1-20 of 340 results for subject:"Regulatory reform orders"
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.337 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.003 seconds
- Search query
- subject:"Regulatory reform orders"
- We searched for
- subject_t:"Regulatory reform orders" OR subject_t:"Regulatory reform order" OR subject_ses:12442
Type
-
Early day motions (2)
+
Legislation (1)
+
Acts (1)
-
Public acts (1)
+
Members' contributions (65)
-
Oral answers to questions (11)
+
Oral questions (12)
-
Topical questions (1)
-
Proceeding contributions (42)
+
Parliamentary committees (152)
+
Committee proceedings (13)
-
Public Bill Committee proceedings (3)
-
Select Committee oral evidence (10)
-
Select Committee reports (137)
-
Select Committee reports (Government responses) (4)
-
Select Committee written evidence (1)
+
Parliamentary papers (186)
-
Command papers (1)
-
Consultation papers (2)
-
Consultation papers (Government responses) (1)
-
Deposited papers (13)
+
House of Commons papers (89)
-
House of Commons sessional returns (1)
-
House of Lords papers (62)
-
Impact assessments (14)
+
Unprinted papers (11)
-
Draft regulatory reform orders (proposal) (7)
+
Parliamentary proceedings (64)
+
Debates (48)
-
Adjournment debates (1)
+
Committee proceedings (13)
-
Public Bill Committee proceedings (3)
-
Select Committee oral evidence (10)
+
Legislative debates (37)
-
Debates on bills (5)
-
Debates on delegated legislation (32)
+
Formal proceedings (2)
-
Legislative formal proceedings (2)
+
Statements (14)
-
Written statements (14)
+
Parliamentary questions (41)
+
Oral questions (12)
-
Topical questions (1)
-
Written questions (29)
+
Research briefings (2)
-
Commons Briefing papers (2)
House
Session
Year
Department
More
Member
More
Primary member
More
Answering member
More
Legislative stage
Legislation
More
Subject
More
Publisher
Clauses 16 and 17 agreed to. Clause 18 agreed to on division (8 to 2). Clauses 19 to 21 agreed to. Schedule 2 agreed to on division (9 to 2). Schedule 3 agreed to as amended. Amendments to clause 22, discussed with new clause 3 (Impact assessments), new clause 7 (Assessment of the impact of repeal of retained EU law), new clause 1 (Impact on the UK’s obligations under the Trade and Cooperation Agreement), debated and withdrawn. Further amendment to clause 22, discussed with new clause 2 (Disapplication of the UK Internal Market Act 2020), under consideration when the Committee adjourned.
Clauses 16 and 17 agreed to. Clause 18 agreed to on division (8 to 2). Clauses 19 to 21 agreed to. Schedule 2 agreed to on division (9 to 2). Schedule 3 agreed to as amended. Amendments to clause 22, discussed with new clause 3 (Impact assessments), new clause 7...
Lead member
Graham Stuart
Answering member
Justin Madders; Alex Sobel
Department
Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy
Type
Debates on bills; Public Bill Committee proceedings
Committee
Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill Committee
Legislative stage
Committee stage
Procedure
New clauses
Legislation
Legislative and Regulatory Reform Act 2006; Small Business, Enterprise and Employment Act 2015; United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020; Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill 2022-23
Subjects
Business; Devolution; Delegated legislation; EU law; Ministerial powers; Northern Ireland; Parliamentary scrutiny; Scotland; Standards; Regulation; Wales; Technology; Regulatory reform orders; Science; Agricultural products; Impact assessments; UK internal trade; UK-EU Trade and Cooperation Agreement
Date
29 November 2022
House
House of Commons
Initial evaluation of the effectiveness of the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005. 107 p.
Initial evaluation of the effectiveness of the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005. 107 p.
Deposited by
Department for Communities and Local Government
Type
Deposited papers
Author
Department for Communities and Local Government
Committed on
26 March 2009
Originated on
1 March 2009
Received on
26 March 2009
Legislation
Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005
Subjects
Enforcement; Fire prevention; Legislation; Fire regulations; Multiple occupation; Reform; Regulatory reform orders; Chief Fire Officers Association
Date
26 March 2009
Reference
DEP2009-0960
House
House of Commons
As the title of the Secretary of State's Department now includes regulatory reform, is he not somewhat embarrassed that in a four-year period only 27 deregulations took place, whereas at the same time the British Chambers of Commerce identified 600 new regulations?
