Progress: Procedure completed
Role | Committee | Rapporteur | Shadows |
---|---|---|---|
Lead | JURI | NIEBLER Angelika ( PPE) | MCCARTHY Arlene ( S&D), WIKSTRÖM Cecilia ( ALDE), ALBRECHT Jan Philipp ( Verts/ALE), ZIOBRO Zbigniew ( ECR), SPERONI Francesco Enrico ( EFD) |
Committee Opinion | ENVI | CALLANAN Martin ( ECR) | |
Committee Opinion | BUDG | ||
Committee Opinion | ITRE | CHICHESTER Giles ( ECR) | Bendt BENDTSEN ( PPE) |
Committee Opinion | REGI | ||
Committee Opinion | ECON | EPPINK Derk Jan ( ECR) | |
Committee Opinion | IMCO | WEILER Barbara ( S&D) | Wim van de CAMP ( PPE), Matteo SALVINI ( ENF) |
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
RoP 54
Legal Basis:
RoP 54Events
The European Parliament adopted by 573 votes to 22 with 78 abstentions, a resolution on guaranteeing independent impact assessments.
Parliament recalls that impact assessments present a systematic evaluation of the likely effects of legislative action and that it has on a number of occasions expressed support for the use of independent impact assessments in the European Union. In this context, Members lay down a series of recommendations on the general requirements for impact assessments at European level with a view to enhancing efficiency and independence.
General requirements for impact assessments at European level : stressing that impact assessments are an important aid to smart and better lawmaking during the whole policy cycle which the makers of EU law should exploit more often in order to help them evaluate more effectively the economic, social, environmental and health related consequences of their policy options, Members emphasise that impact assessments should play a key role throughout the whole policy cycle, from design to implementation, enforcement, evaluation and to the revision of legislation and that they should be considered as a prerequisite for high-quality legislation and correct transposition, application and enforcement.
Parliament stresses that impact assessments are in no way a substitute for political debate and the legislator’s decision-making process. They must respond to a certain number of standards. To summarise, they:
need to be carried out in the early stages of policy development; should be completely independent and should always be based on an objective, reasoned analysis of potential effects; should involve external experts from all policy areas as well as all stakeholder groups affected in the impact assessment process in order to guarantee independence and objectivity; require the maximum of transparency when being drawn up, including the early publication of comprehensive Road Maps of proposed legislation to ensure equal access to the legislative procedure for all stakeholders; should be scrutinised by Member States ex ante , to assess the effects of proposed legislation on national laws and public policies; should be a suitable instrument for verifying the relevance of Commission proposals, and in particular compliance with the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, and for explaining more clearly to the co-legislators and the public at large the reasons behind opting for a given measure; should quickly identify the problems such as the consultation of the parties concerned, definition of the objectives to be achieved and the elaboration of strategic policy options; should be updated during the course of the legislative process; ensure consistency between policies and activities of the EU by taking all the economic, social and environmental aspects which are to be combined in a single evaluation; examine the potential implications for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs); make an ex-post assessment of the impact of EU legislation on the competitiveness of the European economy, including industrial competitiveness; should look into the European added-value in terms of what savings will result from a European solution and/or what supplementary costs would arise for the Member States in the absence of a European solution; should consider the implications of choosing a specific European standard instead of an international standard; must fully consider the alternatives available to the legislator, which should always include a serious examination of the option of taking no action; should not be abused as a means of holding up unwanted legislation, and technical and administrative conditions should be created to ensure the optimal use of resources; should not take place only before the adoption of a legislative text (ex-ante) but should also be carried out after its adoption (ex-post).
Underlining the Commission's primary responsibility for conducting high quality impact assessments of its proposals when exercising its right of initiative in accordance with the Treaty, Members consider it important for new legislative proposals to be accompanied by an impact assessment . They note that this may also apply to the simplification and recasting of EU law and to delegated acts and implementing acts pursuant to Articles 290 and 291 TFEU.
