Source: European Parliament
Question for oral answer O-000025/2025
to the Commission
Rule 142
Christine Anderson
on behalf of the ESN Group
Over the past decade, the Commission has increasingly used public consultations to bolster claims of transparency and democratic legitimacy. Now central to the Better Regulation agenda, they accompany nearly all major legislative initiatives[1]. While public participation is fundamental to representative democracy, independent audits and academic research highlight serious flaws in how these consultations are designed and interpreted[2].
Consultations routinely suffer from self-selection bias, as responses mainly come from actors with a pre-existing interest or resources, skewing outcomes away from the broader EU population[3]. The Commission rarely employs scientifically robust techniques such as randomised sampling, post-stratification weighting or neutral question framing, all of which are standard in public opinion research.
The format itself restricts participation. Dense documents, technical language and online-only access exclude many citizens with a lower level of education, limited digital access or little familiarity with EU processes[4]. There is growing concern that consultation outcomes have limited policy impact, with decisions often shaped earlier by lobbying or internal agendas[5].
- 1.Given these concerns, how does the Commission justify treating its consultation methods as credible democratic engagement, despite their lack of core safeguards from social science?
- 2.What reforms will the Commission introduce to reduce participation bias, reach beyond organised stakeholders and improve accessibility for under-represented and digitally excluded groups?
- 3.Will the Commission adopt rigorous techniques such as randomised and stratified sampling, statistical weighting and neutral framing to ensure that outcomes reflect the views of the broader EU public?
- 4.Finally, what steps will be taken to ensure that consultation results are systematically analysed, publicly reported and meaningfully reflected in legislation?
Submitted: 17.7.2025
Lapses: 18.10.2025
- [1] Rangone, N., ‘Improving consultation to ensure the EU’s democratic legitimacy: From traditional procedural requirements to behavioural insights’, European Law Journal, Volume 28, Issue 4-6, July-November 2022, pp. 154-171, https://doi.org/10.1111/eulj.12439.
- [2] European Court of Auditors Special Report 14/2019 of 5 September 2019 entitled ‘“Have your say!”: Commission’s public consultations engage citizens, but fall short of outreach activities’.
- [3] Røed, M. & Hansen, V., ‘Explaining Participation Bias in the European Commission’s Online Consultations: The Struggle for Policy Gain without too Much Pain’, Journal of Common Market Studies, Volume 56, Issue 6, September 2018, pp. 1446-1461, https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.12754.
- [4] Centre of Expertise for Good Governance of the Council of Europe, ‘Comparative analysis of European practices on public consultations’, Council of Europe, Strasbourg, 5 July 2021, https://rm.coe.int/council-of-europe-comparative-analysis-of-european-practices-on-public/1680aef56f.
- [5] Thompson, L., ‘Is the EU’s consultation process broken?’, The Parliament, 5 September 2023, https://www.theparliamentmagazine.eu/news/article/eu-consultation-process-citizen-participation.