Activities of Dennis de JONG related to 2014/2150(INI)
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION on Regulatory fitness and performance programme (REFIT): state of play and outlook
Amendments (6)
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Reiterates that SMEs need careful consideration in EU legislation, and draws attention to recommendations made in its resolution of 27 November 2014 on this matter (2014/2967(RSP)); calls on the Commission, with a view to providing evidence on the added value of EU action and its costs and benefits, to include a mandatory SME test in the revised impact assessment guidelines;
Amendment 20 #
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’;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Is of the opinion that optional legislation, also known as 29th regimes, does not contribute to the efforts made in the REFIT exercise, as it creates uncertainty and adds to the complexity of legal frameworks, as is the case with the current proposals for a Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base and for a Common European Sales Law;
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls for businesses andall stakeholders to be more closely involved in a balanced manner with subsidiarity checks, administrative burden assessment, and the monitoring of the implementation of EU legislation at national level; welcomes the Commission’s intention to establish a new High Level Group on better regulation under the responsibility of the responsible Vice-President;
Amendment 42 #
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; is of the opinion that public consultations via the Commission´s website cannot replace direct consultation with representatives from stakeholders, as the website is simply not known enough to be representative or balanced;
Amendment 56 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Considers that stakeholders and Member States should be more closely involved in identifying implementation difficulties at national level and should provide feedback to the Commission; calls for the use of indicators for measuring compliance costs as well as the costs of non-regulation (along the lines of the ‘Cost of non- Europe’); calls for these indicators to include which groups in society benefit most;