Better Regulation Agenda

1

• Better Regulation Agenda
• Regulatory Innovation Directorate
• Julie Monk, Director Improving Regulatory
  Delivery
• 10th February 2009

2
The Better Regulation Executive

• BRE within BERR
• BRE Established in 2005, BERR in 2007
• BRE Moved to BERR from Cabinet Office in 2007

3
Better Regulation Executive Structure
4
Regulatory Innovation Directorate

• Special projects future policy.
• Flexible hot desking individuals work on one or
  more projects at a time which vary in length from
  a few weeks to a year or more.
• Flat Structure.
• Hampton Review (more efficient and effective
  regulatory inspection enforcement),
• Rogers Review (LA priorities),
• Macrory Review (Regulatory Penalties),
• Local Better Regulation Office,
• Benefits of good regulation,
• Regulatory Budgets,
• Anderson Review (Guidance for small businesses),
• Undertakes research to suggest changes for
  improving regulatory delivery e.g. business
  perception surveys.

5
Improving Regulatory Delivery

• Deal with the culture and practices of regulators
  so that they are in line with Hampton Principles
• Proportionate,
• Accountable,
• Consistent,
• Transparent,
• Targeted.

6
Who delivers enforcement?

• Complex regulatory landscape
• 31 National Regulators,
• 469 Local Authorities Unitaries, Counties
  Districts,
• Over 60 non economic regulators,
• Over 5000 inspectors,

7
Hampton Review

• Reducing administrative burdens effective
  inspection and enforcement - published in March
  2005.
• Found that risk assessment was not implemented as
  thoroughly as it should be.
• Risk assessment should be comprehensive and
  should be the basis for all regulators
  enforcement programmes.
• Only 36 out of 63 national regulators using risk
  assessment.

8
Hampton recommendations

• The burden of enforcement should fall most on
  high-risk businesses.
• Better focussed inspection activity no
  inspection without a reason.
• Much more use of advice.
• But apply tough and more consistent penalties
  where these are deserved.

9
Macrory Review

• Regulatory Justice Making Sanctions Effective
  - published in November 2006.
• Found regulators to be over-reliant on criminal
  prosecution.
• And lacking flexible means of tackling
  non-compliance.
• Giving rise to a compliance deficit.
• Recommended a more risk-based approach to
  enforcement, with new civil sanctions available
  to regulators including administrative penalties
  fixed and variable, restoration, stop notices and
  undertaking.

10
Regulators compliance code

• Statutory code of practice - came into force in
  April 2008
• Regulators must have regard to the code when
• Determining any general policy or principles and
• Exercising a specified regulatory function.
• Regulators should target their efforts by
  assessing risk of outcomes.
• Risk assessment should inform all activities
  data collection, inspection, advice and support
  and enforcement.

11
What we do to embed new principles

• Promote the use of the Compliance Code to improve
  the risk based approach.
• Undertake Hampton Implementation Reviews to
  improve standards.
• Provide access to the Macrory Sanctions to
  relieve the criminal courts.
• Sponsor LBRO Primary Authority Scheme to
  improve consistency.

12
Local Better Regulation Office

• Created in 2007.
• Role is to improve local authority enforcement of
  environmental health, trading standards and
  licensing reducing burdens on businesses.
• Aim is to secure the effective performance of
  local authority regulatory services in accordance
  with the principles of better regulation.
• Ensures that inspection and enforcement are based
  on an assessment of risk.
• Works to ensure that businesses that operate
  across council boundaries receive greater
  consistency in advice, support and inspection
  from local authorities through the Primary
  Authority scheme.

13
Hampton Implementation Reviews

• Reviews of all regulators within the scope of
  Hampton.
• Comprise review team of peers from other
  regulators and NAO.
• Week long review gathering evidence and
  interviewing stakeholders.
• Looking at whether regulators
• Operate a risk-based approach
• Are transparent and accountable and
• Encourage economic progress.
• Regulators cannot access Macrory sanctions
  without being Hampton Compliant.

14
Access to Macrory Powers

• Regulator must demonstrate that they are Hampton
  Compliant and have implemented the
  recommendations of their HIR.
• Progress re-review to check evidence.
• BRE decision.
• Public consultation.
• Passed through parliament common commencement
  dates April 2010 October 2010.

15
Further information

• Hampton Report http//www.hmtreasury.gov.uk/d/bud
  05hamptonv1.pdf
• Macrory Report http//www.berr.gov.uk/files/file4
  4593.pdf
• Hampton Implementation Reviews
  http//www.berr.gov.uk/whatwedo/bre/inspection-enf
  orcement/implementing-principles/reviewing-regulat
  ors/page44054.html
• Compliance Code http//www.berr.gov.uk/files/file
  45019.pdf
• Regulatory Enforcement Sanctions Act
  http//www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2008/pdf/ukpga_200
  80013_en.pdf http//www.berr.gov.uk/files/file4713
  5.pdf

16

• Questions
• Julie Monk
• Director
• Improving Regulatory Delivery