UK Inquiry Tracker

Regulating for growth

Public Accounts Committee Open Inquiry

Opened: 12 Dec 2025 Parliament page

When regulation is carried out well, it can be essential for the promotion of economic growth and investment. Poorly-instituted regulation can depress investment and inhibit growth. There have been nine government initiatives since 2005 aimed at reducing regulatory costs in support of economic growth. HM Treasury in March 2025 published … Read more When regulation is carried out well, it can be essential for the promotion of economic growth and investment. Poorly-instituted regulation can depress investment and inhibit growth. There have been nine government initiatives since 2005 aimed at reducing regulatory costs in support of economic growth. HM Treasury in March 2025 published its Action Plan laying out how it would encourage regulators to support innovation and economic growth. It builds on past schemes such as 2017’s ‘Growth Duty,’ which introduced a requirement for regulators to have regard for the promotion of economic growth. The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) in its 2016 report on better regulation called on government to rethink its approach, having made limited progress on cutting the costs to business of regulation. It found that government at the time had achieved less than £1bn savings, almost entirely down to it counting the mandatory 5p plastic bag charge as a 'saving' for retailers because of the additional revenue it brings them. The PAC more recently examined water sector regulation in 2025 , which found that a failing sector had been left to flounder, with piecemeal regulators appearing to be missing in action. The National Audit Office (NAO) is examining whether the Department for Business and Trade (DBT), HM Treasury (HMT) and regulators are aligned in their understanding of how to regulate for growth. Proceeding from the NAO’s report due for publication in early 2026 , the PAC will take evidence from senior officials from these Departments on how effectively growth is being promoted through regulation, and what challenges currently exist in this area for regulators and government. If you have evidence on these issues, please submit here by 23:59 on Monday 2 March 2026. Please look at the requirements for written evidence submissions and note that the Committee cannot accept material as evidence that is published elsewhere. The Committee decides what information to publish and how. You can request anonymity or confidentiality when you send evidence, but it is for the Committee to say whether it will agree.It may treat submissions confidentially, even where you have not requested this. Please note that the Committee’s inquiry cannot assist with individual cases. If you need help with an individual problem you are having, you may wish to read the information on Parliament’s website about who you can contact with different issues. Show less

2 Recommendations

21 Conclusions

1 Report

1 Oral session

1 Letter

1 Event

Activity timeline 3 events

13 Jul
2026

Correspondence

Letter from Permanent Secretary at the Department of Trade relating to the Committee’s oral evidence session in March, Regulating for Growt…

10 Jun
2026

Report published

4th Report - Regulating for growth

16 Mar
2026

Oral evidence

Oral evidence session

Oral evidence sessions 1 session

16 Mar 2026

View on parliament.uk

Caleb Deeks · Department of Business and Trade David Lunn · Department of Business and Trade Gareth Davies CB · Department for Business and Trade Jessica Glover · HM Treasury Jim O'Neil · HM Treasury

Reports 1 report · click to expand

Title	HC No.	Published	Items	Response
4th Report - Regulating for growth	HC 93	10 Jun 2026	23	Pending

Recommendations & Conclusions

23 results

2 Recommendation

4th Report - Regulating for growth

HM Treasury will not know if the Action Plan has been successful, as it has...

HM Treasury will not know if the Action Plan has been successful, as it has not defined growth in any detail beyond an increase in GDP. We do not believe HM Treasury is clear on what success or failure of … Read more

HM Treasury

Regulating for growth

Activity timeline 3 events

Oral evidence sessions 1 session

Reports 1 report · click to expand

Recommendations & Conclusions

HM Treasury will not know if the Action Plan has been successful, as it has...

It can be burdensome, complex and difficult for businesses to navigate and cooperate with multiple...

DBT and HM Treasury do not have a grasp on which regulatory interventions they should...

HM Treasury and DBT do not have a robust plan to achieve the 25% reduction...

On the basis of a report by the Comptroller and Auditor General (C&AG), we took...

Regulators must balance different objectives and duties when they exercise their functions.

We asked HM Treasury for examples where increased risk appetite could deliver growth but did...

Having asked regulators to be less risk averse, a year after the Action Plan, neither...

The departments explained that the joint unit responsible for delivering the Action Plan relies on...

Growth can mean very different things depending on the timeframe applied.

We asked the departments what they meant by growth, and the intended timeframe, but they...

Effective monitoring is key to ensuring the Action Plan is kept on track and impacts...

HM Treasury noted that regulators are rarely asked about their role in economic growth by...

It can be challenging for businesses to navigate the regulatory landscape.

HM Treasury told us that it considered simplification and streamlining of engagement to be “incredibly...

A small number of regulatory interventions account for a disproportionately large proportion of costs and...

The Action Plan committed to reduce the administrative burden on business by £5.6 billion (25%...

DBT is also working with businesses and departments to identify opportunities.

The target is net of new regulatory costs, meaning that government counts savings remaining after...

The 25% target is ambitious and cross-governmental but DBT could not confirm whether the programme...

The equivalent programme in 2025 was successful, but unlike this earlier initiative there are currently...

For savings to be credible they need to be verified.

No independent review is planned.

Correspondence 1 letter