Amendments (24)
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 7 a (new)
Citation 7 a (new)
- having regard to the Interinstitutional Common Approach to Impact Assessments concluded between Parliament, the Council and the Commission in November 2005,
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 7 b (new)
Citation 7 b (new)
- having regard to the resolution of 26 June 2010 on better lawmaking – 15th annual report from the Commission pursuant to Article 9 of the Protocol on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality (2009/2142(INI)),
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 13 a (new)
Citation 13 a (new)
- having regard to The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union as adopted by the institutions on 7 December 2000,
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas, when adopting new laws and simplifying and recasting existing laws, impact assessments can serve to improve the evaluation of their social, economic, environmental and health effects, as well as the effects on citizens' fundamental rights, and thus help reduce bureaucracy,
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas Parliament, the Council and the Commission in the Interinstitutional Agreement of 16 December 2003, the Interinstitutional Common Approach to Impact Assessments of November 2005, and Parliament and the Commission in the Framework Agreement of 20 October 2010, undertook to set an agenda for better lawmaking, and whereas this resolution contains concrete proposals for improving impact assessments,
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses that impact assessments are an important aid to better lawmaking which the makers of European law should exploit more often in future to help them evaluate more effectively the consequences of their policy optioneconomic, social, environmental and health-related consequences of their policy options, as well as their impact on citizens' fundamental rights;
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that impact assessments need to be carried out in the early stages of policy development; emphasises that they should be completely independently and should always be based on an objective, reasoned analysis of potential effects;
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Considers that the methodology used to undertake an impact assessment should be regularly reviewed, including undertaking consistency checks to ensure that all impact assessments are carried out to the same high standards and that equal consideration is given to a wide range of stakeholder groups, such as consumers, employee representatives and businesses;
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Considers it advisable and necessary to involve external experts, including non-corporate experts, in the impact assessment process in order to guarantee independence and objectivity; notes in this connection the fundamental distinction between public consultation and independent impact assessment;
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls for the maximum of transparency when drawing up impact assessments, including the early publication of comprehensive Road Maps of proposed legislation to ensure equal access to the legislative procedure for SMEs, voluntary groups, NGOs and trade unions;
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Calls for the Commission's current consultation period with stakeholders to be increased from 8 weeks to 12 weeks;
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Considers that it is essential that impact assessments are scrutinised by Member States ex-ante, to assess the effects of proposed legislation on national laws and public policies; calls for greater ex-post evaluation to be carried out and for further consideration of the inclusion of mandatory correlation tables to ensure that EU legislation has been correctly implemented by Member States and has met its objectives;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Calls for impact assessments to take a large number of criteria into account in order to provide the legislator with as comprehensive a picture as possible; draws attention in this context to the economic, social and environmental aspects referred to in the interinstitutional agreement of 16 December 2003 and the common approach of November 2005, which are to be combined in a single evaluation and to further include aspects relating to fundamental rights;
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Urges that, in connection with the impact assessment, a cost-benefit analysis – i.e. an examination of the cost-efficiency of all programmes and measures involving expenditure – should always be carried out, and potential implications for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) examined; calls in this connection for the consistent application of the ‘SME test’ proposed in the 2008 Small Business Act; recalls in this context that for each law imposing a burden on SMEs, an existing such law should be repealed (the ‘one in, one out’ rule);
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Stresses that the members of the IAB are independent only in formal terms, since they are currently appointed by and subject to the instructions of the Commission President, and cannot therefore be said to be fully independent; calls, therefore, for the memberswork of the IAB to be appointed by the European Parliament and the Council on the basis of a Commission proposal, and no longer subject to the instructions of the Commission Presidentcompletely transparent so that their independence can be verified in practice;
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Calls also for the involvement in the IAB's work ofof experts from all stakeholder areas in the IAB's work; calls for these experts to come from outside the Commission who areand not be subject to instructions; calls in this connection for the participation in the IAB's work of the High Level Group of Independent Stakeholders on Administrative Burdenstresses that the IAB and experts should not focus only on the administrative burdens for businesses but also on economic, social, environmental and health related impacts of legislation, as well as impacts on fundamental rights;
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20 a. Stresses that the IAB and experts should work in the public remit with the highest levels of transparency;
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Calls for the early and comprehensive involvement – including by means of notification and interim reports – of the European Parliament, and in particular of its relevant committees, in the whole impact assessment process and in the work of the IAB; invites the Commission to provide the Parliament and the Council with two-to-four-page summaries with the full impact assessment, when submitting the legislative proposal;
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Notes that presenting the results of an impact assessment at the same time as a legislative proposal is unhelpful, as it gives the impression that the principal aim of the impact assessment is to justify the Commission proposal; therefore advocates the early publication of interim reportdocuments at every stage of the legislative process, including the publication of the Commission's final impact assessment, as approved by the IAB, before inter-service consultations begins;
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40
Paragraph 40
40. Urges that this should take place under the aegis of a separate, independent body such as a foundation, which would be answerable to the European ParliamentCalls for a wide-ranging investigation into the possible options for an independent Impact Assessment body within the Parliament, such as a foundation;
Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41
Paragraph 41
Amendment 71 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
Paragraph 42
42. Calls for the appropriate budget- neutral funding to be made available for the creation of a body at this level; also calls for the necessary administrative infrastructure to be created to this endan agreement that any suitable option should be budget neutral;
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43
Paragraph 43
43. Stresses that long-term deliberations should take place on the prospects of a common approach to impact assessments by the European institutions; recalls that the interinstitutional agreement of 136 December 2003 and the interinstitutional common approach to Impact Assessments of November 2005 already called for a common methodological approach to impact assessments in the European institutions;
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45
Paragraph 45
45. Notes that the Council has hitherto made very little use of impact assessment as an instrument; calls therefore on the Council too to make more intensive use of impact assessments in order to improve the quality of its contribution to European legislation; , in line with the interinstitutional Common Approach to Impact Assessments of November 2005, in order to improve the quality of its contribution to European legislation, not least when the Council is making use of its right to initiate legislation;