Potential for improvement at Commission level : Parliament calls for the following measures (i) strengthen the independence of members of the IAB, who must be scrutinized by the European Parliament and the Council prior to appointment and no longer be subject to the instructions of the Commission President; (ii) the involvement of experts from all policy areas as well as all stakeholder groups affected in the IAB's work; call for these experts to come from outside the Commission and not be subject to instructions; (iii) the early and comprehensive involvement of the European Parliament, and in particular of its relevant committees, in the whole impact assessment process and in the work of the IAB; (iv) the Commission should also consult with the Member States, because the latter must later transpose the directives into national law; (v) in the interest of greater transparency, the publication of the names of all experts and other participants in the impact assessment process as well as of their declaration of interests; (vi) look systematically at the administrative burden imposed by proposed legislation, and state clearly which of the options assessed eliminates the most administrative burdens; (vii) not present the results of an impact assessment at the same time as a legislative proposal, as it gives the impression that the principal aim of the impact assessment is to justify the Commission proposal; (viii) assessments be be published in a special publication series by the Commission; (ix) use data that is reliable and comparable.
Potential for improvement at European Parliament level : Members state that considers recourse to a parliamentary impact assessment particularly necessary when substantive changes to the initial proposal have been introduced. Impact assessments need not form part of a time-consuming study but may also take the form of limited studies, workshops and expert hearings. Parliament suggests the following measures: (i) a standard citation should systematically be included by Parliament in its legislative resolutions, by which a reference is made to consideration of all impact assessments conducted by the EU institutions in the areas relevant to the legislation in question; (ii) presentation of the impact assessment by the Commission to the relevant committees; (iii) review of Commission impact assessments by external experts and the holding of special meetings with independent experts. Parliament states that Parliament’s impact assessments should be regarded as a corrective to the Commission’s impact assessments. The decision to carry out a parliamentary impact assessment must be taken in Parliament’s relevant committee with the participation of the rapporteur. In this context, Parliament urges that its Rules of Procedure be amended so as to enable one quarter of the committee’s members to order an impact assessment to be carried out. It also calls for individual Members 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.
Creation of an autonomous impact assessment structure for the European Parliament, and prospects for the future : Members call for the establishment of a common impact assessment procedure to be developed on the basis of a common system and methodology used by all committees. This process should take place under the aegis of an autonomous structure which makes use of the Parliament's own resources, for instance by involving the library and the policy departments. Members call for the necessary administrative infrastructure to be created to this end, making sure that any such infrastructure is budget neutral , by making use of existing resources.
Lastly, Parliament stresses that long-term deliberations should take place on the prospects of a common approach to impact assessments by the European institutions. It regrets that the Commission opposes the idea of a common approach to impact assessment by the European institutions, and it calls on the Council too to make more intensive use of impact assessments, in line with the interinstitutional common approach to impact assessments of 2005.
It should be noted that a proposal by the Greens/EFA group for a replacement resolution was rejected in Plenary.
The Committee on Legal Affairs adopted the own-initiative report by Angelika NIEBLER (EPP, DE) on guaranteeing independent impact assessments.
The report recalls that impact assessments make a positive contribution to the overall enhancement of the quality of EU legislation in the interest of better lawmaking and that the European Parliament has on a number of occasions expressed support for the use of independent impact assessments in the European Union. In this context, Members lay down a series of recommendations on the general requirements for impact assessments at European level with a view to enhancing efficiency and independence.
General requirements for impact assessments at European level : stressing that impact assessments are an important aid to smart and better lawmaking during the whole policy cycle which the makers of EU law should exploit more often in order to help them evaluate more effectively the economic, social, environmental and health related consequences of their policy options, Members emphasise that impact assessments should play a key role throughout the whole policy cycle, from design to implementation, enforcement, evaluation and to the revision of legislation and that they should be considered as a prerequisite for high-quality legislation and correct transposition, application and enforcement.
