Today we released our annual compliance report. It’s our independent assessment of compliance with Australian Government and Council of Australian Governments’ (COAG) best practice regulation requirements. Essentially, it considers whether a Regulation Impact Statement (RIS) was prepared for each significant decision and whether it was published. It also includes information about post-implementation reviews.
The 2013-14 report shows an increase in compliance with the Australian Government’s best practice regulation requirements. At the decision-making stage, compliance was 98 per cent in 2013-14, up from 97 per cent in 2012-13. There was one non-compliant Australian Government proposal at the decision‑making stage in 2013-14, compared with two in 2012‑13. An ‘exceptional circumstances’ exemption was granted by the Prime Minister (where no regulation impact statement is required to be prepared) on one occasion during 2013-14, down from eight in 2012-13.
Non-compliance with the post-implementation review requirements increased to eight in 2013-14, compared with three in the previous year. Each instance of non-compliance was because the post‑implementation review was not completed within the required timeframe.
The report also shows an increase in compliance at the decision-making stage to 88 per cent by COAG Councils and national standard‑setting bodies in 2013-14. This compares to 86 per cent in the previous year. COAG’s best practice regulation requirements were not met at the decision-making stage on one occasion in 2013-14, down from two in the previous year.
The report also discusses recent changes to the Australian Government RIS system and how the Office of Best Practice Regulation’s role has evolved.
Best Practice Regulation Report 2013 -14
ISSN: 1837-6088 (Print)
ISSN: 1837-6096 (Online)
With the exception of the Commonwealth Coat of Arms, this document is provided under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/au/).
This document must be attributed: “Office of Best Practice Regulation, Best Practice Regulation Report 2013–14, Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, Canberra”.
Publications and Creative Commons licence inquiries:
Office of Best Practice Regulation
Domestic Policy Group
Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet
Tel: 02 6271 6270
Fax: 02 6271 5252
Email: helpdesk-obpr@pmc.gov.au
Web: http://www.dpmc.gov.au/office-best-practice-regulation
Twitter: @OBPRGov
Internet
This document is available online at: http://www.dpmc.gov.au/office-best-practice-regulation/guidance#Compliance
Use of the Coat of Arms
The terms under which the Coat of Arms can be used are detailed on the following website: http://www.itsanhonour.gov.au/coat-arms/.
Contents
1.1 Evolving Australian Government RIS process
2.1 Australian Government’s RIS requirements
2.2 Australian Government compliance
2.3 COAG best practice regulation requirements
3. Australian Government Compliance by Portfolio
3.1 Detailed compliance results by department or agency
3.1.1 Agriculture – Department of Agriculture
3.1.2 Agriculture – Australian Fisheries Management Authority
3.1.3 Attorney-General’s – Attorney-General’s Department
3.1.4 Attorney-General’s – Australian Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre
3.1.5 Communications – Department of Communications
3.1.6 Communications – Australian Communications and Media Authority
3.1.7 Defence – Department of Defence
3.1.8 Education – Department of Education
3.1.9 Employment – Department of Employment
3.1.10 Environment – Department of Environment
3.1.11 Foreign Affairs and Trade – Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade
3.1.12 Health – Department of Health
3.1.13 Health – Private Health Insurance Administration Council
3.1.14 Immigration and Border Protection – Department of Immigration and Border Protection
3.1.15 Industry – Department of Industry
3.1.16 Infrastructure and Regional Development – Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development
3.1.17 Social Services – Department of Social Services
3.1.18 Treasury – The Treasury
3.1.19 Treasury – Australian Accounting Standards Board
3.1.20 Treasury – Australian Prudential Regulation Authority
3.1.21 Treasury – Australian Securities and Investments Commission
3.1.22 Treasury – Reserve Bank of Australia
4.1 Compliance by COAG council and national standard-setting bodies
4.2 Detailed compliance results by COAG council and national standard-setting bodies
4.2.1 Agriculture Ministers’ Forum
4.2.2 Australian Building Codes Board
4.2.3 Consumer Affairs Australia and New Zealand
4.2.4 Equipment Energy Efficiency (E3) Committee
4.2.5 Food Standards Australia New Zealand
4.2.6 Legislative and Governance Forum on Food Regulation
4.2.8 Standing Council on Energy and Resources
4.2.9 Standing Council on Environment and Water
4.2.10 Standing Council on Primary Industries
4.2.11 Standing Council on Federal Financial Relations
4.2.12 Standing Council on Transport and Infrastructure
5. Post-implementation Review Status by Portfolio
5.1 PIRs Published During 2013-14
5.1.1 Communications – Department of Communications
5.1.2 Industry – Department of Industry
5.1.4 Cross Portfolio – Department of Industry, Innovation, Climate Change, Science, Research and Tertiary Education / Department of Immigration and Citizenship
5.2 PIR Status by department or agency
5.2.1 Agriculture – Australian Fisheries Management Authority
5.2.2 Attorney-General’s – Attorney-General’s Department
5.2.3 Attorney-General’s – Australian Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre
5.2.4 Communications – Department of Communications
5.2.5 Defence – Department of Defence
5.2.6 Education – Department of Education
5.2.7 Employment – Department of Employment
5.2.8 Environment – Department of the Environment
5.2.9 Health – Department of Health
5.2.10 Immigration and Border Protection – Department of Immigration and Border Protection
5.2.11 Infrastructure and Regional Development – Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development
5.2.12 Social Services – Department of Social Services
5.2.13 Treasury – The Treasury
5.2.14 Treasury – Australian Accounting Standards Board
5.2.15 Treasury – Australian Prudential Regulation Authority
5.2.16 Cross Portfolio – Department of Defence / Department of Industry
Abbreviations
|
Abbreviation |
Meaning |
|---|---|
|
AASB |
Australian Accounting Standards Board |
|
ACNC |
Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission |
|
ADI |
Authorised Deposit-taking Institution |
|
AO |
