Some comparative patterns in the Better Regulation practices of national parliaments

• Author: Anglmayer, Irmgard
• Pages: 54-61

Bette r Regulation prac tices in natio nal parliaments

54

4.Some comparative patterns in the Better Regulation

practicesof national parliaments

4.1.Cumulative overview of parliaments engaging in regulatory

policy work

From the information provided in chapters 2 and 3 it appears that 17 national parliaments within

the EU-27 enga ge, to a lesseror greater extent, in specific ex-ante impa ct assessment and/or ex-post

evaluation work. Seven of them take an active role in either impact assessment or evaluation

(Belgium, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Hungary, Lithuania and the Netherlands), while ten

parlia ments cover bo th activ ities: Austria, Bulgaria, France, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Poland, Portugal,

Spain and Sweden.

Table 5 – EU-27 p arli aments a nd the Europ ean Parliament – Level of engagement in ex-an te

IA and ex-post evaluati on

PARLIAMENT

smaller-scale

regulatory poli cy

work

ownregulatory

policy work

IAeval. IAeval.

Austria

Belgium

Bulgaria

Estonia

Finland

France

Germany

Hungary

Ireland

Italy

Latvia

Lithuania

Netherlands

Poland

Portugal

Spain

Sweden

EuropeanParliament

In addition, 4 of the 11surveyed third-country parliamentsactively per form ex-post evaluation:

Canada, Moldova, Switzerland and the UK. Only the Canadian Parliament hasprocedur es in place

for ex-ante impact assessment.