REPORT on minimising administrative costs imposed by legislation
3.7.2007 - (2005/2140(INI))
Committee on Budgetary Control
Rapporteur: Jan Mulder
MOTION FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION
on minimising administrative costs imposed by legislation
The European Parliament,
– having regard to the EC Treaty,
– having regard to the communication from the Commission on Better Regulation for Growth and Jobs in the European Union (COM(2005)0097) and the communication from the Commission on an EU common methodology for assessing administrative costs imposed by legislation (COM(2005)0518),
– having regard to the Commission Staff Working Document entitled 'Annex to the communication on an EU common methodology for assessing administrative costs imposed by legislation: Outline of the proposed EU common methodology and Report on the Pilot Phase (April – September 2005)' (SEC(2005)1329),
– having regard to the communication from the Commission to the Spring European Council-'Time to move up a gear - The new partnership for growth and jobs' (COM(2006)0030),
– having regard to its resolution of 20 April 2004 on assessment of the impact of Community legislation and the consultation procedures[1],
– having regard to the Report from the Commission - 'Better Lawmaking 2004' (COM(2005)0098),
– having regard to the conclusions of the Competitiveness Council of 13 March 2006, on the basis of the Commission’s communication of 15 November on Community policy supporting SMEs,
– having regard to the communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions - A strategic review of Better Regulation in the European Union (COM(2006)0689),
– having regard to the Commission working document - Measuring administrative costs and reducing administrative burdens in the European Union (COM(2006)0691),
– having regard to the Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on an Action Programme for Reducing Administrative Burdens in the European Union (COM(2007)0023),
– having regard to the Pilot Project 'Minimising Administrative Burdens' (EU Budget 2007, chapter 26 01, article 08),
– having regard to Rule 45 of its Rules of Procedure,
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control and the opinions of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs and the Committee on Legal Affairs (A6‑0275/2007),
A. Whereas the issue of minimising administrative costs imposed by legislation is one of the most important aspects of the general aim of better regulation,
B. Whereas it is important to seek flexible and coherent cooperation with other committees in Parliament on subjects which might have a significant impact on the implementation of the budget of the European Union,
C. Whereas the mission of the Committee on Budgetary Control is to assure the citizens of the European Union that EU funds are raised and spent effectively and properly, and that they are correctly allocated to the tasks which the EU has been asked to perform; whereas to accomplish this aim the Committee strives to develop a modern, effective and efficient public EU accountability system which can ensure sound implementation of the budget, better governance and clear accountability,
D. Whereas regulatory costs, of which administrative obligations are just one element, must be analysed in a broad context encompassing the economic, social and environmental costs and benefits of regulation, and that regular review and integrated analysis should be considered by all as key components of better regulation,
E. Whereas compliance costs are all the costs of complying with regulation, with the exception of direct financial costs and long term consequences and can, in the context of the Standard Cost Model, be divided into substantive compliance costs and administrative costs,
F. Whereas administrative costs are defined as the costs incurred by enterprises, the voluntary sector, public authorities and citizens in meeting legal obligations to provide information on their action or production, either to public authorities or to private parties,
G. Whereas the European Court of Auditors has repeatedly stated that, on the basis of its audit results, it is of the opinion that one of the main causes of irregularities are the underlying rules and regulations, which do not allow for an adequate risk management and strongly hinder the legal and regular expenditure of EU funds,
H. Whereas the proposed Action Programme for Reducing Administrative Burdens in the European Union could reduce administrative burdens by 25% in 2012, covering Community legislation as well as national regulatory burdens, which could lead to an increase in the level of EU GDP of approximately 1,4% or EUR 150 billion in the medium term[2],
I. Whereas the European Council of 8 and 9 March 2007 decided that in Spring 2008, on the basis of a review by the Commission, it will consider whether further action is needed, taking into account different options, including a group of independent experts to advise the institutions on their work towards better regulation,
J. Whereas the European Council of 8 and 9 March 2007 supported the intention of the Commission to set up, as a pilot project, an independent expert committee to assist the Commission and the Member States with the implementation of the Action Programme for Reducing Administrative Burdens,
K. Whereas reducing administrative burdens is an important measure for boosting Europe's economy, especially through its impact on small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs),
L. Whereas legislation is the foundation of properly functioning societies, taking into account social, economic and environmental aspects and assessing their value equally,
1. Welcomes the interinstitutional agreement on better lawmaking and calls on the Council, the Commission and Parliament to make this a reality;
2. Recalls that the Protocol on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality annexed to the EC Treaty provides that the Commission should "take duly into account the need for any burden, whether financial or administrative, falling upon the Community, national governments, local authorities, economic operators and citizens to be minimised and proportionate to the objective to be achieved";
3. Agrees that the regulatory environment in which businesses operate is a determinant of their competitiveness, sustainable growth and employment performance, and that ensuring that the existing and future regulatory environment is transparent, clear, effective and generally of high quality should be an important objective of EU policy;
4. Emphasises the importance of fully applying the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality in adopting Community legislation;
5. Feels that the constant consulting of stakeholders is instrumental when examining legislative proposals; points out that consultation should involve all groups concerned, with a particular focus on those which have to carry the heaviest burdens resulting from legislation, and that the selection of consulted groups should be transparent and balanced; further points out that the consultation procedure should fully respect the Treaty provisions regarding the role of social partners as provided for in Article 138, as well as the principles laid down in COM (2002)704, which requires the Commission to ensure that relevant parties have the opportunity to express their opinions;
6. Underlines further that smaller actors should be actively consulted because they are simply not capable of competing with multinationals and large corporations or organizations with the resources to hire expensive lobbyists and consultants to bring forward their grievances;
7. Is of the opinion that it is important, with the reduction of administrative burdens for businesses and citizens, that the Commission consult ex-post target groups to determine to what extent administrative burdens have been effectively reduced;
8. Stresses in this light the need to make existing web portals accessible to every European citizen, company or NGO in the official languages of the EU, in order to assure maximum accessibility and influence;
9. Welcomes the emphasis placed on the early consultation of stakeholders, including the social partners, SMEs, legislators, law enforcement bodies and non-governmental organisations; underlines the role of social dialogue as a useful tool, contributing to better European governance by ensuring a better balance of interests through the involvement of all actors in decision-making and in the implementation process; stresses that 'all actors' must include those working in SMEs, as laid down in the SME Charter and agreed by the Lisbon Council; calls on the Commission to take initiatives to extend and enhance social dialogue at European level and, on the basis of the outcome, to continue to improve social standards without disregarding the need to preserve jobs;
10. Invites the Commission to report on its current initiatives to guarantee the direct consultation of stakeholders; feels that it is also important that the Commission carry out an ex-post evaluation that gives evidence of the results obtained;
11. Calls on the Commission, when proposing new legislation, to give an indication as to what the costs of implementing and monitoring the proposed legislation are; argues that the Commission should equate those costs with the total spending specific legislation brings about;
12. Stresses that the effect of simplifying and updating existing legislation should not be deregulation, diluting health and safety legislation or dismantling basic social standards; calls on the Commission to make sure that legislation continues to deliver improvements in social standards whilst at the same time not being detrimental to business competitiveness; recognises that one important way of improving social standards is to reduce unemployment, by fostering a regulatory climate which promotes enterprise and job creation;
13. Considers it very important to counteract any unnecessary gold-plating or topping-up of legislation by Member States; urges the Commission to take this into account when issuing regulations and directives; feels strongly that the Commission clearly states what the minimum requirements of regulations and directives are;
14. Expects that when increasing the level of requirements and control measurements surpassing the minimum requirements issued by the Commission, Member States should communicate and indicate this in national legislation or the implementing measures; Calls on the Commission to monitor Member States as regards unnecessary administrative burdens arising from implementing measures and national legislation;
15. Calls on the Commission, within the framework of the interinstitutional agreement on better law-making, to adopt targeted, well-considered legislation with predictable consequences which will contribute to creating favourable conditions by providing suitable incentives for undertakings and companies, reducing superfluous expenditure and procedures, removing barriers to adaptability and innovation and generally providing legal certainty;
16. Urges that the Commission, when proposing new legislation, indicate the administrative burden this imposes on the various economic, social and environmental sectors in comparison to equivalent sectors outside the European Union; proposes that this be given special attention within the newly proposed competitiveness testing, which is an integral part of impact assessments;
17. Invites the Commission to present to Parliament the 'project on competitiveness testing' currently under elaboration, in order to allow an exchange of views before it is put into place;
18. Highlights the need for the Commission, the Member States and Parliament to cooperate and to commit to a common and comprehensive strategy to promote better regulation in order to strengthen the Partnership for Growth and Jobs, namely through the examination of the different national legislative frameworks and the incorporation of the best proven practices identified; calls on the Commission to respect the different practices and national strategies adopted by the Member States, whether they implement European directives in the fields of employment and social protection through collective agreement or by regulation and law;
19. Stresses the importance of better implementation and enforcement of existing legislation, across all Member States, and calls for infringement procedures to be rapid in order to ensure a level playing field; calls on the Commission and the Member States to improve mechanisms for identifying legislation which must be simplified;
20. Supports the Commission Action Programme to measure the administrative cost for companies in Europe and to reduce administrative burdens by 25% by 2013;
21. Notes that the strategy for a 25% reduction refers to administrative burdens for companies, especially needless burdens and cannot, as the Commission itself states, be perceived as deregulation;
22. Gives full support to the Commission's initiative but, at the same time, will watch to ensure that the goal of legislation is not affected by that approach;
23. Underlines the need for fast track procedures to effectively reduce administrative burdens by 25% by 2013; stresses that Parliament and the Council should be fully supportive in making the simplification process work;
24. Supports therefore the proposal by the Commission for 'fast track actions' concerning Commission measures, collective proposals and stand-alone proposals; invites the Commission to make more use of the experience acquired by Member States which have already carried out baseline measurements, in order to establish further 'fast track actions';
25. Notes the identification of the 13 priority areas in the Commission's Action Programme on the reasoning that 80% of the total administrative burden is to be found in those areas; Emphasizes that this assessment is based on national experiences and measurements[3]; agrees with the Commission that this approach is pragmatic, but feels it should be seen as a first phase;
26. Supports therefore the intention of the Commission to extend the Action Programme to other areas that are currently not included; expects the Commission to include the identification of all further eligible burden reductions in its outsourcing strategy on actual measurement by external consultants;
27. Is of the opinion that the introduction of the Community Action Programme for reducing the administrative burden subsequently means that the Commission has to allocate sufficient resources and appropriations; supports, therefore, the fact that approximately EUR 19,6 million excluding VAT has been made available by the Commission services to this end; invites the Commission however to report to the Committee on Budgets as to which budget lines the appropriations are taken from, to what extent this affects other policies, how and when that sum will be spent and what the legal bases are to justify that expenditure;
28. Stresses that if the Commission feels that it is unable to allocate sufficient resources and appropriations within the current administrative framework, it should pinpoint and communicate possible solutions to overcome those problems to the budgetary authority;
29. Points out that the 25% reduction should reflect a net reduction in burdens; emphasises, therefore, the need to include administrative burdens following on from new regulations as of 2008, as well as in the final assessment in 2012; stresses that a 25% reduction within the 13 priority areas can only be seen as a gross reduction target; points out that the present approach cannot therefore ensure an actual reduction of 25% for companies;
30. Calls on the Commission to publish and present to the relevant committees a detailed scoreboard with precise targets to be achieved in a set timeline for the implementation of measures, identified as necessary for achieving the 25% reduction target by 2013, and to report on its progression to the competent committees annually;
31. Stresses that the Council, Parliament and the Commission have to engage fully and assume political responsibility concerning the reduction of administrative burdens; is convinced that without ownership at the political level, the EU will be unable to succeed in changing the culture of law-making in Europe;
32. Intends to fully apply impact assessment procedures to determine the effect of amendments to proposals, and calls on the Council to do the same; asks the Commission to provide the necessary assistance and expertise;
33. Calls on the Commission to ensure that, during implementation of the impact assessment guidelines, a study of economic activities improves the quality of the actual impact; insists that it is imperative that impact assessments are conducted in a thorough, transparent and balanced way, giving equal weight to social, economic and environmental aspects;
34. Emphasises that ownership at the political level also needs to be accompanied by practice on management and implementation levels; stresses therefore that each Directorate General (DG) must be made aware of the unnecessary administrative burdens in their policy areas through an initial baseline measurement, and further proposes a system, such as, for example, internal audit capabilities in each Commission DG that can advise and help the various Director-Generals cultivate and implement reduction policies and individual targets per DG;
35. Asks the Commission to report on its internal organisational set-up for the administrative burden reduction policy; Asks it to compare this set-up with the set-ups used in the various Member States that already have an administrative burden reduction policy in place;
36. Calls on the Commission to evaluate the added value of the Impact Assessment Board (IAB) in the impact assessment procedures by 2008; invites the Commission to report specifically on the impact of the IAB in comparison to the impact of independent advisory boards in different Member States and to assess the maximum possible added value of truly independent scrutiny at a European level;
37. Proposes that the appropriations reserved on the line 26 01 08 of the EU Budget for a pilot project minimizing administrative burdens be used to set up an independent panel of experts, comprising representatives from all stakeholder groups, to fully monitor implementation of the Action Programme 'Reducing Administrative Burdens in the EU'; Points out that this also means that the independent expert committee can focus on all impact procedures, measurements and legislative proposals outside the 13 priority areas;
38. Underlines that the election and work of this panel of experts should be fully transparent and that members of the panel should be required to complete a declaration of interests;
39. Expresses its satisfaction at the support already given to this approach by the Council and Commission, as stated in paragraph 25 of the Presidency conclusions of the Spring Council of 8 and 9 March 2007; emphasises that this is also in line with the recommendations given by the Nationaler Normenkonntrollrat (Germany), Better Regulation Commission (United Kingdom) and the Dutch Advisory Board on Administrative Burden (The Netherlands) in their position paper on the Commission's Action Programme[4];
40. Proposes further that the independent panel, as well as fully supervising the implementation of the European Action Programme, also assess the findings and outcome of the Internet and local level consultations; proposes that the independent panel be granted access to the impact assessment of reduction proposals before their adoption by the Commission;
41. Asks the Commission to appoint an independent free-thinking representative to chair the panel and have the panel fully operational by September 2007; asks further that the other members of the panel reflect the external stakeholders in the legislative process and include independent experts and academics in the field of administrative burden reduction;
42. Asks the Commission to allow the independent panel also to comment on the steps already undertaken in 2006 and 2007 and which set up the administrative burden reduction policy;
43. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States.
- [1] OJ C 104 E, 30.4.2004, p. 146.
- [2] Arjan M. Lejour, George M.M. Gelauff, 'Five Lisbon Highlights: The economic impact of reaching these targets', CPB Document No 104, CPB, The Hague, 2006.
- [3] 'Pilot Project on Administrative Burdens', WIFO-CEPS, October 2006.
- [4] Position paper on the European Commission's 'Action Programme for Reducing Administrative Burdens in the European Union', 1 March 2007.
OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON EMPLOYMENT AND SOCIAL AFFAIRS (7.3.2006)
for the Committee on Budgetary Control
on minimising administrative costs imposed by legislation
(2005/2140(INI))
Draftsman: Ole Christensen
SUGGESTIONS
The Committee on Employment and Social Affairs calls on the Committee on Budgetary Control, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions in its motion for a resolution:
1. Agrees that the regulatory environment in which businesses operate is a determinant of their competitiveness, sustainable growth and employment performance, and that ensuring that the existing and future regulatory environment is transparent, clear, effective and generally of high quality should be an important objective of EU policy;
2. Emphasises the importance of fully applying the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality in adopting Community legislation;
3. Stresses that the effect of simplifying and updating existing legislation should not be deregulation, diluting health and safety legislation or dismantling basic social standards; calls on the Commission to make sure that legislation continues to deliver improvements in social standards whilst at the same time not being detrimental to business competitiveness; recognises that one important way of improving social standards is to reduce unemployment, by fostering a regulatory climate which promotes enterprise and job creation;
4. Welcomes the interinstitutional agreement on better lawmaking and calls on the Council, the Commission and Parliament to make this a reality;
5. Calls on the Commission, within the framework of the interinstitutional agreement on better law-making, to adopt targeted, well-considered legislation with predictable consequences which will contribute to creating favourable conditions by providing suitable incentives for undertakings and companies, reducing superfluous expenditure and procedures, removing barriers to adaptability and innovation and generally providing legal certainty;
6. Highlights the need for the Commission, the Member States and Parliament to cooperate and to commit to a common and comprehensive strategy to promote better regulation in order to strengthen the Partnership for Growth and Jobs, namely through the examination of the different national legislative frameworks and the incorporation of the best proven practices identified; calls on the Commission to respect the different practices and national strategies adopted by the Member States whether they implement European directives in the fields of employment and social protection through collective agreement or by regulation and law;
7. Calls on the Commission to ensure that, during implementation of the impact assessment guidelines a study of economic activities improves the quality of the actual impact; insists that it is imperative that impact assessments, whether by a European institution or the Member States, are conducted in a thorough, transparent and balanced way, giving equal weight to social, economic and environmental aspects;
8. Stresses the importance of better implementation and enforcement of existing legislation, especially social legislation and legislation to drive the completion of the internal market across all Member States, and calls for infringement procedures to be rapid in order to ensure a level playing field; calls on the Commission and the Member States to improve mechanisms for identifying legislation which must be simplified;
9. Welcomes the emphasis which is put on early consultation of stakeholders, including the social partners, SMEs, legislators, law enforcement bodies and non-governmental organisations; underlines the role of social dialogue as a useful tool, contributing to better European governance by ensuring a better balance of interests through the involvement of all actors in decision-making and in the implementation process; stresses that 'all actors' must include those working in SMEs, as laid down in the SME Charter and agreed by the Lisbon Council; calls on the Commission to take initiatives to extend and enhance social dialogue at European level and, on the basis of the outcome, to continue to improve social standards without disregarding the need to preserve jobs.
SHORT JUSTIFICATION
Better regulation is one of the key-elements of the re-launch of the Lisbon Strategy which identified the need to boost economic growth and job creation.
Transparent high quality regulation not only serves the interests of industry, but also the European citizen. The ultimate aim of the Better Regulation exercise should be to create more quality jobs.
The present Commission Communication on "Better regulation for growth and jobs" builds on the Commission's initiative "Action Plan on simplifying and improving the regulatory environment" as part of the EU White Paper on Governance (2002) and the Inter-institutional Agreement on Better Lawmaking, agreed in December 2003 by the European Commission, European Parliament and the Council.
The Communication proposes three action lines:
· further promoting the design and application of better regulation tools at the EU level, notably in so far as impact assessments and simplification are concerned,
· working closely with the Member States to ensure that better regulation principles are applied consistently throughout the EU by all regulators,
· reinforcing the constructive dialogue between all regulators at the EU and national levels and with stakeholders.
Simplification of existing legislation
Your draftsperson agrees with the Commission that efficacy and enforceability of legislation can be served by clear and simple drafting, on the condition that the quality remains high. However, he stresses that better regulation should not mean deregulation nor relaxing or dismantling of social standards.
In this same light, your draftsman also wishes to underline the importance of better implementation and enforcement of already existing social legislation.
Impact assessment
The Commission states that it intends to strengthen the assessment of economic impacts of new legislation. This deepening of the economic pillar of the impact assessment should however not compromise the social elements duly being taken into account. Potential economic, social and environmental impacts of new legislation should be given equal weight.
Social dialogue
Social dialogue ensures the involvement of relevant stakeholders, while at the same time contributes to a better balance of interests and to more practical resolutions. It should be recognised as a valid tool of co-regulation, that could serve the better quality of regulation.
Therefore, social dialogue should be reinforced both on the European and the national level.
PROCEDURE
|
Title |
Minimising administrative costs imposed by legislation |
||||||
|
Procedure number |
|||||||
|
Committee responsible |
CONT |
||||||
|
Opinion by |
EMPL |
||||||
|
Enhanced cooperation – date announced in plenary |
no |
||||||
|
Drafts(wo)man |
Ole Christensen |
||||||
|
Previous drafts(wo)man |
--- |
||||||
|
Discussed in committee |
5.10.2005 |
26.1.2006 |
|
|
|
||
|
Date adopted |
22.2.2006 |
||||||
|
Result of final vote |
+: –: 0: |
32 1 2 |
|||||
|
Members present for the final vote |
Jan Andersson, Roselyne Bachelot-Narquin, Jean-Luc Bennahmias, Emine Bozkurt, Iles Braghetto, Philip Bushill-Matthews, Alejandro Cercas, Ole Christensen, Derek Roland Clark, Luigi Cocilovo, Jean Louis Cottigny, Proinsias De Rossa, Harald Ettl, Richard Falbr, Ilda Figueiredo, Joel Hasse Ferreira, Roger Helmer, Stephen Hughes, Karin Jöns, Sepp Kusstatscher, Jean Lambert, Raymond Langendries, Bernard Lehideux, Elizabeth Lynne, Thomas Mann, Mario Mantovani, Ana Mato Adrover, Maria Matsouka, Ria Oomen-Ruijten, Csaba Őry, Siiri Oviir, Marie Panayotopoulos-Cassiotou, Pier Antonio Panzeri, José Albino Silva Peneda, Jean Spautz, Gabriele Zimmer |
||||||
|
Substitute(s) present for the final vote |
Elspeth Attwooll, Edit Bauer, Mihael Brejc |
||||||
|
Substitute(s) under Rule 178(2) present for the final vote |
--- |
||||||
|
Comments (available in one language only) |
... |
||||||
OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON LEGAL AFFAIRS (12.9.2006)
for the Committee on Budgetary Control
on minimising administrative costs imposed by legislation
Draftsman: Bert Doorn
SUGGESTIONS
The Committee on Legal Affairs calls on the Committee on Budgetary Control, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions in its motion for a resolution:
A. Whereas on 16 May 2006 the European Parliament adopted the following resolutions:
- the resolution on better lawmaking 2004: application of the principle of subsidiarity – 12th annual report[1], based on the Doorn report;
- the resolution on the implementation, consequences and impact of the internal market legislation in force[2], based on the McCarthy report;
