SMT Online Web Exclusive

SIA Stakeholder Conference 2009: Better regulation and the SIA

03 Jun 09

Graeme McCabe of the Home Office spoke at length during the recent SIA Stakeholder Conference. Brian Sims reports on what McCabe had to say about the Government’s beliefs in relation to Better Regulation.

By Brian Sims

What is the Better Regulation agenda intended to achieve? More importantly, perhaps, what’s the Government – of whatever political persuasion – planning to do in this area in the years ahead?

Delegates assembled at Manchester Central for the recent Security Industry Authority (SIA) Stakeholder Conference – entitled ‘The SIA Journey: have we gone far enough?’ – convened pretty eagerly around 2.00 pm on 21 May to hear whether or not Graeme McCabe – a member of the Home Office’s Better Regulation Team – would answer burning questions like these (and a few more besides).

“Just now, there are people calling for regulation in all sorts of areas,” began McCabe in strident mode. “Ministers need to be seen to be in control of that regulation. Managing competing demands means that we require impact assessments and, of course, there’s always the consideration of a requirement to minimise costs.”

Limiting the costs associated with legislation

Last year, there was a Government-wide consultation on the need for limiting costs attributable to legislation, so too an overdue recognition of the fact that SMEs are in a slightly different position to their larger cousins in the blue chip brigade.

We’ve been force-fed the notion that Better Regulation on the part of this Government means that it only takes place where it’s absolutely necessary. Regulation, states Labour, has to be carried out with the lightest of touches, and reduce the existing burdens “wherever possible”.

In what was pretty much a justification – not to say vindication – of the Government’s views, McCabe showed us all a list of the key fundamentals within Better Regulation. “The Government’s keen on reducing the administrative burden associated with regulation,” he said, “and there’s a desire to cut back on red tape by 25%”. Amen to that, it must be said.

Maybe that cutting back’s why the MPs’ expenses were shoved away in a drawer somewhere until The Daily Telegraph happened to find them?... but I digress.

McCabe told us of the Guide on Guidance (Anderson Review) for business, and also outlined the basics of the Hampton Review (with which I’m sure most of you are familiar by now).

Suffice to say that this Review is heavy on risk assessments, suggests that no inspection should be carried out without a reason for doing so and opines that the encouragement and/or allowance of economic progression will be key to the whole process.

Focus on performance assessment issues

McCabe then began to focus on performance assessment issues. The Better Regulation Executive that sits within the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (BERR) monitors what’s happening with regulation. McCabe explained: “The Department has a responsible minister, a Board-level champion and a Better Regulation Unit. The National Audit Office also reviews its progress on a regular basis. We have to show that we’re delivering in the real world.”

Surely that’s only right and proper?

Guiding principles are at the heart of Better Regulation. As McCabe told it, the five main principles are proportionality, accountability, consistency, transparency and targeting.

“Regulation must always be proportional to the risk it’s designed to tackle,” explained McCabe. “That’s why it’s so important to carry out cost-benefit analyses. It’s also right that the Regulator – in this instance the SIA – must be accountable to ministers and Parliament. Regulation has to be consistently applied in accordance with the law, and demonstrate clear objectives and obligations laid down to fulfil the transparency requirement.”

Targeted regulation is regulation that’s focused on the problem, without going any further or having any unintended consequences.

Striking a balance with regulation

According to McCabe, this Government’s main aim is to “strike a balance with regulation”, minimising costs and maximising outcomes. “I think it’s fair to say that most businesses prefer Governments not to regulate,” opined McCabe, who feels they prefer voluntary agreements or to let the market decide. “Some regulation is necessary, though,” urged the civil servant. “Public protection is always on top of the agenda”.

In real terms, the regulatory process is relatively simple. First, officials agree with ministers what is to be done. New policy proposals, consultation and legislation are part of the mix. Agreements are then reached with officials from other Government departments that could be affected.

Collective agreements are drawn together at Cabinet Committee level, then there’s a public consultation and an impact assessment. You all know the drill, I’m sure, having seen what’s happened with the SIA.

On that note, the security sector’s Regulator is recognised by the Home Office and the Better Regulation Executive as having “fully bought-in to the Better Regulation agenda”. McCabe stressed: “The SIA engages well with its Stakeholders. Its web site is accessible, its information dissemination comprehensive. The SIA’s impact assessments are robust and of good quality.” That’s pretty fulsome praise by anyone’s standards.

The Hampton Review of the SIA (produced jointly with the Home Office) is described by McCabe as showing “very positive” early signs, while last year’s National Audit Office report rendered a similar outcome upon publication.

The SIA, of course, operates on what McCabe termed a “cost recovery basis”. That being the case, it’s vital to identify the costs involved. “In short, it’s important to balance the publics’ protection with the costs to those affected”. Bear in mind, too, that the SIA features in the Home Office’s Simplification Plan.

What does the future hold?

McCabe won the Business Bingo Prize for being the first person on the day to preface a sentence with: “In the current economic climate…” (but I suspect in this case it was necessary as the following words rendered were: “…we need to deliver help for businesses now”).

Apparently, there’s a new economic Cabinet Committee in place to examine any new regulation on business. From this summer onwards, it’ll be publishing details of any forward regulatory programmes. A new Regulatory Policy Committee is also being established to oversee the Hampton Review work.

McCabe brought his discourse to an end with some interesting observations about what might happen if the Conservatives defeat Labour in the General Election. As far as he’s concerned, he has trawled the Tory web site, read ministers’ views and not found too many different opinions on regulation to what is in place at present.

“All regulatory bodies would be thoroughly examined within the first 12 months of a new Conservative Government, though. I think we can say that for certain.”

That’s most certainly food for thought for the SIA, then.