Report from the Commission - “Better lawmaking 2006” pursuant to Article 9 of the Protocol on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality (14th Report) {SEC(2007)737}
Date: 2007-06-06
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: activity report, application of EU law, operation of the Institutions, principle of proportionality, principle of subsidiarity

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 6.6.2007 
COM(2007)286 final 

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION 

“BETTER LAWMAKING 2006” 

pursuant to Article 9 of the Protocol 
on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality 

(14th report) 

{SEC(2007)737} 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION 

“BETTER LAWMAKING 2006” 

pursuant to Article 9 of the Protocol 
on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality 

(14th report) 

This  report  is  the  14th  annual  review  of  the  application  of  the  principles  of  subsidiarity  and 
proportionality.  It  also  covers  progress  in  improving  the  regulatory  environment  in  the 
European Union1. 

1. 

BETTER REGULATION  

A regulatory environment that is well-devised, clear, understandable and as simple as possible 
is key to protecting citizens' welfare, public health and the environment. At the same time it 
ensures  a  fair  market  place  where  European  business  can  compete  effectively  and  with 
innovative  products.  The  Better  Regulation  agenda  sets  out  to  achieve  this  at  both  EU  and 
national level in a concerted effort by EU institutions and Member States and in a manner that 
maximises  public  policy  benefits  while  minimising  the  costs  that  regulations  impose  on  the 
EU economy. 

The main objectives and actions in favour of Better Regulation of the EU institutions are set 
out in the Commission action plan on Better Regulation, as revised in March 20052, and in the 
Inter-Institutional Agreement (IIA) on Better Lawmaking signed by the European Parliament, 
the Council and the Commission in December 20033. 

1 

2 

3 

The  obligation  on  the  Commission  to  present  an  annual  report  on  the  application  of  the  principles  of 
subsidiarity and proportionality to the European Council and the European Parliament was enshrined by 
the  Edinburgh  European  Council  in  December  1992.  This  obligation  was  included  in  a  protocol 
annexed  to  the  Treaty  establishing  the  European  Community  (TEC)  in  the  framework  of  the 
amendments made by the Treaty of Amsterdam in 1997. Since 1995 this report has been extended to 
cover measures taken to improve the quality and accessibility of legislation (for the previous report, see 
COM(2005)  98  and  SEC(2005)  364).  Some  elements  contributing  to  improve  the  regulatory 
environment  are  reviewed  in  greater  detail  by  the  3rd  Report  on  European  governance  (2004-2005) 
(see http://www.europa.eu.int/comm/governance/index_fr.htm). 
“Better regulation for growth and jobs in the European Union” COM(2005)97, March 2005, referred to 
subsequently as the “Action Plan”. This Communication updates and completes the Action Plan set in 
2002  (“Simplifying  and  improving  the  regulatory  environment”,  COM(2002)278,  5 June  2002).  The 
action plan follows up the White Paper on European Governance (COM(2001)727, 25 June 2001). 
OJ C 321, 31.12.2003, p.1. 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
In  November  2006,  the  Commission  presented  a  strategic  review  of  the  Better  Regulation 
agenda4. It identifies the significant and encouraging progress already made and maps out the 
challenges ahead for EU institutions and Member States if Better Regulation is to have real 
and  lasting  positive  impacts  on  business  and  citizens.  The  main  challenges  identified  are  to 
improve  the  quality  of  impact  assessments  and  the  use  of  this  instrument  in  preparing  and 
adopting  legislation;  to  make  progress  on  measuring  administrative  costs  and  eliminating 
unnecessary  burden  in  European  and  national  legislation;  to  continue  and  intensify  work  to 
achieve the ambitious programme for modernising and simplifying the stock of legislation; to 
continue  the  screening  and  possible  withdrawal  of  pending  proposals  to  ensure  that  what  is 
taken forward by the Council and Parliament is still in line with Commission priorities and up 
to date; to reinforce the constructive dialogue between all regulators at EU and national levels 
and with stakeholders. 

1.1. 

