Implications for Society in better regulation report
Independent regulators should all have appeals mechanisms that allow affected parties to appeal against decisions before having to resort to judicial review, the Government's Better Regulation Task Force has said.
This recommendation, and others, might have implications for the Royal
Pharmaceutical Society’s modernisation process because its current
plans for reform of the profession’s disciplinary machinery allow
for no appeals other than to the High Court and, in the case of a caution
by the disciplinary committee, no appeal at all.
The task force’s latest report, on independent regulators, sets
out five principles of good regulation — proportionality, accountability,
consistency, transparency and targeting — which it wants to see
implemented by all regulatory bodies, including the Royal Pharmaceutical
Society and others that regulate professions.
The main target of the report is statutory regulators established by
Act of Parliament, but the task force makes clear that any body that
exerts powers over, or imposes burdens on, other organisations or individuals
is a regulator which should take the report seriously. It says: “We
recognise the independence of the regulators and hope that, as happened
with the economic regulators, the most open-minded will respond quickly
and the rest will follow suit. ... We expect all Departments to disseminate
the report to their regulators and work with them to implement our recommendations.”
On appeals, the report says that independent regulators potentially wield
enormous power and that those being regulated, and those on whose behalf
regulation takes place, should be able to appeal against decision that
substantially impact upon them. Appeals should be less costly and time
consuming than a judicial review. Regulators fall largely into two groups,
the task force says — those which have internal appeals and those
where appeals are to a Secretary of State or though the courts. “The
latter process may be too burdensome for some to use,” the report
states.
The task force, set up by the Cabinet Office, also says that regulators
should be run by management boards that have a majority of non-executive
members, all of whom should ideally have no connection with the activity
being regulated.
Other recommendations include the setting out of management statements
that describe regulatory aims and how a regulator is held to account
for its performance and adherence to Government standards for consultation
and enforcement processes.
In all, the report makes 14 recommendations intended to achieve fairness
and transparency in regulatory processes.
In a statement, the Society said: “The Council’s proposals
[for reform] would put in place appropriate appeals mechanisms for the
future, separate from any judicial review procedure.”
It added: “The Council’s proposals take account of the arrangements
agreed in recent years for bodies regulating other health professions,
legal advice and advice received from the Department of Health. We believe
that they will form the basis of appropriate and proportionate procedures
for the future.” |