The report stresses that an impact assessment is in no way a substitute for political debate and the legislator’s decision-making process. They must respond to a certain number of standards. To summarise, they:
need to be carried out in the early stages of policy development; should be completely independent and should always be based on an objective, reasoned analysis of potential effects; should involve external experts from all policy areas as well as all stakeholder groups affected in the impact assessment process in order to guarantee independence and objectivity; require the maximum of transparency when being drawen up, including the early publication of comprehensive Road Maps of proposed legislation to ensure equal access to the legislative procedure for all stakeholders; should be scrutinised by Member States ex ante , to assess the effects of proposed legislation on national laws and public policies; should be a suitable instrument for verifying the relevance of Commission proposals, and in particular compliance with the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, and for explaining more clearly to the co-legislators and the public at large the reasons behind opting for a given measure; should quickly identify the problems such as the consultation of the parties concerned, definition of the objectives to be achieved and the elaboration of strategic policy options; should be updated during the course of the legislative process; examine the potential implications for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs); should look into the European added-value in terms of what savings will result from a European solution and/or what supplementary costs would arise for the Member States in the absence of a European solution; should consider the implications of choosing a specific European standard instead of an international standard; must fully consider the alternatives available to the legislator, which should always include a serious examination of the option of taking no action; must not lead to more bureaucracy and unnecessary delays in the legislative procedure; should not take place only before the adoption of a legislative text (ex-ante) but should also be carried out after its adoption (ex-post).
Underlining the Commission's primary responsibility for conducting high quality impact assessments of its proposals when exercising its right of initiative in accordance with the Treaty, Members consider it important for new legislative proposals to be accompanied by an impact assessment . They note that this may also apply to the simplification and recasting of EU law and to delegated acts and implementing acts pursuant to Articles 290 and 291 TFEU.
Potential for improvement at Commission level : Members stress 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. They call, therefore, for the members of the IAB to be scrutinized by the European Parliament and the Council prior to appointment and no longer be subject to the instructions of the Commission President. In the interest of greater transparency, the report calls for the publication of the names of all experts and other participants in the impact assessment process as well as of their declaration of interests. It also calls for the involvement of experts from all policy areas as well as all stakeholder groups affected in the IAB’s work.
Members make other suggestions, such as:
stakeholder groups should be given the opportunity, as part of the public consultation process, to comment on impact assessments, and that this should take place in good time, before the Commission proposal is published; the Commission, in its impact assessments, should look systematically at the administrative burden imposed by proposed legislation, and always to state clearly which of the options assessed eliminates the most administrative burdens or creates fewest new ones; the early publication of documents 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; 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.
Potential for improvement at European Parliament level : Members recall that Parliament should make more consistent use of the parliamentary impact assessment, an instrument which is already available. Recourse to a parliamentary impact assessment is particularly necessary when substantive changes to the initial proposal have been introduced. The report recalls further 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. A standard citation should systematically be included by Parliament in its legislative resolutions, by which a reference is made to consideration of all impact assessments conducted by the EU institutions in the areas relevant to the legislation in question. The presentation of the impact assessment by the Commission to the relevant committees would be a valuable addition to the scrutiny undertaken in the Parliament according to Members.
The report stresses that Parliament impact assessments should be regarded as a corrective to the Commission’s impact assessments. The decision to carry out a parliamentary impact assessment must be taken in Parliament’s relevant committee with the participation of the rapporteur.
In this context, the report urges that its Rules of Procedure be amended so as to enable one quarter of the committee’s members to order an impact assessment to be carried out . It also calls for individual Members 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.
Creation of an autonomous impact assessment structure for the European Parliament, and prospects for the future : Members call for the establishment of a common impact assessment procedure to be developed on the basis of a common system and methodology used by all committees. This process should take place under the aegis of an autonomous structure which makes use of the Parliament's own resources, for instance by involving the library and the policy departments. Members call for the necessary administrative infrastructure to be created to this end, making sure that any such infrastructure is budget neutral , by making use of existing resources. They have already called for a common methodological approach to impact assessments in the European institutions and they call on the Council to make more intensive use of impact assessments.
Documents
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2011)8071/2
- Results of vote in Parliament: Results of vote in Parliament
- Decision by Parliament: T7-0259/2011
- Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
- Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading: A7-0159/2011
- Committee report tabled for plenary: A7-0159/2011
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE460.656
- Committee draft report: PE454.384
- Committee opinion: PE448.966
- Committee opinion: PE441.155
- Committee opinion: PE448.644
- Committee opinion: PE442.974
- Committee opinion: PE442.974
- Committee opinion: PE448.644
- Committee opinion: PE441.155
- Committee opinion: PE448.966
- Committee draft report: PE454.384
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE460.656
- Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading: A7-0159/2011
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2011)8071/2
Activities
- Gerard BATTEN
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Richard FALBR
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Véronique MATHIEU HOUILLON
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Gay MITCHELL
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Anna ZÁBORSKÁ
Plenary Speeches (1)
Votes
A7-0159/2011 - Angelika Niebler - Résolution #
Amendments | Dossier |
147 |
2010/2016(INI)
2010/07/01
ECON
4 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Recital A A. whereas Parliament has stressed several times that the independence of impact assessments is a guarantee for
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion Recital B B. whereas the Impact Assessment Board (IAB) is considered by the Commission to be independent although it is under the authority of the President of the Commission and is composed of high-level officials from several DGs and chaired by the Deputy Secretary-General; whereas this leads to an information bias and thus to a violation of necessary neutrality,
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Considers that the impact assessment process must be subject to independent and external quality control;
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Considers that an independent quality- control process in combination with cost- benefit-analysis should evaluate, inter alia, the necessity of an impact assessment, taking into account its costs and the delays to legislation and policies that it causes;
source: PE-445.668
2010/09/14
ENVI
21 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Calls on the Commission to c
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Calls for a
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Calls for an analysis of economic, social and environmental impacts to be included in all IAs; considers that where there are no such impacts this should be explicitly stated in the IA;
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Calls for an analysis of e
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Underlines the importance of and need for the Parliament's own Committees, in accordance with the Inter-Institutional
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8a (new) 8a. Considers that the true independence of IAs should become a general principle that is applicable to all types of IA, and environmental impact assessments in particular. A guarantee that this principle applies should also be contained in Directive 85/337/EEC on environmental impact assessment;
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8b (new) 8b. Is convinced that Parliament should ask the Commission to propose changes to the UN Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context (Espoo Convention) that would ensure the independence of environmental impact assessments;
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8c (new) 8c. Considers that the Commission should play an active role in defending the interests of the EU and its Member States in cases where third-country projects may have an impact on the European Union or on one or more of its Member States;
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8d (new) 8d. Calls on the chair of the IAB to appear before and address the committees concerned, respectively, and upon their request, on an annual basis following the publication of the IAB annual report;
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8e (new) 8e. Takes the view that Impact Assessments act as a guide to better lawmaking, and must not replace or hinder the role of the politically accountable decision-makers;
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1a (new) 1a. Proposes that priority be given to legislative proposals for binding rules, given the cost of carrying out these IAs;
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8f (new) 8f. Stresses that the concept of bio- geographical zones contained in the Natura 2000 network should be applied in European legislation as this would forestall assumptions that legislative implementation was not viable and would help avoid unnecessary costs;
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8g (new) 8g. Proposes that the IAs on legislative proposals include an economic assessment of the implementation of the substitution principle;
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1a (new) 1a. Stresses that impact assessments can only be an aid for making political decisions and that in no case should they replace political decisions within the democratic decision-making process;
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1b (new) 1b. Furthermore stresses that impact assessments should not cause delays in legislative procedures, nor should they be instrumentalised to serve as procedural obstacles in an attempt to block unwanted legislation;
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1c (new) 1c. Insists that the legislator's freedom to propose amendments should not be impaired by requiring impact assessments;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Calls on the Commission to establish a
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Stresses that stakeholders should be
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. C
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5a (new) 5a. Calls for the cost-benefit concept in the IAs on legislative proposals to be expanded to include specific indicators on natural and cultural resources so as to prevent their possible destruction, given that these resources require a specific and different assessment;
source: PE-448.834
2010/10/06
ITRE
27 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1.
