10/09/2025
This autumn, Brussels will debate yet another series of “Omnibus” Packages, one of a growing series meant to – as the European Union likes to say – cut “red tape.” Who could be against making laws easier to follow or reducing paperwork for businesses? But let’s be clear: what Brussels now calls “simplification” is not administrative streamlining, it is deregulation in disguise. The new “Omnibus wave”, ranging from sustainable finance to agriculture and chemicals, and branded as simplification, is expected to water down or delay core protections. At the same time, the European Ombudsman has opened an inquiry into whether the Commission is breaking its own Better Regulation rules by skipping consultations, impact assessments, and climate checks.
From the Green Deal to Competitiveness
Just five years ago, the EU was leading with the Green Deal, a historic pledge to make Europe climate neutral by 2050. That vision matched citizens’ demand for strong protections for health, the environment, and social rights. Today, the Commission’s new mantra is “competitiveness,” fuelled by the Draghi Report’s claim that EU rules hold back growth. But this narrative rests on shaky ground. There is no solid evidence that Europe’s slower growth compared to the US stems from environmental or social regulation. What evidence we do have shows the opposite: fully applying existing EU environmental laws could save the economy €180 billion each year through lower health costs and avoided environmental damage.
The Omnibus Trap
Instead of enforcing those laws, the Commission has rolled out a series of fast-tracked “Omnibus” packages. These are supposed to cut duplication and ease compliance. In reality, they delay timelines, reduce scope, and weaken enforcement. Examples abound: exemptions for farmers under the Common Agricultural Policy, a one-year delay to the EU Deforestation Regulation, and narrower corporate reporting rules that create blind spots in supply chains. The sheer number of Omnibuses being rushed through – six already since 2024, with more this autumn – risks overwhelming scrutiny and letting major rollbacks slip by unnoticed. Each of these steps undermines Europe’s ability to meet its climate and social goals. And none of them makes life more predictable for businesses. On the contrary, constant U-turns and rushed changes create uncertainty, penalising companies that invested early in sustainability and rewarding laggards.
Worse still, the process has been opaque. Impact assessments, climate checks, and public consultations have often been skipped altogether. Some proposals were circulated internally for just 24 hours before being sent to Council and Parliament. The European Ombudsman has already warned that such shortcuts risk breaching the EU’s own Climate Law and eroding trust in EU decision-making. Democratic procedures are not red tape; they are the safeguards that ensure Europe’s laws are evidence-based, transparent, and accountable. By sidelining them, the Commission is undermining its own legitimacy.
The False Trade-Off
The biggest myth is that competitiveness and sustainability are at odds. In reality, Europe’s long-term competitiveness depends on ambitious, predictable sustainability rules. Over 100 investors and 40 major companies have warned that weakening EU sustainability laws will hurt growth, not boost it. Meanwhile, global rivals such as China and Japan are tightening green standards and scaling up investment in clean industries. Europe risks being left behind.
Simplification can play a role. Aligning reporting deadlines, cutting duplicative steps, or digitalising procedures are all sensible. But simplification must never mean dismantling core protections for people and the planet.
That is why leading climate NGOs – BirdLife, EEB, CAN Europe, Transport & Environment, and WWF – held a press briefing last week to set the record straight. For journalists, this is the moment to cut through the spin: is simplification really about reducing red tape, or is it deregulation by stealth?
What Europe needs is not deregulation but enforcement: making sure Member States comply with existing laws and providing support where capacity is lacking. Only then can Europe deliver on its promises and maintain both public trust and global competitiveness. The EU must decide: chase a false promise of “competitiveness through deregulation”, or embrace the reality that strong, stable rules are the real foundation of prosperity.