|
Issue of the day: Red tape
Party spokesmen debate plans to tackle the problems of red tape.
Labour: Trade and industry secretary Patricia Hewitt
I know from talking to hundreds of businesses up and down the country that red tape can be a real problem. So reducing regulatory burdens for business is a top priority for government, and for Labour in a potential third term.
The package of radical reforms recently announced in the Budget builds on our considerable achievements in cutting red tape since the establishment of the Better Regulation Task Force in 1997.
The UK is already well on track; our economic and administrative regulations are among the lowest in the OECD – indeed, we’ve the lowest product market regulation, bar Australia – and the World Bank puts the UK top in the EU and seventh in the top 20 countries in the world for favourable business conditions.
These independent assessments show that we have helped create one of the best business climates ever.
But there is no room for complacency, and I recognise it is still hard for many, particularly small, businesses. We will persist in cutting regulation where it remains over-complicated.
At national and EU level, we are continuing to improve consultation, examine alternatives to regulation, and introduce deregulatory measures.
Much work has already been done to reach these goals, and much achieved. We are determined to make further cuts to the regulatory burden, maintaining the UK’s status as one of the best environments for business.
Conservatives: Shadow industry secretary Stephen O'Brien
Without doubt, the problem of regulation has been getting steadily worse in recent years, particularly for small businesses.
On average, there have been 15 regulations introduced every working day since 1997, costing business an estimated £40bn. The Conservatives have been developing policies to tackle the growing burden of regulation, and address the needs of business.
In government, we must restore the culture of deregulation, replacing the current climate of 'better regulation'.
The place to start this culture change must be the Department of Trade and Industry itself. It needs to be the voice of business in government, yet currently this voice is far too ineffectual to be of practical help to business.
We will focus the DTI on its core functions, which will involve slimming it down by 80 per cent. We will continue to help small businesses by integrating the worthwhile support schemes, such as the Small Firms Loan Guarantee Scheme and Manufacturing Advisory Service, into the new leaner and fitter department for business – providing a strong and authoritative voice within government.
The Conservatives believe that business thrives best in a low-tax, low-regulation economy. We wish to provide them with this framework by introducing deregulation measures, and reducing unnecessary government expenditure.
Liberal Democrats: Trade spokesman Malcolm Bruce
The Liberal Democrats are not against regulation per se. Regulation is necessary in some instances for reasons of consumer, worker or environmental protection. Our target is the unnecessary, excessive and badly targeted regulation.
We have to roll back those regulations that put an unnecessary burden on business, but deregulatory policies are only half the story.
The Liberal Democrats want to institute a better regulatory process and this requires a cultural shift within government that sees prescriptive regulation as a last resort.
The Liberal Democrats will create a Deregulation Unit. This arms-length agency will draw up impact assessments for all regulations.
Red tape can be reduced, and reduced through relatively simple measures.
The importance of releasing business from the shackles of unnecessary administration can’t be overstated. Businesses freed from dealing with regulations can spend more time producing and selling their goods, and the government revenue released from maintaining an inflated bureaucracy can be redirected towards social priorities like health and education.
The above texts are edited versions of articles which first appeared in the Parliamentary Monitor magazine.
|
