...plans early on in the policy making process. This will in turn improve the quality and effectiveness of their regulations by ensuring they think about the intended impacts and how...
...Earlier evaluation would be welcomed (although sufficient time needs to be allowed to pass to properly see the impacts of the regulation). However to be effective, PIRs need to be...
...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...
...signals an intention to remove the Business Impact Target (BIT) in its current form, which includes our current role as Independent Verification Body (IVB). After a further year of reporting...
...in this report to £5,629.0 million net), the cumulative total for the parliament to date is an increase in direct costs to business of £4,445.2 million net. This compares to...
...the Parliament. We are keen to help government in developing this target and offering our expertise in independently verifying the cost reductions achieved. The report details our additional activities. This...
...with the current system is the increasing number of IAs received very late in the process and with requests for expedited scrutiny. This makes it harder for RPC input to...
...to be more conscientious in carrying PIRs out in order to inform decisions over whether regulations should be retained, revised or replaced. Again, we argue in a blog post for...
...The RPC welcomes the new Framework which includes many changes that we have advocated: Independent scrutiny at an earlier stage in the policy development process to allow us to comment...
...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...
Recent Comments