‌

Better Regulation in Europe: Luxembourg

The EU 15 Better Regulation project was a partnership between the OECD and the European Commission. It drew on the initiatives for Better Regulation promoted by both organisations over the last few years.

The OECD report, including recommendations on Better Regulation in Luxembourg is available by clicking on each chapter heading below.

The Executive summary (pdf format) contains the OECD assessment and recommendations.

Conclusions

• Consider ways of giving policy for Better Regulation a permanent status.
• Ensure a balance between programmes for businesses and citizens in future development of the Better Regulation programme.
• Take steps to promote ex ante impact assessments, public consultation, and effective transposition of EU directives, as well as a policy for central/municipal regulatory management.
• Adopt a communication strategy in the full sense of the term, shared between key institutions at the core of government, and designed to explain the strong link between effective regulation, a sound and competitive economy, and a government that can deliver public services more effectively. Identify the opportunities and the vehicles (e.g. annual reports) for doing this. Consider expanding the CSA annual report and give it greater visibility.
• Adopt a clear policy for evaluating the different aspects of regulation based on clearly defined objectives and a strict timetable, in light of available resources. Give thought to who should conduct these evaluations.

• Confirm the CSA’s lead role in regulatory policy, while clarifying the role of its close associates, in particular the Central Legislation Service (SCL). Review the makeup of the plenary to provide for broader representation by civil society stakeholders.
• Continue with the structures in place for ensuring inter-ministerial co ordination. Ensure that the representatives in those structures are officials with sufficient rank to reinforce messages with their colleagues. Consider appointing a minister and/or a senior official within each ministry to ensure visibility and political support for those messages.
• Review the arrangements whereby the executive branch and parliament can share the information needed to maintain parliamentary interest in Better Regulation.
• Prepare a policy that ensures the availability of resources and training needed to support implementation of the various tools for Better Regulation, including legal drafting and impact assessments.

• Develop use of the Internet in a (initially) targeted and specific manner for certain consultations so as to take better account of public views, and to gain “in the field” experience, following the examples of other countries such as Portugal and Finland. Establish an electronic portal for these consultations.
• Establish guidelines for consultation. Share experiences among ministries to identify best practices and the most useful processes.

• Strengthen upstream co-operation among ministries. Publish the government programme and any changes to it, in particular drafts of laws (and of important regulations) to give them greater visibility and allow stakeholders the chance to make their opinions known. Examine the potential of electronic systems for more effective data sharing between ministries and with parliament.
• Review the legal control process to have it start as soon as possible in the procedure. Review the structures and capabilities for quality control, by establishing a panel of jurists within government (following the United Kingdom’s example) or a strengthened partnership with CSA or SCL in the early stages of the process of developing regulations, and boost their resources.
• Establish a timeframe for the Council of State to issue its opinions.
• Review and strengthen institutional arrangements for producing high quality impact assessments.
• Review training courses for possible improvements, and ensure that they are part of compulsory training and are taken by the largest possible number of civil servants. Incorporate these into the revision of the general manual.
• Evaluate the impact assessment mechanism regularly, and publish the evaluations. These could be included in the CSA’s published reports on progress with simplification.

• Confirm the importance attached to legislative simplification, as part of the effort to make laws more accessible.
• Strengthen institutional support for legislative simplification. Establish and publish precise quantified objectives for the ministries concerned in the administrative burden reduction programme.
• Confirm the intention to move forward with the programme to reduce red tape for citizens as soon as resources are available and the responsible body has been identified.
• Consider the possibility of a red tape programme for the government itself.

How to obtain this publication

Go to

www.oecd.org/gov/regref/eu15