In late April, the European Commission published a communication titled "A Simpler, Clearer and Better Enforced EU Rulebook", outlining steps to improve legislative quality, transparency, and stakeholder involvement across the bloc. The document also aims to reduce gold-plating—where member states add extra requirements when transposing EU directives—and to streamline the existing regulatory stock.
While the initiative signals a welcome shift toward more efficient governance, analysts and civil society groups contend that the proposed measures fall short of what is needed to keep Europe competitive. The Consumer Choice Center Europe, in a new report titled "Wiser Regulation—How the EU and Individual Member States Must Transform Lawmaking to Keep the European Economy Competitive", identifies persistent structural weaknesses in both the legislative process and the consultative mechanisms that underpin it.
Tech-forward promises, but gaps remain
One of the more concrete commitments in the communication is the pledge to transparently record and report any procedural derogations in explanatory memoranda. This would, in theory, allow lawmakers and citizens to see how often the Commission bypasses its own Better Regulation Guidelines—a step toward accountability that has been largely absent.
The Commission also promises to notify stakeholders directly when consultation summaries are published on the "Have Your Say" portal, a seemingly basic feature that has not been implemented until now. More ambitiously, it proposes a new IT tool to manage EU laws, track implementing rules, and identify regulatory overlaps and complexities. The Consumer Choice Center argues that this objective should be elevated to a primary goal, as it could help untangle the dense web of rules that often confuses businesses and citizens alike.
Yet the document leaves several critical issues unaddressed. The Commission’s earlier Call for Evidence on better regulation drew widespread criticism over its stakeholder engagement procedures. Various respondents called for more neutral consultation designs and realistic participation timelines. The follow-up communication, however, merely promises to avoid counting holiday periods "whenever possible" while retaining the right to reduce the standard 12-week consultation window to just six weeks.
Historical evidence of non-adherence to the Better Regulation Principles suggests that defining rules is not enough; enforcement and a change in institutional culture are essential. The urgency procedure—which allows the Commission to fast-track legislation—remains broadly defined. Its triggers include crises, severe consequences of inaction, legal deadlines, and a "political context creating a need for urgent action." The first two are legitimate, but the latter two are so vague they could justify almost any procedural shortcut.
The European Ombudsman has previously challenged the misuse of urgency procedures, yet the Commission has not tightened the definition. This loophole risks undermining the very transparency the communication seeks to promote.
Member states struggle to keep pace
A further concern is the capacity of individual EU member states to engage meaningfully in the legislative process. Many capitals, particularly in smaller or less wealthy countries, are understaffed and unable to react quickly to the Commission’s proposals, let alone proactively shape the agenda. The Commission is reportedly considering sending extra personnel to national administrations, but the Consumer Choice Center notes that this alone will not solve the problem.
The report offers recommendations for both the Commission and member states. For Brussels, it suggests leveraging technology not just for tracking rules but for designing smarter consultations and impact assessments. For national governments, it calls for dedicated resources to ensure they can participate effectively in EU policymaking—a prerequisite for the kind of pragmatic federation that former Italian Prime Minister Mario Draghi has advocated to sustain Europe’s global competitiveness.
Draghi’s vision of deeper integration will face resistance unless member states and external stakeholders feel genuinely included in the process. Trust in EU institutions is fragile, and the perception that Brussels imposes rules without adequate consultation fuels populism and anti-EU sentiment across the continent. Improving the quality—not just the speed—of lawmaking is therefore a political imperative.
The Commission’s communication is a step in the right direction, but experts warn that without binding timelines, stricter oversight of urgency procedures, and real investment in national administrations, the overhaul may deliver less than promised. As the EU navigates crises from climate adaptation to digital transformation, the stakes could not be higher.
