Clause 31
Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Bill [Lords]
4:30 pm
Pat McFadden (Minister of State (Employment Relations and Postal Affairs), Department for Business, Enterprise & Regulatory Reform; Wolverhampton South East, Labour)
The hon. Gentleman has given me the opportunity to refer to the impact assessment for the Bill, which details some of the costs and benefits. Referring to it will perhaps help to answer his question about what the benefit in all these things will be.
As ever with impact assessments, we are talking about an assessment. The purpose of the Bill is to review all the issues in three years, but the assessment of benefits to business from, for example, consistency of advice could be anything from £24 million to £48 million. Consistency of risk assessment could be anything between £3 million and £5.8 million and savings from more effective priority setting provision of guidance could be up to £32 million.
So there are substantial potential cost benefits to businesses from a regime under which the advice is more consistent and they are more certain that they can, for example, introduce more product lines, knowing how that might be judged in different parts of the country. Although cost recovery has been built in, to ensure that the primary authority principle does not become too much of a burden to the local authorities that take it on, there is still substantial benefit—in fact, far greater benefit—for businesses in having this regime than in not having it.
The hon. Gentleman asked who would determine the charges and who would judge whether they were reasonable. I fear that, on that question, I may have to come back to him or write to him.