8/8 ... Fingleton himself was cautious: better to achieve concrete progress in one field than to boil the ocean. Many reviews like this aren't acted on in the end, and he was concerned to keep his review team involved in implementing change. So time will tell.
7/8 Much more too - and the PM has welcomed the review as a model for other fields: www.gov.uk/government/s.... However...
6/8 Fourth, project-based regulation doesn’t always achieve best value in terms of outcomes. For example, if an environmental safeguard would cost £x to achieve within a construction project, could more be achieved for the environment by using £x to do something else entirely?
5/8 Third, Fingleton reflected that delegation of regulatory decisions can be problematic because more junior people might make expensive decisions that seniors aren’t aware of until it’s too late. So managing delegation well is key to making the right decisions swiftly.
4/8 Second, many stakeholders are rightly heard in regulatory deliberations but those marginal to a decision may be heard too much. A clear political steer can help in closing down debate – but this is hard to maintain.
3/8 First, those regulated can often be incentivised to displace risk onto others rather than reducing it (he gave the example of closing parks in high winds so that people walk around the perimeter where the risk of being hit by a tree is in fact higher).
2/8 Fingleton spoke at Policy Exchange last week www.youtube.com/watch?v=vWsp... about his review (www.gov.uk/government/p...). The whole discussion is worth your time, but four points points about regulation stood out to me...
1/8 It's good to see the Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) receiving the attention it deserves. This explainer from @howesdaniel.bsky.social @instituteforgovernment.org.uk explains its role ⬇️. But John Fingleton's recent review of ONR raised regulatory issues that go beyond the sector. A thread...
3/3 The government still says it will “look to” strengthen the legislation underpinning the existing regulator – the Financial Reporting Council (FRC) – and it should do so without delay. But this is a poor second best, as I argue in the piece.
2/3 On the contrary, following corporate scandals including Carillion, Patisserie Valerie and others, the ARGA proposal commanded broad consensus as a means of reinforcing the credibility of UK corporate reporting and thereby supporting growth.
1/3 The government’s reasons for scrapping plans for an Audit and Reporting Governance Authority (ARGA) appear specious. This is a bad example of how to achieve growth by cutting red tape, as I argue in my latest comment for @instituteforgovernment.org.uk...
8/8 The practicalities need working out in more detail. This isn’t something regulators can achieve without investment and central co-ordination from government. It would be a major expansion of RIO’s remit to take on all of it, but that may be emerging as one of the most realistic options.
7/8 But Willetts is surely pushing in the right direction. I offer some more ideas to improve regulatory co-operation here - including streamlining legislation, data and platform sharing, and a more consistent approach to redress: www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publication/regulatory-action-plan.
6/8 One could quibble with Willetts. Faster approvals through regulators working in parallel would cost. And emphasising the frustrations of regulation for entrepreneurs can talk past those who value its protections (albeit Willetts is not crude about this).
5/8 Cooperation between regulators is a highly technical, politically sensitive and collaborative task. It’s good that this is being recognised – but getting the right people working on it in a sustained way will require ongoing political energy and support.
4/8 But how to deepen and strengthen that co-operation? Willett’s solution of ministerial involvement in providing cover is part of the answer, but only part – ministers can set direction but this kind of cross-jurisdictional analysis can involve a fiendish level of detail in practice.
3/8 Appropriately weighing these benefits is important, but regulatory co-operation across fields is really hard, particularly when different types of expertise are needed. Willetts cites the DRCF as an example of where this happens – another example would be the UKRN’s work in economic regulation.
2/8 A striking point Willetts makes is that the benefits of new technology might fall outside the purview of the regulator responsible for looking at its risks (Willetts gives the example of drones – regulated by the CAA – being used to survey buildings at height – increasing worker safety).
1/8 Well worth reading this piece from David Willetts out today: www.kcl.ac.uk/news/lord-wi.... It raises many important questions as well as showcasing RIO’s work. A thread:
"Every time I pull a lever" says the Prime Minister.
This dead metaphor is killing his ability to get things done.
There aren't any levers. There's only leadership.
howtorunacountry.substack.com/p/there-aren...
There's often pressure to set up a public inquiry, but they're expensive and rarely a panacea. Lots of insight in this report on how we can use them better!
The updated Governance Code for Public Appointments is a major step forward - good to see many previous IfG recommendations taken on board. There is more to do, however, as shown by recent antics at DCMS.
My and @drmatthewgill.bsky.social 's thoughts below👇
A case study well worth noting, with a recurrent theme that policy targeting is crude - due to: political incentives; easy levers not aligning with need; markets requiring careful stewardship; central decision-making being in tension with local sensitivity. Reads across to many other policy fields!
NEW REPORT: abolishing NHS England could help simplify accountability, improve prioritisation and create savings. But the change could also lead to increases in policy incoherence and blame culture, as well as the loss of skills, capacity and focus on areas outside the day-to-day NHS.
The highlights of my latest thinking on regulation and growth are now here for you in @civilserviceworld.bsky.social: www.civilserviceworld.com/news/article... (and if that whets your appetite, more detail here: www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publication/... for @instituteforgovernment.org.uk).
Hot on the heels of yesterday's Covid inquiry report on decision making, @shaina-sangha.bsky.social and I have a new report out today looking at how combined epidemiological-economic modelling could help government better prepare for future pandemics www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publication/...
5/5 Nonetheless, there remains a lack of ambition in some key cross-cutting areas like legislation, data-sharing and redress, and a risk that progress on regulatory reform generally may become too dependent on ministers' growth agenda.
4/5 There are also a range of accompanying data, consultations and commitments.
3/5 ...including a practical baseline measure of the burden to be reduced and measures to promote innovation and growth that avoid slashing protections or imposing “two- or three-in one out” style targets.
2/5 There is much to welcome in the government's update to its Regulatory Action Plan, published last month...