It is in this context that the experience and practices of the NTC are worth reviewing. This institutional model demonstrates the value of linking sector wide capacity building with reform programs. While the primary function of the NTC is to promote uniform regulation in land transport the Commission’s influence and approach to its work also develops industry and government capacity to work more effectively in an ever changing regulatory environment. The Commission plays a key role in shaping industry opinion and attitudes towards reform and regulation (Painter 1998:146).
The NTC experience demonstrates that as well as supporting uniformity there are times where industry concerns centre on the lack of flexibility and capacity of regulation to account for local variation and need. There is a desire for regulatory regimes to accommodate two opposing views:
consistent treatment of all participants under uniform systems and requirements; and
a capacity to accommodate variation based on local circumstances.
The NTC has developed a culture of cooperative decision-making in the development of land transport policy and regulatory reform (Wilson and Moore 2006:298). It has an extensive range of consultation mechanisms and this includes regulatory authorities, transport agencies, enforcement agencies and representatives from the road and rail industry. The effectiveness of the NTC model rests in its robust policy development process, one that engages transport ministers and links their decisions on reform to a broad intergovernmental agreement that commits governments to a reform process. It is also a participative process, with substantial input from industry advisory bodies, ensuring a broad range of stakeholders are engaged and have access to the process.
Since its inception in 1992 the Commission has progressed regulatory reform in a range of areas impacting on land transport. This has included driver licensing regulations, vehicle standards, emission standards, vehicle registration regulations and legislation governing compliance and enforcement arrangements. The Commission’s current approach to the development and implementation of the new national rail safety laws involves communication strategies, provision of information and guidelines and working groups aimed at helping parties in the rail industry to comply with the legislative requirements. In preparing for the implementation of new rail safety regulation the NTC has also looked at how reform will be maintained into the future. This action is more about building and sustaining regulatory and compliance capacity in the sector. Their work includes the release of an information package for stakeholders that explains how states and territories will work together to ensure regulatory consistency (NTC 2006:2).
The Commission has also recommended changes to the institutional arrangements for the administration of rail safety regulatory regimes. This includes:
establishing development and approval processes for national guidelines and codes;
detailing processes for the maintenance and review of legislation, regulations and guideline material; and
establishing administrative arrangements for the recognition of industry codes and standards (NTC 2006).
It is this type of analysis that reform agendas should aim to promote but tend to neglect. The work of the NTC in rail safety recognises the need to develop mechanisms to more effectively manage complex systems for the benefit of governments, industry and the community (NTC 2004). While not an explicit role of the organisation, the Commission’s work in developing regulations has a major influence on the understanding stakeholders have of the regulatory framework within which they operate. The consultative work of the NTC brings industry and government into the regulatory development process and jointly builds their understanding of what is a dynamic regulatory environment. The outcome is an improvement in both regulation-making and compliance in the land transport sector.