15 Amendments of Anne SANDER related to 2016/2018(INI)
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the interinstitutional agreement (IIA) on better law-making and the inclusion of new, innovative elements such as the annual burden survey (ABS),eeking to improve the quality of regulation and hence make it a real added value in terms of competitiveness, growth and jobs, in particular by introducing an annual burden survey, making a clear reference to SMEs and competitiveness tests, burden reduction targets and the Regulatory Scrutiny Board (RSB), which will help to provide clear added value the ‘think small first’ principle, which should be the common thread running through every impact assessment, and involving the Regulatory Scrutiny Board (RSB) in checks on the quality of impact assessments, as well as by improving legislative procedures, requiring terms ofhe European institutions to comopetitiveness, growth and jobs; rate with each other in good faith, and enhancing the transparency of law-making while observing the core principles of Union law, that is to say, democratic legitimacy, subsidiarity, and proportionality;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. In keeping with the agreement, calls for Parliament and Council experts, to be given full access, on an equal footing, to meetings of Commission expert groups responsible for drafting delegated acts, and for the three institutions, working in close collaboration, to draw up a ‘joint functional register of delegated acts’ in order to ensure that the message of the co-legislators in a basic legislative act is not negated or distorted;
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Points out that there is at present an information disparity between Parliament and the Council, since parliamentary committee meetings are held in public, whereas Council meetings are not; stresses the importance, therefore, of giving effect without delay to point 34 of the agreement, which stipulates that Parliament and the Council, in their capacity as co- legislators, have to maintain close contacts all through interinstitutional negotiations, one means to that end being to exchange views and information;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the establishment. on 14 November 2017, of the Commission Task Force on Subsidiarity, Proportionality and ‘Doing Less More Efficiently’, which mustshould work hand in hand with the IIA to help increase the trust of citizens, who consider the subsidiarity principle a key aspect of the democratic procesare looking to the EU to act where it has genuine added value and gets as close as possible to their daily lives, for instance by helping them to establish themselves in permanent employment and supporting them in their business ventures;
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Believes that the ‘Think Small First’ principle can play an important role inis essential, as it can help to reduce the administrative burdens and the cost that legislation entails for SMEs, which can in turn serve to foster entrepreneurship, job creation, and growth by reducing the cost of legislation to; accordingly calls on the Commission, when carrying out its impact assessments, invariably to perform an ‘SME test’ in order to gauge how SMEs might be affected by its proposals and ensure that they largely apply the rules concerned, without, however, undermining their growth potential or shackling entrepreneurship; calls on the Commission and the co-legislators to ascertain, throughout the legislative process, what impact the rules being drafted are having on SMEs;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Points out that while impact assessments may help to improve the quality of EU legislation, the interinstitutional agreement of 13 April 2016 on better law-making nevertheless states that impact assessments are ‘not a substitute for political decisions within the democratic decision-making process’ and ‘must not be undue delays in the law- making process or prejudice the co- legislators’ capacity to propose amendments’;
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Notes that, as specified in the interinstitutional agreement on better law- making, ‘Each of the three Institutions is responsible for determining how to organise its impact assessment work, including internal organisational resources and quality control’;
Amendment 34 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)
Paragraph 5 c (new)
5c. Maintains that it is essential that, to quote the agreement, ‘The Commission's initial impact assessment and any additional impact assessment work conducted during the legislative process by the Institutions’ should be made public by the end of the legislative process in order to ensure transparency in relation to citizens and stakeholders;
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses the importance of the new provisions for public and stakeholder consultations, which must be used both in the preparatory phase and throughout the entire legislative proces, according to the agreement, are ‘integral to well-informed decision-making and to improving the quality of law-making’; maintains that it is essential for public consultations of this kind to be carried out by the Commission during the preparatory phase of a proposal and for them to be conducted in an open and transparent way by being made available to all stakeholders in all of the EU languages;
Amendment 41 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Stresses the importance of the agreed ABS as a tool to identify and monitor the results of EU efforts to avoid overregulation and, reduce administrative burdens, and improve the quality of EU legislation, which has to be ambitious on the major issues;
Amendment 45 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Urges the Commission to establish the ABS without delay, as it will, without delay, all the measures proposed in the ‘better law-making’ IIA, especially those relating to sincere cooperation among the institutions, greater transparency in the legislative process, and the introduction of an ABS, which could play a key role in the implementation and proper application of EU legislation, and, at the same time, to bring particular the scrutiny ofto bear on Member States’ transposition of directives, and ofn all national measures that go beyond the provisions of EU legislation (‘gold- plating’);
Amendment 54 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Believes that the RSB must show more ambition; calls for an evaluation and follow-up of the independence of the RSB in fulfilling its role of supervischecking, and providing objective advice on, the quality of impact assessments; considers it essential that RSB opinions should be published at the same time as the findings of impact assessments;
Amendment 62 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Calls on the Commission to come forward with proposals for targets for the reduction of burdens in key sectors.Notes that, as stated in the agreement, ‘The Commission [... is to] assess the feasibility of establishing, in [the regulatory fitness and performance programme,] REFIT, objectives for the reduction of burdens in specific sectors’ to help reduce the regulatory and administrative burden overall; calls on the Commission to clarify and spell out the nature of these objectives to be attained and the ways to attain them so as to ensure that they can bring tangible changes for the better for businesses without making it more difficult to achieve the EU’s ambitious strategic goals;