Under Clause 5, the LBRO is required to ensure that local authorities carry out their relevant regulatory functions ““effectively””. The word is carefully chosen. The LBRO is charged with enforcing the code to which the noble Lord, Lord Hodgson, refers. The word ““effectively”” is there to ensure that as the new body works with local authorities to ensure that the burdens of regulation are reduced, it does not neglect the interests of consumers and the public, whom the regulations are designed to protect.
The primary statutory duty of local authority regulators is to enforce the provisions in legislation that Parliament has put in place to protect the public. Better regulation is a matter of finding the right balance between securing those protections and doing so in a way that does not impose unnecessary and counterproductive burdens on business. It is government policy that burdens should not be reduced at the expense of the protections that regulation provides. It should not hamper effective enforcement. Emphatically, the word should not in this context be taken to mean that the LBRO will routinely scrutinise the internal management processes of particular local authorities. As the noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee, said at Second Reading, local authorities have become familiar with the management trinity of the three Es: efficiency, economy and effectiveness.
The way in which local authorities manage their particular services in detail will not be a matter for the LBRO. The body will not overlap with a function that is already performed successfully by the Audit Commission. The LBRO’s role is different; it will be about working to ensure that the whole regulatory system—the system in which local authorities play a critical role—works in the best interests of businesses and consumers alike. It will be as much about effective strategic oversight in the way in which central government plays its part as about working to disseminate the many examples of good practice that local authority regulatory services already have. That is why the phrase that may be widely used in management and local government is not appropriate for the LBRO and why the three E words are to be resisted. What has given me food for thought is the reminder from the noble Lord, Lord Hodgson, that an early part of the code—how will anyone who took part in the proceedings on that code in this Room ever forget?—specifically mentions the word ““efficiency””.
These are two separate amendments. I mean no disrespect to the noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee, but I ask her to withdraw her amendment because we think that using the three E words would be an error and would give the wrong impression about how closely the LBRO would be involved in the mechanics of a local authority’s management. As far as the word ““efficiency”” is concerned, without any promise at all to the noble Lord—I am now talking to the next amendment—I will take that back and consider whether his point about the code is unanswerable or false.
Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Bach
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 21 January 2008.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
698 c34-5GC 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 02:33:03 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_436827
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_436827
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_436827