As the title of the Secretary of State's Department now includes regulatory reform, is he not somewhat embarrassed that in a four-year period only 27 deregulations took place, whereas at the same time the British Chambers of Commerce identified 600 new regulations?
Asked by
Andrew MacKay
(Conservative)
Answering body
Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform
Topical questions - 1st Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
17 January 2008
I think the right hon. Gentleman is referring to regulatory reform orders, which are only one part of our approach to regulatory reform. If he looks in detail at the further plans that were published before Christmas—I am happy to send that very large volume to him—he will see examples of further measures that we are taking across the whole of government to reduce the administrative costs of red tape and bureaucracy. In that respect, we are beginning to make significant and promising progress.
I think my hon. Friend is referring to a section of my statement that dealt with the subsequent granting of planning permission for new nuclear plant, should any proposals be made. My remarks were framed in the context of the time scale, particularly in relation to long-term geological disposal. As he will know, because he studies these matters carefully, there is now, I think, no dispute about the arrangements for disposal: interim storage coupled with long-term disposal is the right way forward. In that context, I hope that he will reflect further on my remarks and understand the point that I was trying to make.
Subjects
Regulatory reform orders; Departmental responsibilities; Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform
Date
17 January 2008
Reference
470 c1074
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
Type
House of Commons sessional returns;
House of Commons papers
Author
House of Commons
Laid on
8 January 2008
Legislation
Human Rights Act 1998; Private Legislation Procedure (Scotland) Act 1936
Subjects
Staff; House of Commons; Allowances; Delegated legislation; Legislative process; EU law; Public bills; Members; Parliamentary procedure; Programme motions; Parliamentary scrutiny; House of Commons Grand Committees; Standing committees; Times of sittings; Members' suspension; Written questions; Oral questions; Westminster Hall sittings; Debates on delegated legislation; Closure motions; Hybrid bills; European Scrutiny Committee; Committee stage; Standing Committee on Regional Affairs; Urgent questions; Delegated Legislation Committee proceedings; Select committees; Regulatory reform orders; Royal assent; Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments; Allocation of time motions; Early day motions; Public bill committees; Private bills; Select Committee on Statutory Instruments; Panel of Chairs; Grand Committee proceedings (HC); Statutory instruments; Court of Referees; Unopposed Bill Committee; Opposed Bill Committee; Standing Orders Committee; Petitions; Prayers; Remedial orders; Legislative reform orders; Special procedure orders
Commons Library location
PCC
Date
8 January 2008
Reference
HC 1 2007-08
House
House of Commons
How many regulatory reform orders have been put forward by the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform in the past year.
How many regulatory reform orders have been put forward by the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform in the past year.
Asked by
Lord De Mauley
(Conservative)
Answered by
Lord Bach
(Labour)
Oral questions - Lead
Status
Answered
For answer on
19 November 2007
Answered on
19 November 2007
My Lords, none. From 8 January 2007, regulatory reform orders were replaced by legislative reform orders as a result of the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Act 2006, which was debated at length in your Lordships’ House. BERR and its agencies are working on proposals for three legislative reform orders.
Subjects
Regulation; Regulatory reform orders; Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform; Legislative reform orders
Date
19 November 2007
Reference
696 c658
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, none. From 8 January 2007, regulatory reform orders were replaced by legislative reform orders as a result of the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Act 2006, which was debated at length in your Lordships’ House. BERR and its agencies are working on proposals for three legislative reform orders.
My Lords, none. From 8 January 2007, regulatory reform orders were replaced by legislative reform orders as a result of the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Act 2006, which was debated at length in your Lordships’ House. BERR and its agencies are working on proposals for three legislative reform orders.
Answered by
Lord Bach
(Labour)
Asked by
Lord De Mauley
(Conservative)
Type
Oral answers to questions
How many regulatory reform orders have been put forward by the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform in the past year.
Subjects
Regulation; Regulatory reform orders; Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform; Legislative reform orders
Date
19 November 2007
Reference
696 c658
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, I thank the Minister for his Answer. Can he confirm that consultation has taken place on only three legislative reform orders and that not a single one has emerged from that consultation process, despite the new procedure, which was designed to respond to the failings of this Government’s Regulatory Reform Act 2001, being in force for nearly a year? If that can be confirmed, why should anyone take seriously this Government’s claims to be deregulatory?