Actions taken by the Commission 

The  Commission,  in  line  with  its  institutional  role  as  initiator  of  legislation,  has  a  special 
responsibility for achieving the Better Regulation objectives at the three levels of preparation, 
follow-up  and  implementation  of  legislation.  It  has  taken  a  lead  on  the  Better  Regulation 
agenda and in 2006 it: 

–  carried  out  67  impact  assessments,  launched  an  external  evaluation  of  its  impact 
assessment system and established an Impact Assessment Board as an independent quality 
support and control function for impact assessments prepared by Commission departments; 

–  continued implementation of its simplification programme, reported on the progress made 
and  added  more  than  40  new  items  to  it5,  and  integrated  simplification  items  into  its 
Legislative and Work Programme for 20076; 

–  integrated the EU Standard Cost Model for the measurement of administrative costs into its 
impact assessment guidelines and proposed the launch of an ambitious action programme 
to reduce administrative burden in the EU; 

–  completed  its  screening  of  pending  proposals  dating  from  previous  Commissions  and  re-

launched its programme for codification and repeal of obsolete legislation. 

Many  of  these  activities  are  carried  out  in  a  mutually  reinforcing  manner,  ensuring  that  the 
Better  Regulation  agenda  is  coherent,  for  example:  measurement  of  administrative  costs  is 
included  in  the  methodology  for  impact  assessments;  and  simplification  proposals  in  the 
Commission  Legislative  and  Work  Programme  are  subject  to  impact  assessment,  which  in 
turn makes use of stakeholder consultation. 

1.1.1.  Consultation of interested parties 

In  2006,  the  number  of  consultations  held  by  the  Commission  increased  significantly  in 
comparison to the previous year, with 217 non-legislative Communications (+28 compared to 
2004) and 129 internet-based consultations (+23) via the web portal “Your Voice in Europe”7. 

4 
5 

6 

COM(2006)689 final 
"First  progress  report  on  the  strategy  for  the  simplification  of  the  regulatory  environment"  - 
COM(2006)690 
COM(2006)629 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
                                                 
In the context of the European Transparency Initiative8 the Commission carried out an open 
public  consultation  on  its  minimum  standards  for  consultation  of  interested  parties9,  which 
showed that stakeholders were generally positive in their assessment of the manner in which 
the Commission carries out its consultations.10 Further improvements were desired in relation 
to  giving  general  feedback  on  input  received  through  consultations,  to  achieving  a  better 
balance of participants in targeted consultations and to keeping to minimum time limits. For 
Commission departments, complying with minimum standards for consultations has an effect 
on workload but also adds value to the final versions of the initiatives. 

1.1.2.  Collection and use of expertise 

The  Commission  will  continue  its  efforts  in  line  with  the  principles  and  standards  on  the 
collection and use of advice from external experts11. In particular it intends to promote greater 
use  of  SINAPSE  (Scientific  INformAtion  for  Policy  Support  in  Europe),  the  interface 
between  experts  and  (EU)  policy  makers12.  The  initial  take-up  has  been  encouraging,  and 
should  be  fostered  in  2007.  New  forms  of  governance  and  the  ever-growing  complexity  of 
many  policy  issues  means  that  the  traditional  advisory  systems  need  support  from  EU-wide 
and rapid consultation of scientist/experts and more efficient communication between experts 
throughout Europe and beyond. This can be facilitated by the further development and a more 
generalised use of the SINAPSE e-network. 

1.1.3. 

Impact assessment 

In  2006,  Commission  departments  produced  67  impact  assessments.  This  included  impact 
assessments for all major legislative and policy-defining initiatives in the annual Legislative 
and  Work  Programme,  as  required  since  2005,  and,  in  addition,  a  number  of  'voluntary' 
impact assessments for other initiatives with significant potential impacts. Experience shows 
that in a growing number of cases impact assessment has significantly changed the approach, 
the nature of the legal instrument, or even led to the abandonment of a foreseen proposal.13 
The  Commission  also  enhanced  its  approach  to  the  integrated  assessment  of  the  economic, 
social and environmental impacts of its proposals by integrating into its guidelines for impact 
assessments a methodology for the measurement of administrative costs.14  

To further improve the overall quality of its impact assessments also in practice, the President 
of the Commission has set up an Impact Assessment Board, which operates under his direct 
authority  and  independently  of  Commission  departments.  It  scrutinises  draft  impact 
assessments and provides opinions on their quality, offering advice and quality support where 
needed.  

