Governments need a range of mechanisms to ensure that regulations remain 'fit for purpose' and to identify priority reforms, according to a discussion draft released by the Productivity Commission.

 

The Commission was asked by the Australian Government to draw lessons for the future from past experiences with regulation reform.

 

The Commission looked at a range of approaches, from routine 'good housekeeping' to major in-depth reviews. Each has its own ‘niche’ in relation to coverage of regulatory areas and sectors, or timing in the regulatory cycle. Most were found to have a useful role to play, though the Commission identified various ways in which they could be made more effective. Key ingredients in the more successful approaches to regulatory reform have been good governance and effective consultation with business and other stakeholders.

 

The Commission noted that approaches such as regulatory stocktakes, benchmarking and in-depth reviews had much to offer, but expressed reservations about red tape targets and 'one in one out' rules. It noted the importance of conducting robust post-implementation reviews for those regulations that had been able to avoid the normal requirements for a Regulation Impact Statement (RIS).

 

The Commission emphasised the importance of governments taking a systemic approach to reviewing and reforming regulation, so as to avoid gaps in coverage and ensure the best overall payoff from available resources. It noted a number of potential areas for improvement at the Commonwealth level, including earlier planning of reviews, and more attention to prioritisation and sequencing of reform efforts.

 

Following public feedback on its Discussion Draft, the Commission is scheduled to finalise its report to Government by the end of November.

 

Submissions should be lodged with the Commission by 21 October 2011.

The Discussion Draft can be accessed here.