UK laws are on average around 2.5 times more cost effective than EU laws News in brief Quote of the fortnight "What do EU Commissioners want? They want to get into the picture with initiatives, smart or not...The only way to stop the stream of useless initiatives is to reduce the number of Commissioners to what is necessary to steer the EU. I think a Commission of twelve capable people is enough." Former Dutch EU Commissioner Frits Bolkestein, writing in Belgian daily De Standaard, 30 March 2010 1. New Open Europe research finds that EU regulation has cost UK economy £124 billion since 1998; UK laws are on average around 2.5 times more cost effective than EU laws Open Europe last week published the most comprehensive study to date on the costs of regulation to the UK economy since 1998. Based on over 2,300 of the Government's own impact assessments, Open Europe has found that regulation has cost the UK economy £176 billion since 1998. Of this amount, £124 billion, or 71 percent, had its origin in EU legislation. The cost of regulation in 2009 stands at £32.8 billion. Of this 59 percent, or £19.3 billion, stems from EU legislation. Since 2005, when the UK Government launched its 'better regulation' agenda, the cost of regulation has doubled - although both the Government and the EU Commission have taken some positive steps to address overly burdensome laws. The research also estimates the average benefit/cost ratio of EU regulations at 1.02, and UK regulations at 2.35. In other words, for every £1 of cost, EU regulations introduced since 1998 have only delivered £1.02 of benefits, meaning that on average it is 2.5 times more cost effective to regulate nationally than it is to regulate via the EU. Following the publication of Open Europe's report, some argued that the exercise was futile, because UK and EU laws are not comparable and Whitehall would have regulated some issues anyway in the absence of the EU. (Economist: Charlemagne blog, 31 March) It is true that the EU often produces regulations, the benefits of which are hard to quantify, such as environmental or health and safety laws. It is also true that the EU and member states sometimes regulate different parts of the economy. However, importantly, there are also a huge number of areas where the EU and UK share power, and where laws aretherefore comparable, to a lesser or greater extent. What's more, the Lisbon Treaty codifies a new category of so-called 'shared competence', further blurring the line between national and EU power, for example in social policy, financial services (via internal market legislation), environment, energy, consumer protection and transport. In these areas, a comparison between UK and EU laws is not only appropriate, but also essential, as one of the central questions when discussing EU policy must always be: at what level of government is it most cost effective and most democratic to legislate? Crucially, our research reveals that in areas of shared competence, such as environmental policy, financial services and agriculture, EU regulations tend to generate higher costs, relative to the benefits, than UK laws. A discrepancy is not surprising, given that EU laws are one-size-fits all solutions which, by definition, cannot fully account for member states' individual circumstances. In addition, since it is very difficult to change EU laws once they've been agreed - as it requires agreement amongst 27 member states and the European Parliament - these laws can continue to generate heavy and unnecessary costs year after year. Our research therefore provides further evidence that, when feasible, it is better to legislative as close as possible to the citizen. To read the report in full click here: http://openeurope.org.uk/research/stilloutofcontrol.pdf To read the press release click here: http://openeurope.org.uk/media-centre/pressrelease.aspx?pressreleaseid=135 Please leave your comments on our blog: http://openeuropeblog.blogspot.com/2010/04/regulation-one-more-round.html The country's most senior judge, the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Judge, has warned of the increasing power that both the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) and the EU's Court of Justice have over British law. He also warned that changes brought about by the Lisbon Treaty will have a "significant impact" on criminal cases in the UK. (Independent Telegraph, 2 April) The Strasbourg-based ECHR falls outside the realm of the EU, although, under the Lisbon Treaty, the EU as a whole is formally obliged to accede to the European Convention of Human Rights, which the Strasbourg court was established to uphold. Lord Judge noted that this creates the prospect of overlap and confusion with the EU's European Court of Justice (ECJ) in Luxembourg. "The [EU's] European Court of Justice is beginning to acquire jurisdiction over matters that would normally be regarded as matters not for Luxembourg but for Strasbourg," he said. (Lord Judge's speech) Lord Judge's second point concerning the EU was that, "The Treaty of Lisbon has brought criminal justice matters to the core of the EU and with it the jurisdiction of the Luxembourg court." This means that if the UK does 'opt in' to new EU justice