7 
8 
9 
10 

11 
12 
13 
14 

http://ec.europa.eu/yourvoice/ 
Cf. Green Paper on the European Transparency Initiative: COM(2006)194. 
These standards have been introduced in 2003 (COM(2002)704, 11.12.2002).  
The  Commission  received  more  than  100  contributions  to  the  consultation,  which  are  published  at: 
http://ec.europa.eu/comm/eti/contributions.htm 
COM(2002)713, 11.12.2002.  
http://europa.eu.int/sinapse 
For examples, see annex to this report, point 2.1.3, footnotes 18-20. 
SEC(2005)791. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                                                                                                                         
Further measures to enhance the overall approach and raise the quality of Commission impact 
assessments  are  likely  in  the  follow-up  to  the  external  evaluation  of  the  impact  assessment 
system, which was launched in 2006 and  concluded in spring 2007. 

1.1.4.  Choice of instruments (self-regulation and co-regulation) 

The Commission is committed to checking, when preparing its proposals, whether alternatives 
to  'classical'  regulation  are  more  suitable  to  reach  the  Treaty  objectives.15  To  encourage  the 
use  of  alternative  regulatory  instruments,  the  Commission  and  the  European  Economic  and 
Social Committee (EESC) have jointly developed a database of "EU self-regulation and co-
regulation".16  It  facilitates  exchange  of  information  and  identification  of  best  practices  on 
initiatives  for  self-  and  co-regulation  with  an  EU  dimension  (i.e.  involving  more  than  one 
Member  State).  Its  main  objective  is  to  encourage  and  support  private  parties  willing  to 
develop or improve self-regulatory schemes, and it can also assist regulators responsible for 
co-regulatory  design.  At  the  same  time,  the  Commission  consulted  stakeholders  on  the 
appropriate use of self- and co-regulation as part of its Impact Assessments but also through 
roundtables and studies17.  

At sectoral level, a number of important self- and co-regulatory  mechanisms were set  up in 
2006. The Commission invited the development of specific codes of conduct at Community 
and/or Member State levels. Several legislative acts also provided for more co-regulation with 
interested  parties.18  However,  2006  also  saw  instances  of  industry  request  to  turn  self-
regulatory practices into co-regulatory schemes or even classic legislation.19  While  insisting 
on the potential of regulatory alternatives, the Commission’s approach also recognises that, in 
many cases, regulations remain the simplest way to reach EU objectives and provide business 
and citizens with legislative certainty. 

1.1.5.  Minimising administrative costs resulting from by EU legislation 

Based  on  preparatory  work  carried  out  in  2005,  the  Commission  has  introduced  a  common 
methodology  for  assessing  administrative  costs  of  (proposed)  legislation.  This  EU  Standard 
Cost  Model  has  been  applied  to  a  number  of  impact  assessments  drafted  and/or  completed 
since  March  2006.  The  Commission  will  pursue  its  efforts  to  reach  the  greatest  possible 
methodological convergence with and among Member States. 

15 

16 
17 

18 
19 

The  impact  assessment  Guidelines  make  checking  the feasibility  of  alternative regulatory  instruments 
an obligatory elements of Commission impact assessments. 
http://www.eesc.europa.eu/smo/prism/presentation/index.asp 
See  for  instance  "Self-Regulation  in  the  EU  Advertising  Sector:  A  report  of  some  discussion  among 
Interested  parties",  July  2006  (http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/overview/report_advertising_en.pdf); 
"Self and co-regulatory practices in the European Union", October 2006  
(http://europa_eu.staging.entr.cec.eu.int/enterprise/regulation/better_regulation/docs/simplification/Fina
l-report-SCR2.pdf); 
sector 
on 
(http://ec.europa.eu/comm/avpolicy/info_centre/library/studies/index_en.htm#finalised). 
For examples, see annex to this report, point 2.1.4. 
This  was  for  example  the  case  when  the  European  Fruit  Juice  Association  (AIJN)  called  for  the 
inclusion into EU legislation of a fruit juice norm which was previously defined by a voluntary code of 
practice of AIJN members concluded in implementation of Council Directive 2001/112. 

co-regulation  measures 

the  media 

the  Study 

or 

in 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                 
In  its  Strategic  Review  on  Better  Regulation  and  the  related  working  document  on 
"Measuring administrative costs and reducing administrative burdens in the European Union" 
from November 200620 the Commission announced for 2007 an ambitious action plan for the 
reduction of administrative burden and invited the Council to set a common reduction target 
of 25%, to be achieved jointly by the EU and  Member States by 2012. As a first stage, the 
Commission  announced  its  intention  to  begin  a  large  scale  measurement  exercise  of  the 
administrative  burdens  in  selected  priority  areas  and  to  present  a  series  of  fast-track  actions 
designed  to  demonstrate  how  administrative  burden  can  be  reduced  without  affecting  the 
overriding political objectives of the legislation concerned. 

