黑洞社区

John Redwood

John Redwood is not impressed. He wanted the photographer to take his portrait in the vast atrium of Portcullis House 鈥� the recently built Westminster MPs鈥� offices 鈥� but a burly security man has said no. Instead, Redwood will have to be snapped in his rather cramped office, four storeys up. 鈥淎nother intrusion,鈥� he fumes, 鈥淚鈥檝e written to the serjeant at arms about this. If you鈥檝e got all the perimeter security around the building checking everyone as they come in, we don鈥檛 need these extra checks inside.鈥�

For Redwood, the overbearing internal security is yet more needless government waste. And as the Conservative party鈥檚 deregulation spokesman, a role to which he was appointed last September after three years in the wilderness, government waste is Redwood鈥檚 pet hate.

It is also likely to be one of the bloodier battlegrounds of the general election: Labour is pledging to make 拢21.5bn of efficiency savings after a review by Sir Peter Gershon, the former chief executive of the Office of Government Commerce; the Tories are pledging an eye-bulging 拢35bn based on an alternative view from David James, the former Millennium Dome troubleshooter.

If this were carried out, says Redwood, the construction industry would enjoy less prescriptive 黑洞社区 Regulations, would benefit from extra money invested in roads and schools, a faster planning system and fewer design changes on PFI projects.

Redwood has a bland, even tone of voice and speaks in carefully constructed sentences, which makes it all the more surprising when he comes out with sweeping overstatements such as comparing his current role with the Thatcher revolution. 鈥淭he analogy I鈥檇 make is with the 1980s鈥� Conservative government, which put through privatisation. We now need to do something similar in deregulation.鈥�

Redwood is not one to play down his impact in public life. He effectively takes the credit for single-handedly 鈥渟aving the pound鈥� (see Q&A overleaf). He also carries the grand title of shadow secretary for deregulation, which would be fine if there was an equivalent Cabinet member for him to shadow. Redwood blanches at this: 鈥淚 shadow the whole of government.鈥� As important as that sounds, if Michael Howard bests Tony Blair in May, the role would be part of the Cabinet Office, which proved a graveyard posting for moribund ministers such as Mo Mowlam and Jack Cunningham.

Like the 1980s Conservative government, which put through privatisation, we need to do something similar in deregulation

In fairness, Redwood would have some real power. Borrowing from the Dutch model, regulatory budgets would be imposed on each department, and these would have to be cut every year, beginning in February or March 2006. The savings would not just be the cost of implementing the regulations; Redwood would also seek to quantify the reduction in costs imposed on businesses and families.

Regulations and planning

Redwood is quick to point out that these changes would be of huge benefit to the construction industry. He would strip out the regional level of the planning system, including unelected assemblies, and reduce the role of regional development agencies. There would be national guidance for major infrastructure projects and county or unitary plans for smaller schemes. 鈥淭he builder would know who to go to, with nothing complicated in the middle,鈥� he says. 鈥淭he planning system is too cumbersome, there are too many people involved. Better to get a quick 鈥榥o鈥� to a project than a long, drawn-out one.鈥�

Redwood adds that the Tories would not relax planning restrictions in greenfield areas 鈥� unsurprising given that he has been campaigning against the construction of homes in his own constituency of Wokingham in Berkshire 鈥� but he is clearly interested in the issues facing housebuilders. His first job, in fact, was as a housebuilding and construction sector analyst at investment bank Robert Fleming. As a trainee in the 1970s he was sent to shadow one of the sector鈥檚 most respected analysts, David Taylor. Taylor recollects: 鈥淏y the end, my knowledge had been pretty well sucked dry by the man.鈥�

By the late 1980s Redwood was chairman of materials giant Norcros, and he seems to have carried some of what he learned there into his savings drive. He wants to reform the 黑洞社区 Regulations, with one example being thermo-efficiency standards. Rather than having separate targets for every part of a building, be it window or roof, he would just have one overall requirement. This would give more scope and flexibility to the architect and builder. He says: 鈥満诙瓷缜� Regulations are too prescriptive and fiddly 鈥� providing an exacting overall target would be a great improvement. We want a more energy-efficient world. Blue is the new green.鈥�

Redwood鈥檚 biggest announcement so far has been the proposed scrapping of 168 quangos, a plan that he says would save 拢4.3bn. He argues that this money could be spent on roads or buildings to accommodate the 600,000 extra school places the party has says it will provide.

黑洞社区 regulations are too prescriptive and fiddly. We want a more energy-efficient world. Blue is the new green

Reality testing

This sounds sensible enough, but some critics shake their heads at the suggestion that so many of these bodies should be outsourced to the private sector. One example is NHS Estates. It is due to be integrated into the Department of Health this year and will have its own directorate. The Tories have said they would privatise it. A senior NHS Estates source says: 鈥淭he NHS is controlled by parliament, so stewardship of the estate should remain within government. It鈥檚 the largest construction programme within government and a core service of the NHS. Besides, 60% of its funding comes from outside government.鈥�

Redwood鈥檚 defence is that outsourcing to the private sector would get better results: 鈥淲hen the government is so clearly useless, what successful business would want to take advice from it?鈥�

The issue of efficiency savings is very much in vogue at the moment, a result of the fanfare that greeted the Gershon review in 2003. Many have feared that the efficiency savings he proposed would be too burdensome on government. The James Review goes further, making the sceptics even more dubious. 鈥溌�35bn of savings sounds a lot,鈥� concedes Redwood, 鈥渂ut taking a government budget of 拢500bn, this is not out of the perspective of the kind of savings British business has to make to remain relentlessly competitive.鈥�

He adds that the Gershon review is not as comprehensive as James鈥�. 鈥淚 don鈥檛 believe that any government could deliver all he said 鈥� for example, he is a bit optimistic on gains made by computerisation. And it is too general. James is more specific. At one point we had a team of 60 consultants working on it. I also don鈥檛 believe that the government is committed to Gershon, because the main point was to reduce back-office staff and there is still a continuous rise.鈥�

It鈥檚 time for the photographer to take Redwood鈥檚 picture. The poster boy of the right insists that he tidy up his desk first. After all, shadow ministers must not just be efficient, they must be seen to be so.