The February survey was an exceptional one in that it was longer than normal, consisting of 22 questions instead of the usual 12. Ahead of the 2004 Budget, it focused strongly on aspects of business connected with the impact of regulation on growth, innovation and productivity. Respondents were asked what their top three practical choices were for government to reduce the impact of regulation on their businesses.
Click here to download this document in Word.
155 respondents were drawn with the following population characteristics:
Other taxes present less overall problems to UKBB respondents, with 32% finding them unproblematic or only moderately problematic although 32% still see them as highly or moderately highly problematic.
The next group of seven questions looked at the impact of compliance on business innovation and growth. The first aspect was that of time taken up by compliance with regulations. Both UKBB and UKBAB respondents took similar views with 62% of UKBB and 68% of UKBAB saying that compliance takes up too much time to a high or moderately high extent.
In terms of developing new markets, the response was still high but not so extreme. 39% of UKBB respondents are highly or moderately deterred from developing new markets because of compliance, while 32% of Advisers think that their clients are deterred to that extent.
Developing new products, services or processes is affected to a somewhat lesser degree by the need to comply with regulations, with 36% of Business respondents and 26% of Adviser respondents feeling that that they, or their clients, were deterred to a high or moderately high extent. 33% of UKBB and 31% of UKBAB respondents reported that they were only slightly deterred, or not at all deterred.
When it comes to diversion of activity from other business areas because of compliance, there was a stronger reaction than to the two preceding questions. 54% of UKBB and 51% of UKBAB believe that complying with regulations does divert them, or their clients, from other business activities , to a high or moderately high extent.
The next two questions looked at staffing impacts. 50% of Businesses and 54% of Advisers find that they, or their clients, are highly or moderately highly deterred by regulations from recruiting more staff, while 23% of Businesses and 19% of Advisers, on behalf of their clients, say that regulation causes very little or no deterrence to recruitment of additional staff.
More respondents to the UKBB believe that regulation compliance costs them too much money in terms of buying in advice or extra staff, with 53% finding this to a high or moderately high extent. UKBAB respondents are not so strong on this, with 51% responding in the high or moderately high categories.
In seeking to discover what businesses and their advisers consider to be the most important ways of reducing the impact of regulation on business performance, respondents were asked to select their first second and third most preferred choices consecutively. What emerged was a small number of focused choices echoed by both groups of respondents.
These leading choices were:
The most preferred option for UKBB respondents was to improve governments understanding of the concerns of business. This gained the support of 26% of respondents. 28% of the UKBAB respondents voted for reducing the number of regulations as their first choice.
Runners up for first choice were:
UKBB - reduce the number of regulations (25%)
UKBAB - make regulations less complicated (24%)
Comments are listed under sector headings.
Views expressed are those of individual panellists and may not represent those of the University.
Production & Manufacturing
Business Services
Other