My Lords, I thank the Minister for his Answer. Can he confirm that consultation has taken place on only three legislative reform orders and that not a single one has emerged from that consultation process, despite the new procedure, which was designed to respond to the failings of this Government’s Regulatory Reform Act 2001, being in force for nearly a year? If that can be confirmed, why should anyone take seriously this Government’s claims to be deregulatory?
Asked by
Lord De Mauley
(Conservative)
Oral questions - 1st Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
19 November 2007
My Lords, there have been no more than three because, as I said, although the Act came into force in January 2007 the House of Commons Standing Orders for the Regulatory Reform Committee were not finalised until July. That was a shame. It was not possible for the Government to lay such orders before these were agreed. I know that the noble Lord will be happy to hear that not only are there the ones that have already been consulted on, but that many more are in the pipeline.
Subjects
Regulation; Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform; Legislative reform orders; Regulatory reform orders
Date
19 November 2007
Reference
696 c658
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, there have been no more than three because, as I said, although the Act came into force in January 2007 the House of Commons Standing Orders for the Regulatory Reform Committee were not finalised until July. That was a shame. It was not possible for the Government to lay such orders before these were agreed. I know that the noble Lord will be happy to hear that not only are there the ones that have already been consulted on, but that many more are in the pipeline.
My Lords, there have been no more than three because, as I said, although the Act came into force in January 2007 the House of Commons Standing Orders for the Regulatory Reform Committee were not finalised until July. That was a shame. It was not possible for the Government to lay such orders before these were agreed. I know that the noble Lord will be happy to hear that not only are there the ones that have already been consulted on, but that many more are in the pipeline.
Answered by
Lord Bach
(Labour)
Asked by
Lord De Mauley
(Conservative)
Type
Oral answers to questions
My Lords, I thank the Minister for his Answer. Can he confirm that consultation has taken place on only three legislative reform orders and that not a single one has emerged from that consultation process, despite the new procedure, which was designed to respond to the failings of this Government’s Regulatory Reform Act 2001, being in force for nearly a year? If that can be confirmed, why should anyone take seriously this Government’s claims to be deregulatory?
Subjects
Regulation; Regulatory reform orders; Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform; Legislative reform orders
Date
19 November 2007
Reference
696 c658
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, I heard the noble Lord’s speech in our debate on this issue last Wednesday, and he will be delighted to know that impact assessments are made on every regulation that comes in. Apparently, it is one of the requirements that his party supports. On sunset clauses, I think that the Liberal Democrats should perhaps think again. The trouble with such clauses is that they remove certainty, and while business wants deregulation, what it wants more than practically anything else is certainty. If there is to be a sunset clause after two, three or four years, the regulations will not have the certainty they deserve.
My Lords, I heard the noble Lord’s speech in our debate on this issue last Wednesday, and he will be delighted to know that impact assessments are made on every regulation that comes in. Apparently, it is one of the requirements that his party supports. On sunset clauses, I think that the Liberal Democrats should perhaps think again. The trouble with such clauses is that they remove certainty, and while business wants deregulation, what it wants more than practically anything else is certainty. If there is to be a sunset clause after two, three or four years, the regulations will not have the certainty they deserve.
Answered by
Lord Bach
(Labour)
Asked by
Lord Razzall
(Liberal Democrat)
Type
Oral answers to questions
My Lords, does the Minister agree that the substance of the Question put by the noble Lord, Lord De Mauley, goes to what the Government are doing to deal with the excessive regulation of industry and business? While I am sure that the Minister will not accept that the Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Bill only touches the surface of these problems, does he accept that in practical terms it would be far better if the Government stopped gold-plating European directives and introduced sunset clauses on all regulations, thus bringing them to an end on a specified date unless their continuation was justified?
Subjects
Regulation; Regulatory reform orders; Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform; Legislative reform orders
Date
19 November 2007
Reference
696 c659
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, it depends on how long you consider the pipe to be. The noble Earl can be satisfied that there are plenty of them.
My Lords, it depends on how long you consider the pipe to be. The noble Earl can be satisfied that there are plenty of them.
Answered by
Lord Bach
(Labour)
Asked by
Earl Attlee
(Conservative)
Type
Oral answers to questions
My Lords, how many orders are in the pipeline?
