Chief Executive’s Blog: Your Chance To Cut Red Tape

One of the most common complaints of business about Government is that it produces too much regulation – most, if not all of which is unnecessary and stifling.  And one of the most commonly repeated commitments of political parties, whether in Government or out, has been their determination to dergulate and cut red tape to free up business. The Coalition Government has probably gone one step further in its commitment to a “one in, one out” principle of regulation.  In effect it has promised to remove a regulation before it introduces a new one. This is a lot tougher than it sounds.  Government doesn’t regulate for the fun of it.  Whatever you might think of the impact and the thought behind it, it acted for a reason and probably went through a lengthy process of justification before bringing it into force. Nevertheless, the new administration is determined to press this agenda forward.  Lord Marland, the junior minister in the Department of Energy and Climate Change, has written to a number of trade associations asking them to suggest if there are existing or planned regulations in his area which should be simplified or repealed.  He specifically asked what burdens imposed by policies and regulations associated with energy and climate change should be amended, reduced or removed and why? DECC has 26 initiatives relating to energy and climate change in the Coalition Programme, which means that they will need to use a wide range of measures to cut carbon emissions, decarbonise the economy and support the creation of green jobs and technologies, while maintaining their commitment to ensuring that the resulting burden on business is as light as possible. The desire to consult business is laudable and sensible.  However, my experience of appeals of this kind in the past is that while there is a strong general sense of the burden of regulation, it is much harder to be specific about something which could be removed, and even more so to find something where the arguments for removal are sufficiently persuasive. Nevertheless, this is too good an opportunity to turn down.  If you have suggestions for regulations which are unnecessary, please send them to me and I’ll forward them on to the relevant Department.