Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T12:18:59.924Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The European Court of Auditors Steps Out Of Its Comfort Zone With An ‘Impact Assessment Audit’

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Anne Meuwese
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

“The Court considers that the Commission should give due consideration to the principles of clarity of objectives, simplification, realism, transparency and accountability when designing new and revising existing interventions.”

Type
Reports
Information
European Journal of Risk Regulation , Volume 2 , Issue 1 , March 2011 , pp. 104 - 107
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 European Court of Auditors, Impact Assessments in the EU institutions: Do they support decision-making?, Special report No 3/2010 (Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union 2010).

2 The Evaluation Partnership, Evaluation of the Commission's Impact Assessment System (2007).

3 European Court of Auditors, supra note 1, p. 6.

4 Ibid.

5 Ibid., p. 46.

6 Ibid., p. 48.

7 Ibid., p. 62 onwards.

8 European Policy Centre, Regulatory Impact Analysis: Improving the Quality of EU Regulatory Activity, Occasional paper (Brussels 2001); Graham Mather and Frank Vibert, Evaluating Better Regulation: Building the System (London: City Research Series No 9, 2006).

9 The National Audit Office in the UK has carried out evaluations of the quality of regulatory impact assessments, but each report had a limited scope. And although of course the evaluations were carried out from an ‘audit perspective’, they have not been cast as ‘audits’. National Audit Office, ‘The NAO's work in regulatory reform’, briefing for the Regulatory Reform Select Committee, October 2010.

10 Tuomas Pöysti, Finnish Auditor General at the European Court of Auditors, Seminar on “The future of public auditing and accountability in the European Union (Luxembourg, 18th October 2007).

11 European Policy Centre, supra note 8, p. 5.

12 Mather and Vibert, supra note 8, p. 31.

13 European Court of Auditors, supra note 1, p. 52.

14 In this case the quality of the data cannot be checked because the underlying data sets have not been published.