Subjects
Regulation; Regulatory reform orders; Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform; Legislative reform orders
Date
19 November 2007
Reference
696 c659
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, it is our turn. Does the Minister agree with his colleague, the noble Lord, Lord Jones of Birmingham, who has been a doughty campaigner against over-regulation by this and previous Governments, that Parliament is not doing an effective job in scrutinising European regulations and that we could do much better? What ideas can the Government put to us in Parliament about how we could be more effective in scrutinising the endless regulations from Brussels?
My Lords, it is our turn. Does the Minister agree with his colleague, the noble Lord, Lord Jones of Birmingham, who has been a doughty campaigner against over-regulation by this and previous Governments, that Parliament is not doing an effective job in scrutinising European regulations and that we could do much better? What ideas can the Government put to us in Parliament about how we could be more effective in scrutinising the endless regulations from Brussels?
Asked by
Lord Howell of Guildford
(Conservative)
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
19 November 2007
My Lords, although the Government can give advice on that, in the end it is for Parliament to decide how it looks at European regulatory orders, which will become increasingly important if Europe follows the route that we have gone down.
Subjects
Regulation; Regulatory reform orders; Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform; Legislative reform orders
Date
19 November 2007
Reference
696 c660
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, does the Minister agree that the substance of the Question put by the noble Lord, Lord De Mauley, goes to what the Government are doing to deal with the excessive regulation of industry and business? While I am sure that the Minister will not accept that the Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Bill only touches the surface of these problems, does he accept that in practical terms it would be far better if the Government stopped gold-plating European directives and introduced sunset clauses on all regulations, thus bringing them to an end on a specified date unless their continuation was justified?
My Lords, does the Minister agree that the substance of the Question put by the noble Lord, Lord De Mauley, goes to what the Government are doing to deal with the excessive regulation of industry and business? While I am sure that the Minister will not accept that the Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Bill only touches the surface of these problems, does he accept that in practical terms it would be far better if the Government stopped gold-plating European directives and introduced sunset clauses on all regulations, thus bringing them to an end on a specified date unless their continuation was justified?
Asked by
Lord Razzall
(Liberal Democrat)
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
19 November 2007
My Lords, I heard the noble Lord’s speech in our debate on this issue last Wednesday, and he will be delighted to know that impact assessments are made on every regulation that comes in. Apparently, it is one of the requirements that his party supports. On sunset clauses, I think that the Liberal Democrats should perhaps think again. The trouble with such clauses is that they remove certainty, and while business wants deregulation, what it wants more than practically anything else is certainty. If there is to be a sunset clause after two, three or four years, the regulations will not have the certainty they deserve.
Subjects
Regulation; Regulatory reform orders; Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform; Legislative reform orders
Date
19 November 2007
Reference
696 c659
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, how many orders are in the pipeline?
My Lords, how many orders are in the pipeline?
Asked by
Earl Attlee
(Conservative)
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
19 November 2007
My Lords, it depends on how long you consider the pipe to be. The noble Earl can be satisfied that there are plenty of them.
Subjects
Regulation; Regulatory reform orders; Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform; Legislative reform orders
Date
19 November 2007
Reference
696 c659
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, does my noble friend agree that many regulations are designed to keep markets open, free and liberal? Is that not the kind of economy my noble friend would like to achieve?
My Lords, does my noble friend agree that many regulations are designed to keep markets open, free and liberal? Is that not the kind of economy my noble friend would like to achieve?
Asked by
Lord Haskel
(Labour)
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
19 November 2007
My Lords, that is what I would like to achieve, as would Her Majesty’s Government. The report on regulators published last week by the Lords Select Committee, which was chaired by my noble friend Lord McIntosh, made precisely that point: regulators in that field should be there to help competition.
Subjects
Regulation; Regulatory reform orders; Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform; Legislative reform orders
Date
19 November 2007
Reference
696 c660
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, on EU regulation, in March this year we, together with the Danes and the Dutch, were very much in the forefront in getting the EU to agree a target to reduce EU administrative burdens by 25 per cent by 2012. We are also working to ensure that best practice is producing robust impact assessments for all European legislation.
My Lords, on EU regulation, in March this year we, together with the Danes and the Dutch, were very much in the forefront in getting the EU to agree a target to reduce EU administrative burdens by 25 per cent by 2012. We are also working to ensure that best practice is producing robust impact assessments for all European legislation.