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Believes that IAs should be carried out systematically for any legislative proposal
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Believes that IAs should be carried out
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Emphasises the importance of an integrated approach to IAs that address interactions between economic considerations – with particular emphasis on SMEs – environmental, social, territorial and health considerations;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Advocates that every IA include a consideration of policy alternatives and
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Advocates that every IA include a consideration of policy alternatives, to be debated publicly in such a way as to ensure the information and consultation of those affected by the legislative proposal, and urges the Commission to set up a mechanism to ensure greater inter- institutional cooperation;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Advocates that every IA include a consideration of policy alternatives and urges the Commission to set up a mechanism to ensure greater inter- institutional cooperation; this would notably limit the need for updates of IA during the policy-making cycle; notes that the Parliament may decide to undertake an IA on its own substantive amendments in accordance with the Interinstitutional common approach to IA and the Parliament's IA Handbook;
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Calls for the draft IAs to be published and submitted for consultation prior to the drawing up of the legislative proposal;
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Stresses that IAs should be updated during the policy-making cycle, in particular to take account of substantive changes to the initial legislative proposal put forward by the Commission, and that the update be available prior to the final vote in Parliament; believes that there should be developed mechanisms allowing for a targeted use of IAs in Parliament in cases where proposals undergo substantive changes in committee;
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6.
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Stresses that the Commission's Impact Assessment Board (IAB) should
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Stresses that the administrative burden of new legislation to be imposed on business and public administration should be a key element assessed by IAs, and administrative and compliance costs should if possible be quantified; urges that the effects of new regulation on industry
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Stresses that the administrative burden of new legislation to be imposed on business and public administration should be a key element assessed by IAs, and administrative and compliance costs should if possible be quantified; urges that the
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Considers that
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Proposes that IAs on legislative proposals include an economic and viability assessment on application of the substitution principle, while taking into account unavoidable exceptions such as heritage considerations. It must be ensured that substitute products are affordable and do not always come from monopoly companies;
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 b (new) 7b. Emphasises that promoters of projects or direct or indirect beneficiaries of their implementation must not be able to conduct or approve the draft environmental assessment, since a mandatory independent external assessment is necessary;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 c (new) 7c. Takes the view that it should not be possible for environmental impact assessments on projects or legislation sponsored by public administrations or their dependent undertakings to be conducted or approved by the administration concerned;
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 d (new) 7d. Believes that a cost-benefit approach is insufficient when it comes to IAs, since this does not serve to assess the impact on natural and historical resources, and that specific indicators should therefore be developed to assess those non-renewable resources;
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 e (new) 7e. Given the cost of IAs, priority should be given to their being conducted on legislative proposals laying down binding rules.
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Stresses that the Commission's Impact
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Believes the impact assessment to be a suitable instrument for verifying the relevance of Commission proposals, and in particular compliance with the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, and for explaining more clearly to the co-legislators and the public at large the reasons behind opting for a given measure;
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Calls at the European Commission to systematically include other institutions' representatives in public consultations, hearings and the like; thus, the European Parliament could be involved earlier and closer in the process and Commission could hence better target the need for impact assessments and its content, as far as policy options are concerned;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. The IAB should check all Commission IAs and issue opinions on them; if the Commission, following a critical opinion from the IAB, decides not to make any changes to its proposal, a statement from the Commission explaining this decision should be published with the proposal as should the IAB's opinion;
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 b (new) 1b. Stresses that impact assessments must in no way diminish the Commission’s independence in exercising its institutional prerogatives, and in particular its sole right to initiate legislation as provided for in Article 17 of the Treaty on European Union;
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Believes that the IAB should be in a position to verify the
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Believes that the impact on EU economic partnerships as well as the implications of choosing a specific European standard instead of an international standard should be taken into consideration in IAs;
source: PE-450.606
2010/11/03
IMCO
15 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Recital 1 (new) (1) having regard to the Commission Communication on Smart Regulation in the European Union (COM(2010)543),
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Calls on the Commission, in its impact assessments, to look systematically at the administrative burden imposed by proposed legislation, and always to state clearly which of the options assessed eliminates the most administrative burdens or creates fewest new ones;
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 a (new) 6 a. Calls on the Parliament to update impact assessments during the policy- making cycle, in particular to take account of substantive changes to the initial legislative proposal put forward by the Commission, and that the update be available prior to the final vote in Parliament.
