What would you do if you learned if the adoption and passage of EU laws and regulations followed a familiar path most of the time? Would it make things easier if you knew what to do, at the right time, with the right people, and bring the right information from the very beginning? You could predict what you needed to do. and whether your chances of success were good or poor from the start.
I’ve chunked down the passage and adoption of 30 pieces of EU legislation – ordinary and secondary – in the environment and chemical policy. I wanted to verify whether the steps align with a model and template I’ve previously mapped.
The steps in the journey were common. The issue and the politics varied. The time it took to prepare and pass an ordinary law, a delegated act, an implementing act, or an RPS measure varied, but again, not by much for each type of law. There are outliers.
What needed to be done to bring about positive change, such as a persuasive position paper, bilateral meetings, data, and studies, was common for each of the steps.
Examining the public domain evidence, it appears that I’ve discovered the map of the Lost Treasures of Solomon. Many position papers are submitted late, often without evidence or proposed solutions. Many interests only wake up after the Commission publishes a proposal, seemingly blissfully unaware that the Commission have an enviable record of getting their proposals through intact.