Bolja regulativa

This page is also available in

Displaying 1 - 10 of 53


Usvojeno on 21/09/2016
Referentni dokument: 
Plenarno zasjedanje: 
519 -
Sep 21, 2016 Sep 22, 2016

The EESC has played an important role in strengthening an informed civil society debate on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) through a number of TTIP-related opinions, adopted in 2014 and 2015, covering issues such as labour rights, investment protection, impact on SMEs, among others.

It is important under the present circumstances that the EESC, in order to maintain its position as a key civil society player in the TTIP debate, react to the textual proposals for TTIP negotiations on essential topics such as the sustainable development chapter, regulatory cooperation, investment and services. This will have the advantage not only of setting up the EESC position on major negotiating chapters but also of presenting concrete recommendations and pointing out the need to involve civil society in the implementation of those chapters.

The position of the EESC on specific key issues of the TTIP

Usvojeno on 10/12/2014
Referentni dokument: 
Plenarno zasjedanje: 
503 -
Dec 10, 2014 Dec 11, 2014

One common rule to apply in all Member States can be much simpler and more efficient than a complex web of varying rules. However, the challenge is to keep this legislation simple by making use of withdrawals, amendments and repeals.

Mišljenje EGSO-a: REFIT Programme

Usvojeno on 22/04/2015
Referentni dokument: 
Plenarno zasjedanje: 
507 -
Apr 22, 2015 Apr 23, 2015

Mišljenje EGSO-a: Self-regulation and co-regulation


Better Regulation - presentation 03.03.2015

Appendix I - List of related EESC opinions

Appendix II - Table on examples

Usvojeno on 21/01/2017
Referentni dokument: 
Plenarno zasjedanje: 
528 -
Sep 20, 2017 Sep 21, 2017

Impact assessments of any legislative proposals must be integrated and accorded due importance to the economic, social and environmental dimensions, including for SMEs. The Committee has called for the Parliament, the Council and the European Commission to agree on a common methodology on impact assessments and evaluations, which could also serve as a prompt for the Committee. It is extremely concerned by the findings on the shortcomings of social and environmental impact assessments and the follow-up to consultations. It calls on the Commission to be more transparent and to give fully documented reasons why a particular measure or proposal is or is not to be submitted for impact assessment and/or an ex-post analysis.

Mišljenje EGSO-a: Transparency, methodology and resources of evaluations