When we speak of red tape, we are generally referring to unnecessary rules and procedures which delay decision taking as well as the implementation of decisions. Some may be disappointed to note that red tape has not been invented by the European Union, although it is known that Brussels does not economise on its use.

In the political guidelines which EU Commission President, Ursula von der Leyen, submitted for the consideration of the EU institutions, during the last summer, she had emphasised that we need a Union that is faster and simpler. Such a statement could be music to some ears.  Different conclusions of the significance of what has been stated, however, are arrived at.

To some a faster and simpler Europe would signify less red tape, that is to say, the elimination of unnecessary rules and procedures. To others this would mean de-regulation, that is eliminating the largest possible number of rules and regulations, on the understanding that these are unnecessary and stifle initiative and competitiveness.

Matters are not however so simple.

An EU Commission proposal entitled "A Simpler and Faster Europe" currently still in draft form, is taking shape, in order to address this issue within the Union. We are told, in the draft proposal, that the Commission's approach will be guided by the need "to take stock of the past, navigate the present, and shape the future."

At the end of the day, however, generally, it is not Brussels which takes the final decisions. These are taken in the individual capital cities of the member states. The real power of the EU, contrary to what some think, is not in the Brussels-based Commission but in the governments of the member states, grouped together in the meetings of the EU Council of Ministers.

It is planned, that during the current Commission's term of office, each Commissioner, in dialogue with stakeholders will, on a regular basis seek to assess progress and identify shortcomings for EU policies to deliver on the ground. This could lead to an improvement of the regulatory process through simplification. The objective of having a leaner rule book is laudable as long as it is not a camouflage for deregulation.

This applies across all areas in the communautaire. Reducing paperwork and addressing multiple (almost identical) reporting procedures would most probably be some of the obvious initiatives required. At times we tend to forget that one of the most important initiatives taken by the EU within the framework of the EU treaties was to emphasise the principle of subsidiarity and its application between the Union and the member states. By ensuring that the EU does not take on board functions and responsibilities which can easily be carried out by the individual member states the EU is already, to an extent, leaner. Obviously, not enough has been done: much more must be addressed to ensure an efficient Union, despite its ever-increasing landmass and population.

We require a constant review of EU rules and regulations in order to ensure that the green and digital transition deliver a better Union for all. The more red tape shed, the better. We must continuously however ensure that shedding red tape is not an excuse to usher in extensive de-regulation.

An architect and civil engineer, the author is a former Chairperson of ADPD-The Green Party in Malta.  [email protected] ,   http://carmelcacopardo.wordpress.com