Tough measures in pursuit of growth The venture capitalist Adrian Beecroft completed his report on employment law in October last year, since when it has been stuck in limbo somewhere between the Prime Minister's office and Vince Cable's Department for Business, Innovation and Skills. It was finally published yesterday, but only after Downing Street had excised three recommendations that raised concerns about David Cameron's family-friendly policies. Mr Cable has made no secret of his antipathy towards its conclusions. It will be a surprise to many, however, to discover that Mr Cameron is not quite the "radical" eager to "shake things up" he declared himself to be only the day before. Yet he should have no cause to be embarrassed by the Beecroft report, which even in its reduced form offers the kind of sharp edge that has so far been absent from the Coalition's efforts to hack away the red tape impeding British business. Its call for very small businesses - with 10 employees or fewer - to be exempted from a swath of onerous employment laws is long overdue. It sensibly argues why the new system of pension auto-enrolment - which is expected to cost businesses £6 billion a year and employees £7 billion a year in the middle of an economic crisis - should be delayed until the economy is in better shape. More provocatively, it calls for the statutory consultation period before a redundancy programme can be announced to be cut from 90 days to 30, and also urges a cap to be placed on compensation awards for workers who are unfairly dismissed. And it demands the scrapping of provisions of the Equality Act which make employers legally liable for employee claims of "third-party harassment," such as customers making "sexist" comments about them. These are commonsense measures that go a long way towards lifting the burden of unnecessary regulation. Mr Cameron's timidity in dropping, among others, Mr Beecroft's ideas for restricting flexible working rights and rules governing the employment of children may be a political calculation. But it is the author's proposal for "no fault dismissal" that has attracted the critics" particular ire - especially his rather crass observation that workers could end up being sacked simply because their employer does not like them and "while this is sad I believe it is a price worth paying." Yet it is quite evident that over the years labour laws have become intractable for employers, to the detriment of the economy, and that a rebalancing of workplace rights is necessary. This report deserves to generate a grown-up debate on how best to make it easier for firms to hire and fire employees, while still ensuring that workers have adequate protection. Only tough choices will bring Britain back to economic growth, and Mr Cameron must demonstrate that he is willing to act and not just speak.