The European Commission in its consideration of the amendments adopted by the European Parliament on the Cashman report (Public Access to Documents) wrote:
The following amendments touch upon parts of the Regulation which the Commission did not propose to amend. In the Commission’s view, they are not compliant with the Inter-institutional Agreement on Recasting:
This is a misconception, though a common one. Recasting is not any different from the ordinary legislative procedure. It is just a presentation technique as the inter-institutional agreement shows. The recasting technique does not limit what Parliament may change of the recasted act. The purpose of “recasting” is to avoid a later codification of the text by doing amending act and codification in a single process.
Interinstitional Agreement, 2002/C 77/01, Provision 8 clarifies the process for provisions that were left unchanged by the Commission proposal:
“Where, in the course of the legislative procedure, it appears necessary to introduce substantive amendments in the recasting act to those provisions which remain unchanged in the Commission’s proposal, such amendments shall be made to that act in compliance with the procedure laid down by the Treaty according to the applicable legal basis.
With other words, Parliament could amend as it likes. The recast technique enables as much freedom to amend as the ordinary legislative procedure. The only difference is that a Commission recast proposal is easier to read and there won’t be a need for later codification.