About ex-post review of legislation and better regulation
I. The ex-post review of legislation is a key part of the Commission’s Better Regulation
policy. It is aimed at facilitating the achievement of public policy objectives at minimum cost
and improving the added value of EU interventions. In 2015, the Commission strengthened
its better regulation policy by launching the Better Regulation Agenda.
How we conducted our audit
II. In our audit, we assessed whether the EU system of ex-post review of legislation had
been properly planned, implemented, managed and quality-controlled, thereby contributing
effectively to the Better Regulation cycle.
III. The audit covered ex-post reviews of legislation carried out between 2013 and 2016 by
four directorates-general of the Commission as well as all legislation and ex-ante impact
assessments within the remit of those directorates-general adopted between 2014 and
2016.
What we found
IV. Overall, we concluded that the Commission’s current ex-post review system compares
well to the situation in the majority of Member States. Regarding more specifically the
evaluations, the Commission has designed a system which is, as a whole, well-managed and
quality-controlled, thereby contributing effectively to the Better Regulation cycle. However,
when it comes to reviews other than evaluations, we identified weaknesses.
V. We found that review clauses and, to a lesser extent, monitoring clauses are widely
used in EU legislation. However in the absence of common inter-institutional definitions and
drafting guidelines, their content and therefore their expected outputs are not always clear.
VI. While evaluations are generally carried out in line with legal requirements and good
practices, this is less the case for the other reviews, to which the Better Regulation
guidelines did not apply until 2017. We also identified shortcomings in the presentation of
the methodology used and in the recognition of data limitations when applicable.
7
VII. We also found that ex-post reviews are publicly available and accessible and that the
vast majority of them provide a clear conclusion and indicate next steps to be taken. The
Commission systematically forwarded its reports on the ex-post reviews to the co-legislators
(European Parliament and Council); the latter, however, seldom react to the Commission
directly. Also, the ex-post reviews are not always used by the Commission when preparing
ex-ante impact assessments. The inter-institutional agreement between the European
Parliament, the Council and the Commission on better law-making, which provides provision
on the review of existing laws, is not binding.
VIII. Finally, we found that the rationale of the REFIT programme is unclear, as are the
criteria by which individual initiatives have been labelled as REFIT. At the same time, the
guidelines present REFIT as a specific programme. This raises questions as to its current
nature and added value.
What we recommend
IX. On the basis of these observations, we make several recommendations to the
Commission and one to the Regulatory Scrutiny Board.

The Regulatory Scrutiny Board (RSB or ‘the Board’) was set up under the Commission’s 2015 better regulation policy. It scrutinises the quality of impact assessments, fitness checks and major evaluations for
the Commission.
The Board is a procedural safety mechanism governed by a mandate (1
). It acts during the early stages
of preparing legislation, and it helps to protect Europeans against poorly conceived laws. It also helps
to find solutions for evaluations and impact assessments that are meant to inform policy decisions. It
allows work that is in good shape to progress quickly with its stamp of approval, but is also able to halt
the preparatory process. Any political decision to override the Board requires a public explanation why.
Fast facts:
• The Board is independent and reports to the President of the Commission.
• There are seven full-time members, both from inside and outside the Commission.
• The Board scrutinises all impact assessments, fitness checks and major evaluations.
• All opinions are published.

The White Paper on the Future of Europe has stimulated a deep
process of reflection about the Europe we need. This will culminate
in the Leaders’ summit in Sibiu in May 2019. The work of this Task
Force should be seen as part of this broader discussion and I hope
our report and its recommendations will find their place in the
ongoing reflections.
The Treaties do not give the EU’s institutions a blank cheque to do
what they want. Subsidiarity and proportionality are the practical
tools to ensure that the Union does not do what the Member
States or regional and local authorities can better do themselves
and to focus the Union’s actions on where it can really add value.
We need both principles and we need to apply them actively,
collectively and in the same spirit if they are to work as our citizens
expect them to do.
Today, we have 41 national Parliament chambers, 74 regional
legislative assemblies, around 280 regions, and 80 000 local
authorities. They are all engaged directly in applying the Union’s
policies on the ground. Their concerns and practical experience
should be heard more systematically if we want policies that work
Foreword from the Chair of the Task Force
while respecting the character and identity of our nations, regions
and localities. I hope that providing a more meaningful say in how
things are done will also allow our national Parliaments and local
and regional authorities to be more effective ambassadors and
advocates of the European Union.
Finally, this report – a collective effort by the European Committee
of the Regions, members of the national Parliaments, and the
European Commission – is not an end in itself. It is the start of a
process to open up our procedures more to the local and regional
level and to make the Union’s legislation work better for its
citizens. While this report is addressed to President Juncker, the
European Parliament, Council, European Committee of the Regions,
European Economic and Social Committee, the national Parliaments,
regional Parliaments, and local and regional authorities all have a
responsibility to consider in responding to the Task Force’s report.
Frans Timmermans, Chairman of the Task Force on Subsidiarity,
Proportionality and “Doing Less More Efficiently”
Brussels, 10 July 2018.

This research paper aims to provide an overview of planned and ongoing evaluations of EU legislation and spending programmes carried out by each European Commission Directorate-General (DG). The general overview and state of play on the public availability of evaluations is completed by a Rolling Check-List comprising the on-going and planned evaluations on the basis of information disclosed by the Commission in various sources (DGs' Annual Management Plans, the Single Evaluation Plan, and Roadmaps published since July 2015) and the information available in individual DGs. The annexes to this research paper contain an overview and links to the DGs Management Plans for 2014 (Annex I) and DGs Management Plans for 2015 (Annex II), the contact details (where available) of the evaluation function in each DG (Annex III); finally Annexes IV and V provide a list of and direct links to the evaluations published in 2014 and until 31 October, 2015 on the Commission's database of completed evaluations.