Strasbourg, 28.04.26 – Today, the European Commission presented its Communication on a Simpler, Clearer and Better Enforced EU Rulebook, including changes to the Better Regulation framework that governs impact assessments, consultations and evaluations – in other words, the rulebook on how the EU makes rules.

While some steps to improve enforcement and streamline procedures are welcome, the Communication risks entrenching political shortcuts rather than strengthening evidence-based and democratic lawmaking.

Most notably, the Commission seeks to further define when “urgency” can justify skipping impact assessments and public consultations. This comes after more than a year in which deregulation has dominated the political agenda, with a succession of Omnibus packages aimed at rolling back or weakening existing safeguards. The European Ombudsman already found maladministration in the use of urgency exemptions for the first Omnibus package on corporate sustainability, due diligence and reporting. Rather than restoring confidence and tightening safeguards, the new approach reaffirms the Commission’s discretion further – including through references to vague “political context”.

The obvious question is what this means for the many deregulation packages still to come. If the EU’s own rulebook can be sidestepped whenever political pressure rises, Better Regulation risks becoming optional when it matters most.

The Communication also fails to systematically account for the costs of policy inaction, such as pollution, biodiversity loss or climate damage, while maintaining a narrow focus on easily quantifiable burdens for businesses.

Proposals to modernise consultations and improve implementation could be positive if applied fairly and transparently. But selective stakeholder outreach must not replace open public participation, and Better Regulation cannot become a tool for deregulation by another name.

Frederik Hafen, Senior Policy Officer for Environmental Democracy at the EEB said:

“Better Regulation should mean better evidence, better participation and better outcomes for people and planet – not more room for political shortcuts. If the Commission is serious about smarter lawmaking, it must assess the real cost of inaction, listen openly to citizens and civil society, and apply its own rules consistently – especially when political pressure is highest.”

Notes: 
Ombudswoman finds maladministration;
Civil Society demands on Better Regulation;
Cost of inaction – European Environmental Implementation Review