Answered by
Lord Bach
(Labour)
Asked by
Lord Stoddart of Swindon
(Independent Labour)
Type
Oral answers to questions
My Lords, is not the Government’s work on better regulation being hampered by new directives from the European Union? The latest one I have seen is a soil condition directive. What on earth is that about? Are the Government going to oppose it?
Subjects
Regulation; Regulatory reform orders; Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform; Legislative reform orders
Date
19 November 2007
Reference
696 c659
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, I am afraid I do not recall that.
My Lords, I am afraid I do not recall that.
Answered by
Lord Bach
(Labour)
Asked by
Lord Lea of Crondall
(Labour)
Type
Oral answers to questions
My Lords, does my noble friend not recall many on the Benches opposite calling for better regulation of Northern Rock?
Subjects
Regulation; Regulatory reform orders; Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform; Legislative reform orders
Date
19 November 2007
Reference
696 c660
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, can the Minister confirm that since legislative reform orders were introduced, replacing regulatory reform orders, they have been used to scrap just 34 regulations, while in the same period more than 18,000 new regulations have been introduced? Now that regulatory reform is an express part of the name of the department to which the noble Lord belongs, can we expect some improvement in those figures?
My Lords, can the Minister confirm that since legislative reform orders were introduced, replacing regulatory reform orders, they have been used to scrap just 34 regulations, while in the same period more than 18,000 new regulations have been introduced? Now that regulatory reform is an express part of the name of the department to which the noble Lord belongs, can we expect some improvement in those figures?
Asked by
Lord Jenkin of Roding
(Conservative)
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
19 November 2007
My Lords, I can confirm part of what the noble Lord has said: there were 34 regulation orders under the 2001 Act. I cannot confirm the other part. Having been a very senior Minister in a previous Government, he will know that regulatory reform is not an easy issue. It certainly was not for his Government in the mid-1990s, and I notice one or two distinguished ex-Ministers nodding on the Benches opposite. Of course regulation is not bad per se; it provides market rules, allowing businesses to thrive, and provides essential rights and protections for employees and consumers. I am happy to accept, however, that there is a long way to go. We believe that bringing regulatory reform into the new department is a very good step.
Subjects
Regulation; Regulatory reform orders; Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform; Legislative reform orders
Date
19 November 2007
Reference
696 c660
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, who makes the impact assessment? Is it done just by civil servants or are representatives of the businesses that the regulations may affect involved?
My Lords, who makes the impact assessment? Is it done just by civil servants or are representatives of the businesses that the regulations may affect involved?
Asked by
Lord Swinfen
(Conservative)
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
19 November 2007
My Lords, as I understand it, consultation takes place with the businesses involved, but of course civil servants from the Better Regulation Executive play an important part, too. The assessments involve a combination of people, and I do not think that assessments have previously been queried.
Subjects
Regulation; Regulatory reform orders; Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform; Legislative reform orders
Date
19 November 2007
Reference
696 c659-60
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, that is the most difficult question I have had for a long time because I never quite understand what the Liberal Democrats are suggesting on most things. On this, I think that the noble Lord, Lord Razzall, was just talking about regulatory reform.
My Lords, that is the most difficult question I have had for a long time because I never quite understand what the Liberal Democrats are suggesting on most things. On this, I think that the noble Lord, Lord Razzall, was just talking about regulatory reform.
Answered by
Lord Bach
(Labour)
Asked by
Lord Pearson of Rannoch
(UK Independence Party)
Type
Oral answers to questions
My Lords, did the Minister understand the Liberal Democrat Benches to be proposing sunset clauses to European regulations? If so, what is his reaction to that?
Subjects
Regulation; Regulatory reform orders; Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform; Legislative reform orders
Date
19 November 2007
Reference
696 c659
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, did the Minister understand the Liberal Democrat Benches to be proposing sunset clauses to European regulations? If so, what is his reaction to that?
My Lords, did the Minister understand the Liberal Democrat Benches to be proposing sunset clauses to European regulations? If so, what is his reaction to that?
Asked by
Lord Pearson of Rannoch
(UK Independence Party)
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
19 November 2007
My Lords, that is the most difficult question I have had for a long time because I never quite understand what the Liberal Democrats are suggesting on most things. On this, I think that the noble Lord, Lord Razzall, was just talking about regulatory reform.
Subjects
Regulation; Regulatory reform orders; Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform; Legislative reform orders
Date
19 November 2007
Reference
696 c659
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords