We
are now considering the Government’s third Deregulation Bill in three years. It
represents their absolute failure to address the cost of living crisis or
implement a proper industrial strategy.
Deregulation
alone is not a long-term, sustainable growth strategy. This Deregulation Bill
is a desperate rag bag, comprising an incoherent bunch of proposals which look
as though they were brought together after a drunken session at an anarchists’
convention.
The
draft Bill’s statement of impact estimates that all the measures
together would only save British businesses 20 pence per business per year.
Wow! And this is Cameron’s latest big idea.
Therefore,
you may think it’s not worth considering. Well, it is, because of the rag, tag
and bobtail proposals that have been thrown in at the last minute.
For
example, the government’s obsessive view, that health and safety legislation is
a hindrance to the economy, has lead them to propose exempting self-employed
people working in certain lines of work – to be decided by the Secretary of
State – from health and safety legislation.
It’s
staggeringly inept. From clarity, it will create confusion and muddle. It is
estimated to save self-employed people thirty-seven pence each a year. Yes, you
read that correctly, 37p each a year.
Then,
we have botched proposals about taxis and private hire vehicles (PHV).
In
May 2012 the Law Commission launched a consultation on changes to taxi
regulation, with a final report and draft Bill originally scheduled for
publication in April 2014. The industry, unions and local authorities have been
engaging with this process. Then, out of the blue in January 2014 the
Government announced a 10 day consultation on three measures relating to taxi
and PHV regulation.
Then,
in March, without any meaningful engagement with stakeholders, new proposals
were made for this Deregulation Bill. Report Stage is expected in the next few
weeks. The proposals include allowing a PHV operator to subcontract your
booking, without your consent, to another operator who is licensed in a
different licensing district.
I’ll
leave you to think about whether you think this is either sensible or something
you will welcome. For my part, I think the proposals are both unwise and
unwelcome.
