Activities of Ulla TØRNÆS related to 2014/2150(INI)
Shadow opinions (2)
OPINION on Regulatory Fitness and Performance Programme (REFIT): State of Play and Outlook
OPINION on Regulatory fitness and performance programme (REFIT): state of play and outlook
Amendments (20)
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Considers that, where the need for action at EU level has been clearly identified, it should be carefully assessed which legislative instrument (regulation or directive) is best suited for reaching the intended political goal, emphasising European added-value and respect for the subsidiarity principle; considers that a set of indicators to identify the full compliance costs of a new legislative act should be applied in order to better assess its impact;
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recognises that REFIT represents a first important step towards reducing the administrative burdens of regulation on businesses and eliminating barriers to growth, competitiveness and job creation;
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Reiterates that SMEs need careful consideration in EU legislation; calls on the Commission, with a view to providing evidence on the added value of EU action and its costs and benefits, to recognise the importance of the "think small first principle" includeing a mandatory SME test and competitiveness proofing in the revised impact assessment guidelines; stresses the pressing need for better- targeted tools to boost productivity and growth in the EU;
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes that up to a third of the administrative burden related to EU legislation stems from national implementing measures, and reiterates the importance of ensuring the swift and consistent transposition, implementation and enforcement of legislation, alongside the proposed simplification, and the need to avoid ‘gold-plating’; calls on the Commission to include national gold- plating in the EU Regulatory Scoreboard;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Supports the Commission’s commitment on cutting red tape and for providing better regulation; welcomes the effort of the Juncker Commission to a strengthened Better Regulation Agenda and calls for the need for it to deliver an efficient system and actual progress; believes that cutting red tape should aim to deliver proportionate, evidence-based protection for workers, while ensuring that businesses can grow, create jobs and boost competitiveness; notes that debetter regulation and better regulationhigh protection of employees are not mutually exclusive;
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Calls on the Commission to introduce a methodology for quantitative targets for the reduction of administrative burden at European level; notes the positive experiences in some Member States of setting net reduction targets with the aim to lower compliance costs; asks that this methodology be discussed at the High Level Group on Administrative Burdens and taken into account in future impact assessments when accepted;
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes efforts to identify genuine opportunities for simplification of legislationand adaptability of legislation whilst maintaining high standards; stresses the need for simpler, clearly-worded rules that remove complexity and can be implemented in a simple manner in order to improve compliance, particularly in the area of health, safety and employment legislation; recalls the importance of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality;
Amendment 40 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Calls on the Commission to establish a "European Stakeholder Forum" on better regulation and less bureaucracy consisting of representatives from the social partners, consumer organisations and the business community with a quantitative goal of reducing administrative burdens by 25 % by 2020; stresses the need for a bottom-up approach to deregulation and regulatory fitness and that the "European Stakeholder Forum" must have direct access to put forward proposals to the Commission through The High Level Group and the responsible Vice- President; stresses that proposals put forward by the "European Stakeholder Forum" must be followed by the principle of "comply or explain";
Amendment 41 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission to ensure that consultations with stakeholders are transparent and timely and their output is analysed both quantitatively and qualitatively to ensure that minority views are also duly taken into account; considers that feedback could already be given on draft impact assessments to the Impact Assessment Board, at the stage preceding the final legislative proposal and assessment; calls on the Commission to ensure that the SME Test and impact assessments are neutral and objective; underlines that all positions should be based on real data and fully cover all the costs and benefits of each policy option on all stakeholders, including SMEs;
Amendment 43 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Stresses the need for a bottom-up approach to better regulation; therefore calls on the Commission to establish a "European Stakeholder Forum" on better regulation and less bureaucracy with a quantitative goal of reducing administrative burdens by 20 % by 2020; emphasizes that the Forum shall consist of relevant stakeholders, including official representatives from the civil society, the social partners, consumer organizations and the business community especially SME's which represent 80 % of European job-creation, stresses that proposals from this forum should be actively considered by the Commission, and that the Commission should address the proposals in accordance with the "comply or explain principle; believes the Forum could serve as a platform for businesses or collective groups working both nationally or across Europe to submit inputs supporting the better regulation principles or contributing to achieving less bureaucracy in the regulation applying in their sector;
Amendment 58 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Calls on the Commission to introduce a methodology for quantitative targets for the reduction of administrative burden at European level; notes the positive experiences in some Member States of setting net reduction targets with the aim to lower compliance costs; asks that this methodology be discussed at the High Level Group on Administrative Burdens and taken into account in future impact assessments when accepted;
Amendment 61 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. WelcomNotes the Commission’s indication that the maternity leave directive shcould be considered for withdrawal; underlines that any new proposal from the Commission in this area must be in full compliance with the principle of subsidiarity;
Amendment 64 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Recalls that Commission Bieńkowska, during her confirmation hearing, commit the Commission to consider the withdrawal of any proposal when Members find that an impact assessment is flawed or elements have not been considered correctly; calls on the Commission to confirm in writing that this is the policy of the whole of the College of Commissioners;
Amendment 65 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 b (new)
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9b. Notes the importance of Multilevel governance and that stakeholders most often face administration burdens at the local and regional level; with regards to this fact, believes that a Multilevel governance test should be included in further guidelines in order to limit this burden;
Amendment 87 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the SME test and reminds the Commission on the commitment it has made in the Small Business Act to implement the "think small first principle" in its policy-making and considers that there is still an important margin of progress to be completed; calls on the Commission to use lighter regimes for micro-enterprises, start-ups and SMEs and to consider exemptions for micro-enterprisesthem on a case-by-case basis, while not compromising on health, safety and employment standards;
Amendment 96 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Reminds that Commissioner Biénkowska during her confirmation hearing committed the Commission to consider the withdrawal of any proposal that Members find that an impact assessment is flawed or that elements have not been considered in full, calls on the Commission to confirm its commitment to this in writing;
Amendment 105 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls for further measures such as carrying out independent impact assessments throughout the legislative process, further strengthening the independence, objectivity and neutrality of impact assessments and the SME-test, further facilitating citizens participation in the EUs legislative process, ensuring the adaptability of legislators and increasing transparency of inter- institutional negotiations as well as monitoring the transposition of the EU- legislation into national laws by including national gold-plating in the EU Regulatory Scoreboard to check that legislation is doing what it was intended to do and to identify areas where there are inconsistencies and ineffective measures;
Amendment 119 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Urges the Commission and co- legislators to continue to improve the legislative cycle and to introduce sunset clauses when justified and useful in concrete cases to ensure that employment legislation is periodically reviewed;
Amendment 134 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Calls on the Commission to prioritise action in the fields of what have been identified as the ‘Top Ten’ most burdensome laws for SMEs, micro- enterprises and start-ups, including the working time and temporary agency directives as well as national legislation which fragments the European Single Market;
Amendment 149 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Calls on the committee responsible to systematically review Commission impact assessments and review IMPA’s analysis as early as possible in the legislative process, and to call for independent impact assessments on its own reports.