Rethink required on regulation of risk

A culture change in the way the UK regulates and manages risks is needed. That was the conclusion of a recent ‘Think Tank’, consisting of senior Government officials and business representatives. The ‘Think Tank’ was organised by the United Kingdom Accreditation Service (UKAS) to discuss the direction of the UK’s regulatory system, following on from the publication of the Better Regulation Commission (BRC) report ‘Risk, Responsibility and Regulation’.

Four keynote speakers presented their views on the report before the proposition that the state has assumed more responsibility for peoples’ lives than is healthy or desirable, was discussed. Rick Haythornthwaite, BRC Chair, highlighted the dichotomy faced by Government: a public demand for the reduction of risk but also for a reduction in regulation. George Yarrow, Director of the Regulatory Policy Institute, welcomed the BRC report as one of the few documents that recognised regulatory failings and the consequences of them.

Judith Hackitt CBE, Chair of the Health and Safety Commission, outlined HSE’s efforts to reduce burdens on business without reducing levels of safety. Lord Whitty, Chair of the National Consumer Council, suggested that the BRC report may have exaggerated the demands for regulation from consumers and thought that overall there was little evidence of systemic failure in the regulatory structure.

Summing up the debate, Lord Lindsay, Chairman of UKAS and Deputy Chair of the BRC, said. “Despite the varied opinions amongst members of the panel and the audience, there was clear recognition that early and effective dialogue between all interested parties is crucial if the intentions behind the regulation are to be realised.” Lord Lindsay also drew attention to the discussion on alternatives to regulation and particularly the valuable role standards, certification and accreditation can play. “It seems that there is a need for a change in business, as well as Government, culture if an effective balance is to be struck between state intervention and self-regulation, he said. “The fact that so many high-level civil servants and key business representatives took part in this debate demonstrates that these important issues are being considered at all levels of government and industry.”



	Rethink required on regulation of risk A culture change in the way the UK regulates and manages risks is needed. That was the conclusion of a recent ‘Think Tank’, consisting of senior Government officials and business representatives. The ‘Think Tank’ was organised by the United Kingdom Accreditation Service (UKAS) to discuss the direction of the UK’s regulatory system, following on from the publication of the Better Regulation Commission (BRC) report ‘Risk, Responsibility and Regulation’. Four keynote speakers presented their views on the report before the proposition that the state has assumed more responsibility for peoples’ lives than is healthy or desirable, was discussed. Rick Haythornthwaite, BRC Chair, highlighted the dichotomy faced by Government: a public demand for the reduction of risk but also for a reduction in regulation. George Yarrow, Director of the Regulatory Policy Institute, welcomed the BRC report as one of the few documents that recognised regulatory failings and the consequences of them. Judith Hackitt CBE, Chair of the Health and Safety Commission, outlined HSE’s efforts to reduce burdens on business without reducing levels of safety. Lord Whitty, Chair of the National Consumer Council, suggested that the BRC report may have exaggerated the demands for regulation from consumers and thought that overall there was little evidence of systemic failure in the regulatory structure. Summing up the debate, Lord Lindsay, Chairman of UKAS and Deputy Chair of the BRC, said. “Despite the varied opinions amongst members of the panel and the audience, there was clear recognition that early and effective dialogue between all interested parties is crucial if the intentions behind the regulation are to be realised.” Lord Lindsay also drew attention to the discussion on alternatives to regulation and particularly the valuable role standards, certification and accreditation can play. “It seems that there is a need for a change in business, as well as Government, culture if an effective balance is to be struck between state intervention and self-regulation, he said. “The fact that so many high-level civil servants and key business representatives took part in this debate demonstrates that these important issues are being considered at all levels of government and industry.”