Reasons for lack of progress
17. We discussed with the Minister some possible
reasons for lack of progress on the regulatory reform programme.
There does not seem to us to be a drying up of ideas for potential
regulatory reform orders. In February 2002, the Government outlined
63 proposals for regulatory reform orders in its Regulatory Reform
Action Plan (RRAP). Of the 62 proposals remaining,[17]
only 13 have been completed; of the remaining 49, 39 are currently
at some stage of the regulatory reform procedure,[18]
meaning that ten are, presumably, under initial development. The
RRAP is due to be updated and re-issued in November 2003, and
will presumably contain further new proposals for regulatory reform
orders.
18. We consider that the Minister went part of the
way towards explaining the Government's lack of progress when
he observed that the operation of the Act:
places a greater and more burdensome responsibility
on the department in question to get the policy-making right at
the outset. Essentially we need to front-load the process of policy-making.
That is a challenge for many departments more familiar with a
means [that is, Bills] of being able to correct errors or deal
with issues that had not been anticipated later on in the process
much of the work has to be taken forward in Government,
notwithstanding the appropriate checks and scrutiny that this
and the other Committee [the Lords Committee on Delegated Powers
and Regulatory Reform] are able to provide.[19]
19. We agree that the requirements of the Regulatory
Reform Act are such that departments would be well advised to
allocate a significant amount of resource at the early stages
of developing a regulatory reform proposal. The Act requires departments
to issue a consultation document before proceeding to lay a proposal
for a regulatory reform order before Parliament. In order to ensure
that the consultation undertaken on a proposal is adequate, in
terms of Standing Order No. 141(6), departments need to have a
very clear idea of the changes they propose to make to the existing
law. The proposed regulatory reform order therefore needs to be
in an advanced state of development before consultation is embarked
upon. This contrasts with the established process for generating
traditional legislative proposals, where comments on policy can
be invited when the policy is at a less advanced stage of development.
20. We accept also the Minister's observation that
departments are still "on a learning curve" in using
regulatory reform orders and that, consequently, principles and
precedents are still in the process of being developed.[20]
We welcome the Minister's strong commitment to encouraging
departments in the ongoing development of common principles to
be applied to proposals for regulatory reform orders.
21. It seems clear to us that much of the potential
of the regulatory reform procedure is yet to be exploited.
We are concerned by the comment in the Cabinet Office memorandum
that regulatory reform orders "are usually not high profile
reforms and work [on them] is sometimes done by less experienced
officials."[21]
If the Government is to achieve its target of delivering a further
46 regulatory reform orders by the end of 2005, departments must
focus their efforts on recognising and meeting the particular
requirements of the regulatory reform procedure. The RIU has a
key role in play in assisting departments in this respect. In
this context, we are pleased to hear that the Government's general
guidance on the regulatory reform procedure has been updated and
is shortly to be released.[22]
22. Equally, departments must be prepared to recognise
that regulatory reform orders propose reform to primary legislation
and that, consequently, they require the attention of suitably
experienced officials. As the Minister himself acknowledged,
it is important:
to make sure that in terms of legal and
technical expertise within departments, within the Treasury Solicitor's
Office and within the Parliamentary Counsel Office, where you
have policy officials and ministers identifying that this is an
area which is amenable to an regulatory reform order there do
not turn out to be legal blockages just because [officials] are
not familiar with the processes and procedures that need to be
followed."[23]
The Government's future programme
23. At the time at which we heard from the Minister,
the Government anticipated laying 12 new proposals for regulatory
reform orders by the end of 2003.[24]
It expected at least ten of these to be in force by April 2004.
Two of the proposals (Fire Safety and Patents) are described in
the memorandum as "quite complex" and "long".
24. At the time of this report to the House, only
two of these 12 proposals had been laid.[25]
Consultation on two of the proposals had not yet started.[26]
Given that only eight sitting weeks remain in 2003, and that at
least three of the proposals are too complex to be laid in the
same week as any other proposal, we conclude that the Government's
future programme for laying proposals for regulatory reform orders
is already slipping. We draw this matter to the attention of the
House.
9 The proposal for the Regulatory Reform (British Waterways
Board) Order 2003 was laid on 13 January; the proposal for the
Regulatory Reform (Gaming Machines) Order 2003 on 13 March, and
the proposal for the Regulatory Reform (Sunday Trading) Order
2004 on 14 October. Back
10
The draft Regulatory Reform (British Waterways Board) Order 2003
was laid on 20 April; both the draft Regulatory Reform (Business
Tenancies) (England and Wales) Order 2003 and the draft Regulatory
Reform (Gaming Machines) Order 2003 were laid on 17 September. Back
11
These items are listed in Annex 1. Back
12
The House sat for 35 of those 52 weeks, not counting the recall
of 24 September 2002. Regulatory reform items-that is, proposals
and draft orders-were laid in 12 of those 35 weeks; in five of
those weeks, two items were laid. Back
13
Second Special Report of Session 2001-02, The Operation of
the Regulatory Reform Act: Government Response to the Committee's
First Special Report of Session 2001-02, HC(2001-02)1029,
para 2.12 Back
14
Appendix 1, para 4.3, although it is unclear whether this target
refers to the end of the 2004-05 financial year or the end of
the 2005 calendar year. For the purposes of this report, we have
assumed that it refers to the latter. Back
15
Appendix 1, Annexes A and E Back
16
Q1 Back
17
The RRAP listed 63 proposals for regulatory reform orders; since
then, 16 new proposals have been added, one has been dropped and
16 have been taken forward by other means. Back
18
These 39 proposals are listed at Appendix 1, Annexes A and B. Back
19
Q 4 Back
20
Q 5 Back
21
Appendix 1, para 3.11 Back
22
Appendix 1, para 2.3 Back
23
Q 14 Back
24
Details of these proposals are set out at Appendix 1, Annex E. Back
25
Proposal for the Regulatory Reform (Sunday Trading) Order 2004
and the proposal for the Regulatory Reform (NHS Charities Accounting)
Order 2003 Back
26
Proposals relating to Weights and Measures and Maritime Employment
Disputes. Under Cabinet Office guidelines, the standard period
for consultation is 12 weeks. Back