HC Deb 11 November 1996 vol 285 c6W
Mr. Steen

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what regulations his Department proposes to repeal by the end of 1996; if he proposes to conduct a compliance cost assessment on each regulation repealed; and what is the estimated cost of undertaking a compliance cost assessment to determine the advantages or disadvantages of such a repeal. [3201]

Sir Paul Beresford

My Department currently proposes to revoke the following regulations by the end of 1996:

  • The Flax and Tow Spinning and Weaving Regulations 1906
  • The Hemp Spinning and Weaving Regulations 1907
  • The Cotton Cloth Factories Regulations 1929
  • The Kiers Regulations 1938
  • The Jute (Safety, Health and Welfare) Regulations 1948
  • The Factories (Cotton Shuttles) Special Regulations 1952
  • The Agriculture (Ladders) Regulations 1957
  • The Agriculture (Safeguarding of Workplaces) Regulations 1959
  • The Agriculture (Poisonous Substances) (Extension) Order 1960
  • The Agriculture (Threshers and Balers) Regulations 1960
  • The Agriculture (Field Machinery) Regulations 1962
  • The Cotton Cloth (Record of Humidity) Order 1964
  • The Agriculture (Poisonous Substances) (Extension) Order 1965
  • The Agriculture (Poisonous Substances) (Extension) Order 1966.

In addition, it is proposed to repeal the Agriculture (Poisonous Substances) Act 1952, and section 68 and schedule 1 of the Factories Act 1961.

Since the effect in each case will be to reduce rather than increase compliance costs, a CCA is not required. The cost of undertaking a CCA varies from case to case but is generally modest. Because part of the cost falls on the businesses consulted, a full CCA would be inappropriate for measures designed to reduce business burdens.