...would extend the benefits of independent scrutiny to increasingly important areas of government policy. It would do more to ensure that an evidence-based approach is taken to assessing the potential...
...to date there is little incentive to conduct them well or make best use of them If evidence is to be available to evaluate a regulatory measure properly, information needs...
...there needs to be a clear mechanism for the Government and Parliament to take this into account in deciding whether to proceed with the policy – for example the Danish...
Stephen Gibson (RPC Chair) and Andrew Williams-Fry (RPC Member) gave evidence to the House of Lords Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee (SLSC) for its inquiry into the Government’s use of regulatory...
...to understand if departments had improved their impact assessments (IAs) in the interim. Stephen flagged that in 2023, the RPC issued ‘Initial Review Notices’ for around 40% of Final IAs,...
...prior to full committee review. Depts have 15 working days to revise their assessment and have the opportunity to meet the secretariat to discuss the comments in the IRN. Following...
...PIR. Independent scrutiny of monitoring and evaluation plans in impact assessments would help to ensure rigorous, useful and proportionate arrangements are in place to track the outcome of the regulations...
...taken into account when regulations are introduced. We the RPC exist to provide independent scrutiny at key stages of this process. Independent challenge and support of the sort we provide...
...BIT report (which covered the year to 16 December 2022). We have, however, continued to verify the costs of new regulation and we believe it is of interest to stakeholders...
...are similar to those expected when the policy was put in place. They ensure consideration of whether changes to regulation are required. We support the OEP’s work looking at how...
Recent Comments