IEA Warns of a Tsunami of Red Tape in UK Political Party Manifestos

A new briefing authored by Matthew Lesh, the Institute of Economic Affairs’ Director of Public Policy and Communications, has warned of a Tsunami of red tape within the political party manifestos that could increase costs for consumers and businesses.

In approximately one week, the British public will be casting their votes in ballot boxes up and down the country, and this election, perhaps more than any other in living memory, has revealed a clear division in what the British people want.

Much of the ‘smart money’ is currently on the Labour Party winning with a massive majority, with the Conservative Party heading for what some media commentators have called ‘extinction’.

However, there is another political party that has been vying with the Labour and Conservative parties for the biggest share of the headlines, and it is Reform UK, which has been winning the hearts and minds of a large proportion of the British public, according to several authoritative polls.

The popularity of leaders and candidates aside, the deciding factor likely to determine which party will run the country is ‘who will give more and take less’.

Matthew Lesh’s briefing has revealed that the new regulations proposed during this election campaign could significantly increase costs for businesses and consumers.

The IEA paper reveals that the political party manifestos contain 361 policies to increase the regulatory burden, with just 67 to decrease it. In addition, the IEA mentions that no party has provided costings for their regulatory proposals, despite claims to the contrary.

The briefing, titled Shadow Expenses: Uncosted Regulatory Burdens in Election Manifestos, has analysed the manifestos of the six largest UK parties, and it shows the Liberal Democrats have proposed the most new regulations, with 128 policy measures, followed by the Green Party at 104.

Labour’s manifesto includes 62 proposals to increase the regulatory burden, compared to 13 proposed reductions. The Conservatives have proposed 28 new regulatory measures and 20 that would reduce the regulatory burden. Reform UK has put forward 14 increases and 15 decreases.

The proposals range from relatively trivial policies, like the Green Party’s compulsory hedgehog holes in all new fencing, to the Labour Party’s plan to increase the minimum wage, apply it to all age groups, and extend equal pay duties.

The Conservatives, Labour and SNP have also backed ‘Martyn’s Law’ terrorism risk assessments for hospitality and nighttime venues, which the government’s impact assessment found would cost £2.7 billion.

The briefing, authored by the IEA’s Director of Public Policy and Communications, Matthew Lesh, highlights that no party has presented costings for their regulatory proposals despite claims of offering ‘fully costed’ manifestos.

It also warns that the economic impact of these regulatory changes is likely to be larger than the proposed fiscal changes for many parties.

Labour has proposed five tax-raising measures, which are expected to increase revenues by £8.6 billion. According to the government’s impact assessment, just one Labour policy requiring privately rented homes to meet minimum energy standards would cost £12.2 billion. Liberal Democrats and the Green Party have included the same policy in their manifestos.

• The Centre for Economics and Business Research has estimated that the 2030 ban on the sale of new petrol and diesel cars will cost an extra £1,000 per household per year from 2022 until 2050. [Labour, Green Party, Liberal Democrats policy]
• The government’s impact assessment for the Renters (Reform) Bill found a cost to businesses of £1 billion. [Conservative, Labour, Green Party, Liberal Democrats]
• The government’s impact assessment found that the football regulator would cost clubs £79.9 million. [Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrats]
• The government’s impact assessment found that the smoking ban would cost businesses £2 billion. [Conservative, Labour and SNP]
• The government’s impact assessment estimated that the junk food advertising ban would cost businesses £664 million. [Conservative and Labour]

Lesh also welcomes some manifesto commitments, such as planning reforms, that could reduce business burdens and grow the economy.

However, he warns that the overall trend is towards increased compliance requirements.

Matthew Lesh, paper author and IEA Director of Public Policy and Communications, said, “The major parties are proposing a tsunami of new regulations that could significantly increase costs for businesses and consumers. These policies will have far-reaching economic consequences, from banning petrol cars to mandating higher energy efficiency standards.

“It’s concerning that parties claim to have ‘fully costed’ manifestos while ignoring the substantial costs of their regulatory proposals. Voters deserve transparency about the true impact of platforms on their wallets and the wider economy.

“While some regulations serve important purposes, the sheer volume proposed risks higher prices, lower wages, and stifled innovation. Parties should carefully consider the costs and benefits of new rules rather than defaulting to more red tape in the face of every challenge.”