1.1.6. 

Screening and withdrawal of pending proposals 

As  part  of  its  efforts  on  Better  Regulation,  the  Commission  regularly  screens  legislative 
proposals pending before the legislator to check that they are still relevant and up to date. In 
2006,  the  Commission  completed  the  screening  of  all  pending  proposals  adopted  by  the 
previous  Commissions.  Resulting  from  the  2005  screening  of  183  pending  proposals  from 
before  2004,  68  proposals  were  withdrawn  in  2006.  In  the  same  year,  the  Commission 
screened more than 80 further pending proposals adopted by the Commission in 2004 before 
the present Commission took office, on 22 November 2004, and decided to withdraw another 
10  proposals.  These  proposals  are  included  in  the  Commission's  Legislative  and  Work 
Programme  for  200721.  In  accordance  with  article  32  of  the  Framework  Agreement  on 
relations between the European Parliament and the Commission (May 2005), Parliament has 
been informed of the Commission's intention to withdraw those proposals and that withdrawal 
will take effect when published in the Official Journal. 

The Commission recommends that any new Commission carry out a similar exercise within 
the first months of taking office to verify whether previously adopted proposals are still in line 
with its priorities and to confirm its political ownership of these proposals. 

1.1.7. 

Simplifying and updating the Community acquis 

Of  the  three-year  rolling  simplification  programme  presented  in  October  200522,  the 
Commission in 2006 adopted 27 items foreseen for 2006 and 6 items which were carried over 
from 2005. A further 23 initiatives foreseen for 2006 were postponed to 2007 to allow further 
analysis supporting these proposals. 

As  part  of  its  Strategic  Review  of  Better  Regulation,  in  November  2006  the  Commission 
presented  the  first  progress  report  on  the  strategy  for  the  simplification  of  the  regulatory 
environment23,  and  announced  43  new  initiatives,  which  will  enhance  the  ambitious  rolling 
simplification programme covering the period 2006-2009. 47 major simplification initiatives 
are for the first time included in the Commission Legislative and Work Programme for 2007. 
The report also presents an updated programme to complete the codification of the stock of 
legislation by 2008.  

20 
21 
22 
23 

COM(2006)691  
Annex 4 to document COM(2006)629, of 24.10.2006. 
COM(2005)535 
COM (2006)690 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
                                                 
However, implementing the simplification programme successfully and in good time requires 
careful  consultation  of  stakeholders,  assessment  of  likely  impacts  of  initiatives,  and  shared 
responsibility  with  legislators  at  Community  and  national  levels.  At  EU  level,  inter-
institutional dialogue to speed up the adoption of simplification items should be pursued. In 
the Member States, national simplification programmes need to be developed to prevent the 
positive effects of simplifying EU legislation being cancelled out by excessive national rules 
that are not adapted accordingly. 

1.1.8.  Monitoring the application of EU law 

The  correct  application  of  EU  law  is  an  important  element  of  achieving  Better  Regulation 
objectives.  Simplifying  and  improving  the  regulatory  environment  can  only  produce  the 
expected  benefits  for  business  and  citizens  if  Member  States  transpose  EU  law  swiftly  and 
correctly.24  To  help  avoid  that  transposition  gaps  evolve  which  may  lead  to  infringement 
cases,  Commission  departments  are  required  by  the  Impact  Assessment  Guidelines  to  take 
potential  transposition  difficulties  into  account  already  during  the  preparation  of  their 
legislative  proposals.  Furthermore,  the  Commission  is  working  to  adapt  its  monitoring 
methods  in  co-operation  with  Member  States.  This  includes  the  production  of  correlation 
tables,  clearly  linking  provisions  in  directives  and  national  rules,  as  well  as  full 
implementation of the electronic notification system for national transposition measures. The 
system  has  been  fully  in  place  for  all  Member  States  since  early  2006  and  the  Commission 
promoted its use in 2006 by various activities.  

1.2. 

