The Treasury should be sparing in its use of the proposed power to require regulators to review their rules, and should not use it to implicitly require the regulators to consider a general ‘public interest’ requirement for rulemaking. Each use of this power is a potential weakening of the independence of the regulators. Regulators should not be expected to reverse or adjust regulation where such regulation is deemed to remain appropriate to carry out the regulators’ statutory objectives. Tha...

The Treasury should be sparing in its use of the proposed power to require regulators to review their rules, and should not use it to implicitly require the regulators to consider a general ‘public interest’ requirement for rulemaking. Each use of this power is a potential weakening of the independence of the regulators. Regulators should not be expected to reverse or adjust regulation where such regulation is deemed to remain appropriate to carry out the regulators’ statutory objectives. That being said, the regulators should not impose costs without being able to show benefits. Type: conclusion | Number: 16 | Paragraph: 105 | Response status: under_consideration Government response: The government notes this recommendation. Clause 27 of the FSM Bill (which will insert new sections 3RC and 3RD into FSMA) introduces a power for the Treasury to require a regulator to review its rules. This power is designed to be used only in exceptional circumstances where the Treasury considers