back to article Biz bosses 'to save £400m' as axes green red-tape

More than 100 energy and climate change regulations are to be scrapped or improved in a bid to cut "red tape" for businesses, the government has announced. Energy Minister Charles Hendry said that, following a review, 86 regulations would be dropped completely while a further 48 regimes would be "improved". The full package of …


This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. chrisf1

    CRC - still?


    'the CRC, a mandatory scheme aimed at improving energy efficiency and cutting emissions in large public and private sector organisations not caught by the EU ETS.'

    As ETS affects electricity generation and the CRC affects energy users that's an interesting distinction. Overlap is 100% as all downstream users are affected by the additional upstream costs of ETS. You also pay the CCL as well. So that's three regulations all supposed to be doing the same thing and 'non-intensive' users get caught by all three. Pick one - fix it.

    Bizarre that such a known poor piece of legislation is still only up for 'improvement' - this is the one that penalizes growing companies like those that sell energy efficient services! It was under review even before it was implemented.

    Oh of course it's said best with poetry:

    'David Porter, chief executive of industry body Energy UK, welcomed the changes to "a number of overly complex regulations", but stressed that the review should form part of an ongoing process.'

    Just maybe a decent better regulation team with teeth would be able to ensure they didn't get passed in the first place? How about automatic sunset clauses for regulations that turn out to have exceeded the regulatory impact in the regulatory impact assessment or not met their objectives?

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Thumb Down

    Not enough

    The usual crummy, out of touch and piecemeal approach to "reducing red tape". And destined to be as ineffective as all the previous commitments to reduce red tape.

    The impact on business is from the pelthora of huge, complex, user-unfriendly legislation, all requiring legal advice simply to understand, more so than a few minor duplications that only affect (for example) big corporates involved in gas transmission. And they need to address nonsense "not quite legal red tape", that for example HMRC demand, like provision of VAT receipts even when claiming mileage at HMRC's approved rates. That then means a bureaucracy for mandating, gathering, storing, and retrieving physical paperwork to prove that you've paid VAT on something when there's no meaningful way of avoiding it in the first place. So all the business efficiency of electronic claims and approvals is completely lost. Well done HMRC!

    Rather than piffling around with a protracted lottery on individual regulations to redraft (in yet more acts of parliament) they need to start rescinding entire acts, and simplify the law. And whilst they're at it, how about actually writing it in plain English, as well?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Not enough

      Your proposal while interesting would increase unemployment among civil servants who have no prospects of another job if released into the community. Therefore, it won't happen.

      The Government's proposals, on the other hand, will be a paradise for lawyers. Perhaps my kid will get a country house or a yacht on the strength of them once the judicial reviews and the suits start flying.

      1. The Axe

        Re: Not enough

        Civil servants do have job prospects if made redundant from wasteful qangos and departments. At least those that are not equality and diversity coordinators whose skill set is vanishingly small and useless.

        If the government was shrunk, which means that it doesn't need so much tax (which it spends inefficiently), then businesses can generate more profits and grow and employ more. That's where the sacked civil servants can go.

        Simplistic, but in the whole scheme of things it really is that straight forward if you want the economy to grow. It does not grow under government dictat. Russia showed how that does not work.

  3. Harry

    Yes, plain English please

    In many business, the biggest cost of complying with the law is understanding it in the first place.

    The law should exist for the benefit of everybody in general, whether an individual or in business, not for the primary benefit of the legal profession that has its sole interest in keeping it incomprehensible.

  4. Recaf

    "over the next 20 years"

    That's £20m/year across all UK companies or about 5p each. What a load of bollocks.

  5. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Biz Bosses 'To save £400m'...

    ...the rest of us pay £500m+ to clean up they crap they'll start pumping out afterwards?

This topic is closed for new posts.

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020