In conclusion, the Taskforce report provides a useful insight into the systems for making business regulation. However, several of its arguments, especially those relating to the alleged risk averseness of Australian society, are not convincing, at least without further refinement and more reliable data. In part, this may have been caused by the limited time available for such an important project. It is more convincing when it comes to the assessment of the RIS system and its recommendations for its strengthening, no doubt drawing upon its chair’s knowledge and experience in the Productivity Commission. The Government clearly found the Taskforce’s assessment convincing and accepted the bulk of its recommendations — most of which constituted improvements to existing processes and techniques rather than fundamental changes — although these will be re-interpreted in ways that will not unduly constrain government prerogative.

As the tenor of the specific comments made in this chapter suggest, a large proportion of the recommendations made and accepted by the government represent a plea for more effective support and resourcing for a system that is already largely in place but that lacks the full extent of political and senior, administrative commitment and support needed to make it effective. Its positive reception suggests that commitment and support has now been increased, which should provide some reassurance to those in the Productivity Commission and business who have been expressing rising concern over the volume and quality of regulation. But, any government’s capacity to provide support and commitment is limited and variable, swinging from issue area to issue area in line with changing socio-economic realities. The greatest value of the report might be that it made the pendulum swing in the direction of regulation and its improvement.