- the resolution on the Commission's 21st and 22nd Annual reports on monitoring the application of Community law (2003 and 2004)[3], based on the Frassoni report;
- the resolution on a strategy for the simplification of the regulatory environment[4], based on the Gargani report,
B. Whereas one of the tasks of the Committee on Budgetary Control of the European Parliament is to oversee the proper expenditure of European funds by European institutions,
1. Notes that the Mulder report on minimising administrative costs imposed by legislation repeats the conclusions of the reports by Doorn, McCarthy, Frassoni and Gargani;
2. Insists that the Committee on Legal Affairs has primary responsibility for the better lawmaking agenda; welcomes, however, the aspects of the Mulder report which deal with the financial impact of European regulation on the budget of the European Union, particularly paragraphs 1, 9, 10, 12 and 13;
PROCEDURE
|
Title |
Minimising administrative costs imposed by legislation |
||||||
|
Procedure number |
|||||||
|
Committee responsible |
CONT |
||||||
|
Opinion by |
JURI |
||||||
|
Enhanced cooperation – date announced in plenary |
|
||||||
|
Drafts(wo)man |
Bert Doorn |
||||||
|
Previous drafts(wo)man |
|
||||||
|
Discussed in committee |
12.7.2006 |
12.9.2006 |
|
|
|
||
|
Date adopted |
12.9.2006 |
||||||
|
Result of final vote |
+: –: 0: |
19 0 0 |
|||||
|
Members present for the final vote |
Maria Berger, Carlo Casini, Rosa Díez González, Bert Doorn, Giuseppe Gargani, Klaus-Heiner Lehne, Hans-Peter Mayer, Aloyzas Sakalas, Francesco Enrico Speroni, Gabriele Stauner, Diana Wallis, Rainer Wieland, Nicola Zingaretti, Jaroslav Zvěřina |
||||||
|
Substitute(s) present for the final vote |
Kurt Lechner, Eva Lichtenberger, Manuel Medina Ortega, Marie Panayotopoulos-Cassiotou, Michel Rocard |
||||||
|
Substitute(s) under Rule 178(2) present for the final vote |
|
||||||
|
Comments (available in one language only) |
... |
||||||
- [1] Texts Adopted, P6_TA(2006)0203.
- [2] Texts Adopted, P6_TA(2006)0204.
- [3] Texts Adopted, P6_TA(2006)0202.
- [4] Texts Adopted, P6_TA(2006)0205.
PROCEDURE
|
Title |
Minimising administrative costs imposed by legislation |
|||||||||||
|
Procedure number |
||||||||||||
|
Committee responsible |
CONT |
|||||||||||
|
Committee(s) asked for opinion(s) |
JURI |
ITRE |
EMPL |
ECON |
|
|||||||
|
Not delivering opinion(s) |
ITRE |
ECON |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
Enhanced cooperation |
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
|
Rapporteur |
Jan Mulder |
|
||||||||||
|
Discussed in committee |
3.10.2005 |
21.2.2006 |
3.5.2006 |
19.6.2006 |
13.7.2006 |
|||||||
|
27.2.2007 |
27.3.2007 |
4.6.2007 |
27.6.2007 |
|
||||||||
|
Date adopted |
27.6.2007 |
|||||||||||
|
Result of final vote |
+ - 0 |
25 0 0 |
||||||||||
|
Members present for the final vote |
Herbert Bösch, Paul van Buitenen, Mogens N.J. Camre, Jorgo Chatzimarkakis,Antonio De Blasio, Petr Duchoň, Szabolcs Fazakas, Christofer Fjellner, Ingeborg Gräßle, Dan Jørgensen, Bogusław Liberadzki, Nils Lundgren, Marusya Ivanova Lyubcheva, Jan Mulder, Francesco Musotto, Borut Pahor, Aldo Patriciello, Bart Staes, Alexander Stubb, Jeffrey Titford, Bernard Piotr Wojciechowski, Marilisa Xenogiannakopoulou |
|||||||||||
|
Substitute(s) present for the final vote |
Silvana Koch-Mehrin, Petya Stavreva |
|||||||||||
|
Substitute(s) under Rule 178(2) present for the final vote |
Karin Jöns |
|||||||||||
|
Date tabled |
3.7.2007 |
|||||||||||
|
Comments |
|
|||||||||||