and home affairs legislation "decisions of the Luxembourg court on issues arising out of the Treaty of Lisbon, even to the extent that they involve criminal matters, would become binding on us all." He concluded, "The development of the European Union, and the extended jurisdiction of the European court in criminal matters, will have a significant impact domestically. Twenty years down the line, where will we be?" Please leave your comments on our blog: http://openeuropeblog.blogspot.com/2010/04/twenty-years-down-line-where-will-we-be.html MEPs jet to Tenerife to discuss climate change. Six MEPs, including five from the UK, have flown to Tenerife at a cost of £550,000 on a junket to discuss climate change. The choice of destination was made by the rotating Presidency of the EU, Spain, and came under criticism from UK Lib Dem MEP Fiona Hall who complained that it was "ridiculous". (Express, 27 March) MEPs vote to reopen Lisbon Treaty. MEPs on a European Parliament Committee voted this week to re-open the Lisbon Treaty in an inter-governmental conference, in order to allow the extra 18 MEPs that are created by the Treaty to take their seats. MEPs are expected to endorse the decision in May, but any Treaty changes agreed at the conference would still need to be ratified in every member state, a process that could potentially take several years. The reopening of the Treaty could potentially trigger a referendum in the UK if the Conservatives were to win the General Election. (EUobserver, 8 April; Elsevier, 7 April) MPs call for urgent changes to EU rules on tests for foreign GPs. The House of Commons Health Select Committee has said the next Government must "as a matter of extreme urgency" demand changes to a 2005 EU Directive governing the free movement of labour. At present, EU rules mean that the General Medical Council (GMC) is unable to carry out systematic clinical or language checks on doctors from EU countries, as it does for those from elsewhere in the world, putting patients at risk. Health Minister Mike O'Brien warned the Committee that the UK could face sanctions if it tries to amend the Directive. (Telegraph, 7 April) Cut in working hours for junior doctors under EU rules led to increase in sickness. A study conducted at a district general hospital in Hastings has shown that a reduction in working hours for junior doctors in 2007 under the EU's Working Time Directive did not improve the health of junior doctors and actually increased their rates of sickness. (Times, 1 April) MEPs call for law to make Sunday a day of rest. Hundreds of MEPs have signed a declaration calling for Sunday to be made a legal day of rest, under a review of the EU's Working Time Directive, with only the likes of hospital staff, police and firemen to be allowed to work on that day. (NOTW, 4 March) European Commission proposes tough rules on Citizens' Initiative. The European Commission has set out its plans for the Citizens' Initiative, which was introduced by the Lisbon Treaty and obliges the Commission to consider new legislative proposals if more than one million EU citizens sign a petition. According to the Commission's proposal, which still needs to be approved by the European Parliament and member states, the one million signatures must come from at least a third of member states (nine) and reach a minimum threshold in each country. Each signatory will be obliged to provide a wealth of personal data including name, street address, email address, date and place of birth, nationality and personal identification numbers (passport, ID card, and social security). The Commission will also retain the right to reject requests that they consider to be against "European values". (EUobserver, 31 March;EurActiv, 30 March) EU regulation has cost UK economy £124 billion since 1998 8 April Wprost 7 April The Parliament 4 April Conservative Home: Persson 1 April EurActiv 231 March Economist: Charlemagne's notebook Sun 30 March WSJ: Wheatcroft Sky News blog Reuters Telegraph Conservative Home Evening Standard Mail Liverpool Post Express29 March FT PA City AM Euractiv Open Europe's new research, published last week, was covered by the Telegraph, Mail, Evening Standard, City AM, EurActiv, Express, Conservative Home, Reuters, Liverpool Post, and on PA and Alex Rossi's Sky News blog. The FT noted that the study warns that the Conservatives' heavy focus on regulatory reform of domestic rules rather than EU rules "could lead to contradictory or undeliverable policies since a future Conservative government will only have full control over 28 per cent of the cost of regulation". The study was also cited by Patience Wheatcroft in the Wall Street Journal and was featured on page 2 of the Sun. Open Europe's Sarah Gaskell was quoted in several articles arguing, "Our research clearly shows that it's far more cost-effective to regulate domestically than is it is to legislate through the EU. This means that passing laws as close as possible to the citizen is not only more democratic, but also vastly cheaper. This shows the massive influence the EU has over our economy and everyday life. Whether we think this is a good or a bad thing, politicians can no longer be in denial over the extent of this influence and