Lookee what I got.

Thank you for your email of 23 March 2006, to Jim Murphy, Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office, regarding the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill. I have been asked to reply on his behalf.

The Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill aims to make a real impact on reducing burdensome regulation. This Bill is the third attempt by governments since 1994 to have an Act that can improve the way we regulate the public sector, businesses, charities and the voluntary sector. Although the World Bank in September 2005 ranked the UK second in the EU (behind Denmark) and ninth in the world for the best business conditions, we must get this Bill right if we are to further strengthen the UK’s position.

Debate about the Bill during its passage through Parliament so far has served to confirm the general consensus that the 2001 Act is not up to the job of delivering the reductions in red tape that businesses, public servants and voluntary workers tell us they need. That’s because the 2001 Act is too narrowly defined and too complicated to use. The Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill aims to deal with these shortcomings.

However in its current form, the order-making power in the Bill has caused some concern. Wilder claims have ranged from government being able to use the power to abolish trial by jury to repealing the Magna Carta. These and other far-fetched statements about amending by order our constitutional arrangements could never happen as a result of the safeguards already in the Bill. Similar wild accusations were made about the 2001 Act and have proved to be groundless.

However, the Government want to make it clear beyond doubt that the Bill could not be used to make such constitutional changes. The Government have listened to more measured concerns, as Jim Murphy, Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office, said it would do at Second Reading and in Committee, about using the power for changes to legislation that would deliver no better regulation benefit. Government amendments have been tabled that will ensure that this Bill can deliver the Government’s better regulation agenda and nothing else. These amendments clearly focus the power in Part 1 of the Bill on better regulation objectives.

The changes to the order making power in Part 1 focus the power so that Ministers can only use orders for the purpose of furthering the better regulation agenda. This will be achieved through a power to remove or reduce burdens, and a power to bring regulatory activity in line with the Better Regulation Commission’s five principles of good regulation: that regulation should be proportionate, accountable, consistent, transparent and targeted.

The definition of burdens proposed differs from that in the Regulatory Reform Act 2001. The 2001 Act described how legislation could be reformed – by removing legislative restrictions. The power in the proposed amendments focuses on why legislation should be reformed – for the purpose of removing administrative burdens or barriers to productivity etc. This will remove the need for onerous legal analysis when preparing orders which has proved such a constraint on the effective use of the 2001 Act.

Concentrating the order-making power in this way will allow us to make real changes to the way we regulate. This includes the simplification measures that every department is currently putting together as well as our comprehensive programme to reduce overall administrative burdens for businesses, voluntary organisations and our public services.

Other better regulation initiatives which this order-making power will allow us to deliver include:

· the consolidation of legislation to make it easier to understand and work with;

· ensuring that inspection is risk-based to reduce the burden on those who comply with regulation and concentrate inspection on those who do not;

· simplifying and making more transparent the ways in which people and businesses need to apply for consent from authorities; and

· the exemption in certain key instances of Small and Medium Enterprises, charities and others from burdensome regulation to allow them to concentrate their effort where it is most needed.

This Bill is all about driving forward the Government’s ambitious programme of better regulation and addressing the recognised weaknesses of the 2001 Regulatory Reform Act. Safeguards already in the Bill ensure that the order-making cannot be used to remove necessary protections, rights or freedoms. The amendments to focus the power on better regulation reinforce these safeguards and ensure that the order making power can only be used to achieve our better regulation objectives.

The safeguards in the Bill will be policed by the Regulatory Reform Committee and its equivalent in the House of Lords, but the Government is strengthening the role of Parliament further with other amendments. There will be a statutory veto to be exercised by the relevant Committee in either House. This means that the Committees will have a statutory power to block an order.

A further related change is that the period which Parliament has to determine which scrutiny procedure should apply to any order is extended from 21 to 30 days. These two amendments follow commitments made to this effect at Committee stage by Jim Murphy, Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office.

The combination of an order-making power concentrated on better regulation objectives, the Bill’s existing safeguards as well as the statutory Parliamentary veto on the face of the Bill, will allow us all to focus on the substantial challenge that we face: how Government and Parliament can best tackle the burden of regulation placed on our businesses, public services and voluntary organisations.

Finally, the Government is proposing that orders implementing Law Commission recommendations will now be subject to the same restrictions on imposing criminal penalties and authorising forcible entry, search, seizure or compelling the giving of evidence as are applied to other orders.

This is the third attempt at legislation intended to lighten the regulatory load. The Government believe that it is vital to the continued competitiveness of the United Kingdom and the effectiveness of public services and voluntary sector that it delivers on the better regulation agenda – of which this Bill is an important part.

Yours,

Sydney G. C. Nash

Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill Team

***

A number of thoughts spring instantly to mind, but only one that I’m going to share now before I go make my tea:

This is the third attempt at legislation intended to lighten the regulatory load.

Wouldn’t it just be more cost effective to work it out properly and do it right first time???