1. Better Regulation Agenda Regulatory Innovation Directorate Julie Monk, Director Improving Regulatory Delivery 10 th 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. Regulator’s 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/bud05hamptonv1.pdf http://www.hmtreasury.gov.uk/d/bud05hamptonv1.pdf Macrory Report: http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file44593.pdf http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file44593.pdf Hampton Implementation Reviews: http://www.berr.gov.uk/whatwedo/bre/inspection-enforcement/implementing- principles/reviewing-regulators/page44054.html http://www.berr.gov.uk/whatwedo/bre/inspection-enforcement/implementing- principles/reviewing-regulators/page44054.html Compliance Code: http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file45019.pdf http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file45019.pdf Regulatory Enforcement & Sanctions Act: http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2008/pdf/ukpga_20080013_en.pdf http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file47135.pdf http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2008/pdf/ukpga_20080013_en.pdf http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file47135.pdf

16. Questions Julie Monk Director Improving Regulatory Delivery