Improving Regulation Making Processes
There is considerable scope to improve the way that regulations are developed and scrutinised in Australia, according to the Productivity Commission's newly released report on Regulatory Impact Analysis: Benchmarking.
Regulatory impact analysis processes adopted by all governments should improve policy development and ultimately ensure that regulations (or other policy initiatives) provide the greatest benefit to the community, relative to the overall cost imposed.
'While these processes are reasonably well designed and supported in all jurisdictions, there are some shortcomings and a significant gap between agreed and actual practice that must be addressed', said Commissioner Robert Fitzgerald.
Regulatory impact analysis processes are failing to deliver on their potential due to inadequate ministerial and agency commitment. The Commission found evidence that proposals with the largest impacts on communities are often not rigorously scrutinised.
The Commission has identified a number of leading practices in regulatory impact analysis that, if more widely adopted, would improve the efficacy of policy development processes, including:
- publication of all regulation impact statements and compliance assessments by oversight bodies
- the use of a two stage impact analysis process, with stakeholders being able to comment on all draft regulation impact statements
- reducing opportunities to avoid assessment
- more effective targeting of regulatory impact analysis resources
- ensuring that post implementation reviews are undertaken through an independent process.
'More widespread and consistent adoption of the leading practices identified by the Commission, particularly in relation to transparency and accountability, would create stronger incentives for governments to demand and officials to deliver policies that are well considered and supported by rigorous analysis of different options and their impacts', according to Commissioner Fitzgerald.