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Welcomes the fact that the Commission’s new Impact Assessment Guidelines contain a commitment to examine the potential impact of proposals
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 8. Emphasises the need to improve the work of the Impact Assessment Board by ensuring that Commission experts from all policy areas affected a
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 9 a (new) 9 a. Emphasises that smart regulation based on complete and objective impact assessment remains the shared responsibility of the European institutions and of the Member States, and that the Commission must therefore also take into account feedback received from the European Parliament, the Committee for the Regions, the European Economic and Social Committee and Member States;
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Calls on the Commission to carry out an independent, neutral assessment of all possible options, without committing itself to a particular option before an impact assessment has even been carried out;
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Points out that, for an impact assessment to be objective, the Commission must systematically consult all interested parties, including SMEs and consumer protection organisations; a public consultation is not sufficient, because it can never be representative;
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Points out that, for an impact assessment to be objective, the Commission must systematically consult all interested parties, including SMEs and consumer protection organisations in order to strengthen the voice of EU citizens in the consultations;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Notes that, in carrying out its impact assessments, the Commission should also work with the Member States, because the latter must later transpose the directives into national law, and national authorities usually know better how legal provisions will work in practice;
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Stresses that the European Parliament should also submit its main amendments and compromises to an impact assessment;
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4 a. Confirms that all co-legislators should comply with the disciplines of carrying out impact assessments when they introduce amendments to legislation that significantly impact the legislative outcome or impact on affected stakeholders;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Calls on the Commission to guarantee that consumer protection requirements are taken into account by ensuring that impact assessments examine the potential impact of proposals on the single market and consumers, as well as their economic, social and environmental impact;
source: PE-452.625
2011/03/03
JURI
80 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution Citation -1 (new) - having regard to the entering into force of the Lisbon Treaty,
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution 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,
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution 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 12 #
Motion for a resolution Recital H a (new) Ha. whereas the Lisbon treaty lays down obligations for the Commission to carry out impact assessments regarding employment,
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution Recital I I. whereas the Commission is pursuing a new kind of approach in industrial policy, whereby all political proposals with significant effects on
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution Recital I I. whereas the Commission is pursuing a new kind of approach in industrial policy, whereby all political proposals with significant effects on industry should be analysed in detail as to their impact on competitiveness; calls for this approach to focus on effects on employment as well,
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Stresses that impact assessments are an important aid to better lawmaking which
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Welcomes the Smart Regulation Communication, and emphasises that impact assessments should play a key role throughout the whole policy cycle, from design to implementation, enforcement, evaluation and to the revision of legislation; stresses the importance of well-considered and fully informed decision-making at the design stage of legislative proposals, because this can lead to both improved quality of outcomes and a shorter legislative process;
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Points out that reforming the impact assessment mechanisms within EU institutions must not lead to a further slowing down of the legislative process;
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution 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 independent
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution 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 2 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 1 a (new) - having regard to the Lisbon Treaty, which entered into force on 1 December 2009,
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Considers it
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Considers
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Considers it advisable and necessary to involve external experts from all policy areas affected 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 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) 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) 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 26 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Considers it
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution 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, which are to be combined in a single evaluation, with the aim to ensure consistency between policies and activities of the European Union by taking all of its objectives into account and in accordance with the principle of conferral of powers as laid down in Article 7 TFEU;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution 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
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution 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; calls for impact assessments to always evaluate the compatibility of the legislation with fundamental rights; recalls the "horizontal" social and environmental clauses (Article 9 and 11 TFEU) of the Lisbon Treaty ; also draws attention in this context to the economic, social and environmental aspects referred to in the interinstitutional agreement of 16 December 2003, which are to be combined in a single evaluation;
