31st May 2023


The secretive EU body that likes to say 'no'

  • Even EU insiders are often unaware of the workings of the Regulatory Scrutiny Board (Photo: Kristina Flour)
Listen to article

Not every scandal results in a public outcry. Some scandals remain in the dark. Without public pressure for positive change, problematic cases persist — for too long.

The European Commission's Regulatory Scrutiny Board (RSB) is such a case. Although the RSB, and the wider so-called 'Better Regulation' agenda of which it is part, have been heavily criticised by NGOs from the outset, the general public has barely noticed their problematic influence on EU legislation. Even EU insiders are often unaware of the workings of the board. But take a closer look at the RSB and alarm bells start ringing.

Read and decide

Join EUobserver today

Become an expert on Europe

Get instant access to all articles — and 20 years of archives. 14-day free trial.

... or subscribe as a group

The main task of the RSB is simple: it assesses draft impact assessments of upcoming EU legislative proposals as prepared by the commission. If the RSB's opinion on the impact assessment is negative, the legislative proposal cannot move forward.

The assessment must then be substantially revised and resubmitted for a review. If the RSB's second opinion is negative too, it get's tough. Only the vice-president for interinstitutional relations and foresight can then submit the legislative initiative to the College of Commissioners to decide whether or not to proceed with the proposal.

This de facto veto power is only one aspect that gives the RSB the leverage to effectively delay or even water-down legislation. And it mostly hits legislation tackling the climate crisis, protecting the environment, or other rules aimed at protecting Europe's 448 million citizens.

The unelected RSB undermines the work of EU Parliament and the Council: it lacks democratic legitimacy. Moreover the RSB has a very early say on the likely direction, scope, and depth of proposed new EU rules before the parliament sees the final proposal from the commission.

Lack of transparency

With the significant influence it can have on EU legislation, it is disturbing that the RSB is allowed to operate largely in secret. EU citizens and even MEPs have no insight into how the RSB reaches its decisions, because the RSB's opinions are only disclosed once the final legislative proposal is published.

It is especially the negative opinions are of interest to legislators. Yet the European Parliament was recently denied access to the documents on the RSB's negative opinion on the right-to-repair initiative.

In order for journalists and citizens to be able to follow the work of the RSB, we need full transparency and accountability. This includes the real-time publication of the RSB's decisions, access to minutes of its internal meetings, full information on the RSB's lobbying contacts and a publication of the declarations of interests of the members of the RSB. The refusal to release these is currently being investigated by the Ombudsman.

Evaluation criteria favours business interests

The root of the problem is the so-called 'better regulation agenda'. Its job is to ensure that new EU rules are as narrow as possible and don't hurt business profits too hard.

Although the evaluation toolbox includes criteria for social and environmental impacts , the RSB's opinions often emphasise economic impacts and costs, as a new study by political scientist Brigitte Pircher and commissioned by LobbyControl and the Chamber of Labour, Vienna confirms. This is a bias within the 'better regulation' agenda, but it also reflects the lack of social and environmental expertise on the RSB — which the European Ombudsman is currently also investigating.

What difference does it make? One example is the Due Diligence Directive for Sustainable Business. The aim of the directive is to oblige companies to take responsibility for environmental or human rights violations throughout their value chain.

The RSB issued two negative opinions on this initiative and delayed it significantly. Also, after several contacts with Danish/Swedish industry, both the number of companies covered by the draft legislation were reduced and the scope in terms of the value chain was limited.

The EU needs to provide answers to the climate crisis, social inequality and corporate power — and for that, EU legislation, and thus the RSB, must take greater account of long-term impacts on society, workers and the environment,

That's why the EU Commission should abolish the RSB's veto power, introduce widespread transparency and scrap the commission's anti-regulation agenda. What we need is a legislative process that truly serves the interests of citizens — not corporations.

Author bio

Felix Duffy is a campaigner at LobbyControl in Germany. Frank Ey works at the Chamber of Labour in Vienna.


The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author's, not those of EUobserver.

MEPs push for limited 'right-to-repair' on consumer devices

The MEPs's report asked the EU Commission to "consider" labelling products and services according to their durability and estimated lifespan - but only to examine so-called "planned obsolescence." The parliament plenary will vote in November.

Ombudsman censures EU Commission on gas-projects list

The European Ombudsman said the climate risks from gas projects included on the EU Commission's list of priority energy projects were not properly assessed, urging the commission to address the "shortcomings" of its methodology.

The EU needs to foster tech — not just regulate it

The EU's ambition to be a digital superpower stands in stark contrast to the US — but the bigger problem is that it remains far better at regulation than innovation, despite decades of hand-wringing over Europe's technology gap.

EU export credits insure decades of fossil-fuel in Mozambique

European governments are phasing out fossil fuels at home, but continuing their financial support for fossil mega-projects abroad. This is despite the EU agreeing last year to decarbonise export credits — insurance on risky non-EU projects provided with public money.

Latest News

  1. Europe's TV union wooing Lavrov for splashy interview
  2. ECB: eurozone home prices could see 'disorderly' fall
  3. Adapting to Southern Europe's 'new normal' — from droughts to floods
  4. Want to stop forced migration from West Africa? Start by banning bottom trawling
  5. Germany unsure if Orbán fit to be 'EU president'
  6. EU Parliament chief given report on MEP abuse 30 weeks before sanction
  7. EU clashes over protection of workers exposed to asbestos
  8. EU to blacklist nine Russians over jailing of dissident

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. International Sustainable Finance CentreJoin CEE Sustainable Finance Summit, 15 – 19 May 2023, high-level event for finance & business
  2. ICLEISeven actionable measures to make food procurement in Europe more sustainable
  3. World BankWorld Bank Report Highlights Role of Human Development for a Successful Green Transition in Europe
  4. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic summit to step up the fight against food loss and waste
  5. Nordic Council of MinistersThink-tank: Strengthen co-operation around tech giants’ influence in the Nordics
  6. EFBWWEFBWW calls for the EC to stop exploitation in subcontracting chains

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. InformaConnecting Expert Industry-Leaders, Top Suppliers, and Inquiring Buyers all in one space - visit Battery Show Europe.
  2. EFBWWEFBWW and FIEC do not agree to any exemptions to mandatory prior notifications in construction
  3. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic and Baltic ways to prevent gender-based violence
  4. Nordic Council of MinistersCSW67: Economic gender equality now! Nordic ways to close the pension gap
  5. Nordic Council of MinistersCSW67: Pushing back the push-back - Nordic solutions to online gender-based violence
  6. Nordic Council of MinistersCSW67: The Nordics are ready to push for gender equality

Join EUobserver

Support quality EU news

Join us