He continued to answer questions from Millett, concerning the attempts by the government of the day, to cut bureaucracy through a “two out, one in” regulation policy.
This is not a paywall. Registration allows us to enhance your experience across Construction Management and ensure we deliver you quality editorial content.
Registering also means you can manage your own CPDs, comments, newsletter sign-ups and privacy settings.
Millett had been questioning Pickles about a 2011 internal email sent by a press officer, which suggested subjects for potential press releases the department could send out. One of the story titles suggested in the email read: “Pickles introduces new red tape test for department.” It went on: “All future policy at DCLG will be subject to new bureaucracy-busting tests as ministers introduce new red tape challenge to policy.”
Millett asked if the email showed “quite some zeal” on Pickles’ part for the deregulatory agenda and to “place Building Regulations firmly within it”.
‘No status’
But Pickles described the author of the email as a “middle-ranking press officer”. He said: “This, sir, is very thin gruel. This is a press officer trying to find stories. This has no status in terms of our policy”.
As Millett persisted with the line of questioning, Pickles, who explained that he had meetings in the afternoon, appeared to grow impatient.
He told Millett: “I respectfully remind you that you did promise that we would be away this morning, and I have changed my schedules to fit this in. I do have an extremely busy day meeting people, but this is more important than anything. But I would urge you to use your time wisely.”
He added that he had answered Millett’s question “to the point of exhaustion”.
Apology
Following a break later in the morning, Pickles apologised to Inquiry chair Sir Martin Moore-Bick and Millett “if in any way I seemed discourteous”.
He added: “As soon as I left the room, I took the decision to cancel everything. This is more important than anything I am doing, and I apologise particularly to you, Mr Millett, if in any way I seemed as though I was being discourteous. I fully understand that you’re doing a proper job.”
The Inquiry continues.