must dedicate much more attention to the EU in the run-up to the general election." In a comment piece on Conservative Home Open Europe Director Mats Persson argued that it was "disappointing that the Conservatives have chosen to focus their regulatory reform proposals almost entirely on the domestic level... Should the Conservatives get into power, they must grasp the chance to embark on a new course to compel the EU to do much less, and concentrate on doing it better. That is not euroscepticism; it is pragmatic localism." Open Europe's research was also featured in a second EurActiv article, in The Parliament magazine, and in Polish weekly news magazine Wyprost. On his Economist blog the magazine's Charlemagne columnist critiqued Open Europe's research. MEPs call for law to make Sunday a day of rest 4 April NOTW Following the news that hundreds of MEPs signed a petition calling for a ban on working Sundays, the News of the World quoted Open Europe's Stephen Booth saying: "There is absolutely no need for the EU to be deciding what days people can work. This ludicrous proposal shows the extent to which MEPs are determined to interfere in the working practices of UK citizens". EU plans to promote regional rather than national borders 4 April NOTW In an article looking at the £1.1 million EU INTERREG project to create new trans-frontier EU regions, which would see parts of southern England joined to northern France as a new zone called "TransManche", the News of the World quoted Open Europe Director Mats Persson saying, "The whole exercise is ridiculous". European Commission proposes stringent rules on Citizens' Initiative 31 March Business Week Forbes AP Czech TV Following the unveiling of the Commission's plans for the new EU citizens' initiative, Open Europe's Pieter Cleppe was quoted by AP, Forbes, Business Week and was interviewed on Czech TV, saying that the proposal would prevent petitions from smaller political groups outside the mainstream, adding "who is going to decide what the values of the EU are?" France and Germany push for EU economic government 28 March LBC radio 27 March Express Mail Following the EU Council summit and the call from the German government for the European Council to be the "economic government" of the EU, Open Europe Director Mats Persson was quoted in the Mail saying, "Merkel's vision is quite clear - countries which run persistently high deficits should face heavy sanctions. These would be imposed by the European Council in a vote in which there would be no veto and the member state concerned would be excluded." The Express quoted Mats saying, "This smacks of economic federalism." Mats also appeared on LBC Radio discussing the proposals for an EU economic government. French MEP: 'I won't be sad' at job losses resulting from AIFM Directive 27 March Times 26 March Bloomberg Following comments from the French MEP Jean-Paul Gauzes, serving as rapporteur for the EU's AIFM Directive, that he would not be "sad" if the rules resulted in job losses in the City of London, Open Europe Director Mats Persson was quoted by Business Week saying, "It's a very revealing remark that shows he thinks the only negative impact of the directive will be on hedge funds and private equity funds in the UK. It could have a much wider impact." The Times also cited Open Europe's estimate that the hedge fund industry contributes £3.5 billion a year in tax to the Treasury. Conflict of interest 26 March Rzeczpospolita Open Europe's Pieter Cleppe was interviewed by Polish daily Rzeczpospolita on the question of whether it is acceptable for people involved in EU projects on the national level to seek employment in the EU institutions. He said that several national politicians are European Commission officials on unpaid leave, who can always take up a job at the Commission afterwards, which "limits their ability to take a critical stand towards the actions of EU institutions." Open Europe is a small, lean operation which relies entirely on individual donations. We produce cutting-edge research on all aspects of EU policy, targeting both politicians and the media to campaign for radical reform of the EU. We unearth high-impact stories and hold high-profile events, and, despite being a small team, we are quoted and interviewed several times a week in the media. We believe there is a better way forward for Europe, and we need your help in trying to make our vision a reality. If you support our work and would like to help us continue to do it, please click the link below to find out how you can donate. Anything you can give will go directly to helping us counter the spin from EU officials and EU-funded lobby groups, and allow us to make our case for a fresh approach to Europe. Thank you for your support. Open Europe is an independent think tank campaigning for radical reform of the EU. For information on our research, events and other activities, please visit our website:openeurope.org.uk or call us on 0207 197 2333.Open Europe Fortnightly Open Europe Bulletin: 8 April 2010 2. UK's top judge: Lisbon Treaty will have a "significant impact" on criminal cases in Britain 3. News in brief 4. Open Europe in the news 5. Please support Open Europe
Thursday, 8 April 2010
Posts
