EU Seeks Technology-Driven Legislative Reform, Though Experts Argue More Is Needed
The EU wants smarter tech forward – During the latter part of April, the European Commission unveiled a comprehensive communication titled “A Simpler, Clearer and Better Enforced EU Rulebook.” This streamlined document outlines strategies for elevating the quality of European legislation while simultaneously boosting transparency and encouraging greater stakeholder participation. Additionally, it addresses the need to thoroughly clean up existing EU laws and manage potential gold plating or even avoid transposing EU rules at the Member State level. Although the document captures several necessary modifications to the EU’s lawmaking framework, experts suggest the proposed actions could demonstrate greater ambition and future orientation. This comes at a crucial moment when the Commission is engaged in extensive internal discussions regarding efficiency, institutional AI-readiness, and related matters.
Consumer Choice Center Europe recently published a paper titled “Wiser regulation — How the EU and individual Member States must transform lawmaking to keep the European economy competitive.” This evaluation examines the very same Communication, pinpointing structural weaknesses within current legislative and consultative processes. The paper subsequently presents actionable, technology-forward recommendations tailored for both EU institutions and Member State governments. One particularly welcome development is the Commission’s commitment to transparently record and report any procedural derogations within explanatory memoranda. This initiative should hopefully ensure that both lawmakers and citizens remain informed regarding the frequency and reasons behind procedural derogations, such as instances where not all steps in the Better Regulation Guidelines are followed.
Areas for Improvement in Current Framework
The document also pledges to notify stakeholders directly when consultation summaries are published on the “Have Your Say” portal. While this may appear to be a straightforward measure, it has not been consistently practiced until now. Furthermore, the Commission proposes leveraging technological progress by introducing a new IT tool designed to manage EU laws, track implementing rules, and identify regulatory overlaps and complexities. This objective should be elevated to one of the primary goals, as it has the potential to address numerous deep-rooted problems arising from the complexity of the EU’s institutional framework and divergent interests.
The Commission’s previous Call for Evidence on better regulation attracted widespread criticism concerning its stakeholder engagement procedures. Numerous stakeholders called for more neutral public consultation designs and realistic timelines for participation, among other adjustments. Despite these requests, the follow-up document failed to adequately address the design of public consultations. Instead, it vaguely promised to avoid counting in holiday periods “whenever possible,” while simultaneously retaining the authority to reduce the standard 12-week window to merely six weeks.
The Commission’s self-evaluation of its own work and its more concrete suggestions for improvement remain limited. Historical evidence of non-adherence to the Better Regulation Principles demonstrates that merely defining principles is insufficient; one must also closely monitor and enforce their application across institutions and, effectively, change institutional culture. The very subject that was challenged in the Ombudsman — the urgency procedure — remains remarkably broad. The EC’s definition encompasses four triggers: crises or shocks, severe consequences of inaction, legal deadlines, and a “political context creating a need for urgent action.” While the first two are legitimate, the latter two are sufficiently broad to justify almost any procedural shortcut and should be viewed with caution and eventually reviewed.
Recommendations for Future Progress
Consumer Choice Center Europe’s report outlines actionable recommendations directed at the European Commission. These recommendations concentrate on improving lawmaking, enhancing institutional capabilities, and leveraging technology to ensure EU rules are simpler and more understandable. Additionally, they focus on facilitating accountability and ensuring that everyone within the Brussels bubble is on board, or at least more on board than they currently are. The report also presents recommendations for individual EU Member States, which are increasingly struggling to keep pace with the EU’s legislative speed, resulting in limited participation in EU policymaking.
While the EC is reportedly considering deploying additional manpower to capitals, these capitals themselves are often understaffed, unable to react promptly, let alone proactively propose their own agenda points. Mario Draghi recently emphasized that the EU must evolve into a pragmatic federation to sustain its global competitiveness. Such integration, however, will encounter resistance unless Member States and external stakeholders feel genuinely integrated into the process and possess strong trust in the EU’s institutions and lawmaking, while European businesses choose to operate within this framework.