Actions by EU institutions, the European Economic and Social Committee and 
the Committee of the Regions 

Better  Regulation  and  its  implementation  was  a  priority  for  all  institutions  in  2006.  Apart 
from  the  Commission,  the  European  Parliament  was  particularly  active.  It  held  a  plenary 
discussion  in  April,  and  in  May  2006  it  adopted  a  package  of  five  resolutions  on  Better 
Regulation, which include a wide range of proposals for action and improvements of existing 
tools and procedures. These were mainly directed at the Commission but also at the Council 
and Member States.  

In  response  to  the  European  Parliament's  call  for  reinforced  quality  control  of  Commission 
impact assessments, the President of the Commission announced that an independent quality 
check would be established under his personal authority, which led to the Commission setting 
up the Impact Assessment Board in November 2006.  

2006  also  saw  the  political  endorsement  by  the  European  Parliament25  of  the  Inter-
Institutional  "Common  Approach  to  Impact  Assessment"26,  which  had  been  negotiated  in 
November  2005.  It  came  in  response  to  a  provision  in  the  Inter-Institutional  Agreement  on 
Better  Lawmaking  of  2003  and  sets  out  "traffic  rules"  on  how  Commission  impact 
assessments  should  be  used  in  the  legislative  process  and  on  European  Parliament  and 
Council impact assessments of their substantive amendments. 

24 

25 
26 

See  the  annual  report  from  the  Commission  on  Monitoring  the  Application  of  Community  Law  for 
2005, COM(2006)416. 
It had already been endorsed by Council and the Commission in late 2005. 
Council Document No 14901/05. 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Both  Parliament  and  Council  have  stepped  up  their  use  of  Commission  impact  assessments 
when  examining  Commission  proposals,  thus  consolidating  impact  assessment  as  a  tool  to 
ensure that political decisions are taken in the light of the best available evidence of potential 
impacts. During the Austrian Presidency the Council drew up an indicative guide for working 
parties  on  handling  impact  assessments  in  the  Council27.  Parliament  and  its  committees  are 
increasingly  requesting  that  studies  and  impact  analyses  on  certain  subjects28  or  substantive 
amendments to Commission proposals29 are carried out.The Committee of the Regions (CoR) 
and the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) also took an active part in the Better 
Regulation  debate  in  2006,  especially  on  subsidiarity  issues.  The  CoR  requested  systematic 
consultation  and  involvement  in  Commission  impact  assessment  work  of  local  and  regional 
authorities to ensure that financial or administrative burden put on local and regional authorities 
in  implementing  EU  legislation  are  proportionate  to  the  objectives  pursued  by  EU  action.  To 
support this, the CoR set up in 2006 a subsidiarity monitoring network30 as a tool for exchange 
of information between European territorial actors on Commission proposals which will have 
an impact on local and regional authorities and the policies for which they are responsible. The 
European  Economic  and  Social  Committee  adopted  an  own-initiative  report  on  "EU  and 
national administration practices" in 2006 and its Single Market Observatory launched work on 
the  integration  of  social  impacts  in  Commission impact  assessments,  the  results  of  which  are 
expected in 2007. 

2. 

APPLICATION OF THE PRINCIPLES OF SUBSIDIARITY AND PROPORTIONALITY 

The Commission continued efforts to better explain how the measures it proposes comply with 
both  principles,  through  impact  assessments  and  explanatory  memoranda31.  In  May  2006,  it 
decided  to  transmit  its  new  proposals  and  consultation  papers  directly  to  the  national 
parliaments, inviting them to react so as to improve the process of policy formulation32. The 
move was welcomed by the European Council in June 2006. Heads of State and Government 
asked the  Commission  to duly consider comments by the national parliaments, in particular 
with regard to the subsidiarity and proportionality principles. 

to  Commission  proposals 

As  in  previous  years,  the  European  Parliament  and  the  Council  introduced  relatively  few 
amendments 
subsidiarity  and 
proportionality33.  The  vast  majority  of  opinions  from  the  Committee  of  the  Regions  (CoR) 
and the European Economic and Social Committee had no criticism regarding the application 
of  the  subsidiarity  principle.  Proportionality  problems  were  raised  slightly  more  often.  This 
was also the conclusion of the two test cases of the CoR's Subsidiarity Monitoring Network34. 

