These memes feature someone causing some form of catastrophe and then asking who is responsible. You can find more of an explanation and examples of the former meme <a href="https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/who-killed-hannibal" target="_blank" rel="noopener">here</a>, and the latter meme <a href="https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/were-all-trying-to-find-the-guy-who-did-this" target="_blank" rel="noopener">here</a>. I’ve been amused that there have been two recent instances where a regulator has said 'not me!' in response to backlash. The <a href="https://www.onr.org.uk/publications/regulatory-reports/other-reports/onr-s-regulatory-influence-on-the-epr-design-in-the-uk/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">first</a> relates to almost 7,000 design changes at Hinkley Point C, with the regulator stating that they were not responsible for considering cost, and the second relating to the now infamous £100m bat tunnel with the regulator being forced to publish <a href="https://naturalengland.blog.gov.uk/2024/11/08/natural-england-role-in-high-speed-2/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">a statement</a> (‘It is for HS2 Ltd to make choices, consider risks and factor in costs when deciding how to comply with environmental law)

There are two potential lessons here. First, if cost and proportionality are not part a public body’s remit, shouldn’t they be? Second, whilst we’re all wondering who is responsible for disproportionality, it’s worth bearing in mind that our system naturally incentivises risk-aversion because of legal challenges and, importantly, picking and choosing your battles. That means even when, as in those two examples above, the regulator says ‘we simply assessed what was put in front of us, we didn’t require it’, it’s failing to decouple the explicit actions of a regulator from the implicit requirements, culture, and choosing the path of least resistance (e.g., it’s sometimes easier to simply agree, then have it out). Both of those recommendations require resources so that regulators feel comfortable challenging proposals, but – given culture is amorphous - it also requires re-asserting proportionality into processes for example through Written Ministerial Statements or other Government policy so that the mood music is “please don’t do this”.