Proportionality test before adoption of new regulation of professions
In general, the IA appears to set out logical reasoning linking the problem, its underlying drivers, the objectives and the policy options to tackle the problem. It seems to be based on sound research and analysis, while nevertheless recognising that there are still data gaps to be filled. With regard to the analysis of impacts, a more targeted analysis of the likely impacts on SMEs might have been desirable. Also, the IA does not seem to identify operational objectives for its preferred policy option and corresponding monitoring indicators. More generally, a proof-reading of the final text, and different choices as to its organisation and presentation, would almost certainly have considerably improved the IA's clarity and readability and its effectiveness in supporting the policy choices made in the proposal.
Briefing
Despre acest document
Tipul publicației
Autor
Domeniul tematic
Cuvânt-cheie
- acces la o profesie
- ANGAJARE ÎN MUNCĂ ŞI CONDIŢII DE MUNCĂ
- calificare profesională
- COMERŢ
- conducătorul unui vehicul
- construcţie europeană
- crearea de locuri de muncă
- DREPT
- drept de reședință
- dreptul Uniunii Europene
- izvoarele şi ramurile dreptului
- libera circulație a forței de muncă
- libertatea de a oferi servicii
- locuri de muncă
- marketing
- ofertă de servicii
- organizarea transporturilor
- piaţa muncii
- piață unică
- principiul proporționalității
- simplificare legislativă
- TRANSPORT
- UNIUNEA EUROPEANĂ