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution 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 30 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Calls for impact assessments to take a large number of criteria into account, in accordance with the principle of an integrated approach, 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, which are to be combined in a single evaluation;
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 a (new) 8a. Stresses, in particular, the need to examine the social effects of legislative proposals, including their impact on the European labour market and living standards;
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
Amendment 33 #
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;
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Calls, in the context of impact assessments, for an intensive analysis to be carried out on all new policy proposals with significant effects on industrial competitiveness; further calls for an ex- post assessment of the impact of EU legislation on the competitiveness of the European
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Calls, in the context of impact assessments, for an intensive analysis to be carried out on all new policy proposals with significant effects on industrial competitiveness, including the promotion of a high level of employment, the guarantee of adequate social protection, the fight against social exclusion and a high level of education, training and protection of human health as requested by Article 9 TFEU; further calls for an ex- post assessment of the impact of EU legislation on the
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Urges that impact assessments at European level should look into the European added-value in terms of what savings will result from a European solution and/or what supplementary costs would arise for the Member States in the absence of a European solution;
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Stresses that impact assessments must
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Stresses that impact assessments must
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Stresses that impact assessments should not take place only before the adoption of a legislative text (ex-ante) but should also be carried out after its adoption (ex-post); points out that this is necessary in order to evaluate more accurately whether the objectives of a law have actually been achieved and whether a legal act should be amended or retained; stresses nevertheless that the ex-post evaluation should never replace the Commission's duty as "Guardian of the Treaties" to monitor effectively and in a timely manner the application of Union law by Member States;
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution 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 40 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 a (new) 16 a. Underlines the Commission's primary responsibility for conducting high quality impact assessments of its proposals when exercising its right of initiative in accordance with the Treaty;
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
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Stresses that the members of the IAB are independent
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Calls also for the involvement
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution 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 46 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 21. Calls for the early and comprehensive
Amendment 47 #
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, 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 48 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 24. Notes the criticism by the European Court of Auditors to the effect that the Commission sometimes undertakes legislative initiatives even though the impact assessment process has not been completed; further notes the criticism that not all policy options may receive the same level of attention; stresses that all policy options must be fully considered in the impact assessment process;
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution 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 50 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 25. Calls, in the interest of greater transparency, for the publication of the
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution 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
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;
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 Amendment 54 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 29. Calls for the
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 31 31. Calls on its committees to make more consistent use of the parliamentary impact assessment, an instrument which is already available; recalls that there is a specific budget line to cover the carrying out of impact assessments; considers recourse to a parliamentary impact assessment particularly necessary when substantive changes to the initial proposal have been introduced;
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;
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 33 33. Notes that Parliament and its committees already possess the machinery with which to scrutinise the Commission's impact assessments; stresses that this may take a number of forms, including
Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 33 33. Notes that Parliament and its committees already possess the machinery with which to scrutinise the Commission's impact assessments;
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;
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A a (new) Aa. whereas following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty the Charter of Fundamental Rights has the same legal value as the European Union treaties and impact assessments should always verify the compatibility of the legislation with fundamental rights,
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;
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;
Amendment 62 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 40 Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 40 40.
