Submitting additional evidence to the Regulatory Policy Committee

What external organisations should consider when submitting additional evidence and how the Regulatory Policy Committee treats this information

Information or views on new regulatory and deregulatory proposals should, be submitted to the department responsible for developing the policy during their consultation. This will allow your views to be considered fully and properly.

It is the department’s role to look at all the responses and to decide how to reflect all concerns, for example whether they warrant a change to the proposal or the underlying evidence.

When considering if an impact assessment is fit for purpose the Regulatory Policy Committee does not seek information from any sources outside of the department responsible. The role of the RPC is to examine whether the impact assessment as presented is fit for purpose. It is not to judge whether or not the policy is fit for purpose. However, if you have additional information that you think the Committee should be considering when deciding if the impact assessment is fit for purpose you should:

  • Submit your information to our email address
  • Detail any and all contact you have had with the department about the proposal;
  • Explain why you are submitting this outside the normal route outlined above;
  • Ensure the information relates to the analysis of the cost or benefit to business or civil society and not the policy itself;
  • Only provide information that has also been provided to the relevant department; and
  • Copy the department into any submission and associated communications you make to the Committee.

You will receive an acknowledgement by email confirming receipt of your submission.

In the interests of transparency, the Committee reserves the right to publish any submissions it receives. Information will only be redacted in the interests of commercial sensitivity or where it relates to personal information. The need to do redact information, and which information should be redacted, must be clearly explained when the information is submitted.

As part of its scrutiny of the impact assessment, the Committee will investigate how the department has addressed any significant concerns raised. In the case of concerns being discounted by the department, the Committee will expect the department to provide a satisfactory explanation as to why.

Published 12 June 2014
Last updated 12 April 2019 + show all updates
  1. Updated email address

  2. First published.