Good regulation demands good processes for developing and administering it. The essential elements are not rocket science. They simply require clarity about the nature of a perceived policy problem and why intervention would help, and a detailed understanding of the pros and cons of different possible measures. To do this well, however, can be demanding. Among the key requisites are an ability to analyse the costs, benefits and risks associated with regulatory ‘solutions’, and to undertake effective consultation with those who bear these (not just those calling for action).

And because today’s solutions may no longer be the right ones tomorrow, the periodic review of existing regulation is integral to achieving good outcomes over time.

There is nothing very novel in all this and, indeed, most governments, to varying degrees, have requirements in place, including regulation impact statements for significant regulatory proposals. What would be new would be their effective implementation and enforcement. This was what the Taskforce’s recommendations were directed at, and many of its recommendations to entrench good process and practice have been adopted at the Commonwealth level. There have also been some steps forward within COAG, although the lowest common denominator appears to have prevailed thus far.

Ultimately, real progress will depend on the ability to change the ‘regulate first’ culture that is pervasive within government, and achieve a better appreciation within the wider community of the limits of regulation in dealing with society’s complaints. I believe that procedural and institutional reforms will help on both fronts, but the critical ingredient for success will be political leadership.

Gary Banks

Chairman

Productivity Commission