Ill-thought-out regulation under fire
By Kiran Stacey
Published: August 6 2010 00:03 | Last updated: August 6 2010 00:03
Ministers are passing badly thought out regulation that has not been properly analysed, according to a report by an independent panel of experts.
In a scathing report, the regulatory policy committee, which advises the business department on new regulations, identified problems in 22 out of the 107 cases it reviewed between December 2009 and May 2010. All the cases looked at arose during the previous government,
which created the RPC last October.
The report said: “There are a number of impact assessments that lack significant analytical rigour, are poorly presented or appear to be produced as an afterthought, seemingly as a means of ‘ticking the right boxes’ to obtain the necessary approval for a proposed course of action.”
In an interview with the Financial Times, Michael Gibbons, who chairs the RPC, said: “It may well be that ministers make up their minds without having a sound evidence base, and civil servants are then asked to assess the impact of measures retrospectively.”
Among the problems Mr Gibbons identified were a lack of explanation for regulation, a failure to examine other possible options and an inadequate examination of the costs and benefits of legislating.
One example was
a ban on selling cigarettes from vending machines, which was designed to prevent under-18s from buying cigarettes. The committee said the Department of Health had not analysed whether the ban would actually reduce smoking.
That legislation was passed in spite of the committee’s views, which Mr Gibbons’ said was a “concern”. Business groups warned it cast a question mark over how seriously ministers had taken deregulation.
Steve Pointer, of the EEF, the manufacturers’ association, said: “These findings are quite shocking really in a lot of ways. The most damning thing is that the government went ahead in some cases despite the critical opinions. That is really poor and has got to be seen off.”
Vince Cable, the business secretary, has
given Mr Gibbons’ committee a wider remit and has asked it to scrutinise new legislation before it is formally published. It will advise Mr Cable’s
“star chamber” of ministers, which has the power to block proposed regulations if it considers them too costly or badly designed.
However, some business groups criticised the plans. The Institute of Directors was “sceptical” of the RPC’s membership, which includes a trade unionist and a consumer champion. “We question whether a body which has significant trade union and consumer interests in its make-up will really challenge government figures which consistently understate the cost to business of proposed regulations,” it said.
Mr Gibbons defended the group’s membership, saying the make-up showed true independence from government and from business.
Mr Cable also announced on Thursday the implementation of the new “one-in, one-out” system of monitoring the flow of new red tape from September 1. Mr Gibbons welcomed the prompt implementation of the rule, which he said was a “genuinely innovative attempt to deal with the otherwise stubborn weight of regulation on the statute books”.
Scrutiny chief seen as robust voice of reason
Michael Gibbons has now spent almost a decade at the heart of government working with ministers on how to improve regulation.
After leaving Powergen, the energy company, in 2002, he went to work for the government’s Better Regulation Task Force.
He became interested in how regulations were developed after seeing what he believed was a heavy-handed government approach to setting gas prices after the energy industry was denationalised.
Mr Gibbons served on the various successor bodies to that task force, in 2007 producing a report for Alistair Darling, then trade secretary, on employment dispute regulations.
In late 2009, he was asked by Lord Mandelson, then business secretary, to chair the regulatory policy committee and keep an eye on how well departments were assessing the impact of their own regulations.
He has earned the respect of ministers and admiration of business groups, who say he has been a robust voice of reason within Whitehall.
When Vince Cable, the business secretary, was looking for a body to scrutinise regulations before publication, his reputation and his experience treading carefully around Whitehall sensitivities made him the ideal candidate.
Sign In
Create Account
8
Back to top
