Reforming the Framework for Better Regulation – Government Consultation

ClientEarth argues that the UK government's proposed 'Better Regulation' framework, informed by the TIGGR report, risks a deregulatory shift that would threaten environmental protections. The organization specifically opposes the adoption of a 'common law approach' to regulation and a 'new' proportionality principle, warning that these could erode the precautionary principle and lead to 'death by a thousand cuts' for the environment. ClientEarth also cautions against delegating excessive discretion to regulators through guidance rather than legislation, citing failures in oil and gas and agricultural pollution enforcement. Instead, it advocates for a prescriptive, government-led approach that integrates the value of natural capital into regulatory impact assessments.

• The organization opposes the proposed "common law approach" to regulation, asserting that it is "vague and ambiguous" and would likely make the regulatory environment less stable and predictable by shifting control to the discretion of individual regulators.
• ClientEarth warns that a "new Proportionality Principle" could be used to erode the precautionary principle, potentially leading to a "death by a thousand cuts" for the environment if the cumulative effects of small-scale impacts are ignored.
• The document argues that delegating greater flexibility to regulators to use guidance and rules instead of primary legislation reduces transparency and accountability, making it harder to enforce standards and hold authorities to account.
• ClientEarth cites the Oil and Gas Authority's 2020 Maximum Economic Recovery UK Strategy and the Environment Agency's failure to enforce The Reduction and Prevention of Agricultural Diffuse Pollution Regulations 2018 as examples of how excessive regulatory discretion leads to poor environmental outcomes.
• The submission rejects the "one-in, X-out" regulatory offsetting approach as "crude and arbitrary," arguing that environmental regulations should be treated with the same priority as public safety regulations.
• ClientEarth recommends that any reform to regulatory impact assessments should include a mandatory requirement to consider the full value of "natural capital," as suggested by the Dasgupta Review.

APA

ClientEarth (2021). Reforming the Framework for Better Regulation – Government Consultation. https://www.clientearth.org/media/dubbgh3g/clientearth-better-regulation-framework-consultation-response.pdf

Chicago

ClientEarth. Reforming the Framework for Better Regulation – Government Consultation. 2021. https://www.clientearth.org/media/dubbgh3g/clientearth-better-regulation-framework-consultation-response.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite press release |author=ClientEarth |title=Reforming the Framework for Better Regulation – Government Consultation |date=October 2021 |url=https://www.clientearth.org/media/dubbgh3g/clientearth-better-regulation-framework-consultation-response.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@misc{clientearth2021reforming, author = {{ClientEarth}}, title = {{Reforming the Framework for Better Regulation – Government Consultation}}, publisher = {ClientEarth}, year = {2021}, month = oct, url = {https://www.clientearth.org/media/dubbgh3g/clientearth-better-regulation-framework-consultation-response.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }