Single market report: review of the balance of competences

The (UK) government is carrying out a review of the balance of competences between the EU and the UK.
The review will provide an analysis of what the EU does and how it affects the UK.

Introduction
The government is carrying out a review of the EU’s competences, which the Foreign Secretary launched in July 2012.
This is an audit of what the EU does and how it affects the UK.
It is important that Britain has a clear sense of how our national interests interact with the EU’s roles, particularly at a time of great change for the EU.

Government departments will consult Parliament and its committees, business, the devolved administrations, and civil society to look in depth at how the EU’s competences (the power to act in particular areas conferred on it by the EU Treaties) work in practice.

Our European partners and the EU institutions will also contribute evidence to the review, and it will examine issues that are of interest across the EU, seeking to improve understanding and engagement.

https://www.gov.uk/review-of-the-balance-of-competences

Mutual recognition v harmonisation

2.53 An important distinction is that between mutual recognition and harmonisation.

2.54 Under mutual recognition, Member States agree to recognise each others’ regulations and goods or services authorised under them.
For example, if a particular good meets the requirements of one Member State, it has in principle to be accepted onto the market in all other Member States.
Mutual recognition can be provided for directly by the Treaty or by the CJEU’s jurisprudence, or it can be set out in legislation.

2.55 Under harmonisation, Member States’ rules are explicitly brought into line through legislation.
Despite the name, it does not necessarily, or even usually, mean making rules exactly the same in all Member States (known as exhaustive harmonisation): examples of exhaustive harmonisation include the Cosmetics Directive (76/768) and much of the legislation covering motor vehicle safety.
Its typical form is the “approximation” provided for in Article 114, which normally means significant though not exhaustive harmonisation.
Another form is minimum harmonisation, rules which all Member States must observe but which do not prevent some having tougher rules, for example, in the environment area.

2.56 Mutual recognition is generally simpler and can more readily relect local conditions and preferences17. It could be said to be more in consonance with the principles of subsidiarity
and proportionality set out in the Treaties. It enables regulatory competition and acts as a brake on over-regulation18: for example, many of the large digital service companies have located in Member States with less onerous national privacy and consumer protection regimes19. It does not require legislation20 and can therefore be more adaptable to changes in technology or business models, and be less vulnerable to lobbying by vested interests.
But it can be difficult to assert a mutual recognition right in court if a Member State does not easily enable it; and it can put onus on the consumer to deal with the consequences of divergent national requirements.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...data/file/224707/2901084_SingleMarket_acc.pdf