An EESC report flags up five areas where changes need to be made to the European Commission's programme to improve EU legislation ("Better regulation"), if it is to continue in the future. Overall, however, the EESC believes the outcome of the 2014-2019 programme to have been positive.

At its September plenary session, the European Economic and Social Committee adopted a report on the European Commission's "Better Regulation" programme, in which it stresses that on balance the programme has helped improve EU regulation. It believes that it should continue, but warns against it being used as a replacement for political decisions, stressing the importance of upholding consumer and citizens' rights.

"Better regulation is not a substitute for political decisions and must on no account lead to deregulation or reduce the level of social, environmental and consumer protection and protection of fundamental rights", warns the rapporteur, Denis Meynent.

The EESC singles out five key weaknesses in the programme:

-           impact assessments, which should be based on fewer economic criteria, less cost-oriented, carried out independently and include a sustainability check;

-           public consultations, which paint a simplistic picture of the situation in Europe due to cultural and economic factors;

-           red tape, which is still excessive;

-           the innovation principle, which is not clear enough to effectively replace the precautionary principle, which should remain the principle of choice;

-           the REFIT platform, which it criticises for lack of expertise, disproportionate costs, sluggishness, submissions asymmetry, duplication of the work of the Council's working groups, and giving the EESC a lesser role compared to other stakeholders.(dm)