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 40 40. Urges that th
Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 41 Amendment 66 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 41 Amendment 67 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 41 Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 42 Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 42 Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C a (new) Ca. whereas Article 9 of the Treaty of Lisbon calling on the Union to take account of requirements linked to the promotion of a high level of employment, the guarantee of adequate social protection, the fight against social exclusion, and a high level of education, training and protection of human health in defining and implementing its policies and activities requires an in-depth analysis of the social impact of any proposed legislation,
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 42 42. Calls for the appropriate
Amendment 71 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 42 42. Calls for
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution 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 1
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution 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
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution 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; emphasises that smart regulation based on complete and objective impact assessment remains the shared responsibility of the European institutions and of the Member States;
Amendment 75 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 46 a (new) 46a. Calls for the cost-benefit concept in impact assessments on legislative proposals to be expanded to include specific indicators on natural and cultural resources so as to prevent their possible destruction, given that these resources are not renewable, offer added richness and require a specific and different assessment;
Amendment 76 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 46 b (new) 46b. Considers it necessary, given the differences in climate in the various parts of Europe, to apply the definition of biogeographical zones used in the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), so that the rules apply to a specific situation, avoiding distortions;
Amendment 77 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 46 c (new) 46c. Takes the view that it should not be possible for environmental impact assessments on projects or legislation sponsored by public administrations or their dependent undertakings to be either conducted or approved by the administration concerned;
Amendment 78 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 46 d (new) 46d. Takes the view that, with regard to land-use planning issues and the expansion of large-scale urban developments, where responsibility lies with the Member States or regional institutions, the latter will need to revise their own procedures where appropriate so that independent impact assessment is guaranteed, ensuring that institutions benefiting from projects are obliged to accept and respect the judgment reached in impact assessments;
Amendment 79 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 46 e (new) 46e. Takes the view that impact assessments on legislative proposals should include an economic and viability assessment applying the substitution principle, while taking into account unavoidable exceptions such as historical and natural heritage considerations, as a foundation for and guarantee of European cultural tourism; takes the view that care must be taken to ensure that substitute products do not harm competitiveness, avoiding the existence of monopoly companies;
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D a (new) Da. whereas the Lisbon Treaty contains "horizontal" social and environmental clauses (Article 9 and 11 TFEU) the Union should take into account and integrate when defining and implementing Union actions and policies,
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 46 f (new) 46f. Takes the view that, when large-scale projects covered in the 'SEI' Directive 2001/42/EC on strategic environmental assessment are implemented, the Commission should ensure the full application of all aspects of Article 3 of the 'EIA' Directive 85/337/EC, which includes: 'human beings, fauna and flora; soil, water, air, climate and the landscape; material assets and the cultural heritage; the interaction between the factors mentioned in the first, second and third indents';
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution 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, and thus help reduce bureaucracy and ensure the consistency of the EU's policies in reaching the overarching objectives set by the European Council,
source: PE-460.656
|
History
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
docs/7/docs/0/url |
/oeil/spdoc.do?i=20023&j=0&l=en
|
events/3/docs |
|
committees/0/shadows/4 |
|
docs/0/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE442.974&secondRef=02New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/ECON-AD-442974_EN.html |
docs/1/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE448.644&secondRef=02New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/ITRE-AD-448644_EN.html |
docs/2/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE441.155&secondRef=02New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/ENVI-AD-441155_EN.html |
docs/3/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE448.966&secondRef=02New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/IMCO-AD-448966_EN.html |
docs/4/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE454.384New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/JURI-PR-454384_EN.html |
docs/5/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE460.656New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/JURI-AM-460656_EN.html |
docs/6/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-7-2011-0159_EN.htmlNew
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-7-2011-0159_EN.html |
events/0/type |
Old
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single readingNew
Committee referral announced in Parliament |
events/1/type |
Old
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single readingNew
Vote in committee |
events/2 |
|
events/2 |
|
events/3/docs |
|
events/5 |
|
events/5 |
|
procedure/Modified legal basis |
Rules of Procedure EP 150
|
procedure/Other legal basis |
Rules of Procedure EP 159
|
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 54
|
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 052
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/3 |
|
committees/3 |
|
committees/4 |
|
committees/4 |
|
committees/5 |
|
committees/5 |
|
docs/6/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2011-159&language=ENNew
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-7-2011-0159_EN.html |
docs/7/body |
EC
|
events/2/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2011-159&language=ENNew
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-7-2011-0159_EN.html |
events/5/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2011-259New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-7-2011-0259_EN.html |
committees/0/rapporteur/0/mepref |
4289
|
activities |
|
commission |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/3 |
|
committees/3 |
|
committees/4 |
|
committees/4 |
|
committees/5 |
|
committees/5 |
|
committees/6 |
|
committees/6 |
|
docs |
|
events |
|
links |
|
other |
|
procedure/Modified legal basis |
Old
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 150New
Rules of Procedure EP 150 |
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee |
Old
JURI/7/01634New
|
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 052
|
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 052
|
procedure/subject |
Old
New
|
other/0/dg/title |
Old
Secretariat GeneralNew
Secretariat-General |
activities |
|
committees |
|
links |
|
other |
|
procedure |
|