‘What do they have to hide?’ Ministers must not scrap regulatory watchdog
The Regulatory Policy Committee keeps a close eye on government red tape, and scrapping it would be a serious mistake – says Andrew Griffith.
Red tape is strangling British business. A survey just out from the Federation of Small Businesses has found small firms and entrepreneurs collectively spend 379 million hours a year complying with regulations. And we have seen no shortage of effort from this Government to increase that burden. But now, Ministers are turning their sights towards the watchdog whose job is to ask of all new regulation, “At what cost?”.
Reports that the Department for Business and Trade is considering scrapping the Regulatory Policy Committee (RPC) are deeply concerning. The RPC is the independent group tasked with calculating the true cost of regulation to our economy and assessing whether the Government impact assessments – their own scorecards – are up to scratch.
It’s like a Chancellor proposing to scrap the Office for Budget Responsibility. Not a good look at all.
This committee holds ministers to account
The RPC is a lean body that works hard to ensure the costs and administrative burdens imposed on businesses are accurately measured and transparently reported to Parliament before they become law. Without the RPC, there will be no independent body to hold lawmakers to account if they decide to introduce new red tape. At a time when costs for business are already skyrocketing, a move to scrap the watchdog would not be out of place in an Orwellian novel.
The RPC does important work. Their recent reports have found a worrying number of impact assessments over the last three years are not fit for purpose. Take the Employment Rights Bill: the RPC’s investigation found that the Government’s ‘costings’ on this 330-page, back to the 1970s behemoth cited “weak evidence, inadequate appraisal of policy options and insufficient analysis of costs to employers.” They found Defra’s Wet Wipes regulations in 2025 “lacked clear evidence and did not adequately assess other non-regulatory options.” The same criticisms were also applied to Rishi Sunak’s ‘Tobacco and Vapes Bill’.
The law passed most often in Westminster is the law of unintended consequences, and without proper scrutiny of new regulations punted up by Whitehall this will never change.
Undermining the UK’s reputation
A powerful coalition of Britain’s most influential business groups, including the CBI, FSB, IoD, MakeUK and British Chambers of Commerce, has rightly written to the Business Secretary to express their alarm. These organisations, representing enterprises of every size, view the RPC as a vital component of the UK’s legislative architecture. They understand that without independent scrutiny, the true impact on business of new laws often remains concealed until it is too late.
The Government may find the RPC’s findings uncomfortable reading – indeed, the previous Conservative administration often did – but that is exactly why it must stay. An objective arbiter is fundamental to better regulation. If ministers do decide to scrap this watchdog, they would be further undermining the UK’s reputation as a stable, predictable environment for investment.
And if the Government is confident its regulations are pro-growth, why fear independent verification? What do they have to hide?
Andrew Griffith MP is the shadow secretary of state for business