home page ← Buzz@Bruss! Edition #11 ← Can flawed questions produce sound policy?
In the previous article, we argued that any future revision should be guided by evidence, necessity and proportionality. But that raises another question: can policymakers rely on the evidence generated by the consultation itself?
In our consultation response, we highlight several features of the Commission’s questionnaire that risk making it harder to gather neutral, differentiated and decision-relevant evidence.
A consultation should test assumptions, not validate them
Public consultations are intended to help policymakers understand a broad range of evidence, perspectives and policy options. They work best when questions are neutral and allow respondents to challenge assumptions as well as support them.
In our assessment, several questions appear to start from the premise that further intervention is needed and then ask respondents what form that intervention should take. That may sound like a subtle distinction, but it matters. A consultation should help determine whether a problem exists and whether action is justified, not simply explore the design of potential new measures.
When categories blur, evidence can too
One concern we highlighted is the consultation’s definition of “young people” as a single group covering individuals aged 10 to 24.
That approach combines minors and legal-age adults despite their very different legal status and policy considerations. It also makes it more difficult to distinguish evidence relating to youth access and uptake from evidence relating to informed adult consumers. For a process built around evidence-based policymaking, those distinctions matter.
The same issue arises when different product categories are grouped together. Heated tobacco products, e-cigarettes and nicotine pouches are frequently treated as a single category despite significant differences in consumer profiles, market dynamics and regulatory frameworks. The Commission’s own evaluation treats these product categories separately. We believe the consultation should have done the same.
The missing option: what if the current framework works?
Another concern relates to how response options were structured.
Across several key questions, respondents were asked to comment on different forms of potential intervention, while options reflecting alternative approaches, such as maintaining the current framework, improving enforcement or addressing issues at national level, were often absent from the structured response choices
That matters because structured answers are easy to aggregate and quantify. Views expressed in free-text fields are not always captured in the same way. As a result, some positions may become far more visible in the consultation results than others, regardless of how widely they are held.
Better Regulation is more than a slogan
None of this is about opposing regulation. It is about ensuring that regulation is built on the strongest possible evidence base.
The Commission’s Better Regulation framework calls for consultations to be neutral, transparent and evidence-led. It also recognizes that policy development benefits from testing assumptions, exploring alternative options and considering the full range of stakeholder perspectives. That is ultimately what makes legislation more robust, more proportionate and more likely to achieve its objectives.
As the revision process moves into its next phase, the quality of the evidence underlying future proposals will matter as much as the proposals themselves. After all, if policymakers want good answers, they need to start with good questions.
Timing matters too
Questions about methodology are not the only procedural concerns. In September, Tobacco Europe wrote to the Commission seeking clarification on how the exceptionally large volume of consultation responses would be analyzed and reflected in the Impact Assessment within the available timeframe. The letter asked how stakeholder contributions are incorporated into policy development and how the Commission ensures that consultations constitute a substantive input rather than a purely procedural exercise.
To date, no response has been received. Ultimately, the value of a consultation is measured not by the number of responses received, but by how meaningfully those responses are reflected in policymaking.
