8 Amendments of Claude TURMES related to 2010/2016(INI)
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses that the Commission's Impact Assessment Board (IAB) should be independent from the European Commission consisting of independent non-executive members accountable to, and appointed by,ensure a stringent quality control as well as transparency and shall report regularly to the European Parliament;
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
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 8 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Believes that the IAB should be in a position to verify the cost calculations of the impact assessment (IA) and establish independent cost calculations with the assistance of independent experts where necessarybalance between the consideration of environmental, social and economic impacts;
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Believes that IAs should be carried out systematically for for significanyt legislative proposals and calls on the Commission, for the exceptional cases in which no IA can be carried out, to always provide a reasoned justification why an IA is not performed;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
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 17 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. StresseReminds that the administrative burden of new legislation to be imposed on business and public administration should be a keyis an element assessed by IAs, and administrative and compliance costs should if possible be quantified; urges that the effects of new regulation on industry be thoroughly assessed and thatcalls for a balance between administrative burden reduction and achieving the goals of legislation, in order to ensure that the latter are not being compromised; points at the fact that some aspects of IA, notably with regard to administrative burden might be better assessed at Member State level; asks for the SME test to be consistently applied to evaluate the impact of new regulation on SMEs in particular;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Considers that the methodology for the IAB'scosts, red tape and delays to the legislative process for impact assessment process should be regularly evaluated by an independent body such as the Court of Auditors; urges that ex-post evaluations be carried out to show whether the policy has been effective and to optimise the methodology for IAs, without however pre-empting the Commission's powers to enforce EU legislation.