The EC’s system of reviewing laws compares well overall with its equivalents in the Member States, according to a new report by the ECA. High-quality ex-post reviews are critical to the quality of legislation.
The ECA identified a number of weaknesses, mostly relating to the lack of common interinstitutional definitions regarding review clauses, the unclear treatment of certain kinds of review and the lack of clarity of the Regulatory Fitness and Performance (REFIT) programme.
Reviewing legislation after it has come into effect is a key part of the EC’s ‘Better Regulation’ policy. Better Regulation means designing policies and laws so that they achieve their main objectives, allowing evidence-based public choices. It is a way of working which should ensure that political decisions are prepared in an open and transparent manner, informed by the best available evidence and backed by the comprehensive involvement of stakeholders. It covers the whole policy cycle from policy design and preparation, through adoption, implementation and application (including enforcement), to evaluation and revision.
The auditors assessed whether the EU system of review was properly planned and has been satisfactorily implemented, managed and quality-controlled. Overall, they concluded that the EC’s reviews compare well to the situation in most Member States. The system for evaluation reviews is well designed, well managed and carefully quality-controlled. But other kinds of reviews are not subject to the same strict quality control standards, even though the underlying work can be of a similar nature, duration and cost as those of evaluations.
Full press release
Full report
© ECA PRESS
Key
Hover over the blue highlighted
text to view the acronym meaning
Hover
over these icons for more information
Comments:
No Comments for this Article