The 3 ways Burnham plans to cut red tape and change Britain quickly
Key Points
- Andy Burnham's government has published a letter to ministers outlining how it will cut red tape to effect change.
- The letter announces three initiatives: cutting back on consultations, giving ministers authority to act under more legal risk, and paring back judicial review.
- Ministers will be empowered to act more freely and effectively, and to push back on legal risk evaluations to cut through red tape and deliver bold change.
- The government said it was confident the Civil Service would support its new approach.
Andy Burnham’s government has published a letter to all ministers outlining their strategy for cutting red tape and pushing through the change the United Kingdom needs to deliver for its populace.
Pointing to the its democratic mandate, the letter penned by the Chancellor, First Secretary of State, and Attorney General, said the government would act with the full agency at its disposal and is determined to overcome ‘administrative frictions’ that have accumulated under and impeded past governments.
The government said it exists to serve the British people and will change its fundamental approach to policy and action to act with alacrity, cutting red tape and paring back administrative burdens.
The letter outlined three ways in which Burnham’s government aimed to achieve this greater agency: cutting consultations, taking more legal risk, and stopping disproportionate legal reviews.
Cutting back unnecessary consultations
The first major change which Burnham’s government will make to the way it is administered is to put an end to the ‘dither and delay’ of endless consultations which can plague UK policy planning and execution.
Most importantly, the government will assert that there is no general duty of consultation. Instead, the default position will now be that ministers make decisions and are empowered to act upon them.
Consultations will still be held where appropriate, but ministers will take a leading role in determining where this necessary and make this process less formal and more participatory.
The government said that under this new regime, there should be no formal consultation except where it is statutorily required, or it would be conspicuously unfair not to consult, or where a minister determines that a formal consultation would be effective.
“Even where departments have historically consulted or previously promised to consult, we expect each individual instance to be considered afresh, thinking about what is fair in the particular circumstances,” the government said.
“We also want to see this approach to consultations adopted not just within central government and its agencies, but across the wider public sector – so it is important that we lead from the front.”
Acting with more legal risk
Under Burnham’s government, ministers will be given more leeway to act and effect decisions under higher legal risk than previously.
The government noted that while the law is vital and the government will always act within it, the level of legal risk involved in ministerial decisions is rarely black and white.
“It is for that reason that, so long as there is a tenable legal argument, it is for ministers to determine how to proceed – and it can be right to act where the level of legal risk is considered to be high,” the government told ministers.
“We want all ministers to feel trusted to make these judgements and empowered to accept higher levels of risk where you feel it is warranted.”
The government will update the legal risk guidance used by its lawyers to make it clear that ministers will be properly empowered to take decisions even where there is high legal risk, and to encourage lawyers to suggest alternative options to mitigate this risk instead of opposing it.
Limiting judicial review
Andy Burnham’s government has also informed ministers that it will continue efforts to ensure judicial review is proportionate and does not hamper its progress.
It said the courts have a core constitutional role in acting as a check on executive competence, but noted that in some instances the system has become ‘out of balance’.
“That is why the Government took action last year to limit the number of attempts that can be made to bring a judicial review against nationally significant infrastructure projects, and why the Government has been advancing further reforms to limit the scope for judicial review where Parliament has had a say in authorising a project,” it said.
These reforms will continue, and the range to which they can apply will be broadened to all nationally significant infrastructure projects.
“This will mean that transport, water and other types of major infrastructure can benefit from the parliamentary authorisation route once we have passed the necessary legislation,” the government said.
The letter concluded by sharing its confidence that the Civil Service would embrace the government’s approach and support it in achieving its aims.
