department of the taoiseach regulating better€¦ · ria promotes evidence-based policy-making by...

Necess i ty

Effect iveness

Propor t ional i ty

Transparency

Accountabi l i ty

Consis tency

Regulating BetterA Government White Paper setting out six principles of Better Regulation

Roinn an TaoisighDepartment of the Taoiseach

BAILE ÁTHA CLIATHARNA FHOILSIÚ AG OIFIG AN tSOLÁTHAIR

Le ceannach díreach ónOIFIG DHÍOLTA FOILSEACHÁN RIALTAIS

TEACH SUN ALLIANCE, SRÁID THEACH LAIGHEAN, BAILE ÁTHA CLIATH 2,nó tríd an bpost ó

FOILSEACHÁIN RIALTAIS, AN RANNÓG POST-TRÁCHTA,51 FAICHE STIABHNA, BAILE ÁTHA CLIATH 2,

(Teil: 01-6476834/35/36/37; Fax: 01-6476843)nó trí aon díoltóir leabhar.

DUBLINPUBLISHED BY THE STATIONERY OFFICE

To be purchased directly from theGOVERNMENT PUBLICATIONS SALES OFFICE,

SUN ALLIANCE HOUSE, MOLESWORTH STREET, DUBLIN 2,or by mail order from

GOVERNMENT PUBLICATIONS, POSTAL TRADE SECTION,51 ST. STEPHEN’S GREEN, DUBLIN 2.

(Tel: 01-6476834/35/36/37; Fax: 01-6476843)or through any bookseller.

January 2004

€5.00

PRN 1395

Roinn an TaoisighDepartment of the Taoiseach

Regulating Better

desi

gned

by

ww

w.r

eddo

g.ie

Taoiseach’s Foreword 01

Executive Summary 02

Glossary 04

Overview 06

Chart of Principles 10

Necessity 11

We will require higher standards of evidence before regulating. We will reduce red tape. We will keep our regulatory institutions and framework under review.

Effectiveness 16

We will target our new regulations more effectively. We will make sure that regulations can be adequately enforced and complied with.We will ensure that existing regulations in key areas are still valid.

Proportionality 20

We will regulate as lightly as possible given the circumstances, and use more alternatives. We will ensure that both the burden of complying and the penalty for not complying are fair.We will use Regulatory Impact Analysis appropriately when making regulations.

Transparency 26

We will consult more widely before regulating. There will be greater clarity about Public Service Obligations.Regulations will be straightforward, clear and accessible.

Accountability 30

We will strengthen accountability in the regulatory process. We will improve appeals procedures.

Consistency 34

We will ensure greater consistency across regulatory bodies. We will ensure that regulations in particular sectors/areas are consistent.

Action Programme for Better Regulation 37

Actions relating to legislative process and Statute Law RevisionActions on RIA and evidence-based policy-makingActions on institutional change and reviewActions on sectoral regulators/sectoral issuesActions on regulatory procedures and processes

Appendices 47

APPENDIX I – Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA)APPENDIX II – RIA and the Legislative Process

Index 50

Table of Contents

Enhanced competitivenessis a key part of theGovernment’s strategy toachieve social progress,better living standardsand a steadily improvingquality of life. I amabsolutely committed toensuring that Irelandcontinues to be acompetitive and openeconomy and that we donot erode the social andeconomic progress we

have made as a country over recent years. This WhitePaper deals with good quality regulation, which has anessential role in achieving these objectives. It sets outcore principles that the Government will adhere to inregulating and outlines a number of steps that will betaken to put the principles into practice.

Our exceptional economic growth in recent years hasenabled Ireland to make significant gains on a numberof fronts. Employment expanded, the unemploymentrate fell rapidly, much-needed infrastructural projectswere put in place or initiated, and living standards rosesignificantly. However, in the current, more uncertainglobal economic environment we need new avenuesthrough which we can maintain and enhance ourcompetitiveness. We also need to ensure that thebenefits of greater competitiveness and of heighteneddomestic competition are transferred to citizens andbusinesses. Better Regulation is one of the instrumentsavailable to achieve this.

Historically, much Government attention has beenfocused on the traditional instruments of Government,such as current expenditure, taxation and investment.Little importance has been given to regulatory policy.However, increasingly in OECD countries, greaterattention is being paid to choosing the most appropriateregulatory framework. The coming years are likely to becrucial, domestically and internationally, in establishingthe right mix of regulatory policies, tools andinstitutions. This White Paper establishes coreprinciples to guide these choices and, in doing so,provides for greater participation and transparency inpolicy-making and contributes to a better environmentfor the individual, the community and for business.

While many countries now recognise that BetterRegulation is vitally important for competitiveness andeconomic growth, Better Regulation also has a role toplay in promoting inclusiveness and good government forall citizens. Thus, the core principles set out in thisWhite Paper also relate to the quality of governance andthe efficiency and effectiveness of the public service.

It is widely accepted that, as well as providingpredictability and certainty in the business world, goodquality regulation contributes to establishing andmaintaining individual freedom and social cohesion, notleast through articulation and protection of citizens’ andconsumers’ rights. However, the reverse is also true.Bad or cumbersome regulation not only creates barriersto efficient markets, thereby discouraging competitionand innovation, but also alienates citizens fromgovernment and can contribute to unfair income andwealth distribution.

Reflecting the importance of regulation in many areas ofeconomic and social policy, the latest social partnershipagreement, “Sustaining Progress”, containscommitments to publish a White Paper on Regulationand introduce Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA). At EUlevel, the Better Regulation agenda has been gainingmomentum in recent years, particularly in terms of thestated need, in the Lisbon objectives, to pursue asimpler regulatory environment. The EuropeanCommission is implementing an action plan onsimplifying and improving the regulatory environmentwhich Ireland is actively supporting.

This White Paper sets out core principles of goodregulation. It also goes further: it sets out a programmeof actions to give effect to these principles. I lookforward to seeing these actions being implemented andto a new drive for economic competitiveness, socialprogress and better Government.

BERTIE AHERN, T.D.Taoiseach

Regulating Better 01

Taoiseach’s Foreword

Introduction

The Government has prepared “Regulating Better”, aGovernment White Paper that will contribute to improvingnational competitiveness and better Government byensuring that new regulations – Acts and StatutoryInstruments (Orders) – are more rigorously assessed interms of their impacts, more accessible to all and betterunderstood. Existing regulations will be streamlined andrevised, where possible, through a process of systematicreview and by repealing, restating and consolidating themas appropriate. This White Paper will also contribute tobetter regulatory processes and institutions, including amore consistent approach to the establishment anddesign of independent sectoral regulatory authorities.

Principles

This White Paper identifies what the Government sees asthe principles of good regulation:

NECESSITY – is the regulation necessary? Can we reduce red tape in this area? Are the rules andstructures that govern this area still valid?

EFFECTIVENESS – is the regulation properly targeted? Is itgoing to be properly complied with and enforced?

PROPORTIONALITY – are we satisfied that the advantagesoutweigh the disadvantages of the regulation? Is there asmarter way of achieving the same goal?

TRANSPARENCY – have we consulted with stakeholdersprior to regulating? Is the regulation in this area clear andaccessible to all? Is there good back-up explanatorymaterial?

ACCOUNTABILITY – is it clear under the regulationprecisely who is responsible to whom and for what? Is therean effective appeals process?

CONSISTENCY – will the regulation give rise to anomaliesand inconsistencies given the other regulations that arealready in place in this area? Are we applying best practicedeveloped in one area when regulating other areas?

Approach taken

The approach of this White Paper is both practical, in thatit is action-oriented, and pragmatic in that theGovernment is not “for or against” regulation. Rather, theGovernment favours Better Regulation. Regulation is anintegral part of the process of governing and it will

continue to be so. Legislation and subsidiary regulationshave a critical role to play in key areas of economic andsocial life. The recommendations and actions in thisWhite Paper are best seen in the context of thecontinuing drive for competitiveness and people’sexpectations of high quality public services. Many of theprinciples and commitments reflect good practice anddevelopments regarding regulation internationally. Forexample, many of our European Union (EU) partners andthe EU institutions themselves are developing similarprinciples and actions.

Overview of Actions

The Government will make better use of evidence-basedpolicy-making. This means making better use of researchand analysis in both policy-making and policyimplementation. Regulation is an expression of policyand Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) is an evidence-based approach that allows for the systematicconsideration of the benefits and costs of a regulatoryproposal to the economy and society. The Governmentwill pilot a system of RIA in a small number ofDepartments and, following the pilot phase, RIA will beintegrated with existing procedures. RIA will give specialconsideration to business impacts, especially in respectof Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs). RIA will beintegrated with developments under the e-Cabinet projectand will be supported through training, guidelines andpromotion.

Systematic reviews of the regulation of key areas andsectors will be carried out which will involve reviewing theregulatory institutions in place, as well as the body ofregulation governing particular areas.

To improve the internal consistency of regulation inparticular areas, the Government will implement aprogramme of Statute Law Revision, including a majorproject to update pre-1922 legislation. The Governmentwill also use RIA to ensure the effectiveness of newregulations, taking account of the existing body of regulation.

Emphasis will be placed on developing proposals forimprovements to the procedures for appealing regulatorydecisions. For example, consideration will be given toestablishing expert panels of judges to deal with specificcompetition and sectoral regulation cases.

02 Regulating Better

Executive Summary

In considering the burden of complying with regulations,the Government will review:

i) compliance and the question of linking penalties and fines to income and ability to pay; and

ii) the extent to which the criminal justice system is capable of efficiently dealing with the complexities of modern regulatory issues.

The Government will also monitor the cumulative burdenof compliance on business and SMEs to ensure thatcompliance costs are fair and proportionate with thebenefit the regulation brings.

The Government will ensure that new regulations arebetter understood, by publishing explanatory guidesalongside primary legislation with significant impacts, inparticular those that impact directly onconsumers/citizens/SMEs. Similar steps will be taken toimprove the quality of the explanatory material thataccompanies secondary law/statutory instrumentscontaining major proposals.

The Government will also encourage the establishment ofnorms and standards for consultation processes and willkeep under consideration the need for legislationunderpinning administrative procedures.

The Government will create new sectoral regulators onlyif the case for a new regulator can be clearlydemonstrated in light of existing structures. It willassess the possibilities for rationalisation of sectoralregulators along with promoting the strengthening ofexisting contacts between the sectoral regulators, theCompetition Authority and the Office of the Director ofConsumer Affairs.

To further improve customer service delivery, theGovernment will require Departments to streamlineservice delivery and administrative processes wherepossible, using the latest technology, along with theintroduction of customer charters, to reduce the burdenof compliance on the citizen.

The Government intends to strengthen the capacity forevidence-based policy-making by ensuring thatDepartments promote training and awareness-raising ofpolicy analysis skills. Departments will also be requiredto report, through their Strategy Statements and AnnualReports, on regulatory reforms and service improvements.

A key to Better Regulation will be clarity and accessibility ofregulations. The Government will improve the coherence oflegislation through revision, restatement and repeal, byensuring greater consistency in the drafting of StatutoryInstruments and maximising the use of IT/e-Governmentinitiatives to improve clarity and accessibility of regulations.

Next steps

A detailed Action Programme is set out in this WhitePaper, along with assignments of responsibility andindicative timescales. A Better Regulation Group will beestablished and it will be asked, inter alia, to report backregularly to the Government on implementation of theseactions by Departments, Offices and Agencies.


Some terms explained

Codification: Codification is sometimes used, in a generalsense, to describe processes such as restatement andconsolidation, which help bring all the relevant legislationon a particular topic into a single, updated text.

Consolidation: Consolidation is the process whereby theOireachtas passes one, overall Act into which all previousActs relating to a topic are collected. An example is theSocial Welfare (Consolidation) Act, 1993.

Consumer & citizen: The terms consumer and citizen areused in this document and it is important to note thatthese are not interchangeable terms.

The term consumer means a private individual,participating in the market by buying goods and servicesfor their own use.

The concept of a citizen denotes a fuller relationshipbetween an individual and the State. In this White Paper,it is not used to denote nationality in any strict legal sense.

In situations where the State is a direct producer orsupplier of particular goods or services to citizens andbusinesses, those citizens/businesses are also consumers.

Governance: Governance has been defined as “rules,processes and behaviour that affect the way in whichpowers are exercised…. particularly as regardsopenness, participation, accountability, effectiveness andcoherence” (European Commission, EuropeanGovernance – A White Paper, 2001). In this Paper theterm refers to governance at all levels of Government:national, regional, local and - at times - at the level ofspecific economic sectors.

The Lisbon Objectives: These are the main targets whichwere adopted by the Heads of State and Government ofEU Member States at their meeting in Lisbon in March2000. The strategic goal agreed at Lisbon is to make theEuropean economy the most competitive and dynamicknowledge-based economy in the world by 2010, i.e. tocreate an economy capable of sustainable development,with more and better jobs and stronger social cohesion.

These objectives are designed to focus the EUinstitutions and Member States on strengthening anddeepening the European internal market, by preparing forthe transition to a knowledge-based economy and societyand promoting investment in research and innovation.Other objectives include promotion of entrepreneurship,support for Small to Medium Enterprises (SMEs),modernisation of the labour market and combating social

exclusion. The Lisbon Objectives are the central theme atEuropean Spring Council meetings, attended by Heads ofState and Government.

Public Service Obligation (PSO): A PSO is an obligationplaced by the State on a supplier to provide a service orto engage in an activity where it is not commerciallyattractive to do so, but which the State considers to be inthe public interest. Examples of PSOs are to be found inlocal public transport services and regional air services.

Regulation: In this document we generally use“regulation” to mean primary legislation enacted by theOireachtas and secondary legislation enacted byMinisters empowered under primary legislation.Depending on the context, it can also mean “to regulate”in the economic and social sense of the word. Forexample, “regulation of telecommunications” would betaken in a general sense to include ComReg (theCommission for Communications Regulation), theDepartment of Communications, Marine and NaturalResources and the body of regulation that governstelecommunications.

A wider definition of “regulation” would also include, inaddition to Acts of the Oireachtas and StatutoryInstruments, Bunreacht na hÉireann and the Treaties, rulesand regulations of the European Union. Such a definitionmight also extend to subsidiary rules and regulations, suchas those made by Local and Regional Authorities, and self-regulatory bodies with regulatory powers.

Regulation can also be used in a more specific sense tomean an EU “Regulation”, as opposed to a Directive.This is a particular class of legal instrument made by theCouncil, Parliament or Commission and binding onMember States and their citizens.

It will be made clear in the document where thesemeanings are intended.


Glossary of Terms

Regulatory capture: This is an economic term describinga situation where one operator (or group of operators) inthe market uses its influence or resources to extract aregulatory decision, or lack of decision, for their ownbenefit rather than the benefit of society as a whole. It is associated with patterns of behaviour on the part ofa regulatory body in one, or a combination, of thefollowing situations:

• the regulatory body is tending to further producerinterests over consumer interests.

• the regulatory body has become overly protectivetowards the regulated entities.

• the regulatory body is tending to adopt objectives thatare very close to those of the entities it is supposed to regulate.

Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA): RIA is an assessmentof the likely effects of a proposed new regulation orregulatory change. It involves a detailed analysis toascertain whether or not the new regulation would havethe desired impact. It also helps to identify the sideeffects and any hidden costs associated with regulation.RIA clarifies the desired outcomes of the proposedregulatory change.

RIA promotes evidence-based policy-making by giving detailedconsideration to the likely impacts of decisions, along withstructured consultation with stakeholders and citizens.

RIA is not a substitute for decision-making. It is anapproach which improves the quality of political andadministrative decision-making, while providing openness,public involvement and accountability.

Regulatory Management and Better Regulation:Increasingly, these terms are being used to convey theconcept of an ongoing commitment by Governments toimproving regulation, e.g. the processes of policyformulation, legislative drafting and enhancing the overalleffectiveness and coherence of regulation.

The idea of “Better Regulation” also helps to draw animportant distinction between the wide regulatory reformagenda and the more specific issue of deregulation. Insome cases, consumer, investor and the general publicinterest may be better served by new regulations, while inothers it is better served by amending or removing regulations.

Regulatory Reform: Generally, this term describes,“changes that improve regulatory quality, i.e. enhance theperformance, cost-effectiveness or legal quality ofregulations and related government formalities” (OECD,Regulatory Reform in Ireland, 2001).

These can be changes in specific regulations governingmarkets and sectors, such as utilities -telecommunications, energy or transport. Alternatively, itcan mean changes to the way regulations are formulated,enacted and enforced. Examples of these changesinclude: impact analysis techniques, the use ofalternatives to regulation and “sunsetting” (see below).

Repeal and re-enactment: Repeal and re-enactment isthe process whereby legislation can be repealed and re-cast in more coherent language, but with the sameunderlying policy. Repeal and re-enactment of secondarylegislation can be undertaken by persons authorised bylaw to make secondary legislation.

Restatement: Restatement is the process used by theAttorney General to make updated versions of Acts of theOireachtas, or earlier statutes, available. These versions,known as restatements, do not alter the substance of thelaw and, therefore, do not require Oireachtas approval.They are, in effect, administrative consolidations. Theymay, however, be cited in court and accepted in court asprima facie evidence of the legislation set out in them.

Sunsetting: Sunsetting is when, at the time a regulationis made, a specific date is set on which that regulationwill expire unless it is re-made. This ensures that aregulation is formally reviewed at an agreed date in thefuture, to establish whether or not it is still valid, or if itcould be improved, reduced or even revoked.

Universal Service Obligation (USO): A USO is a specifictype of Public Service Obligation (PSO) – see above. It isan obligation placed by the State on a supplier to providea service of a specified quality to all users throughout thecountry, irrespective of geographical location, at anaffordable price. It is used particularly for networkindustries such as telecommunications and postalservices. An example of a USO is where the price of postinga letter is the same irrespective of where in the country itis to be delivered. The cost of a USO is often met bysome form of cross-subsidisation, whereby some users ofthe service pay more than the true cost of providing theservice to them, so as to subsidise other users who pay less.


Why do we need this White Paper?

We need a White Paper on Regulation, mainly because ofthe impact which regulation has on nationalcompetitiveness. We also need it because regulationaffects the quality of everyday life. This includes thequality of our food and water, the safety of our workplacesas well as the range of products and services available tous and the price we pay for them. Despite this level ofinfluence, we have rarely paused to consider in asystematic way questions relating to the quality ofregulation. Questions such as: why we regulate, how wemake regulations, what kind of regulation we want or whatconstitutes good regulation? This White Paper attempts toaddress some of these questions by setting down coreprinciples of good regulation.

What are the principles of Better Regulation?

The principles of Better Regulation that the Governmentwishes to promote are:

+ NECESSITY – is the regulation necessary? Can wereduce red tape in this area? Are the rules and thestructures that govern this area still valid?

+ EFFECTIVENESS - is the regulation properly targeted?Is it going to be properly complied with and enforced?

+ PROPORTIONALITY – are we satisfied that theadvantages outweigh the disadvantages of theregulation? Is there a smarter way of achieving thesame goal?

+ TRANSPARENCY – have we consulted withstakeholders prior to regulating? Is the regulation inthis area clear and accessible to all? Is there goodback-up explanatory material?

+ ACCOUNTABILITY – is it clear under the regulationprecisely who is responsible to whom and for what?Is there an effective appeals process?

+ CONSISTENCY – will the regulation give rise toanomalies and inconsistencies, given the otherregulations that are already in place in this area? Arewe applying best practice developed in one area whenregulating other areas?

What do we mean by “regulation”?

We generally mean primary and secondary legislation.Primary legislation means Acts passed by the Oireachtasand earlier Parliaments. Secondary legislation meanslegislation for which responsibility has been delegated bythe Oireachtas to some other party. In practice, it isusually Government Ministers to whom responsibility hasbeen delegated and secondary legislation usually takesthe form of Statutory Instruments. Of course, much ofour national regulation is derived from our membership ofthe European Union, through EU Directives and regulations.

However, at some points in the White Paper we also talkabout “regulation” in a wider sense. For example, we maytalk about regulation of an economic sector liketelecommunications. In such discussions, “regulation” isnormally used to describe the entire regime whichgoverns that particular sector or activity. Regulation inthis sense includes all of the primary and secondarylegislation but also extends to the various authoritieswhich operate in those areas. For example, “regulation oftelecommunications” would be taken to include ComReg(the Commission for Communications Regulation), theDepartment of Communications, Marine and NaturalResources and the body of regulation that governstelecommunications.

How will these principles improvecompetitiveness?

Competitiveness is a relative concept and Ireland mustconstantly seek to improve its position vis-à-vis othereconomies. Inappropriate regulation can adversely affectthe competitiveness of the economy. For example, ourpublic services must not become snarled up in red tape.Our businesses must not be made to carry the deadweight of unnecessary or unduly restrictive regulation.We must not stifle competition or innovation throughregulation that promotes or protects inefficiencies in theeconomy.


Overview

The actions that we will take arising from our applicationof the principles that we identify in this White Paper willtackle both the “stock” of existing regulation and the“flow” of new regulation. We will scrutinise regulations toensure that they do not unintentionally damagecompetitiveness. As far as possible, we will try to ensurethat they enhance Ireland’s competitive position.

We will pay particular attention to the interaction ofcompetition and regulation. Vigorous competition canfrequently deliver great benefits to consumers in terms ofthe quality and range of products and services as well aslower prices. By ensuring that regulation is supportingcompetition, we can bring benefits to consumers andenhance the competitiveness of the economy as a whole.

How will these principles improve oureveryday lives?

In addition to benefits as consumers, applying theseprinciples to new and existing regulations will improve thequality of our everyday lives. Red tape is at bestfrustrating and, at worst, it alienates people by placingbarriers between the Government on the one hand, andcitizens and communities on the other. Sometimes thisis because of the quality of the regulations themselves –they might be drafted more with a focus on theadministrator than on those whom they are designed toassist or protect. Sometimes it can be because there isconfusion as to the structures and processes that are inplace for dealing with particular issues. There may beoverlap or duplication between regulatory authorities.There might be a lack of clarity on appeals proceduresand who is responsible for what. The new principles thatwe are proposing will mean that we will systematicallyreview and take account of these issues. The goal is toachieve a more coherent regulatory framework and toimprove the quality of our everyday lives.


REGULATION AND COMPETITIVENESS

The Global Competitiveness Report 2003, published bythe World Economic Forum (www.weforum.org),provides an assessment of the comparative strengthsand weaknesses of 102 countries in relation to theireconomic competitiveness and growth. In the report,the five most competitive economies – Finland, USA,Sweden, Denmark and Taiwan – all identified tacklinginefficient bureaucracy /red tape as a competitivenessissue. In general, respondents – both OECD anddeveloping/transition countries – singled out red tapeas one of the two major factors constraining theirbusiness operations.

REGULATION IN OUR EVERYDAY LIVES

In an average day, a person will, perhaps withouteven being aware of it, come into contact with anumber of services that are subject to regulation.The radio stations available when one wakes up inthe morning, for example, are regulated by theBroadcasting Commission of Ireland. Transportation– on buses, trains, taxis and road usage – is alsoregulated. If children are left in a crèche duringworking hours, health, safety and welfare standardsin those crèches are subject to regulation under theChild Care Act, 1991. Health, safety and otherstandards are also enforced in restaurants, cafes,bars, and supermarkets. In other words, oureveryday lives are subject to regulation in a numberof ways. Providing clarity and transparency in howwe make and implement regulations is important,therefore, so that services do not get tied up byexcessive red tape and people are clear about howregulation affects them directly.

Are we against regulation?

The Government is not against regulation. Rather, it is infavour of Better Regulation. Regulation is an integral partof the process of governing and it will continue to be so.Legislation and subsidiary regulations have a critical roleto play in key areas of economic and social life, including:

+ To protect and enhance the rights and liberty of citizens;+ To promote an equitable, safe and peaceful society;+ To safeguard health and safety or protect citizens;+ To protect consumers, employees and vulnerable groups;+ To promote the efficient working of markets;+ To protect the environment and promote sustainable

development; and+ To collect revenue and ensure that it is spent in

accordance with policy objectives.

This White Paper recognises that, in certain cases, lessregulation may be appropriate while, in other cases, moreregulation might be required to achieve particularoutcomes. In all cases, however, there should be betterquality regulation.

What about EU regulation?

While precise measurement is difficult, many EU MemberStates have estimated that about half of their regulationderives from membership of the EU and Ireland would beno different in this respect. The actions that we areadopting in this White Paper will not stem the flow ofregulation at European level. However, many of themeasures that we are proposing – such as impactassessment and simplification of regulation – are beingadopted at EU level by the Commission and otherinstitutions. Other Member States are also at variousstages of implementing similar reforms to their regulatoryprocesses. There is a growing recognition within the EUthat Better Regulation can help to achieve the goals thatwere established by the European Council at Lisbon in2000, which were designed to make the EU the mostcompetitive economic bloc in the world in ten years.

While the flow of EU regulations (and other internationalregulations, e.g. United Nations, International LabourOrganisation) will continue, Ireland, as a Member State,can influence their quality and content. In addition, justbecause a regulation originates in the EU and must beimplemented at national level does not mean that weshould not try to assess its likely impact at the earliestpossible stage. The European Union (Scrutiny) Act 2002requires the engagement of the Oireachtas in earlyassessment of EU legislative proposals.

Will this White Paper change who hasresponsibility for regulation?

The fundamentals of the legislative process and the roleof the Oireachtas are established in the Constitution andthere is nothing in this White Paper which proposes anychange in this regard. Nevertheless, some changes havebeen taking place in recent times to our regulatory“architecture”. Like many OECD countries, the role of theIrish Government has changed in some areas, from beingservice provider to service regulator. Many regulatorydecision-making functions have transferred to specificsectoral regulators, in a bid to open competition andpromote innovation. These new independent regulatorshave been established in areas such as communications –both telecommunications and postal services – as well as


COST OF REGULATION IN THE EU

The European Commission’s internal marketscoreboard shows that the burden of ‘red tape’ onbusiness – not including citizens or administrations– is estimated to be between 4% and 6% of GrossDomestic Product (GDP) and that 15% of this burdenis avoidable. National studies within the EU havevariously estimated the burden on business atlevels ranging from 2.2% of GDP (Netherlands) to4.4% of GDP (Germany).

Taking 3% of GDP as a guideline estimate of theoverall administrative burden, and assuming the EUestimate that 15% of this burden was avoidable,then unnecessary regulation could have cost Irishbusiness about €582 million in 2002.

The cost to the European Union as a whole issomewhere in the region of 0.45% of European GDPor nearly 40 billion euro.

energy, aviation and financial services. Furtherdevelopments are expected in the transport sector. Thenew regulatory bodies do not necessarily have the samestructure or powers.

The main regulatory “actors” - those currently designingand implementing regulation in Ireland - are: theOireachtas (as primary regulator); GovernmentDepartments and Offices; agencies at arms-length fromGovernment which have regulatory enforcement functions;local authorities; independent sectoral regulators; and - incertain cases - professional bodies. There is a need toavoid overly elaborate regulatory structures. Thechallenge is, therefore, to implement regulatory reformwhile managing the ongoing development andeffectiveness of existing regulatory institutions. Theprinciples and actions contained in this White Paper willhelp to guide future choices about our regulatory system.

What practical difference will this WhitePaper make?

The White Paper establishes principles and also outlinessteps for their implementation. These steps includechanges to existing regulatory practices and introductionof some new measures. The net result will be that:

+ Regulations will be prepared in a more transparent way;+ Public participation in their formulation will be enhanced; + Regulations will be clearer in their language and their focus;+ Regulations will more effectively identify and achieve

Government objectives;+ Regulations will be designed so as to minimise the

burden of compliance;+ Regulations are likely to be better enforced;+ Unintended effects of regulations will be minimised; and+ Regulations will be regularly reviewed for their

effectiveness and their continued relevance.



Char

t of R

egul

ator

y Pr

inci

ples

and

Act

ions

1. N

ECES

SITY

We

will

req

uire

hig

her

stan

dard

s of

evi

denc

ebe

fore

reg

ulat

ing

We

will

str

engt

hen

polic

ym

akin

g an

d th

e qu

ality

of

regu

latio

ns t

hrou

gh im

pact

anal

ysis

, be

tter

tra

inin

gan

d aw

aren

ess-

rais

ing

and

bett

er q

ualit

y da

ta o

n w

hich

to b

ase

deci

sion

s.

We

will

red

uce

red

tape

The

burd

en o

f re

d ta

pe

will

be

redu

ced

thro

ugh

cust

omer

ser

vice

initi

ativ

es,

IT-e

nabl

edim

prov

emen

ts a

nd

Sta

tute

Law

Rev

isio

n.

We

will

kee

p ou

rre

gula

tory

inst

itut

ions

and

fram

ewor

k un

der

revi

ew

The

requ

irem

ent

for

sect

oral

reg

ulat

ory

inst

itutio

ns w

ill b

e re

gula

rly r

evie

wed

in t

helig

ht o

f se

ctor

al d

ynam

ics,

com

petit

ion,

con

verg

ence

and

mar

ket

chan

ge.

We

will

tar

get

our

new

regu

lati

ons

mor

eef

fect

ivel

yTh

e ob

ject

ives

of

regu

latio

nw

ill b

e st

ated

cle

arly

inex

plan

ator

y gu

ides

. W

ew

ill m

ore

freq

uent

ly u

sere

gula

tion

that

set

s ou

t th

ego

als

to b

e ac

hiev

ed b

utw

hich

leav

es m

axim

umfle

xibi

lity

as t

o th

e m

eans

of a

chie

ving

the

m.

We

will

mak

e su

re t

hat

regu

lati

ons

can

bead

equa

tely

enf

orce

d an

dco

mpl

ied

wit

hW

e w

ill f

ram

e re

gula

tions

so t

hat

they

ach

ieve

the

grea

test

leve

ls o

fco

mpl

ianc

e w

ithou

tex

cess

ive

enfo

rcem

ent

and

com

plia

nce

cost

s.

We

will

ens

ure

that

exis

ting

reg

ulat

ions

in k

eyar

eas

are

still

val

idW

e w

ill s

yste

mat

ical

lyre

view

exi

stin

g re

gula

tions

gove

rnin

g ke

y ar

eas

of t

heec

onom

y an

d so

ciet

y.

We

will

reg

ulat

e as

ligh

tly

as p

ossi

ble

give

n th

eci

rcum

stan

ces,

and

use

mor

e al

tern

ativ

esW

e w

ill p

rom

ote

the

use

of a

wid

er r

ange

of

alte

rnat

ives

by

Gov

ernm

ent

Dep

artm

ents

/Off

ices

.

We

will

ens

ure

that

bot

hth

e bu

rden

of

com

plyi

ngan

d th

e pe

nalt

y fo

r no

tco

mpl

ying

are

fai

rPe

nalti

es in

reg

ulat

ions

w

ill b

e m

ore

prop

ortio

nate

.W

e w

ill a

lso

mon

itor

the

burd

en o

f co

mpl

ianc

e on

busi

ness

and

SM

Es.

We

will

use

Reg

ulat

ory

Impa

ct A

naly

sis

appr

opriat

ely

whe

n m

akin

g re

gula

tion

sW

e w

ill p

ilot

and

then

mai

nstr

eam

a s

yste

m o

fR

IA in

Gov

ernm

ent

Dep

artm

ents

and

Off

ices

.

We

will

con

sult

mor

ew

idel

y be

fore

reg

ulat

ing

Con

sulta

tion

proc

esse

s w

illbe

impr

oved

and

mad

em

ore

cons

iste

nt a

cros

sG

over

nmen

t D

epar

tmen

tsan

d O

ffic

es.

Ther

e w

ill b

e gr

eate

rcl

arit

y ab

out

Pub

licSer

vice

Obl

igat

ions

We

will

ens

ure

that

Pub

licS

ervi

ce O

blig

atio

ns a

rem

ade

mor

e ex

plic

it w

hen

regu

latin

g, in

ter

ms

ofco

sts

and

serv

ice

leve

ls.

Reg

ulat

ions

will

be

stra

ight

forw

ard,

cle

ar

and

acce

ssib

leR

egul

atio

ns w

ill b

e as

stra

ight

forw

ard,

cle

ar a

ndac

cess

ible

as

poss

ible

,w

ith g

uida

nce

in p

lain

lang

uage

.

We

will

str

engt

hen

acco

unta

bilit

y in

the

regu

lato

ry p

roce

ss

Reg

ulat

ors

and

enfo

rcem

ent

agen

cies

shou

ld b

e cl

early

acco

unta

ble

to c

itize

ns,

thro

ugh

the

Hou

ses

of t

heO

ireac

htas

and

Gov

ernm

ent.

We

will

impr

ove

appe

als

proc

edur

esTh

ere

shou

ld b

e w

ell

publ

icis

ed,

acce

ssib

le

and

equi

tabl

e ap

peal

spr

oced

ures

tha

t ba

lanc

erig

hts

of a

ppea

l with

the

need

for

spe

edy

actio

n,

in a

fai

r m

anne

r.

Whe

rere

gula

tory

dec

isio

ns a

rere

ferr

ed t

o th

e co

urts

,th

ere

are

part

icul

arre

quire

men

ts o

f sp

eed

and

expe

rtis

e.

We

will

ens

ure

grea

ter

cons

iste

ncy

acro

ssre

gula

tory

bod

ies

As far

as

poss

ible

, th

ere

shou

ld b

e gr

eate

r si

mila

rity

in t

he r

emit,

res

pons

ibili

ties,

stru

ctur

e an

d ap

proa

ches

of

regu

lato

ry in

stitu

tions

.

We

will

ens

ure

that

regu

lati

ons

in p

arti

cula

rse

ctor

s/ar

eas

are

cons

iste

nt

Legi

slat

ion

in li

nked

or

conn

ecte

d ar

eas

will

be

cons

iste

nt,

and

kept

up

to d

ate

and

acce

ssib

leth

roug

h pr

oces

ses

of s

impl

ifica

tion,

cons

olid

atio

n an

dre

stat

emen

t.

2. E

FFEC

TIVE

NESS

3. P

ROPO

RTIO

NALI

TY4.

TRA

NSPA

RENC

Y5.

ACC

OUNT

ABIL

ITY

6. C

ONSI

STEN

CY

We will require higherstandards of evidencebefore regulating.We will reduce red tape.We will keep our regulatoryinstitutions and frameworkunder review.

In the context of regulation, the ‘necessity’principle is about ensuring regulatory policiesand tools are deployed only when required andthat the need for particular regulatoryinstitutions is kept under regular review.

In terms of regulatory institutions - includingcentral Government agencies, local authoritiesand sectoral regulatory institutions - ongoingmonitoring and review of optimum structures areimportant. Technological advances, economicnecessities or political priorities can all quicklychange the rationale for particular regulatorystructures. In such cases, the continuednecessity and appropriateness of regulation, andthe need for specific regulatory institutions andtheir mandates, must be reviewed and adjustedas appropriate.

In terms of assessing the need for regulation inan economic context, it is important to assesscarefully whether or not the existing situation canbe resolved through market mechanisms. Clearcriteria should be used to determine whethercircumstances justify regulation of particular markets.

Direct intervention by Government alwaysrequires careful consideration. The Stateshould avoid the “regulatory impulse” wherebyit adopts programmed, default responses tosituations that arise, to the exclusion of otherpossible solutions.

It is also important to be clear about anobjective before considering whether

intervention will ensure the intended result orbe outweighed by the unintended consequences.To this end, an evidence-based approach shouldbe adopted to policy-making in general and tothe regulatory process in particular.

The decision to make a regulation is an important oneand it will always have implications. The extent of theseimplications may not always be clear. In the case ofregulations which affect particular markets, theimplications can be far-reaching. In the future, we willrequire regulations to be more rigourously supported interms of the information, analysis and assumptions thatunderpin them. This will be done partly through specifictechniques such as impact assessment but also throughstrengthening capacity within Government Departments toproduce evidence-based policy options. It will alsorequire ensuring that data are available to allow properrigorous analyses. A more favourable climate forevidence-based policy will be created within Government,through training and awareness-raising, and developmentof policy tools and techniques such as scenario planningand option generation.

There is already a discernible shift towards evidence-based policy. We see it, for example, in terms ofevaluative programmes such as expenditure reviews,greater use of research in the social sciences and policyproofing tools to underpin key policy objectives, e.g.reducing poverty and promoting gender equality.

A recently published report by the National Statistics Board– “Developing Irish Social and Equality Statistics to meetPolicy Needs” 1 – underlines this trend. On foot of thisreport, Departments are working with the Central StatisticsOffice (CSO) to identify the potential for integrating andcross-referencing data across the system. This ongoingwork will add to the range and quality of available data.

The evidence-based approach seeks to answer questionssuch as “What works? In what context did it work? What didit take to make it work? How would it work better?” Thisapproach has a lot in common with other results-oriented


Necessity

Is the regulation necessary?

We will require higher standards of evidence before regulating

1 National Statistics Board – “Developing Irish Social and EqualityStatistics to meet Policy Needs” (2003) (Government of Ireland)

TO SUM UP: To ensure that regulations arenecessary, the Government will:

Strengthen capacity for evidence-basedpolicy-making [Action 2.2.1];Improve the quality of information tosupport evidence-based policy [Action 2.2.2];Use Regulatory Impact Analysis [Action 2.1.1];Examine where regulation may behampering competition, including throughfurther reviews of sectors by theCompetition Authority [Actions 3.2.2-3.2.3].Develop competencies through thePerformance Management andDevelopment System (PMDS) [Action 2.2.3];Recruit specialist staff with relevantcompetencies, where appropriate [Action 2.2.4];

approaches to public service delivery, such as qualitycustomer service and the value-for-money approach tofinancial management.

Regulations are the legal expression of policy choices.However, policy outcomes can be influenced by the decisionto use a regulation as the means of implementing the policyas well as by the quality of the regulation itself. This meansthat, before regulating, we must assess the evidence todetermine if regulation is the correct option. Strengtheningthe evidence base for regulation will, in turn, add to thedemand for good quality data. It will raise questions as tothe availability and sufficiency of such data and it will haveimplications for the capacity of the system to produce anduse this kind of information.

Of course, regulation can also be a positive force and the decisionmay be quite clear-cut in certain circumstances. There are manyexamples of this, related to environmental, health and safety andconsumer protection. Nothing in this document will affect thesedecisions except that we will wish to have the decision supportedby clearer evidence. The key test here is that there must bedemonstrable benefits in terms of achieving public policyobjectives flowing from regulation that would not otherwise accrue.

We are all familiar with red tape. It arises fromcumbersome administrative procedures, unclearcommunications, excessive information demands orcomplicated approval processes. Red tape is irritatingand frustrating but it is also costly. It is a financial drainfor those who have to comply with it but also for thosewho have to administer it. Often, public serviceorganisations are their own worst enemy in this areabecause they tie up their own operations in excessiveadministrative procedure.

A lot has been done already to improve things.Government Departments and agencies are much morecustomer focused than they were ten years ago.Customer service principles underpin many of theschemes and services that we offer to the public.


Can we make it easier and simpler?

We will reduce red tape

IMPORTANCE OF COMPETITION

Competition is a positive force for creating jobs andpromoting economic growth. Competition policyhas a major role to play in generating continuedimprovements in living standards and overalleconomic welfare.

In a small open economy like Ireland’s, greatercompetition in the "sheltered" (non-traded) sectorsof the economy can result in lower costs to firms inthe traded sector, making them more competitiveinternationally and resulting in higher employment.In part, this will be achieved through the continuedrefinement and active implementation ofcompetition policy.

The role of the Competition Authority is crucial inthis regard. The Authority’s work, especially itsstudies of particular markets and sectors (e.g. thestudy of the professions initiated in 2001) are animportant input to, and a trigger for, regulatoryreform. In addition to those studies alreadyundertaken by the Competition Authority, furtherstudies will be commissioned across a range oftopics/sheltered sectors of the economy.

However, we need to go further. We need to designquality and efficiency into our new services and we needto review and overhaul our existing ones. Using existingstructures and initiatives for improving customer servicewithin the public service, we will begin to make furtherinroads in this area. Information Technology will continueto play its part. e-Government has great potential tostreamline delivery of services and we will continue towork to harness its full benefits.

We are planning to make it possible to access anincreasing amount of public services using moderntechnology, reducing the need for form-filling and makingservices faster and more accessible. The intention is tovirtually integrate public services so that they will beaccessible at a single point. Access to services will beprovided through a number of channels, such as theinternet, one-stop shops, mobile phones etc. Accessingpublic services through the “Public Services Broker” (alsoreferred to as the e-Broker) is likely to be another optionfor accessing services.

Such accessibility would have many advantages, including:

+ Public services would be accessed more easily, 24hours a day, 7 days a week;

+ There would be less form-filling – the sameinformation need not be given again to differentoffices or agencies;

+ Progress of applications could be tracked more easilyby the applicant; and

+ It would be possible to have faster and more efficientprocessing and service than provided by traditionalaccess routes.

Departments are currently preparing customer charterswhich will set down service commitments followingconsultation with their customers. Arising from thisconsultation and to help mainstream Quality CustomerService (QCS), all Departments will be asked to identifyopportunities to simplify and streamline how they interactwith their customers, including reductions in red tape.Departments will be required to report on progress intheir annual reports.

The burden of red tape from existing regulation will bereduced through programmes under the direction of theStatute Law Revision Unit in the Office of the AttorneyGeneral. Some work is already under way. For example,a review is being undertaken of all pre-1922 legislation.This review will identify outdated legislation that is inneed of repeal, revision or re-enactment. It will alsoremove anomalies. In addition, statute law revision toolswill contribute to the process of systematically reviewingregulation with a view to identifying the potential forsimplification.


RED TAPE AND SMALL ENTERPRISES

For small businesses, red tape can be especiallyonerous because they do not have the staffresources to deal with it. It has been estimated thatin a small firm employing just 8 people, 50% of oneperson’s time will be spent on form filling. Whenwe think of how important the small and mediumbusinesses are to our economy, we can immediatelysee how red tape can erode competitiveness.

TO SUM UP: In terms of getting rid ofunnecessary red tape, the Government will:

Streamline service delivery andadministrative processes includingthrough further development of initiativesin e-Government and Quality CustomerService (e.g. customers charters).[Actions 1.6.1, 1.9.1];Introduce sectoral regulatory reviews –systematic reviews of regulationcovering key areas within the economyand society [Actions 3.1.1-3.1.3];Use Statute Law Revision processes totackle red tape imposed by existingregulation [Actions 1.1.1; 1.7.1-1.7.2].

When all the rule-making and enforcement agencies aretaken into account, the regulatory landscape in Irelandseems quite crowded. We need, therefore, to ensure thatthe potential for fragmentation and duplication isminimised. Such fragmentation and overlap may behorizontal in terms of the scope of coverage of regulatoryfunctions across the sectors. There may also be verticalfragmentation or overlap in terms of the accountabilitychain and precise reporting arrangements in place.

Ongoing review of the regulatory framework can helpensure that the range of regulatory institutions is optimaland that the accountability mechanisms arecomprehensive. In cases where the rationale forestablishing an independent sectoral regulatory body is tofacilitate a sector’s transition to the open market, theneed for regulation ought to diminish in line with thedevelopment of competition in the sector. As competitiondevelops, it may therefore be possible to roll back thesector-specific regulatory constraints and allow marketforces and the general rules of competition law to prevail.

In addition, technological developments generateconsiderable change that impacts on products andmarkets, for example, through technological convergence.This obliges us to ensure that our regulatory structuresare up to date and relevant. Regular review can also helpestablish whether the split between the role ofGovernment as policy-maker and regulator, which is oftenmirrored in the split of functions between centralGovernment and independent sectoral regulators, is beinghandled effectively.

Review of this nature is part of the policy function ofGovernment Departments. It can also be helpful to havean independent, objective assessment of such arrangements,and opportunities will be sought to benchmark Ireland’sregulatory regime and progress on regulatory reform atinternational level, including through the OECD.

A further review mechanism will be a system of sectoralregulatory reviews whereby sectors of the economy areexamined on a regular basis in order to establish theviability of current regulatory approaches, including theroles of sectoral regulators.

Such reviews could be initiated by the Government, by therelevant Minister, or on the recommendation of the Better Regulation Group (BRG) based on its analysis ofdevelopments in particular sectors or in overall regulatorypolicy. It will be open to the BRG to organise the reviewsitself in certain circumstances.

In addition to sectoral regulatory reviews, the role andresources of the Competition Authority and the Office ofthe Director of Consumer Affairs will be reviewedperiodically to ensure their ongoing effectiveness.


Are our rules and structures in this area still valid?

We will keep our regulatory institutions and framework under review

REGULATORY BODIES IN IRELAND

There are over 500 public agencies/bodies in Ireland,many of which have a regulatory function – either asa rule-maker or rule-enforcer. For example, eachGovernment Department and Office generatesregulation – either as primary or secondarylegislation. In addition, there are more than 100 localauthorities, including City, County and Town Councilsthat regulate on a local basis. Currently, there is asmall number of independent sectoral regulatorsincluding ComReg (communications regulator), theCommission for Aviation Regulation, the Commissionfor Energy Regulation, and the Irish FinancialServices Regulatory Authority (IFSRA). Furtherregulatory authorities have been mooted, including inthe transport sector.

Organisations such as the Office of the Director ofConsumer Affairs, and the Competition Authority alsohave important roles in the enforcement of a widerange of consumer protection and competition law.

There are also many agencies under the aegis ofGovernment Departments that have been delegatedregulatory /enforcement functions. Examples of suchbodies include the Food Safety Authority and theCensorship of Publications Board.

The Better Regulation Group, to be established as anoutcome of this White Paper, will undertake an audit ofthe regulatory framework in Ireland which will map thevarious bodies and reporting arrangements in place.


TO SUM UP: In terms of keeping thenecessity of regulatory structures underreview, the Government will:

Systematically review regulation in keyareas and sectors [Actions 3.1.1-3.1.3]; Establish a new Better Regulation Group[Action 3.3.1]; Produce an audit of the regulatoryframework which will map out thevarious rule-making and enforcementbodies and reporting arrangements.[Action 3.4.2].Benchmark Ireland’s regulatory regimeat international level, including throughthe OECD [Action 3.4.1];Review the role and resources of theCompetition Authority and the Office ofthe Director of Consumer Affairs [Actions3.2.2, 3.3.2];

GOVERNANCE AND ACCOUNTABILITY

Sectoral regulation has often been set in the contextof a three-part model of State activity: policy-making,service provision and regulation. In certain markets(e.g. energy, public transport, communications),Ministers and their Departments have sometimesengaged in all three activities simultaneously bysetting policy for the sector, owning the only serviceprovider and regulating the market.

Recent years, however, have seen a move awayfrom monopoly market structures in cases wherethese are no longer justified by technologies or byeconomic or social dynamics, and a move towardsan opening of such markets to competition. When amarket is liberalised in this manner, it becomesundesirable for a single part of the State (typically aMinister and a Department) to continue to regulatethe behaviour of all market players, while owningthe dominant such player. One option that has beenfollowed in several instances is to establish anindependent economic regulator who takes onresponsibility for exercising the regulatory function,within a policy context set by the Minister andGovernment.

This model was described in Governance andAccountability in the Regulatory Process(Department of Public Enterprise, 2000) ,and itsapplicability can be seen in key aspects of themarkets for communications, energy, publictransport, aviation and others.

2

2 Governance and Accountability in the Regulatory Process (2000),Department of Public Enterprise

We will target our new regulations more effectively.We will make sure that regulations can be adequately enforced and complied with.We will ensure that existing regulations in key areas are still valid.

Effective regulation requires clear, achievableobjectives and ensuring that these policy goalsremain to the fore throughout the regulatoryprocess. An objective-led approach toregulation places greater emphasis onperformance and outcomes. However, theassumptions underlying the stated objectivemust also be clear. These are the importantevents, conditions or decisions outside theregulation that must nevertheless prevail forthe objective to be attained.

An associated element of regulatoryeffectiveness is the need to minimise unintendedoutcomes. That means avoiding the creation ofunnecessary barriers which can frustrate andinhibit innovation and stifle economic activity byreducing entry and exit to particular sectors andmarkets. Effectiveness, therefore, is also aboutensuring that regulations are precise, not only inidentifying the right targets, but also in confiningthe extent of their impact.

This raises the question of downstreamenforcement and compliance with regulations.This is often inadequately considered in termsof identifying acceptable and unacceptablelevels of compliance, the range of enforcementoptions available and the likely costs involved.These aspects are important because they willultimately determine whether or not regulationsare observed.

We need a results-orientated approach to regulation. Thismeans focusing on the outcomes of regulations ratherthan just the process of making regulations. Such anevaluation is in keeping with the Government’s approachto public policy in other areas. For example, in financialmatters, we are increasingly concerned with theoutcomes of expenditure: the idea of value-for-moneyrather than simply focussing on the expenditure process.

When we talk about targeting regulations more effectively,we mean a number of different things. Firstly, we meanbeing clearer about the key objectives of proposed newregulations. Often, it is difficult to determine preciselywhat we want to achieve from a particular Act or StatutoryInstrument. At present, an Explanatory and FinancialMemorandum is published at the same time as the Bill towhich it refers. It is not normally updated to take accountof changes made during the legislative process. In future,an Explanatory Guide, which will explain the main purposeand principal provisions of the legislation, will be publishedalongside Acts or secondary legislation with significantimpacts, in particular those with major implications for theconsumer/citizen or Small to Medium Enterprises (SMEs)e.g. consumer protection, health and safety of workers, etc.These Explanatory Guides will be in a user-friendly,accessible form. By informing citizens of their rights andentitlements, such guides will help promote greatercompliance and reduce the burden of enforcement on theExchequer. This will also complement the drive forconsumer-centred customer delivery across the publicservice.

Secondly, having clearly stated the key objectives of aproposed regulation, it may be possible to set down theoverall goal to be achieved while leaving maximumflexibility as to how it can be achieved. For example, theobjective of a regulation might be to reduce emissions ofa particular pollutant. It may be possible to set the goalto be achieved in terms of the amount of emissions butleave flexibility for individual firms to decide how best toachieve this goal. Some firms may do it by cleaning uptheir production processes. Some may achieve it by usingbetter raw materials. Others may do it by installingfiltering equipment and so on. Thus, the regulation isclearly targeting the “end” to be achieved but avoidsimposing too much of a burden by being over-prescriptivein terms of the “means”. We propose to promote greateruse of this type of outcome-orientated regulation.


Effectiveness

Is the regulation correctly targeted?

We will target our new regulationsmore effectively

The third way that we can achieve better-targetedregulations is through Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA)which will require a clear statement of the objective of aregulation. It is also important that we make the bestattempt that we can to identify all likely impacts of aparticular regulation through RIA. If RIA is used earlyenough in the formulation process, it can help to generatemore and better ways of framing regulations so as tominimise unintended impacts and maximise effectiveness.

A key consideration in evaluating the effectiveness of aregulation is the extent to which it is complied with. Arelated issue is the cost of enforcement. If we hadunlimited resources, we could probably achieve close to100% compliance with all regulations, by putting in placelarge teams of inspectors, enforcement agents, monitoring

mechanisms, etc. In reality, we do not have such resourcesand we must regulate more effectively to ensure thegreatest level of compliance without excessive enforcementprocedures. A simple example of this might be theregulations restricting the use of bituminous coal to achievecleaner air. The regulations that were introduced for urbanareas did not make the burning of bituminous coal illegal –not least because this would require significant numbers ofinspectors to enforce. The regulations simply banned thesale of bituminous coal in specified urban areas.

It is important, therefore, that when considering theregulations, we are aware of factors such as the levels ofcompliance that are likely to be achieved under theproposed enforcement regime and the costs involved.The introduction of a regulation must be seen as the firststep only in achieving a policy goal. If it is not adequatelyformulated, implemented, enforced and complied with,the desired policy outcomes will not be achieved.

We have not tended to use compliance and enforcementindicators to formally assess the success of regulatorydecisions. Regulatory Impact Analysis will help toredress this for new regulations. With regard to existingregulations, assessments of compliance levels andenforcement will form an important part of the reviews ofregulation affecting particular areas of economic andsocial life. The type of questions that we will ask include:


TO SUM UP: In terms of ensuring thatnew regulations are better targeted, theGovernment will:

Publish Explanatory Guides alongsidemajor primary legislation with significantimpacts, particularly that which hasmajor implications forconsumers/citizens and/or SMEs;[Action 1.4.1(c)];Improve the quality of the explanatorymaterial that accompanies secondarylegislation, including the production ofExplanatory Guides, where appropriate [Action 1.2.3];Promote wider use of regulation thatleaves maximum flexibility as to howgoals can be achieved [Action 5.2.1];Use Regulatory Impact Analysis [Action 2.1.1].

Is it going to be properly complied with and enforced?

We will make sure that regulations can be adequately enforced andcomplied with

NON-COMPLIANCE WITH REGULATIONS

Failure to comply with regulatory measures canarise for a number of reasons:

+ Unwillingness by stakeholders to adhere to the regulation. This may happen when, for instance: • the burden of compliance costs fall heavily on

SMEs • regulated parties have not been

adequately consulted• there is a complex set of regulations that

stakeholders do not understand;+ Inadequate enforcement of regulation;+ Inadequate penalties for non-compliance;+ Lack of an implementation policy that gives

stakeholders the necessary information and support mechanisms for compliance.

+ Has the issue of compliance with the regulation beenfully considered?

+ What are the compliance costs and who is mostaffected by them?

+ How can these costs be minimised?+ Has consideration been given to how enforcement

can be improved?+ What criteria for success will be put in place?+ What methods of enforcement will be or are

being applied?+ Is it obvious where full compliance has been achieved?+ Are there enforcement costs involved and who will

bear them?+ Has attention been given to enforcement issues with

respect to technological advances?

In addition, wider and deeper consultation in advance ofmaking regulations can assist with compliance. Activeparticipation by stakeholders/citizens in the design andimplementation of regulations is an effective way, not onlyof promoting openness and transparency in policymaking, but also of ensuring greater understanding of,and compliance with, the regulation.

The idea that regulations would be regularly reviewed, toensure that their original objectives are still valid and/orbeing achieved, is an integral part of measuringeffectiveness. With technological change and greaterconvergence of economic sectors, we need to ensure thatthere are regular systematic reviews of the effectivenessof regulation in particular areas and sectors. Under theprinciple of “necessity”, a commitment is made toongoing reviews of our regulatory “architecture” – theinstitutions that are in place within our regulatoryframework. Here, this is reinforced by committing toongoing review of the actual body of regulations governingkey areas of society and the economy.

These reviews will be undertaken in particular sectors orother areas of economic activity on a project basis. Thereviews will examine the effectiveness of the regulationsand regulators in particular sectors and may result inproposals for greater competition or re-regulation. Itwould be appropriate to conduct reviews of a sectorwhere there are rapid changes in the global market, coststo consumers, enforcement and compliance burdens ornegative economic impacts.

While such reviews may be initiated by the Government orrelevant Ministers, areas for review may also besuggested by the Better Regulation Group (BRG) based onits analysis of the regulatory burden. Areas for reviewmay also be identified following consultation with, orsuggestions by, representatives of consumers or SMEs.


TO SUM UP: In terms of ensuring bettercompliance and enforcement, theGovernment will:

Use RIA when framing new regulationsso as to ensure maximum compliancewithout excessive enforcementprocedures and costs [Actions 2.1.1-2.1.6];Use sectoral regulatory reviews toassess compliance levels andenforcement costs [Actions 3.1.1-3.1.3];Implement better consultation processesto inform and involve stakeholders[Actions 5.1.1-5.1.4].

Is it still effective?

We will ensure that existing regulations in key areas are still valid

TO SUM UP: In terms of ensuring thatexisting regulations in key economic areas arestill valid, the Government will:

Undertake sectoral regulatory reviews -systematic reviews of the regulationsgoverning key areas within the economyand society [Actions 3.1.1-3.1.3];Establish a new Better Regulation Group,inter alia, to advise on areas for review.[Action 3.3.1].


REVIEW MECHANISMS IN OTHER COUNTRIES

The Danish Government have established a Divisionfor Better Regulation, based in the Ministry ofFinance. The Division works on a number ofprojects including a comprehensive review of theregulatory system in Denmark, aimed at reducingthe administrative burdens for both citizens andbusinesses. Together with the Prime Minister’sOffice, the Division also advises a high-levelRegulation Committee regarding the legislativeprogramme of the Government.

In the Swedish Ministry of Industry, Employmentand Communications, the SimpLex Unit aims topromote small business development by reducingthe number of regulations, and making them morefair and intelligible. Its work consists ofinvestigation and information, giving advice andsupport to government agencies and otherregulatory bodies, reviewing present regulationsand putting forward suggestions for modificationsin order to promote simpler and more intelligibleregulations.

The UK’s Better Regulation Task Force was set up in1997 as an independent body to advise Governmenton actions to ensure good regulation. The TaskForce does this through a series of reviews ofparticular regulatory issues by sub-groups of theTask Force. The sub-groups set their own workingmethods and produce detailed reports on the area.They do not carry out formal consultations butdiscuss their proposals with key stakeholders andwith Ministers and Government Departments. Whencompleted, the report is sent to the relevantGovernment Minister who is required to respondwithin 60 days of publication. The Task Force alsomonitors and assesses the Government’s progressin response to its recommendations.

We will regulate as lightly aspossible given thecircumstances, and usemore alternatives.We will ensure that both theburden of complying and thepenalty for not complyingare fair.We will use RegulatoryImpact Analysis appropriatelywhen making regulations.

In this context, proportionality means striking abalance between the advantages a regulationprovides and the constraints that it imposes.The first consideration is the fundamentalquestion: is Government action required in thefirst place and, if so, should that action beregulatory? Just as there may be alternatives toregulation, there may also be alternative typesof regulation, for use in cases where the fullrigour of primary legislation is not required.

A second aspect of proportionality is ensuring that,when framing regulations, the burdens imposedand penalties for non-compliance are proportionateto the risks. A fundamental consideration mightbe, for example, whether penalties within the civilor criminal code are most appropriate. Similarly, itis useful to consider whether the costs for aparticular group (e.g. small businesses) ofcomplying with an administrative procedure areproportionate to the benefits to society resultingfrom the new procedure.

Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) providespolicy makers with a deeper understanding ofthe likely effects of regulatory actions. This isa practical way in which the proportionality ofproposed regulations can be assessed. Impactanalysis then supports other principles of good

regulation, such as transparency - throughmaking clear the underlying assumptions - andaccountability. Arguably, its main contributionis in helping policy makers to ensure regulationis warranted in the first place and that benefitsand costs are clearly defined.

There will always be a need for regulation. The questionsthat we need to consider are about how much regulationis appropriate and to what extent it is of good quality.When we talk about the quantity of regulation, this canmean both the volume of regulations governing particularaspects of economic and social life, as well as theircomplexity. When we talk about the quality of regulation,we mean how effective and how clear it is.

An efficient and well-founded regulatory system is one ofthe features of good governance and gives great strengthand certainty to society and the economy. But we doneed to recognise the potential disadvantages of State-imposed regulation in certain circumstances. Forexample, such regulation can be restrictive to marketentry, enforcement can be costly, and it can beunresponsive to change over time.

In this regard, some countries have set targets forreduction of regulation. For example, Denmark publishedan Action Plan in 2002 containing a target to reduce theregulatory burden on businesses by 25% in four years. Inaddition, it is estimated that the Community acquis –secondary legislation binding on EU Member States – hasbeen reduced by 20,000 official journal pages followingcompletion of a consolidation programme.

It is important to assess the costs and benefits of atraditional “command and control” type regulation, butalso to evaluate whether it would be more sensible to usean instrument other than regulation, such as a tax,subsidy, tradable permit, information campaign or othermeans. A combination of a number of these optionsmight be the best mix to achieve a particular policy goal.


Proportionality

Is there a more effective way of achieving the objective?

We will regulate as lightly as possible given the circumstances, and use more alternatives

For example, to alleviate the litter problem arising fromplastic bags, a tax was used to modify behaviour. Thisstill meant that a regulation had to be introduced but itwas a relatively “light” regulation. It did not ban theimportation or production of plastic bags. It did not seekto appoint more litter wardens or establish aninspectorate to visit shops.

Regulation should be seen as one of a range ofinstruments available to policy makers. It can be usedinstead of, or alongside, other instruments. However,one of the problems with regulation – particularlytraditional “command and control” regulation – is that itis often seen as a quick fix. However, problems may notalways have a regulatory solution or regulation may onlybe part of the solution, if used alongside informationcampaigns, or some other measures.

We need to build our confidence in using alternative typesof regulation and alternatives to regulation. We need tobuild our capacity and understanding of these alternativesbecause they can, of themselves, improve publicunderstanding of policy objectives. Regulatoryalternatives tend to encourage desired behaviours ratherthan discourage undesired ones.

It is important to recognise that there are costsassociated with regulation. Direct costs include fiscalcosts (e.g. the cost to the Exchequer of administrators’and legislators’ time, the cost of enforcement, etc.).Direct costs also include the cost to industry, business orcitizens of complying with the regulations - e.g. installingnew equipment, meeting new standards, etc. It iscritically important for competitiveness, and for socialequity, that we know what the direct costs arising from aregulation will be and who will bear them. For example,compliance can place a disproportionately higher burdenon smaller firms. It was estimated by another EU MemberState in 1995 that the cost of ‘red tape’ absorbed bysmall business works out at €3,600 per annum for eachperson employed. For larger firms, the comparable figurewas put at €153. In Small and Medium Enterprises(SMEs), owners and managers tend to combine a numberof functions, and administrative compliance is not easilydelegated or contracted out. Excessive compliance


ALTERNATIVES TO REGULATION

A range of regulatory and non-regulatoryalternatives exist including:

+ Co-regulation: usually involves sharing the regulatory role between the regulating authority and regulated parties, such as particular industries or groups. Objectives may be set by the regulator, with implementation largely devolved to the regulated parties through enforceable codes of practice.

+ Economic instruments: By raising or lowering thecost of engaging in a particular activity,regulatory authorities can provide incentives to undertake desired actions. Options include taxes, charges, subsidies, user-pays pricing and refund schemes.

+ Performance-based regulation: specifies the ends rather than the means. Firms and individuals are allowed to choose the process bywhich they will comply with the law. This promotes compliance at a lower cost and encourages use of technology and innovation. A further refinement is the “equivalent principle”which allows parties to propose more efficient ways of achieving compliance. This has been used in other countries in areas such as health and safety, environment and fisheries.

TO SUM UP: In terms of ensuring that wewill regulate as lightly as possible, and usemore alternatives, the Government will:

Promote different ways of regulating andalternatives to traditional regulation asways of more effectively achieving policygoals [Action 5.2.1].

Is the regulation framed in a proportionate way?

We will ensure that both the burden of complying and the penalty for not complying are fair

requirements, and administrative procedures that areinsensitive to the special difficulties of SMEs, will deternew entrepreneurs and distract existing enterprises frominnovation and expansion.

Just as compliance costs should be fair andproportionate to the benefits that the regulation brings,the penalties for non-compliance should also be realisticand related to the potential harm and have the desireddeterrent effect. Over time, the impact of monetarypenalties is inevitably eroded by inflation with the resultthat they have less and less deterrent effect.Mechanisms are needed to ensure that such penalties,the monetary value of which may have been fixed in oldstatutes, should be kept in line with inflation. Suchdifficulties could be overcome by the introduction of astandard fine system based on a number of categoriesrelated to the gravity of offence, and containing anindexation mechanism. The Government will explore thepossibility of addressing these issues through theintroduction of appropriate legislation.

The complexity of regulatory systems in a moderneconomy can give rise to particular difficulties, includingthe timeliness and suitability of penalties that can beimposed on regulated parties. When setting penalties, itmay be appropriate to bear in mind the financialcircumstances of the offending person or body. Inparticular, the offender’s ability to pay may beconsidered, the provision of easier methods of payment(by instalments, for example), as well as more efficientsystems for the collection of fines. This is an issue thatrequires careful consideration.


TO SUM UP: In terms of ensuring that boththe burden of complying with regulations - andthe penalty for not complying - are fair andproportionate, the Government will:

Examine the extent to which the criminaljustice system can deal effectively withcomplex regulatory issues, including thequestion of applying meaningful penaltiesfor non-compliance [Action 5.4.1] ;Introduce an indexation mechanism forfines and improved methods for payment,and enhance procedures to link penaltiesand fines with ability to pay [Action 5.4.2];Monitor the cumulative burden ofcompliance on business and SMEs[Action 2.1.3].

APPROPRIATENESS OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEMTO DEAL WITH REGULATORY MATTERS

There is a need to consider the extent to which thecriminal justice system is capable of dealing withthe complexities of modern regulatory issues in anefficient manner.

Consideration should be given to alternativeprocesses for addressing particular difficultieswhich arise, such as the risk of competitors,including less established operators, beingsqueezed out of the market during the time it takesto build cases to meet the standards of criminalproof required.

Related to this, an examination of the issues aroundthe introduction of meaningful and proportionatefines for corporate entities who breach regulationswill also be considered. This would enable fines tobe set at such a level so as to act as a firmdeterrent against non-compliance by corporatebodies.

Evidence based policy making is about making better useof research and analysis in both policy-making and policyimplementation. Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) is anevidence-based decision tool, which has four main facets:

+ Quantification of impacts;+ Structured consultation with stakeholders;+ Evaluation of alternatives to regulation and

alternative types of regulation; and+ Full consideration of downstream compliance and

enforcement issues.

RIA is an aid to, and not a substitute for, decision-making.RIA should not be a mechanistic decision process. Itshould not give a single “right or wrong” answer - either inmonetary or in other terms - on the question of whether ornot to regulate in particular circumstances. Neither shouldRIA be something that simply adds to the bureaucraticprocess of producing regulations. Rather, RIA should berelatively light and proportionate.

It is envisaged that there will be a two-phase approach, thefirst stage involving relatively light preliminary assessments.In many cases, these will provide sufficient insight into likelyimpacts and costs. The second stage - the actual RIA - willbe a more thorough analysis. A carefully designed systemof thresholds and triggers will ensure that a RIA is onlyrequired for proposals with major implications - for example,if the cost of the regulation exceeds a certain threshold, orif it has major implications for certain, very specific policyareas that have been identified by the Government to be ofparticular importance. The level of analysis will becommensurate with the likely impact of the proposal.

RIA enhances the quality of political and administrativedecision-making. It also supports other principles of goodregulation, including greater openness and transparencyand accountability of regulators. This is because publicconsultation is an essential component of the process.With openness and transparency in regulatory policy,stakeholders/citizens will be able to see the benefits ofparticipation and get actively involved.

Special consideration will be given to the impact onbusiness, particularly SMEs. Better quality regulation can

significantly improve competitiveness. Some businessgroups have found that for over half of small Irishbusinesses, legislation – specifically rules and regulationsemanating from the EU and employment legislation – is amajor problem due to the costs of compliance and loss offlexibility. It has been estimated that 44% of small Irishfirms have cited red tape – form filling and compliance withregulatory requirements – as problematic, both as a barrierto market entry and as a significant impediment tobusiness expansion. This is consistent with the results ofa Government-commissioned survey 3 published in 2003which found that 54% of businesses felt that regulationswere a significant and increasing burden on their business.

At present, a number of policy proofing mechanisms andprocedures already exist within Government Departments.These include various checklists that must be completedwhen submitting proposals to the Government under Cabinet Procedures. They also include specific filters for policy


Do the advantages of the regulationoutweigh the disadvantages?

We will use Regulatory Impact Analysis appropriately when making regulations

EU AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT

In the context of the European Union, impactassessment techniques are increasingly becoming afeature of the regulatory process. This is part of ashift toward evidence-based policy-making. TheCommission’s Action Plan on Simplifying theRegulatory Environment (June 2002) emphasisesthe importance of impact assessment, not only forthe Commission in initiating legislation, but also forMember States when proposing substantial changesto Draft Directives/Regulations or other major policyinitiatives. Ireland will continue to promote bestpractice at EU level in relation to regulatorymanagement, including impact assessment and theprinciples of good regulation.

As well as being an opportunity to maintain andimprove our influence on EU regulation as it is beingmade, impact assessment offers us a vehicle forscrutinising, understanding and transposingEuropean legislation when it has been made. EUregulation is often made with uniformity in mind,which is understandable in light of the internalmarket. Ireland’s economic, social and geographicfeatures often present particular challenges interms of adapting regulatory requirements to ourcircumstances. RIA can help to ensure that the fullramifications of regulation are understood andtaken into account when being transposed intonational law.

3 Business Attitudes Towards Government Regulations, (2003):Lansdowne Market Research

designed to identify particular impacts on issues such asgender, poverty and health. There is potentially an overlap insome of these areas with Regulatory Impact Analysis. preparingand submitting documents to Government will be done on anelectronic basis. RIA, along with other proofing mechanisms,would form part of the e-Cabinet system whereby the detailedassessment of impacts would be available to Ministers at thetouch of a button, where thay have been undertaken.


RIA INTERNATIONALLY

Many countries have adopted the approach that afull RIA is only required based on definedthresholds/criteria, for example:

In KOREA, a full RIA is applied to significantregulations only. Significant is defined as follows:+ an annual impact exceeding KRW 10 billion

(equivalent to €7.25 million); or+ an impact on more than 1 million people; or+ a clear restriction on market competition; or+ a clear departure from international standards.

In the NETHERLANDS, criteria similar to that ofKorea are applied to regulatory proposals with theresult that only 8-10% of draft regulations aresubject to a full RIA.

In the USA, a full benefit/cost analysis of a rule isrequired in the following instances:+ if annual costs exceed $100 million; or+ where rules are likely to impose a major

increase in costs for a specific sector/region; or+ if the rules have significant effects on

competition, employment, investment,productivity or innovation.

RIAs are conducted in a number of OECD countries,although the approach can vary considerably fromone country to another. The European Union alsoconducts impact assessments on certain draftregulations and directives. Among the countriesthat currently use a model of RIA are:

Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic,Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Iceland,Italy, Japan, Korea, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand,Norway, Poland, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland,United Kingdom, and the United States.

TO SUM UP: In terms of ensuring thatRegulatory Impact Analysis is used whenmaking regulations, the Government will:

Pilot a system of RIA in a number of Government Departments [Action 2.1.1];Support RIA through training, guidelinesand promotion [Action 2.2.1];Give special consideration to businessimpacts, especially SMEs [Action 2.1.3];Integrate RIA with developments underthe e-Cabinet Project [Action 2.1.4];Use RIA for scrutiny of EU regulation[Action 1.8.1];Publish RIAs, where conducted,alongside a Bill, where appropriate [Action 1.4.1(b)].

We will consult more widelybefore regulating.There will be greater clarityabout Public ServiceObligations.Regulations will bestraightforward, clear andaccessible.

Enhancing regulatory transparency contributesto the quality of regulations, increases thelikelihood of compliance and reduces the risk of“capture” or bias towards special interests. Italso empowers citizens by giving access toinformation which enhances their decision-making abilities as consumers and asparticipants in the community. Freedom ofInformation legislation has already made animportant contribution to transparency ofregulation in Ireland.

Transparency is an important principle of goodgovernance - it is widely accepted that thereshould be the maximum possibility clarity andopenness in the operations of government andpublic administration. Transparency ofregulations is also critically important to theperformance of the economy, not least becauseit guards against special interests gainingundue influence in markets. It generatesgreater trust on the part of consumers. Itassures and satisfies investors that there is alevel playing field, and encourages new entrantsto sectors. In terms of the quality of publicservices, the principle of transparencyunderpins the need for regulations to be asclear, straightforward and accessible aspossible in their drafting, promulgation,codification and dissemination.

Many existing regulatory authorities, including theindependent regulatory bodies, have quite sophisticatedconsultation processes. However, there is a need forgreater consistency in our approach to consultation.Better consultation provides opportunities forstakeholders to have a meaningful input into theregulatory process. We need a regulatory framework thathas mechanisms for informing and involving affectedparties but is sufficiently open to ensure special interestgroups do not gain disproportionate influence or control.

The State does not have a monopoly on wisdom orexpertise in all areas of economic and social life. Problemscan best be solved with the active involvement of therelevant stakeholders. The Government is committed to asocial partnership approach across the policy spectrum. Asimilar broadly based inclusive approach will underpinregulatory policies and processes.

While excessive rigidity is undesirable, consultation normsshould be established for sectors and groups ofregulatory agencies - such as utility regulators, centralGovernment Departments and local authorities. Thesewould give customers a sense of what they can expectfrom regulatory bodies, such as the timeframes allowedfor observations on regulations. These norms might varyfrom sector to sector or across different levels ofgovernment. There will, of course, always be the need foremergency regulation that would override normalconsultation practices.

It is important to recognise the danger of over-representation of one particular viewpoint duringconsultations. Consideration will be given to encouragingnot-for-profit groups to engage with the consultationprocess. Greater engagement will help consumerorganisations, for instance, to become self-sustainingthrough demonstrated success in achieving policy influence.

In other jurisdictions, administrative procedureslegislation has been introduced to give a statutory basisto service standards. In Ireland, the principles ofaccessibility and transparency in administration aresupported by legislation such as the Freedom ofInformation Acts, the Ombudsman Act, the Data


TransparencyHave we consulted with stakeholders prior to regulating?

We will consult more widely before regulating

Protection Acts, the Ethics in Public Office Act and promptpayment legislation. Against the background of existinglegislative provisions, the need for legislation to underpinadministrative procedures will be kept under review.

However, guidelines for consultation will be prepared,setting out the range of consultation mechanisms andoptions available to regulators, be they centralGovernment Departments or otherwise, and thecircumstances in which they should be applied. Guidelineswill include an assessment of the strengths andweaknesses of different approaches and set out thecircumstances where particular approaches are best used.For example, “calls for comment”, which are shortadvertisements in newspapers seeking comments on thebasis of a few headings, have been found to be useful.“Notice and comment” procedures, on the other hand,give citizens a period for comments before the final rule isintroduced. A sensible approach to consultation will beadopted in order to avoid blocking up the regulatory anddecision-making processes. This may be achieved througha graduated approach to consultation, where somemeasures would be the subject of national advertisementand/or public meetings, while others would merit e-mailcontact with identified/registered interested parties, andthe use of Departmental websites.

In general, competition in a market brings lower prices,higher standards of service and greater choice. In thelong run, most customers benefit from marketliberalisation. If suppliers focus only on profitable areas,some potential customers - such as geographicallyisolated, low income or low demand consumers - may notbenefit. For reasons of economic, social and regionalcohesion, governments often decide that such customersshould be provided with access to certain service levelsat reasonable prices, even though it might not becommercially viable. Ensuring the provision of uneconomic– but socially desirable – service is commonly achievedthrough Public Service Obligations (PSOs).

It is important also that there is clarity around the scope,rationale and cost of PSOs and, as a subset, UniversalService Obligations (USOs). This is necessary so thatcitizens and consumers can be kept fully aware of theirservice entitlements. In addition, the Government needs tobe clear about the cost of providing PSOs, given that it isusually either the taxpayer (via the Exchequer) or consumerthat bears the costs of PSOs.


THE NEED FOR OPEN REGULATORY PROCESSES

“Regulatory capture” is a term used in economicsto describe a situation where a market player usesinfluence or superior resources to extract aregulatory decision - or lack of decision - thatbrings it greater benefits than it does society as awhole.

There are many facets to regulatory capture such asthe idea that concentrated interest groups, likemarket players, have a greater incentive to influenceregulators than more diffuse groups, like consumers.More open and better-structured consultationprocesses can only be one element of an overallstrategy to deal with the complex issues involved.They are important, however, to guard against theincidence, and the perception of, regulatory capture.

TO SUM UP: In terms of improvingconsultation processes, the Government will:

Make public consultation more rigorous and consistent [Actions 5.1.1-5.1.4];Use RIA to support greater consultationprior to regulating [Action 5.1.1]; Establish norms and standards forconsultation processes [Action 5.1.2]; Support an inclusive consultationprocess [Actions 5.1.3-5.1.4];Keep under review the need forlegislation to underpin administrativeprocedures [Action 5.3.1].

Is regulation transparent with regard to Public Service Obligations?

There will be greater clarity about Public Service Obligations

The costs related to the delivery of USOs to ‘uneconomic’customers are usually balanced against the provider’s overallprofits and presence in the market. If the extra costs aredeemed to be relatively insignificant, then the USO providermust absorb them into its cost base. However, if the USOcan be shown as a significant and undue burden on theprovider, then recompense may be available. This is usuallyfunded through a levy on other service providers in themarket. Thus, the cost of USOs generally falls ultimately onthe other customers in the market.

In cases where the Government contracts out suchservices, it is important that alternative service providersare kept fully aware of the issues around PSOs, to ensurethat barriers to sectoral entry are not created that woulddeter future competitors.

High quality regulation is essential for the appropriatefunctioning of society. How the regulation is explained toaffected parties is critically important if it is to beeffectively implemented, accepted and supported. Theobjectives and implications of the regulation and theresponsibilities of those involved should be plainly set outand easily understood.

Regulation should be drafted in language that achieves itsintended purpose, resolving the tensions between clarity,simplicity and accuracy. It should not create ambiguitiesand uncertainties. In addition, it is important to ensureStatutory Instruments (S.I.s) are drafted moreconsistently and, where possible, in plainer terms. Manysignificant proposals are legislated for through S.I.s and,in time, RIA should be applied to the more substantiveproposals contained in S.I.s. In order to improve draftingof S.I.s across the Civil Service, the Office of theParliamentary Counsel to the Government has produced amanual for Government Departments - “StatutoryInstruments – Drafting Checklist and Guidelines” in 2003.To complement this, consideration will be given to optionsfor enhanced scrutiny of S.I.s by the Oireachtas. Departments sponsoring legislation should consider


SERVICES OF GENERAL INTEREST

In May 2003, the European Commission published a‘Green Paper on Services of General Interest’. Theintention was to stimulate a debate on the role ofthe EU in promoting the provision of high-qualitypublic services.

The Green Paper focuses on issues related to‘services of general economic interest’. InCommunity practice, there is broad agreement thatthe term refers to services of an economic naturewhich the Member States or the Community subjectto specific Public Service Obligations by virtue of ageneral interest criterion. The concept thus coverscertain large network industries such as transport,postal services, energy and communications. Theterm also extends to any other economic activitysubject to Public Service Obligations.

The view of the Government is that the principle ofsubsidiarity underpinning Member States’competencies should continue to be respected inthe area of services of general interest. (Theprinciple of subsidiarity is intended to ensure thatdecisions are taken at a level as close as possibleto the citizen, whilst checking that any action to beundertaken at European level is justified comparedwith the options available at national level.)

TO SUM UP: In terms of improving thetransparency of regulations relating to PublicService Obligations, the Government will:

Ensure that regulatory authorities clearlyset out the scope and rationale of Public Service Obligations [Action 5.5.1];Ensure that RIA clarifies the cost and other impacts of Public Service Obligations [Action 2.1.6];Enhance dialogue and informationsharing on a cross-border basis [Action 5.5.2].

Is the regulation in this area clear and accessible to all?

Regulations will be straightforward,clear and accessible

publishing the draft heads of Bills where feasible andappropriate. This would enhance openness andtransparency in the drafting process and allow forconsultation on the measures proposed in the Bill. Acompleted RIA, where carried out, should also bepublished alongside the Bill to ensure openness andtransparency in the legislative process.

The existing Explanatory and Financial Memoranda forprimary legislation are confined to Bills as initiated. Infuture, an Explanatory Guide, which will explain the mainpurpose and principal provisions of the legislation, will bepublished alongside Acts or secondary legislation withsignificant impacts, particularly those with majorimplications for the consumer/citizen or SMEs, e.g.consumer protection, health and safety of workers, etc.These Explanatory Guides will be in a user-friendly,accessible form. By informing citizens of their rights andentitlements, such guides will help promote greatercompliance and reduce the burden of enforcement on theExchequer. This will also complement the drive forcustomer-centred delivery of public services.

The clarity of legislation will also be improved by avoidingthe use of non-textual amendments. A non-textualamendment is one which does not insert text but insteadrequires the reader to interpret a word or phrase in aparticular way. A non-textual amendment is made where anamending Act instructs the reader to read a particularprovision or phrase in the Principal Act in a particular way.For example, in The Central Bank and Financial ServicesAuthority of Ireland Act, 2003, the reader is asked to read“Bank” for “Board” in each place it occurs in a series ofsections.

In relation to improved access for citizens to the existingstock of legislation, our programme for delivering e-Government will make provision for the accessibility ofActs, Statutory Instruments, the Chronological Tables (theTables that provide information about amendments toActs) and related materials such as Dáil and SeanadDebates. These initiatives will be structured tocomplement similar developments at EU level.

In addition, the programme of Statute Law Revision willoutline specific targets and priorities for using repeal,consolidation and restatement to streamline existinglegislation.


TO SUM UP: In terms of improving the clarityand accessibility of regulations, theGovernment will:

Improve coherence of legislation throughrevision, restatement and repeal (Statute Law Revision) [Action 1.7.1];Maximise the use of IT and e-Government initiatives to improveclarity and accessibility of regulations [Action 1.6.1];Minimise the use of non-textualamendments in legislation [Action 1.5.1];Publish draft Heads of Bills, wherefeasible and appropriate [Action 1.4.1(a)];Publish RIAs, where conducted,alongside a Bill, where appropriate [Action 1.4.1(b)];Ensure that an increasing number ofActs are accompanied by an explanatoryguide, particularly those with majorimplications for consumer/citizensand/or SMEs [Action 1.4.1(c)];Apply RIA to Statutory Instruments thatcontain proposals with significant impacts[Action 1.2.1]; Ensure greater consistency in thedrafting of Statutory Instruments [Action 1.2.2];Give consideration to more effectivescrutiny of Statutory Instruments by theHouses of the Oireachtas [Action 1.2.4].

We will strengthen accountability in the regulatory process.We will improve appeals procedures.

Accountability is fundamental because of thecomplexity of the regulatory process and therange of participants involved. The concept ofa regulatory chain is often used to describe theregulatory process and it is critically importantthat the links in that chain – from originator toregulated party - are clearly defined.

Regulatory accountability means having clarityand certainty about the roles of: thoseoriginating regulation; those who must enforceor otherwise achieve compliance; the regulatedparties; those charged with adjudicating onappeals; and those reviewing and evaluating.Integrating the tiers of accountability whileregulations are being designed is criticallyimportant. However, given the complexity andevolving nature of regulatory institutions androles, changes in one regulatory area or to thereponsibilities of one agency may have knock-on effects in other areas or for other agancies.

Of particular importance is the question of fair,open, efficient and effective appealsprocedures. Increasingly, this aspect ofaccountability has informed developmentswithin the public service, for example, throughinitiatives to improve customer service andthrough the work of the Ombudsman. There isa need to ensure that this concept is replicatedand expanded within the regulatory framework,including sectoral regulatory areas.

The regulatory framework is constantly evolving and it isnecessary to ensure that proper lines of accountability aremaintained. At the heart of accountability are the questions,“accountable to whom and accountable for what?”

Due in part to the complexities of the industries inquestion, the accountability of independent regulators willbe subject to development and institutional change in yearsto come. In the meantime, accountability is served throughgood information flows, with full disclosure of the details ofthe decision-making process and of all submissions andrepresentations made to the regulator. This is, in fact, thepractice largely followed by sectoral regulators in Ireland. Ithas contributed significantly to a better understanding ofthe problems faced and the reasons behind the decisionstaken. Such information disclosure also makes it morelikely that the regulatory decisions will be accepted bythose most affected by them.

As part of ongoing accountability arrangements forGovernment Departments and Offices, their annualreports will include material on aspects of regulatorymanagement, including consultation processes used,simplification or consolidation of legislation, and conductof RIAs throughout the year. Such reports will also containcommentary on oversight of regulatory bodies under theiraegis and on any sectoral regulatory reviews undertaken.

Regulators and regulated bodies alike have indicated thatthey are conscious that the question of ‘who regulatesthe regulator?’ is not always adequately addressed by theexisting systems in place. In devising legislativeframeworks for sectoral regulators, the Government willensure that a systematic approach is being taken to theoverview of sectoral regulators by GovernmentDepartments and Oireachtas Committees.

The resources of the Oireachtas and its Committees forreviewing sectoral regulatory structures must becommensurate with their monitoring and accountabilityfunctions. In addition, there is a need for greater clarity andconsistency when regulatory bodies are being established,as to how they relate to the Oireachtas, balancing autonomyin making regulatory decisions and their politicalaccountability.


AccountabiltyIs it clear under the regulation precisely who is responsible to whom and for what?

We will strengthen accountability in the regulatory process

Accountability can also be strengthened through greaterinvolvement of the consumer. The consultative processesin which the regulators engage would be strengthened byinformed and well-researched submission and commentfrom sectoral consumer councils, user groups, andbusiness interests, as well as households, communitiesand disadvantaged groups. Where existing industry leviesare collected, consideration will be given to usingresources generated by these levies to support consumercouncils and user groups.

In many areas, the State has moved from the role ofservice provider, transferring regulatory decision-makingfunctions to specific sectoral regulators. As a result ofplacing greater autonomy with the sectoral regulators, andgrowing competition among a greater number of players,decisions made by sectoral regulators have beenchallenged – in some cases lasting a very long time.Although there are a variety of sector-specific appealsmechanisms, in some instances the only route for the


ACCOUNTABILITY OF REGULATORS

Independent sectoral regulators are accountable tocitizens for the pursuance of their remit, overallperformance and plans for future work. Thisaccountability is provided through a number ofmechanisms and, for sectoral regulators establishedin recent years, such mechanisms are often set outin law.

Firstly, regulators are accountable to Governmentthrough being:+ appointed by Ministers (after an independent

selection process);+ obliged to have their finances audited by the

Comptroller and Auditor General; and+ required to work within a policy framework set

by the Minister and to report to the Minister on their strategy and work.

Secondly, they are accountable to the Oireachtasthrough:+ presenting annual reports; and + being obliged to appear before relevant

Oireachtas Committees.

Thirdly, regulators are also accountable through thecourts by being subject to judicial review of theirdecision processes, and they are sometimes subjectto other appeals or review mechanisms in relationto their decisions.

Fourthly, regulators give account directly toregulated industries and to citizens generallythrough the publication of information about theirdecisions and their work.

In practice, the accountability of regulators needs tobe balanced against their independence. Regulatorshave been established as independent entities inorder to ensure that regulatory decisions are takenin an objective manner. Accountability mechanismsmust be designed so that regulators give fullaccount for the discharge of their duties, and thattheir regulatory independence is not compromisedin the process.

TO SUM UP: In terms of improvingaccountability in the regulatory process, theGovernment will:

Develop a systematic approach to the overview of sectoral regulators by Government Departments and OireachtasCommittees [Actions 4.1.1, 3.2.1];Develop new measures to strengthen therole of the consumer [Actions 3.3.2]; Ensure more comprehensiveaccountability by GovernmentDepartments in respect of regulatorymanagement [Action 5.3.2]; Supplement existing accountabilityarrangements with a series of sectoralregulatory reviews [Actions 3.1.1-3.1.3].

Is there an effective appeals process?

We will improve appeals procedures

questioning of regulatory decisions has been toundertake a judicial review - even though recourse tojudicial review often proves to be a time-consuming andresource-intensive process.

Regulatory appeals have also placed a considerableburden on the courts system. In a number of cases,judges have been asked by complainants to substitutetheir opinion for the decision of the regulator, even thoughthis is beyond the scope of a judicial review.

If accountability is to be fully established, an innovativeapproach to regulatory appeals should be adopted tofacilitate expedient, efficient and informed review ofregulatory decisions. Ideally the parties undertaking thereview would have expertise in relevant areas, e.g.competition law, economics and sector-specific issues, ordirect access to such expertise. However, we must seekto get the correct balance between the right to appeal aregulatory decision and undue delay in decision-makingand implementation. There are, therefore, a number ofcomplex issues involved in establishing an efficientappeals procedure. The Government is committed toreviewing the options available, in consultation withinterested parties, and developing proposals for animproved approach.

A small number of judges have been appointed to dealwith competition cases in accordance with theCompetition Act 2002. Judges have either presided overprevious competition cases or have a specific interest inthe area. However, there is a need to consider whetherfurther specialisation should be supported, for examplerelating to regulatory matters, due to the growingcomplexity of the issues involved.

It may also be possible to improve processes throughbetter case management, including allocation of cases,limitation of opportunities for submissions andpresentations on points of law. In other words, moreefficient administration of cases may have the desiredeffect.


REGULATORY APPEALS

In the case of utilities regulators, one possibilitymight be to establish a single regulatory appealsbody. Such an appeals body could call on a numberof expert panellists with relevant knowledge andexperience of sector specific issues and/orcompetition law and policy, and/or economics, toadjudicate appeals. The regulatory appeals panelmight facilitate a more expedient and cost effectivealternative to judicial review. Access to furthercourt appeals would remain an option, but only onpoints of law.

Powers of the single regulatory appeals body mightinclude:+ Confirming or setting aside all or part of the

regulator’s decision;+ Imposing, revoking or varying the amount of any

penalty;+ Granting or cancelling an individual exemption or

varying any condition or obligation which relatesto that exemption;

+ Giving such directions, or taking such other steps as the sectoral regulator could have given or taken; and

+ Making any other decision which the sectoral regulator could have made.

There are, of course, challenges associated withestablishing a regulatory appeals body. Firstly, theright of appeal to the courts will still remain - as thecourts can always review any administrative decision.Thus, the only effect of having a formalised appealsprocedure may be to delay the final decision further.Secondly, the appeals procedures themselves may beused intentionally to delay a final decision, to protectthe benefits accruing to the incumbent or dominantproducer in the sector.

TO SUM UP: In terms of improvingregulatory appeals procedures, theGovernment will:

Develop proposals for an improved approach to appeals of sectoral regulators’ decisions [Action 4.3.1];Develop further the approach wherebythere are expert judges in particularcommercial areas, to deal with specificcompetition and/or sectoral regulationcases [Action 5.6.1];The Courts Service will continue toimprove and streamline casemanagement practices in cases relatingto sectoral regulation in order toexpedite the process [Action 5.6.1].

We will ensure greater consistency across regulatory bodies.We will ensure that regulations in particular sectors/areas are mutually consistent.

Consistency in the regulatory process isimportant as it gives a degree of predictabilityand legal certainty to individuals and groupswithin society and the economy. Ad hocapproaches, whereby similar situations aretreated differently, tend to add to transactioncosts associated with particular activities.They can also create unnecessary bureaucraticlayers to social and economic processes, andultimately diminish respect for the regulatoryprocess.

Two types of consistency are deemedparticularly important in this context: first, theidea of structural consistency wherebyregulatory actors in similar situations wouldhave broadly similar roles, responsibilities,powers and perhaps even structures. Thismight apply to independent regulatoryauthorities and to Government Departments andagencies. For example, responsibility forconsumer complaints and/or competition hastended to be treated differently in the mandatesand operations of the various sectoralregulators.

The second aspect of the regulatory process forwhich greater consistency is important is inachieving greater internal consistency betweenregulations and legislation within particularsectors. Regulations should be compatible withinternational trade rules, EU law andcompetition policy. Regulations should also beconsistent with each other to the extent thatconflicting requirements are not being imposedon sections of the community or in particular

economic sectors. They should also recognisethe economic linkages between different sectors.

In terms of consistency within the regulatorysystem, it is important that, where markets arereformed or deregulated, other regulatorysystems should not be used as an alternativeform of regulation.

The evolution of regulatory policy in Ireland has not, todate, proceeded in a uniform fashion. The result hasbeen the establishment of regulatory institutions withdifferent mandates, as well as different levels ofresponsibility, different legal bases and differentstructures. Most other OECD countries have seen asimilar pattern of development.

One of the main issues is the variety in structures andresponsibilities across different sectors. While thesemay not be significant problems in themselves, theadoption of a national regulatory policy should ensurethat consistency is introduced across the regulatorysystem, where possible. The issue is not about following‘precedent’ but rather one of dealing with situationsconsistently. It is also about public bodies seekinginformation or designing application processes, as muchas possible, in the same format. This would ensuregreater confidence in the system, greater transparency indecision-making and promote greater efficiency acrossthe various sectors.

Given the limited size of the Irish economy and publicservice, integration of regulatory activity may bestrengthened by a sharing of resources, especially ingeneric areas such as financial management,administration, human resource management (HRM), datasystems and legal services. To this end, Government policywill be to minimise the creation of new regulatoryauthorities. In addition, dialogue between the variousregulatory authorities should be maximised to encouragethe sharing of best practice, and resources where possible,across the sectors.


Consistency

Are we dealing with similar situationsacross the board in similar ways?

We will ensure greater consistencyacross regulatory bodies

On a separate point relating to consistency, it isimportant to recognise the advantages, in certaincircumstances, that a complementary approach to PublicService Obligations (PSOs) would bring to the island ofIreland. In the case of utilities’ regulation, such a sharedapproach to regulation could promote greater competition,security of supply and consumer welfare.

The principle of consistency applies to both new andexisting regulations in a number of ways.

In the context of new regulations, it is important to attaina degree of consistency with existing or proposednational, European or international regulations, especiallyin key economic or social policy areas. To ensure evengreater consistency in the regulatory system, it isimportant that, where markets are liberalised, otherregulatory measures for example, new physical planning,safety or other requirements, are not used as analternative form of regulation to restrict market entry.

In terms of existing regulation, systematic reviews wouldbe useful to allow regulatory objectives to be maintained,improved or removed in the light of changes in economicor social situations. Review could also occur after thecollection of new data provides new information on theregulated market or activity. This will ensure thatregulations remain targeted on their objectives whileallowing for adjustments to maintain consistency acrossthe thematic area. In addition, mechanisms such as“sunsetting”, whereby regulations expire after a certainperiod of time, can also be used to ensure thatregulations remain relevant and consistent over time.

Consolidation is the traditional tool for making legislationmore accessible and coherent. Departments have usedthis tool to ensure up-to-date legislation but, generally, theprocess has been piecemeal which is consistent with theexperience of codification/Statute Law Revision in othercountries. A comprehensive policy is necessary, usingtools of codification, restatement, simplification andconsolidation, to reduce the volume of legislation andmake it more coherent and accessible. This is in line withthe public service modernisation commitments under‘Sustaining Progress’, the current social partnershipagreement.

Successive amendments to Statutory Instruments cancreate difficulties in their interpretation. As outlinedabove, a stronger programme of consolidation is needed.As best practice, therefore, Departments should considerconsolidating Statutory Instruments that have beenamended more than three times.

Taken together, these streamlining measures will createmodern, more user-friendly legislation that willsubstantially reduce transaction costs and give citizensand investors a more accessible legal system. Thesepolicies will mirror work being undertaken with the sameobjective at European Community level. It is estimatedthat the Community acquis – the secondary legislationbinding on EU Member States – has been reduced by20,000 Official Journal pages following completion of aconsolidation programme.


TO SUM UP: In terms of improvingconsistency in regulatory bodies, theGovernment will:

Create new sectoral regulators only if the case for a new regulator can be clearly demonstrated in light of existing structures [Action 4.2.1]; Assess the possibilities forrationalisation of sectoral regulatorsincluding through the merger of existingregulators and/or through the sharing ofcommon services [Action 4.2.2];Promote the strengthening of existingcontacts between the sectoralregulators, the Competition Authorityand the Office of the Director ofConsumer Affairs [Action 4.2.3]; Pursue development of a complementaryapproach to regulation, and PSOs inparticular, on an island of Ireland basis[Action 5.5.2].

Will the regulation give rise to anomalies and inconsistencies given the other regulations that are already in place in this area?

We will ensure that regulations inparticular sectors/areas are consistent


TO SUM UP: In terms of improving internalconsistency of regulation in particular sectors,the Government will:

Implement a Programme of Statute Law Revision [Actions 1.7.1-1.7.2];Use RIA to ensure the consistency ofnew regulations with the existing body ofregulation [Action 1.3.1(c)];Examine the advantages anddisadvantages of using reviewmechanisms such as “sunsetting”[Action 1.3.1(b)];Ensure an integrated approach is takensuch that removing regulatory barriers ina particular sector is not offset byimposing different kinds of regulatorybarriers to entry in that sector [Action1.3.1(a)];Improve the quality of StatutoryInstruments through greaterconsolidation [Action 1.2.2]


ACTI

ONPR

INCI

PLE

BY W

HOM

BY

DAT

E

1. A

ctio

ns re

latin

g to

legi

slat

ive

proc

ess

and

Stat

ute

Law

Rev

isio

n

1.1

P

re-1

922

legi

slat

ion

1.2

Sta

tuto

ryIn

stru

men

ts

1.3

Dra

ftin

gne

w le

gisl

atio

n

1.1

.1

A pr

ogra

mm

e (u

nder

the

rem

it of

the

Sta

tute

Law

Rev

isio

n U

nit)

will

be

put

in p

lace

to

anal

yse

pre-

1922 le

gisl

atio

n w

ith a

vie

w t

o:■

Id

entif

ying

mor

ibun

d le

gisl

atio

n an

d re

peal

ing

it th

roug

h th

ein

trod

uctio

n of

a B

ill;

■

Re-

enac

ting

legi

slat

ion

that

is s

till u

sefu

l, re

mov

ing

anom

alie

s in

the

pro

cess

; an

d■

S

trea

mlin

ing/

sim

plify

ing

the

Sta

tute

Boo

k as

nec

essa

ry.

1.2

.1R

IA w

ill b

e us

ed f

or S

tatu

tory

Ins

trum

ents

tha

t co

ntai

n pr

opos

als

with

a s

igni

fican

tim

pact

.

1.2

.2Th

e O

ffic

e of

the

Att

orne

y G

ener

al w

ill w

ork

with

Dep

artm

ents

to

prom

ote

the

Gui

delin

es o

n dr

aftin

g S

tatu

tory

Ins

trum

ents

.

As b

est

prac

tice,

Dep

artm

ents

/Off

ices

will

enc

oura

ged

to s

impl

ify/c

odify

, e.

g. t

oco

nsol

idat

e S

tatu

tory

Ins

trum

ents

tha

t ha

ve b

een

amen

ded

mor

e th

an t

hree

tim

es.

1.2

.3S

tatu

tory

Ins

trum

ents

con

tain

ing

sign

ifica

nt p

ropo

sals

will

be

acco

mpa

nied

by

an

impr

oved

exp

lana

tory

sta

tem

ent

/gui

de.

(see

als

o 1.4

.1)

1.2

.4C

onsi

dera

tion

will

be

give

n to

opp

ortu

nitie

s fo

r m

ore

effe

ctiv

e sc

rutin

y of

Sta

tuto

ryIn

stru

men

ts b

y th

e H

ouse

s of

the

Oire

acht

as.

1.3

.1Th

ere

will

be

grea

ter

trai

ning

and

aw

aren

ess-

rais

ing

in G

over

nmen

t D

epar

tmen

ts a

ndO

ffic

es o

n th

e pr

oces

s of

legi

slat

ive

draf

ting,

incl

udin

g is

sues

suc

h as

:a)

The

nee

d to

ens

ure

that

the

gai

ns m

ade

by r

educ

ing

regu

latio

ns in

a p

artic

ular

se

ctor

/ind

ustr

y ar

e no

t of

fset

by

re-re

gula

ting

in a

noth

er g

uise

.

b) T

he a

dvan

tage

s an

d di

sadv

anta

ges

of m

echa

nism

s su

ch a

s "s

unse

ttin

g" c

laus

es a

sa

mea

ns o

f en

surin

g re

view

at

a fu

ture

dat

e.c)

The

nee

d fo

r cl

oser

scr

utin

y of

new

reg

ulat

ions

to

ensu

re t

heir

cons

iste

ncy

with

the

exis

ting

body

of

regu

latio

n in

tha

t ar

ea (

RIA

will

be

of u

se in

thi

s re

gard

).

Off

ice

of t

he A

ttor

ney

Gen

eral

All D

epar

tmen

ts/

Off

ices

Off

ice

of t

he A

ttor

ney

Gen

eral

All D

epar

tmen

ts/O

ffic

es

All D

epar

tmen

ts/O

ffic

es

Off

ice

of t

heG

over

nmen

t C

hief

Whi

p

CM

OD

, D

epar

tmen

t of

Fin

ance

All D

epar

tmen

ts/O

ffic

es

Spr

ing

2004

2005

Ong

oing

Ong

oing

Imm

edia

te

Ong

oing

Ong

oing

Nec

essi

ty

Tran

spar

ency

Tran

spar

ency

Con

sist

ency

Effe

ctiv

enes

sTr

ansp

aren

cy

Tran

spar

ency

Con

sist

ency

ACTI

ON P

ROGR

AMM

E FO

R BE

TTER

REG

ULAT

ION


ACTI

ONPR

INCI

PLE

BY W

HOM

BY

DAT

E

1.4

Bet

ter

info

rmat

ion

on n

ewle

gisl

atio

n

1.5

Am

endm

ent

of e

xist

ing

legi

slat

ion

1.6

Im

prov

edac

cess

to

legi

slat

ion

1.7

Use

of

Sta

tute

Law

Rev

isio

n to

ols

1.4

.1D

epar

tmen

ts a

nd O

ffic

es w

ill a

dopt

bes

t pr

actic

es r

egar

ding

pro

vidi

ng b

ette

r qu

ality

info

rmat

ion

on le

gisl

atio

n, in

clud

ing:

a) D

raft

Hea

ds o

f a

Bill

to

be p

ublis

hed

whe

re f

easi

ble

and

appr

opria

te.

b) R

IAs,

whe

re c

ondu

cted

, to

be

publ

ishe

d al

ongs

ide

a B

ill,

whe

re a

ppro

pria

te,

taki

ngin

to a

ccou

nt C

abin

et c

onfid

entia

lity,

sec

urity

and

com

mer

cial

sen

sitiv

ity is

sues

.c)

An

expl

anat

ory

guid

e to

be

publ

ishe

d al

ongs

ide

all n

ew A

cts

with

sig

nific

ant

impa

cts,

part

icul

arly

tho

se w

ith m

ajor

impl

icat

ions

for

con

sum

ers/

citiz

ens

and/

or S

MEs

. Th

isgu

ide

will

be

akin

to

the

Expl

anat

ory

Mem

oran

dum

tha

t cu

rren

tly a

ccom

pani

es m

ost

Bill

s an

d w

ill b

e w

ritte

n w

ith t

he g

ener

al p

ublic

in m

ind.

A

sim

ilar

guid

e w

ill b

epr

oduc

ed in

res

pect

of S

tatu

tory

Inst

rum

ents

tha

t co

ntai

n m

ajor

pro

posa

ls.

1.5

.1As

a m

atte

r of

goo

d pr

actic

e, D

epar

tmen

ts/O

ffic

es w

ill b

e en

cour

aged

to

amen

dle

gisl

atio

n by

tex

tual

am

endm

ents

and

avo

id t

he u

se o

f no

n-te

xtua

l am

endm

ents

as

far

as p

ossi

ble.

1.6

.1C

urre

nt e

-Gov

ernm

ent

(in

clud

ing

e-C

abin

et)

and

Qua

lity

Cus

tom

er S

ervi

ce in

itiat

ives

will

be

utili

sed

mor

e fu

lly t

o im

prov

e th

e qu

ality

and

acc

essi

bilit

y of

legi

slat

ion,

incl

udin

g:

a) G

reat

er a

cces

sibi

lity

of A

cts,

Sta

tuto

ry Ins

trum

ents

, th

e C

hron

olog

ical

Tab

les

(the

Tabl

es t

hat

prov

ide

info

rmat

ion

abou

t am

endm

ents

to

Acts

) an

d re

late

d m

ater

ials

such

as

Dái

l and

Sea

nad

Deb

ates

.b)

Fur

ther

dev

elop

men

t of

a w

eb-b

ased

ser

vice

to

allo

w c

itize

ns f

ull e

lect

roni

c ac

cess

to le

gisl

atio

n, d

ebat

es o

f th

e H

ouse

s of

the

Oire

acht

as a

nd o

ther

rel

ated

mat

eria

ls.

c) U

sing

cus

tom

er c

hart

ers

to r

educ

e th

e bu

rden

of

com

plia

nce

on t

he c

itize

n.

1.7

.1Th

e G

over

nmen

t’s

Legi

slat

ive

Com

mitt

ee w

ill in

clud

e a

rolli

ng p

rogr

amm

e of

Sta

tute

Law

Rev

isio

n as

a p

art

of t

he le

gisl

ativ

e pr

ogra

mm

e.

This

will

out

line

spec

ific

targ

ets

and

prio

ritie

s fo

r th

e us

e of

the

prin

cipa

l Sta

tute

Law

Rev

isio

n to

ols

of r

epea

l,co

nsol

idat

ion

and

rest

atem

ent.

1.7

.2Th

e S

tatu

te L

aw R

evis

ion

Uni

t w

ill m

aint

ain

a pr

iorit

ised

list

of

legi

slat

ion

to b

e: (

a)co

nsol

idat

ed;

(b)

repe

aled

; (c

) re

stat

ed;

(d)

othe

rwis

e re

vise

d.

This

list

will

be

com

pile

d in

con

junc

tion

with

Dep

artm

ents

/Off

ices

and

will

be

subm

itted

to

the

Bet

ter

Reg

ulat

ion

Gro

up f

or c

onsi

dera

tion.

All D

epar

tmen

ts/

Off

ices

All D

epar

tmen

ts/

Off

ices

a) a

nd b

) Off

ice

of the

At

torn

eyGen

eral

in

co-o

pera

tion

with

D

epar

tmen

ts/O

ffic

es

c)Al

l Dep

artm

ents

/ O

ffic

es

Off

ice

of t

he

Atto

rney

Gen

eral

,O

ffic

e of

the

Gov

ernm

ent C

hief

Whi

p,

Off

ice

of t

he

Atto

rney

Gen

eral

,D

epar

tmen

ts/O

ffic

es

a)Im

med

iate

b)O

n in

trod

uctio

nof

RIA

c)Im

med

iate

Imm

edia

te

2004

Ong

oing

Ong

oing

Tran

spar

ency

Pro

port

iona

lity

Effe

ctiv

enes

s

Tran

spar

ency

Nec

essi

ty

Tran

spar

ency

Nec

essi

ty

Tran

spar

ency

Con

sist

ency

Nec

essi

ty

Con

sist

ency


ACTI

ONPR

INCI

PLE

BY W

HOM

BY

DAT

E

1.8

Scr

utin

y of

EU

legi

slat

ion

1.9

Im

prov

ing

serv

ice

deliv

ery

On

intr

oduc

tion

of R

IA

Imm

edia

te

All D

epar

tmen

ts/

Off

ices

All D

epar

tmen

ts/O

ffic

es

1.8

.1R

IA w

ill b

e us

ed a

s a

tool

for

gre

ater

scr

utin

y of

EU

legi

slat

ion,

incl

udin

g us

e by

Dep

artm

ents

and

Off

ices

in t

he r

epor

ts t

hat

they

mak

e to

the

Oire

acht

as C

omm

ittee

on E

U A

ffai

rs a

nd f

or a

naly

sing

impa

ct a

sses

smen

ts p

rodu

ced

by t

he E

urop

ean

Com

mis

sion

.

1.9

.1In

the

con

text

of

furt

her

impr

ovem

ents

to

cust

omer

ser

vice

, D

epar

tmen

ts a

nd O

ffic

esw

ill b

e as

ked

to r

evie

w t

heir

curr

ent

regu

lato

ry a

nd a

dmin

istr

ativ

e sy

stem

s an

d id

entif

yop

port

uniti

es t

o si

mpl

ify a

nd s

trea

mlin

e ho

w t

hey

inte

ract

with

the

ir cu

stom

ers,

incl

udin

g:

■

Sim

plify

ing

form

s an

d us

ing

mor

e ac

cess

ible

lang

uage

■

Rev

iew

ing

requ

irem

ents

for

the

pro

visi

on o

f in

form

atio

n■

R

edes

igni

ng s

ervi

ces

arou

nd c

usto

mer

nee

ds■

U

sing

alte

rnat

ive

deliv

ery

chan

nels

(e.

g. p

hone

and

inte

rnet

)■

En

surin

g in

form

atio

n is

onl

y co

llect

ed f

rom

cus

tom

ers

once

■

Inte

grat

ing

serv

ices

acr

oss

orga

nisa

tions

This

wor

k w

ill b

e ta

ken

forw

ard

as p

art

of t

he w

ider

Civ

il S

ervi

ce m

oder

nisa

tion

prog

ram

me

incl

udin

g th

e Q

ualit

y C

usto

mer

Ser

vice

initi

ativ

e an

d e-

Gov

ernm

ent

(incl

udin

g Pu

blic

Ser

vice

s B

roke

r)

Pro

port

iona

lity

Effe

ctiv

enes

s


ACTI

ONPR

INCI

PLE

BY W

HOM

BY

DAT

E

Actio

ns o

n RI

A an

d ev

iden

ce-b

ased

pol

icy-

mak

ing

2.1

Reg

ulat

ory

Impa

ctA

naly

sis

Dep

artm

ent

of t

heTa

oise

ach

in

co-o

pera

tion

with

pi

lotin

g D

epar

tmen

ts

Dep

artm

ent

of t

heTa

oise

ach

and

Bet

ter

Reg

ulat

ion

Gro

up

Dep

artm

ent

ofEn

terp

rise,

Tra

de a

ndEm

ploy

men

t an

dD

epar

tmen

ts/O

ffic

es

Dep

artm

ent

of t

heTa

oise

ach

Dep

artm

ents

of

Fina

nce

and

the

Taoi

seac

h,

Rel

evan

t D

epar

tmen

ts

Dep

artm

ent

ofTr

ansp

ort,

Dep

artm

ent

ofC

omm

unic

atio

ns,

Mar

ine

and

Nat

ural

Res

ourc

es a

nd o

ther

Dep

artm

ents

as

appr

opria

te.

Sec

tora

l Reg

ulat

ors

a) 2

004

b) 2

005

End-

2004

On

intr

oduc

tion

of R

IA

2005

On

intr

oduc

tion

of R

IA

On

intr

oduc

tion

of R

IA

2.1

.1a)

RIA

will

be

pilo

ted

in a

num

ber

of G

over

nmen

t D

epar

tmen

ts a

nd O

ffic

es w

ith a

vie

wto

gai

ning

fur

ther

insi

ghts

into

its

use

and

the

prac

tical

issu

es a

risin

g fr

om it

s us

e, e

.g.

appr

opria

te t

hres

hold

s an

d ot

her

crite

ria t

o en

sure

tha

t R

IAs

are

only

req

uire

d fo

r im

port

ant

and

rele

vant

pro

posa

ls.

b) F

ollo

win

g th

e pi

lot

phas

e, t

he R

IA m

odel

will

be

refin

ed a

nd m

ains

trea

med

acr

oss

all

Dep

artm

ents

and

Off

ices

.

2.1

.2D

etai

led

guid

elin

es w

ill b

e pr

epar

ed a

nd is

sued

prio

r to

the

mai

nstr

eam

ing

of R

IA w

ithin

the

Civ

il S

ervi

ce t

o en

sure

qua

lity

and

cons

iste

ncy

of a

ppro

ach.

2.1

.3R

IAs

will

pay

par

ticul

ar a

tten

tion

to b

usin

ess

impa

ct a

sses

smen

t, e

spec

ially

in r

espe

ctof

SM

Es.

How

ever

, th

is w

ill c

ompl

emen

t, n

ot r

epla

ce,

exis

ting

busi

ness

impa

ctas

sess

men

t to

ols

and

proc

edur

es p

rom

oted

/und

erta

ken

by t

he D

epar

tmen

t of

Ente

rpris

e, T

rade

& E

mpl

oym

ent.

2.1

.4C

abin

et p

roce

dure

s w

ill b

e am

ende

d as

app

ropr

iate

to

take

acc

ount

of

the

RIA

pro

cess

.Th

is w

ill in

clud

e ch

ange

s to

pro

cedu

res

bein

g m

ade

unde

r th

e e-

Cab

inet

initi

ativ

e.

2.1

.5R

IAs

will

be

scru

tinis

ed b

y th

e D

epar

tmen

ts o

f th

e Ta

oise

ach

and

Fina

nce

(Pub

licEx

pend

iture

Div

isio

n) f

rom

a q

ualit

y pe

rspe

ctiv

e.

RIA

s w

ill a

lso

be e

xam

ined

by

rele

vant

Dep

artm

ents

/Off

ices

in r

espe

ct o

f pa

rtic

ular

po

licy

impa

cts,

e.g

. by

the

Dep

artm

ent

of E

nter

pris

e, T

rade

and

Em

ploy

men

t in

res

pect

of

bus

ines

s an

d co

nsum

er im

pact

s or

by

the

Dep

artm

ent

of S

ocia

l and

Fam

ily A

ffai

rs in

resp

ect

of im

pact

s on

pov

erty

.

2.1

.6R

IAs

will

be

used

in a

sses

sing

the

intr

oduc

tion

or v

aria

tion

of P

ublic

Ser

vice

Obl

igat

ions

with

a s

igni

fican

t im

pact

.

Nec

essi

ty

Effe

ctiv

enes

s

Pro

port

iona

lity

Pro

port

iona

lity

Effe

ctiv

enes

s

Effe

ctiv

enes

s

Pro

port

iona

lity

Effe

ctiv

enes

sP

ropo

rtio

nalit

y

Pro

port

iona

lity

Effe

ctiv

enes

s

Tran

spar

ency


ACTI

ONPR

INCI

PLE

BY W

HOM

BY

DAT

E

2.2

C

apac

ity

build

ing

tosu

ppor

tev

iden

ce-

base

d po

licy-

mak

ing

CM

OD

, D

epar

tmen

t of

Fina

nce

All D

epar

tmen

ts &

Off

ices

, N

atio

nal

Sta

tistic

s B

oard

and

the

Cen

tral

Sta

tistic

sO

ffic

e

Dep

artm

ent

of F

inan

ceAl

l Dep

artm

ents

/O

ffic

es

Dep

artm

ent

ofFi

nanc

e

Ong

oing

Ong

oing

Ong

oing

2004

2.2

.1Th

e ca

paci

ty f

or e

vide

nce-

base

d po

licy-

mak

ing

in t

he p

ublic

ser

vice

will

be

stre

ngth

ened

thro

ugh

grea

ter

awar

enes

s-ra

isin

g an

d tr

aini

ng,

incl

udin

g sp

ecifi

c co

urse

s on

RIA

tech

niqu

es,

as w

ell a

s m

odul

ar in

puts

to

wid

er p

olic

y an

alys

is a

nd le

gisl

ativ

e pr

oces

str

aini

ng c

ours

es.

2.2

.2D

ata

man

agem

ent,

incl

udin

g th

e qu

ality

and

ran

ge o

f st

atis

tical

enq

uirie

s, w

ill b

eim

prov

ed.

2.2

.3Th

e re

quis

ite c

ompe

tenc

ies

to s

uppo

rt e

vide

nce-

base

d po

licy

anal

ysis

will

be

activ

ely

prom

oted

in t

he C

ivil

Ser

vice

thr

ough

the

Per

form

ance

Man

agem

ent

and

Dev

elop

men

tS

yste

m (

PMD

S).

2.2

.4Th

ese

polic

y co

mpe

tenc

ies

will

be

give

n sp

ecia

l att

entio

n fo

r th

e pu

rpos

es o

f pr

omot

ion

and

recr

uitm

ent,

incl

udin

g th

roug

h m

echa

nism

s es

tabl

ishe

d in

‘S

usta

inin

g Pr

ogre

ss’

whi

ch a

llow

for

the

dire

ct r

ecru

itmen

t of

sta

ff w

ith s

peci

alis

t sk

ills

in c

erta

inci

rcum

stan

ces.

Nec

essi

ty

Pro

port

iona

lity

Nec

essi

ty

Nec

essi

ty

Nec

essi

ty


ACTI

ONPR

INCI

PLE

BY W

HOM

BY

DAT

E

3. A

ctio

ns o

n in

stitu

tiona

l cha

nge

and

revi

ew

3.1

Sec

tora

lre

gula

tory

revi

ews

3.2

B

uild

ing

on e

xist

ing

capa

city

Dep

artm

ents

&O

ffic

es,

Bet

ter

Reg

ulat

ion

Gro

up.

Dep

artm

ents

&O

ffic

es,

Bet

ter

Reg

ulat

ion

Gro

up.

Dep

artm

ents

&O

ffic

es,

Bet

ter

Reg

ulat

ion

Gro

up

Off

ice

of t

heG

over

nmen

t C

hief

Whi

p

Dep

artm

ent

ofEn

terp

rise,

Tra

de a

ndEm

ploy

men

t

Com

petit

ion

Auth

ority

From

2004

From

2004

From

2004

Imm

edia

te

Ong

oing

Ong

oing

3.1

.1R

egul

ator

y re

view

s of

sec

tors

of

the

econ

omy

will

be

unde

rtak

en in

ord

er t

o es

tabl

ish

the

viab

ility

of

exis

ting

regu

lato

ry a

ppro

ache

s.

This

will

invo

lve

revi

ewin

g th

e re

gula

tory

inst

itutio

ns in

pla

ce,

as w

ell a

s th

e bo

dy o

f re

gula

tion

gove

rnin

g pa

rtic

ular

are

as.

3.1

.2S

uch

revi

ews

coul

d be

initi

ated

by

the

Gov

ernm

ent,

by

the

rele

vant

Min

iste

r, or

on

the

reco

mm

enda

tion

of t

he B

ette

r R

egul

atio

n G

roup

. It

may

be

open

to

the

Bet

ter

Reg

ulat

ion

Gro

up t

o or

gani

se r

evie

ws

itsel

f.

3.1

.3Th

e re

view

s w

ill in

clud

e as

sess

ing

the

role

s of

sec

tora

l reg

ulat

ors

and

the

rang

e of

func

tions

tha

t ha

ve b

een

tran

sfer

red

from

cen

tral

Gov

ernm

ent

Dep

artm

ents

to

inde

pend

ent

regu

lato

ry b

odie

s. T

his

will

incl

ude

cons

ider

ing

whe

ther

the

re is

sco

pe f

orpa

rtia

l int

egra

tion

of r

egul

ator

y bo

dies

.

3.2

.1Th

e qu

estio

n of

the

cap

acity

of

the

Hou

ses

of t

he O

ireac

htas

and

its

com

mitt

ees

tore

view

new

reg

ulat

ory

stru

ctur

es w

ill b

e ex

amin

ed in

the

con

text

of

reso

urce

s.

3.2

.2Th

e ro

le a

nd r

esou

rces

of

the

Com

petit

ion

Auth

ority

will

be

revi

ewed

per

iodi

cally

to

ensu

re it

s on

goin

g ef

fect

iven

ess

in r

evie

win

g m

erge

rs a

nd a

cqui

sitio

ns,

in a

dvoc

atin

gan

d po

licin

g co

mpe

titio

n po

licy

and

stud

ying

ant

i-com

petit

ive

aspe

cts

of p

artic

ular

mar

kets

incl

udin

g re

gula

tions

.

3.2

.3Th

e C

ompe

titio

n Au

thor

ity w

ill c

ondu

ct f

urth

er r

evie

ws

of s

ecto

rs a

nd m

arke

ts a

cros

s a

rang

e of

are

as in

clud

ing

shel

tere

d se

ctor

s. T

hese

rev

iew

s co

uld

be c

ondu

cted

on

ast

and-

alon

e ba

sis,

for

exa

mpl

e at

the

req

uest

of

the

Gov

ernm

ent,

or

coul

d fo

rm a

par

tof

a s

ecto

ral r

egul

ator

y re

view

.

Nec

essi

ty

Effe

ctiv

enes

s A

ccou

ntab

ility

Nec

essi

ty

Effe

ctiv

enes

s A

ccou

ntab

ility

Nec

essi

ty

Effe

ctiv

enes

s A

ccou

ntab

ility

Acc

ount

abili

ty

Nec

essi

ty

Nec

essi

ty


ACTI

ONPR

INCI

PLE

BY W

HOM

BY

DAT

E

3.3

N

ewst

ruct

ures

3.4

Rev

iew

at

nati

onal

leve

l.

Dep

artm

ent

of t

heTa

oise

ach

Rel

evan

t D

epar

tmen

ts

Dep

artm

ents

of

the

Taoi

seac

h an

dFi

nanc

e

Bet

ter

Reg

ulat

ion

Gro

up

2004

2004

2005

2004

3.3

.1A

new

Bet

ter

Reg

ulat

ion

Gro

up w

ill b

e es

tabl

ishe

d to

mon

itor

impl

emen

tatio

n of

the

actio

ns a

risin

g fr

om t

his

Whi

te P

aper

and

will

rep

ort

to t

he G

over

nmen

t on

an

annu

alba

sis.

In

add

ition

, it

will

mak

e re

com

men

datio

ns t

o G

over

nmen

t on

rel

evan

t ar

eas

for

exte

rnal

rev

iew.

It

will

als

o be

ope

n to

the

Gro

up t

o ar

rang

e su

ch r

evie

ws.

3.3

.2N

ew m

easu

res

will

be

exam

ined

to

stre

ngth

en t

he r

ole

of t

he c

onsu

mer

in t

he p

roce

ss o

fse

ctor

al r

egul

atio

n.

In t

his

cont

ext, c

onsi

dera

tion

will

be

give

n to

the

est

ablis

hmen

t of

sect

oral

con

sum

er c

ounc

ils t

o br

ing

toge

ther

the

con

cern

s of

indi

vidu

al c

itize

ns.

The

Gov

ernm

ent

will

als

o co

nsid

er t

he c

ase

for

usin

g re

sour

ces

gene

rate

d by

exi

stin

g in

dust

ryle

vies

to

supp

ort

cons

umer

cou

ncils

. Th

e ro

le a

nd r

esou

rces

of

the

Off

ice

of D

irect

or o

fC

onsu

mer

Aff

airs

will

be

revi

ewed

per

iodi

cally

to

ensu

re it

s on

goin

g ef

fect

iven

ess.

3.4

.1O

ppor

tuni

ties

will

be

soug

ht t

o be

nchm

ark

Irel

and’

s re

gula

tory

reg

ime

and

prog

ress

on

regu

lato

ry r

efor

m a

t in

tern

atio

nal l

evel

, in

clud

ing

thro

ugh

the

OEC

D,

whi

ch u

nder

took

a

maj

or n

atio

nal r

evie

w o

f Irel

and’

s re

gula

tory

str

uctu

res

and

proc

esse

s in

2001.

3.4

.2An

aud

it of

the

reg

ulat

ory

fram

ewor

k in

Irel

and

will

be

unde

rtak

en w

hich

will

map

the

var

ious

bodi

es a

nd r

epor

ting

arra

ngem

ents

. It

will

als

o pr

ovid

e in

form

atio

n on

the

ran

ge a

nd t

ype

of b

odie

s in

Irel

and

with

reg

ulat

ory

pow

ers

– w

heth

er “

rule

-mak

ers”

or

“rul

e-en

forc

ers”

.

Nec

essi

ty

Effe

ctiv

enes

s

Acc

ount

abili

ty

Nec

essi

ty

Nec

essi

ty


ACTI

ONPR

INCI

PLE

BY W

HOM

BY

DAT

E

4. A

ctio

ns o

n se

ctor

al re

gula

tors

/sec

tora

l iss

ues

4.1

Acc

ount

abili

ty

4.2

Str

uctu

res

4.3

App

eals

Off

ice

of t

heG

over

nmen

t C

hief

Whi

p an

d re

leva

ntD

epar

tmen

ts

All

Dep

artm

ents

/Off

ices

Dep

artm

ents

of

Fina

nce,

Tran

spor

t, a

ndC

omm

unic

atio

ns,

Mar

ine

and

Nat

ural

Res

ourc

es

Rel

evan

t D

epar

tmen

ts,

Com

petit

ion

Auth

ority

,O

ffic

e of

the

Dire

ctor

of

Con

sum

er A

ffai

rs a

ndre

gula

tory

age

ncie

s

Bet

ter

Reg

ulat

ion

Gro

up a

nd r

elev

ant

Dep

artm

ents

/O

ffic

es.

Ong

oing

Ong

oing

Ong

oing

Ong

oing

End-

2004

4.1

.1Th

e G

over

nmen

t w

ill p

rom

ote

a sy

stem

atic

app

roac

h to

the

ove

rvie

w o

f se

ctor

alre

gula

tors

by

Gov

ernm

ent

Dep

artm

ents

and

Oire

acht

as C

omm

ittee

s.

4.2

.1W

here

new

sec

tora

l reg

ulat

ors

are

prop

osed

, th

ey w

ill b

e es

tabl

ishe

d on

ly if

the

requ

irem

ent

for

a re

gula

tor

can

be c

lear

ly d

emon

stra

ted

and

if re

spon

sibi

lity

for

the

sect

or in

que

stio

n ca

nnot

be

assi

gned

to

an e

xist

ing

regu

lato

r.

4.2

.2Th

e G

over

nmen

t w

ill a

sses

s, o

n an

ong

oing

bas

is,

the

poss

ibili

ties

for

ratio

nalis

atio

n of

sect

oral

reg

ulat

ors

incl

udin

g th

roug

h th

e m

erge

r of

exi

stin

g re

gula

tors

and

/or

thro

ugh

the

shar

ing

of c

omm

on s

ervi

ces.

4.2

.3S

tren

gthe

ned

cont

acts

bet

wee

n th

e se

ctor

al r

egul

ator

s, t

he O

ffic

e of

the

Dire

ctor

of

Con

sum

er A

ffai

rs a

nd t

he C

ompe

titio

n Au

thor

ity w

ill b

e pr

omot

ed.

4.3

.1Pr

opos

als

for

an im

prov

ed a

ppro

ach

to a

ppea

ls o

f de

cisi

ons

by s

ecto

ral r

egul

ator

s,w

hich

will

be

put

forw

ard

for

cons

ulta

tion

with

inte

rest

ed p

artie

s, w

ill b

e de

velo

ped.

This

cou

ld in

volv

e, f

or e

xam

ple:

■

an a

ppea

ls b

ody

com

pose

d of

mem

bers

dra

wn

from

a p

anel

of

expe

rts

with

aju

dici

al/l

egal

cha

ir.

The

sam

e pa

nel a

nd a

ppro

ach

coul

d be

use

d fo

r ea

ch s

ecto

r;■

ap

peal

s w

ould

be

on t

he m

erit

of t

he r

egul

ator

’s d

ecis

ion.

A

num

ber

of d

iffe

rent

optio

ns w

ould

be

avai

labl

e to

the

app

eals

bod

y (c

hang

e de

cisi

on,

refe

r ba

ck t

ore

gula

tor)

;■

le

gisl

atio

n w

ould

cla

rify

that

, gi

ven

the

avai

labi

lity

of a

n ap

peal

s pr

oces

s, r

ecou

rse

toth

e co

urts

wou

ld b

e lim

ited

to p

oint

s of

law

;■

to

pre

vent

use

of t

he a

ppea

ls s

truc

ture

in a

vex

atio

us o

r de

layi

ng m

anne

r, th

ere

coul

d be

disi

ncen

tives

, per

haps

in t

he fo

rm o

f a r

equi

rem

ent

to lo

dge

a su

m o

f mon

ey a

s w

ell a

slia

bilit

y fo

r co

sts,

whi

ch m

ight

incl

ude

any

wid

er e

cono

mic

cos

ts a

risin

g; a

nd■

th

e de

cisi

on o

f th

e re

gula

tor

coul

d st

and

for

the

dura

tion

of t

he a

ppea

ls p

roce

ss.

Acc

ount

abili

ty

Con

sist

ency

Con

sist

ency

Con

sist

ency

Acc

ount

abili

ty


ACTI

ONPR

INCI

PLE

BY W

HOM

BY

DAT

E

5. A

ctio

ns o

n Re

gula

tory

Pro

cedu

res

and

Proc

esse

s

5.1

Con

sult

atio

n

5.2

Alt

erna

tive

s

5.1

.1W

ider

and

mor

e co

nsis

tent

con

sulta

tion

is a

key

ele

men

t of

the

new

Reg

ulat

ory

Impa

ctAn

alys

is a

ppro

ach.

Pr

oced

ures

and

gui

delin

es w

ill b

e de

velo

ped

to p

rom

ote

bett

erqu

ality

pub

lic c

onsu

ltatio

n an

d to

out

line

a fu

ll ra

nge

of c

onsu

ltatio

n op

tions

incl

udin

g"n

otic

e an

d co

mm

ent"

pro

cedu

res,

"ca

lls f

or c

omm

ent"

, an

d "s

ilenc

e is

con

sent

" ru

les,

whe

re a

ppro

pria

te.

5.1

.2W

hile

the

dur

atio

n of

con

sulta

tion

proc

esse

s m

ay v

ary

from

sec

tor

to s

ecto

r or

acr

oss

diff

eren

t br

anch

es o

f G

over

nmen

t, n

orm

s an

d st

anda

rds

of c

onsu

ltatio

n w

ill b

ees

tabl

ishe

d w

ithin

par

ticul

ar a

reas

. B

ypas

sing

con

sulta

tion

will

be

poss

ible

, bu

t th

eex

cept

ions

will

be

set

out

so t

hat

it w

ill b

e cl

eare

r to

the

end

use

rs o

f re

gula

tion

wha

tca

n be

nor

mal

ly e

xpec

ted

in t

erm

s of

con

sulta

tion

on r

outin

e re

gula

tion.

C

omm

itmen

tsin

thi

s re

gard

cou

ld b

e in

clud

ed in

cus

tom

er c

hart

ers,

whe

re a

ppro

pria

te.

5.1

.3B

ette

r us

e w

ill b

e m

ade

of w

eb-b

ased

tec

hnol

ogie

s as

a p

ro-a

ctiv

e m

easu

re t

o in

crea

seco

vera

ge o

f co

nsul

tatio

n pr

oces

ses.

5.1

.4C

onsi

dera

tion

will

be

give

n to

the

mec

hani

sms

for

ensu

ring

bala

nced

con

sulta

tion

proc

edur

es,

taki

ng c

are

to c

onsi

der

the

part

icul

ar r

equi

rem

ents

of

“not

-for-p

rofit

” gr

oups

.

5.2

.1a)

Alte

rnat

ives

to

trad

ition

al "

com

man

d an

d co

ntro

l" t

ype

regu

latio

n/le

gisl

atio

n w

ill b

epr

omot

ed a

nd d

evel

oped

for

wid

er u

se b

y G

over

nmen

t D

epar

tmen

ts a

nd O

ffic

es.

This

coul

d in

clud

e ne

w a

ppro

ache

s to

reg

ulat

ion,

incl

udin

g co

-regu

latio

n an

d pe

rfor

man

ce-

base

d re

gula

tion

(whe

re t

he o

vera

ll go

al is

sta

ted

but

max

imum

fle

xibi

lity

is p

erm

itted

as t

o ho

w t

he g

oal c

an b

e ac

hiev

ed).

b) D

etai

led

guid

ance

on

this

app

roac

h w

ill b

e pr

epar

ed a

nd is

sued

.

Dep

artm

ent

of t

heTa

oise

ach,

Dep

artm

ent

ofFi

nanc

e(C

MO

D/C

PMR

)

All D

epar

tmen

ts/

Off

ices

,re

gula

tory

age

ncie

s

All D

epar

tmen

ts/

Info

rmat

ion

Soc

iety

Com

mis

sion

All D

epar

tmen

ts/

Off

ices

a) A

llD

epar

tmen

ts/O

ffic

es

b) B

ette

r R

egul

atio

nG

roup

2004

2004

Ong

oing

2004

End-

2004

Effe

ctiv

enes

s

Tran

spar

ency

Effe

ctiv

enes

s

Tran

spar

ency

Effe

ctiv

enes

s

Tran

spar

ency

Effe

ctiv

enes

s

Tran

spar

ency

Effe

ctiv

enes

s

Pro

port

iona

lity


ACTI

ONPR

INCI

PLE

BY W

HOM

BY

DAT

E

5.3

Adm

inis

trat

ive

Pro

cedu

res

5.4

Pen

alti

es

5.5

Pub

lic S

ervi

ceO

blig

atio

ns

5.6

Cas

eM

anag

emen

t

5.3

.1Th

e ne

ed f

or a

n Ad

min

istr

ativ

e Pr

oced

ures

Act

, to

set

out

, in

one

Act

, th

e pr

oced

ures

unde

rpin

ning

the

rig

hts

and

stan

dard

s of

tre

atm

ent

that

peo

ple

can

expe

ct in

the

irva

rious

dea

lings

with

Gov

ernm

ent

Dep

artm

ents

and

Off

ices

, w

ill b

e ke

pt u

nder

rev

iew.

5.3

.2Th

ere

will

be

grea

ter

acco

unta

bilit

y by

Gov

ernm

ent

Dep

artm

ents

in r

espe

ct o

f re

gula

tory

man

agem

ent,

incl

udin

g re

port

ing

on r

egul

atio

ns e

nact

ed,

repe

aled

, re

vise

d an

dre

stat

ed e

tc.

thro

ugh

the

stra

tegy

sta

tem

ent/

annu

al r

epor

t pr

oces

s.

5.4

.1Th

e G

over

nmen

t w

ill e

xam

ine

the

issu

e of

em

pow

erin

g C

ourt

s an

d re

gula

tors

to

appl

yef

fect

ive

and

econ

omic

ally

mea

ning

ful p

enal

ties

for

non-

com

plia

nce

with

law

s or

regu

latio

ns.

The

Gov

ernm

ent

will

exa

min

e th

e ex

tent

to

whi

ch t

he c

rimin

al ju

stic

esy

stem

can

app

ropr

iate

ly d

eal w

ith c

ompl

ex r

egul

ator

y is

sues

in a

n ef

ficie

nt m

anne

r.

5.4

.2Th

e G

over

nmen

t w

ill p

rovi

de f

or t

he in

dexa

tion

of f

ines

and

giv

e gr

eate

r co

nsid

erat

ion

to t

he li

nkin

g of

mon

etar

y pe

nalti

es/f

ines

to

the

inco

me/

abili

ty t

o pa

y of

the

non

-co

mpl

iant

par

ty/b

ody.

5.5

.1Th

e ra

tiona

le a

nd c

riter

ia f

or P

ublic

Ser

vice

Obl

igat

ions

(PS

Os)

sho

uld

be c

lear

ly s

et o

ut b

yth

e ap

prop

riate

reg

ulat

ory

auth

oriti

es/G

over

nmen

t D

epar

tmen

ts a

nd s

houl

d be

kep

t un

der

ongo

ing

revi

ew.

5.5

.2Th

e G

over

nmen

t w

ill k

eep

unde

r re

view

the

opp

ortu

nitie

s fo

r de

velo

ping

a

com

plem

enta

ry a

ppro

ach

to r

egul

atio

n, a

nd P

SO

s in

par

ticul

ar,

on a

n is

land

of

Irel

and

basi

s, in

clud

ing

enha

ncin

g in

form

atio

n sh

arin

g on

a c

ross

-bor

der

basi

s.

5.6

.1Th

e C

ourt

s S

ervi

ce w

ill c

ontin

ue t

o im

prov

e an

d st

ream

line

case

man

agem

ent

prac

tices

in c

ases

rel

atin

g to

sec

tora

l reg

ulat

ion

in o

rder

to

expe

dite

the

pro

cess

. Ex

pert

pan

els

of ju

dges

will

be

esta

blis

hed

with

in t

he s

yste

m t

o de

al w

ith s

peci

fied

case

s of

co

mpe

titio

n an

d se

ctor

al r

egul

atio

n.

Acc

ount

abili

ty

Acc

ount

abili

ty

Pro

port

iona

lity

Pro

port

iona

lity

Tran

spar

ency

Tran

spar

ency

Con

sist

ency

Acc

ount

abili

ty

Dep

artm

ent

ofFi

nanc

e

All D

epar

tmen

ts/

Off

ices

Bet

ter

Reg

ulat

ion

Gro

up in

con

junc

tion

with

Dep

artm

ents

with

sect

oral

reg

ulat

ory

resp

onsi

bilit

ies,

Dep

artm

ent

of J

ustic

eEq

ualit

y an

d La

wR

efor

m a

nd t

he O

ffic

eof

the

Att

orne

yG

ener

al.

Dep

artm

ent

ofJu

stic

e, E

qual

ity a

ndLa

w R

efor

m

Dep

artm

ent

ofCo

mm

unic

atio

ns, M

arin

ean

d N

atur

al R

esou

rces

Dep

artm

ent o

f Tra

nspo

rt

Dep

artm

ent

ofCo

mm

unic

atio

ns, M

arin

ean

d N

atur

al R

esou

rces

Dep

artm

ent o

f Tra

nspo

rt

The

Cou

rts

Ser

vice

;D

epar

tmen

t of

Just

ice,

Equ

ality

and

Law

Ref

orm

Ong

oing

Annu

al R

epor

ts2004

End-

2004

End-

2004

Ong

oing

Ong

oing

Ong

oing

What is Regulatory Impact Analysis?

Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) is a policy tool designed to identify and quantify, where possible, the impact of newregulations. It can also be used in the review of existing regulations. In essence, RIA attempts to clarify the relevantfactors for decision-making through the comprehensive and systematic compilation of information. It encourages policy-makers to make balanced decisions when considering legislative action that trade off possible solutions to a problem,against the wider economic and distributional goals.

Best practice models of RIA often include the following key elements:

+ Identification and quantification (where possible) of impactsAny model of RIA must be designed to ensure that all relevant potential impacts are examined, without creating anoverly burdensome assessment process. The OECD has noted a trend for overly extensive and unclear testsincorporated within the RIA model.

+ Structured consideration of alternatives to regulation and of different regulatory approachesState regulation is not always the best option and alternatives to regulation, or different regulatory approaches,need to be examined. Efficient and effective policy action is only possible if all options are considered. Thisincludes the use of available instruments, whether singly or in combination, or the possibility of the State taking noaction where the problem can be solved by other means.

+ Built-in comprehensive, consultation processesIreland has a long tradition of consultation with affected parties. Until now, however, there haven’t been formalmeasures in place to formalise public consultation processes or to ensure consistency of the process - such aswho should be consulted or how to actively engage consumer groups’ interest. As well as providing information onthe acceptability of a proposal, consultation can be a vital support for evidence-based decision-making, by actingfirstly as a source of data and then as a means of ensuring that the assumptions upon which recommendationsare made are correct.

+ Formal consideration of compliance issues (including enforcement aspects, plain language drafting, red tape issues etc.)Consideration should be given, as early in the process as possible, to the issue of compliance. Will there becompliance costs, and if so, who will pay? How can these costs be minimised? Will effective compliancemechanisms be in place when the regulation comes into effect? What criteria for success will be put in place? And will it be obvious that compliance will be taking place?

RIA is designed to encourage evidence-based policy-making by requiring that each element is reported upon and byimposing accountability through the requirement to make the report public. It is intended to establish a standard forrigorous policy work, building on our current procedures. This will ensure that all elements are undertaken and astructured reporting format to provide users with consistent, complete and accessible information is implemented. RIAformalises and provides evidence of the steps that should be taken in policy formulation. It also provides consistency inthe presentation of this information in summary form.

Why introduce RIA?

One important way to achieve the goals of Better Regulation is the use of Regulatory Impact Analysis.This promotesevidence-based policy-making, based on a detailed consideration of the impacts of decisions along with structuredparticipation of stakeholders and citizens. Evidence-based policy is about making better use of research and analysis,in both policy making and practice. RIA by itself is not a substitute for decision-making. Instead, RIA is best used as aguide to improve the quality of political and administrative decision-making, while also serving the important values ofopenness, public involvement and accountability.

The introduction of Regulatory Impact Analysis is not just a matter of improving the quality of legislation. It must beseen in the wider context of enhancing the capacity of the public service to provide high quality timely analysis to informpolicy-making. A structured, rigorous process of impact analysis will ensure the strengthening of analytical competencies in


Appendix 1 - Regulatory Impact Analysis

the public service, and facilitate the wider acquisition of such competencies across management grades.

The enhanced capacity required to operate RIA will support all forms of impact analysis, proofing and evidence-basedpolicy-making - whether or not legislation is involved. RIA will, therefore, help to address the recommendation of PAConsulting in their Evaluation of the Progress of the Strategic Management Initiative for ‘measures to improve policydevelopment on a service-wide and Departmental basis.’

RIA could also be usefully used when reviewing existing legislation. Extending RIA to local authorities, sectoralregulators and so on, could be considered at a later point. It must be acknowledged, however, that the sectoralregulators already undertake structured public consultation in relation to proposals being developed.

In developing the model, it is crucially important to ensure that RIA does not become an overly bureaucratic exercise,with costs outweighing the advantages. Practical use must take precedence over superficial compliance. The level ofanalysis required in any instance must be proportionate to the likely impact of the proposal.

Further context for the application of RIA in Ireland

It is recognised that, in practice, many of the steps in the RIA process are already undertaken when a regulation isbeing prepared in Ireland. Introduction of a formalised system of RIA will increase the consistency with which thesesteps are taken and assist in the application of best practice.

Most OECD countries already use some form of RIA when taking regulatory decisions. By 1996, more than half hadadopted RIA programmes, up from one or two in 1980. In April 2001, the Government acted on the findings of theOECD Report which strongly recommended introduction of a diagnostic tool, namely Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA).

The introduction of RIA at national and EU levels was also recommended by the Report of the EU High LevelConsultative Group on Regulatory Quality (Mandelkern Group). On 5 June 2002, the European Commission published apackage of measures on Better Regulation. This package includes the Commission’s plans for the introduction ofImpact Assessment, on a phased basis, for all major Commission initiatives from 2003. The system would be fullyoperational by 2004/2005. It also requires Member States to carry out an Impact Assessment in certaincircumstances.

From 1 July 2002, new proposals for Oireachtas scrutiny of EU business require that a paper on the nature andpurpose of EU legislative proposals and an initial indication of possible implications for Ireland be sent to the JointCommittee on European Affairs. RIA might serve as an initial assessment of the implications of a proposal for Irelandfor this purpose.

RIA is an aid to decision-making, and does not substitute for, but rather seeks to contribute to, the making of political judgements.



Appendix 2 - RIA and the Legislative Process

Identify problem and generate policy options including legislation.

1

Undertake a Preliminary Assessment to evaluate the options.

2

When preparing Draft Bill, carryout full RIA, if appropriate. (RIA toinclude public consultation).

4

If legislation is required, submitMemo to Government with DraftHeads and result of PreliminaryAssessment.

3

If proceeding with legislation asplanned, prepare and circulateDraft Bill and RIA, to Departmentsfor comment.

5

Publish Bill and ExplanatoryMemorandum plus RIA, ifapproved by Government.

7

Submit final draft Bill toGovernment backed up by RIA.

6

Consideration by the Houses ofthe Oireachtas (5 stages).

8

On signature by the President, Billbecomes an Act.

9

Publication of Act and, asnecessary, Explanatory Guide.

10

AAccessibility 28, 38, Accountability 2, 5, 6, 10, 20, 23, 30, 31, 44, 47Action Programme 37 Administrative Procedures 12, 46Alternatives to Regulation 21, 47Annual reports 3, 13, 30, 46Appeals 2, 6, 7, 10, 30, 31, 32, 44Audit 15Aviation 9

BBarriers 16, 28 Best practice 2,6,23Better Regulation 2, 5, 6, 8, 19Better Regulation Group 3, 14, 15, 19, 42, 43, 44, 45Benchmark 15, 43Business 3, 6, 7, 10

CCabinet Procedures 40 Chronological Tables 29, 38 Citizen, 4, 5, 7, 8, 16, 29CMOD 37, 41, 45Codification 4, 35 Commission for Communications Regulation (ComReg)4, 14Commission for Aviation Regulation 14Commission for Energy Regulation 14Competition 14, 15, 18, 22, Act 32, Competition Authority 3, 12, 14, 15, 35, 42, 44 Competitiveness 2, 6, 7, 23Compliance 3, 10, 16, 17, 18, 20, 30, 47Comptroller and Auditor General 31Consistency 2, 34, 47Consolidation 4, 35 Consultation 3, 5, 6, 10, 23, 26, cause for comment27, 45, 47Consumer 3, 4, 5, 7, 8,16, 17, 26, 31, 34, Councils 43Court 5, 10, 31, 32, 44, 46CPMR 45 Criminal Justice System 3, 22, 46Customer Charter 3, 13, 38, 45Customer Service (Quality) 12, 13, 16, 26, 29, 38, 39

DDepartments 3, 9, 10, 12, 14, 24, 28, 30, 37- 46 Deregulation 5, 34 Draft Heads of Bills 38Drafting new Legislation 37 Duplication 14

Ee-Cabinet 24, 38, 40Effectiveness 2, 6, 10,16e-Government 3, 13, 38Employees 8Enforcement of Regulations 16, 17, 18, 47Environment 8, 21, 23European Commission 4, 8, 28EU/ European Union 2, 4, 6, 8, 20, 24, 35, 39Evidence-based policy 2, 3, 5, 11, 23, 40, 41, 47, 48Explanatory Guide 17, 29, 38 Expert panels 2, 32, 44, 46

FFinancial Services 9Fines (See also penalties) 3, 22Fisheries 21Flexibility 17Freedom of Information 26

GGlobal Competitiveness Report 7Governance 4, 20Governance and Accountability in the RegulatoryProcess 15Government 6, 20, 22Guidelines 24, 27

HHealth and Safety 7, 8, 21

IImpact Assessment 8, 24Independent Sectoral Regulators 9, 14, 30, 31 Information campaigns 20, 21Information Society Commission 45Information Technology 13Interest Groups 26, 27International Trade Rules 34Irish Financial Services Regulatory Authority (IFSRA) 14


Index

JJudges 2, 32Judicial review 32

LLegislation 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 20, 22 prompt payment27, non textual amendment 29, 38Legislation Explanatory Guide 16Legislative Process 49Lisbon Objectives 4Local Authorities 4, 9, 14

MMandelkern Group 48Markets 11, 12, 15, 18, 20, 35Ministers 15, 24, 31, 42Monopoly 15

NNecessity 2, 6, 10, 11, 18Non-Textual Amendments 38

OOffice of Director of Consumer Affairs 3, 14, 15, 35, 44,Office of the Parliamentary Counsel to the Government 28,OECD 5, 8, 14, 15, 24, 34, 43, 47, 48Office of the Government Chief Whip 37, 38, 42, 44Oireachtas 5, 8, 9, 10, 28, 29, 30, 31, 37, 39, 42,44, 48, 49Ombudsman Act 26

P Penalties, 10, 17, 20, 22, 32, 46Performance Management and Development System12, 41Performance-based regulation 21Policy 2, 5, 16, 20, 23, Analysis 3, Proofing 23, 41Pre 1922 Legislation 37Principles 3, 6, 10Proportionality 2, 6, 20 Public Service Obligations 4, 5, 10, 26, 27, 28, 35

RRationalisation 3, 35, 44Red tape 2, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 23, 47Regulation/s 2, 4, light 21, command and control 21,emergency 26Regulatory Capture 5, 26, 27Regulatory Framework 7, 26, 30, 43Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) 2, 5, 10, 17, 18, 20,23, 24, 27, 29, 36, 39, 40, 41, 45, 47Regulatory Reform 3, 5Regulatory Structures 14, 15Repeal 2, 3, 5, 29 Reviews 2, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 27, 35

SSectoral Regulators 3, 8, 14, 44Sectoral Regulatory Reviews 14, 18, 19, 42Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) 2, 3, 4, 10,18, 23, costs 21, 40Social Partnership 1, 26, 35Stakeholders 2, 5, 18Statute Law Revision 2, 10, 13, 29, 36, 37, 38Statutory Instruments 2, 3, 4, 6, 16, 28, 29, 35, 36, 37Statutory Instruments - Drafting Checklist andGuidelines 28Strategy Statements 3Strategic Management Initiative 48Subsidies 21Sunsetting 5, 35, 36 Sustaining Progress 35, 41

TTelecommunications 4, 5Training 2,3, 24, 41Transparency 2, 6, 10, 20, 23, 26 Transport 5,7

UUniversal service obligations 5, 27, 28, Costs 28 User pays pricing 21Utilities 5, 32, 35

VValue for Money 16

WWebsites 27


www.betterregulation.iewww.bettergov.ie

department of the taoiseach regulating better€¦ · ria promotes evidence-based policy-making by...

Documents