ACE's commentary on the consultation on the regulation of professions: Member States' National Action Plans and proportionality in regulation



In 2014, architecture was one of the professions addressed directly in the EU Commission’s ‘Mutual Evaluation’ exercise arising from Article 59 of the PQD (2005/36/EC). The ACE has previously taken strenuous issue with elements of the process.

Member States have been required to respond to the Mutual Evaluation process with the production of National Action Plans (NAPS), intended to address how Member States will improve their regulatory systems.

The Commission has opened a consultation on the NAPS, which includes a suite of questions on how to assess the proportionality of regulation. Proportionality is defined by the Commission as making sure that “requirements are justified by overriding reasons of general interest and are suitable for securing the attainment of the objective pursued without going beyond what is necessary to attain that objective”. In the preamble to the questions, the Commission suggests that the burden [of regulation] on the professional poses a risk of negative consequences not only to the economy but also to consumers. 

Read the ACE's answer


Back to top