referring  explicitly 

to 

27 
28 
29 

30 
31 

32 
33 

34 

Council document 9382/06, 15.5.2006 
For example, on the inclusion of social impacts in Commission impact assessments. 
For example, ENVI Committee impact analysis on amendments to the proposal for a Directive on Air 
Quality. 
http://www.cor.europa.eu/en/activities/sub_mon.htm. 
In December 2003, the Commission decided to set a standard format for the explanatory memorandum 
accompanying each of its legislative proposals, to improve its structure and content; cf. C(2003)4555, 
adopted by the Commission on 13 December 2003.  
"A Citizens' Agenda - Delivering Results For Europe", COM(2006)211. 
For instance, in 2006, the Parliament referred explicitly to subsidiarity and proportionality principles in 
11 legislative reports and 3 own initiative. 
The CoR conducted these tests on the proposal for a recommendation of the European Parliament and of 
the  Council  on  the  establishment  of  the  European  Qualifications  Framework  for  lifelong  learning 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Several opinions sent by national parliaments asked for Commission arguments to be clarified 
or backed by more detailed data. A minority of them concluded that the proposals transmitted 
by  the  Commission  were  considered  in  some  respects  to  go  against  the  principles.  The 
Commission is responding to these submissions individually. 

These divergences of views underline the need for a common understanding of the conditions 
set  by  the  two  principles  as  defined  in  the  Treaties.  The  Commission  hopes  that  the 
presentation  of  the  standard  set  of  questions  used  for  drafting  the  explanatory  memoranda 
accompanying  Commission  proposals  will  contribute  to  such  understanding35.  Convergent 
interpretation  would  avoid  confusion  with  for  instance  the  principle  of  "conferral  of 
competences"  and  counter  misapprehension  that  occasionally  feed  the  perception  of 
subsidiarity infringements. 

As regards ex-post judicial control in 2006, the principle of subsidiarity was referred to in two 
judgments  delivered  by  the  Court  of  First  Instance  of  the  European  Communities,  which 
confirmed previous case law. In neither case did the Court find that the principle of subsidiarity 
had been infringed.36 As of 31 December 2006, the case  law of the Court of Justice and the 
Court  of  First  Instance  did  not  include  any  judgements  to  the  effect  that  the  principle  of 
subsidiarity  had  been  contravened  or  that  compliance  with  the  principle  had  insufficiently 
been substantiated. 

Possible  infringements  of  the  principle  of  proportionality  were  analysed  in  several  judgments 
and, in some cases, the Community measures were annulled in full or in part on that ground. 
For  example,  in  case  C-310/04  Spain  v  Council  concerning  a  Council  Regulation  amending 
the support scheme for cotton, the Court ruled that "the basic facts which had to be taken into 
account as the basis of the contested measures of the act and on which the exercise of their 
[the  EU  institutions']  discretion  depended"  were  missing37.  It  found  that  the  principle  of 
proportionality had been infringed and annulled the contested act. 

(COM(2006)479) and on the Communication on Efficiency and equity in European education and training 
systems (COM(2006)481). The CoR will publish the results in 2007.  
See Annex 3 of the Commission Staff Working Document attached to this Communication. 
See Case T-168/01 GlaxoSmithKline Services v Commission, judgment of 27 September 2006, not yet 
Reported, paragraph 196 et seq. and Case T-253/02 Chafiq Ayadi v Council, judgment of 12 July 2006, 
not yet reported, paragraph 105 et seq. (appeal pending, Case C-403/06P). 
Judgement of 7 September 2006, paragraph 123. 

35 
36 

37 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
                                                                                                                                                         
ANNEX:  
Commission legislative proposals,  
and consultation documents and reports: 

Number of Commission legislative proposals 
Situation at 31/12/ 2006 

787

704

702

667

596

622

549

569

528

493

490

448

405

532

494

474

439

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Number of proposals for Regulations, Directives, Decisions and Recommendations
(Source for 1990-2001: Eur-Lex; source for 2002-2006: Prelex)

Consultation documents and reports (1993-2006)

250

200

150

100

50

0

1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Reports

Communications

Green papers

White papers

131

93

135

123

164

122

155

133

154

120

166

132

148

103

175

133

139

157

81

73

102

142

110

159

3

1

2

1

9

3

1

2

6

2

2

1

2

2

4

3

7

4

2

0

5

0

6

1

92

189

14

2

106

217

10

2

EN 

10 

   EN