BETA

Activities of Cecilia WIKSTRÖM related to 2010/2016(INI)

Shadow reports (1)

REPORT on guaranteeing independent impact assessments PDF (232 KB) DOC (162 KB)
2016/11/22
Committee: JURI
Dossiers: 2010/2016(INI)
Documents: PDF(232 KB) DOC(162 KB)

Amendments (12)

Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution
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Act; recalls in this context that for eachin every law imposing a burdens on SMEs, an existing such law should be repealed (the ‘one in, one out’ rule) there should be a careful evaluation of existing regulations with the aim at reducing the overall regulatory burden on SMEs;
2011/03/03
Committee: JURI
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
13. Stresses that impact assessments must not lead to more bureaucracy and unnecessarybe allowed sufficient time in order to produce a reliable result without causing unwarranted delays in the legislative procedure; further stresses in this connection that impact assessments should not be abused as a means of holding up unwanted legislation; urges, therefore, that the technical and administrative conditions be created to ensure that impact assessments are carried out speedily and promptly, e.g. through such instruments as framework agreements, accelerated tendering procedures and the optimal use of resources;
2011/03/03
Committee: JURI
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution
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 members 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 President;
2011/03/03
Committee: JURI
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution
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, and the Council in the whole impact assessment process and in the work of the IAB; stresses in this context that the participation of Parliament and Council should focus on ensuring that all relevant issues are addressed by the impact assessment without jeopardizing the independence of the impact assessment by influencing the actual evaluation;
2011/03/03
Committee: JURI
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
23. Calls for the European Parliament and the Council to be provided in every case with a written explanation of why the Commission does not wish to carry out an impact assessment in connection with a specific legislative proposal;deleted
2011/03/03
Committee: JURI
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 a (new)
28 a. Suggests that all completed impact assessments by the Commission should be published in a special publication series by the Commission so that they can easily be referenced and searched by the public on a dedicated website;
2011/03/03
Committee: JURI
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
29. Calls for the systematic ex-post evaluation by the Commission of legal acts adopdeleted;
2011/03/03
Committee: JURI
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
32. Further recalls that impact assessments need not form part of a time-consuming study but may also take the form of limited studies, workshops and expert hearings;
2011/03/03
Committee: JURI
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37 a (new)
37a. Stresses that apart from the usual parliamentary impact assessments commissioned by committees there should be a strengthened possibility for committees to request assessment of the added-value of European legislation, as proposed by the Bureau;
2011/03/03
Committee: JURI
Amendment 60 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37 b (new)
37b. Calls in addition for individual MEPs to have the scope to request small studies to provide them with relevant facts or statistics in areas relating to their parliamentary work, and suggests that such studies may be undertaken by the European Parliament's library to complement its current functions;
2011/03/03
Committee: JURI
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37 c (new)
37c. Calls therefore for the European Parliament's Bureau to adopt plans for the European Parliament's library to provide members with this service; stresses that any plans should be based on the best practices of parliamentary libraries, including those of Member States, and should be carried out, according to strict rules and in full cooperation with the research function serving committees;
2011/03/03
Committee: JURI
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution
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 end;
2011/03/03
Committee: JURI