Order of Australia |
|
ASEAN |
Association of Southeast Asian Nations |
|
ASIC |
Australian Securities and Investments Commission |
|
AUSTRAC |
Australian Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre |
|
BCC |
Business Cost Calculator |
|
CEO |
Chief Executive Officer |
|
COAG |
Council of Australian Governments |
|
COAG Guide |
COAG Best Practice Regulation: A Guide for Ministerial Councils and National Standard Setting Bodies |
|
E/c |
Exceptional circumstances |
|
ESS |
Employee Share Schemes |
|
FOFA |
Future of Financial Advice |
|
KAFTA |
Korea-Australia Free Trade Agreement |
|
N/a |
Not applicable |
|
NBN |
National Broadband Network |
|
NOPSEMA |
National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority |
|
NSSB |
National standard-setting body |
|
OBPR |
Office of Best Practice Regulation |
|
OECD |
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development |
|
PIR |
Post-implementation Review |
|
PSM |
Public Service Medal |
|
R&D |
Research and Development |
|
RBM |
Regulatory Burden Measure |
|
RIA |
Regulatory Impact Analysis |
|
RIS |
Regulation Impact Statement |
|
TFN |
Tax File Number |
|
The Guide |
Australian Government Guide to Regulation |
|
Treasury |
Department of The Treasury |
Foreword
The Office of Best Practice Regulation (OBPR) reports annually on compliance with the Australian Government and the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) best practice regulation requirements.
The OBPR is a division in the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. The OBPR maintains day-to-day independence from government in its regulatory decision making.
This report is prepared by the staff of the OBPR in cooperation with relevant agencies, authorised by the Executive Director of the OBPR and presented to the Government as a final report. The transparency associated with the publication of this report is an important element of best practice regulation for both the Australian Government and COAG.
The year was challenging. The key theme, or constant, has been change. During 2013–14 four different Australian Government regulation impact statement (RIS) systems applied. The OBPR moved to the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet; deregulation units, headed by Senior Executive Service Officers were established in each portfolio; and COAG Ministerial Councils were substantially reorganised.
The change in Australian Government RIS processes changed the nature of work in the OBPR with a greater focus on regulatory costings. With the impact on individuals now included in the RIS system and all Cabinet submissions requiring a RIS, the volume of work increased substantially.
The OBPR set itself the goal of being a best practice regulator and has sought to use a wider range of tools to implement the RIS system. These are discussed in more detail in the report.
I would like to thank all those across the Australian Public Service and COAG Ministerial Councils who contributed to RIS work in 2013–14. A number deserve particular recognition. First, the new Deregulation Units, whose staff have shown remarkable leadership in starting a cultural change to improve regulatory analysis. Second, our new colleagues in the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, who have been both welcoming and willing to work together to implement the new RIS system. Third, our sister division, the Office of Deregulation, who were great partners in implementing these changes. Finally, the team in the OBPR, who showed resilience and maintained their professional approach in the face of considerable challenges.
Jason McNamara
Executive Director
Office of Best Practice Regulation
January 2015
1. Best Practice Regulation
The Office of Best Practice Regulation (OBPR) administers the Australian Government and Council of Australian Governments (COAG) best practice regulation requirements. It has a dual
role of assisting departments and agencies to meet the requirements and improving the quality of regulatory analysis, and in monitoring and reporting on compliance with the requirements.
In assessing the quality of the regulatory impact analysis (RIA), the OBPR does not endorse or support particular regulatory options or outcomes. Rather, its role is to assess whether good regulatory policy development has been followed, in accordance with the processes and requirements outlined in the Australian Government Guide to Regulation (the Guide) or in the COAG Best Practice Regulation: A Guide for Ministerial Councils and National Standard Setting Bodies (COAG Guide).
In facilitating government decision-making processes, the OBPR assists departments and agencies to ensure that all regulatory decisions are supported by an appropriate level of impact analysis. Compliance with individual proposals is reported on the OBPR website (ris.dpmc.gov.au) as soon as practicable after decisions are announced. Current and previous financial year summaries of compliance are also published online.
Regulatory activity triggering the regulation impact statement (RIS) requirements was lower in 2013–14, compared to 2012–13, for both the Australian Government and COAG RIS requirements. Compliance with the Australian Government RIS system at the decision making stage increased in 2013-14 compared to the previous year with one instance of non-compliance. For the COAG RIS requirements, compliance has increased in 2013-14 with a single instance of non-compliance at the decision-making stage, compared to two in the previous year.
1.1 Evolving Australian Government RIS process
There has been considerable change to the RIS process in 2013-14 with the OBPR administering four different RIS systems at various stages of the year. The main attributes of each RIS process are listed in Table 1.1.
In July 2013, the then Government introduced a system which incorporated a two-stage RIS process. A transition period allowed agencies nearing the completion of the RIS process under the previous arrangements (the June 2010 process) to finalise the RIS and have it assessed under this previous process.
RIS arrangements were again changed immediately following the election of the current Government in September 2013. These changes applied on an interim basis until they were replaced with the current RIS arrangements in March 2014 with the publication of the Guide.
Table 1.1: Main attributes of the RIS arrangements which have applied in 2013-14
|
RIS process |
Main attributes |
|---|---|
|
June 2010 |
Single stage RIS OBPR gatekeeper – non-compliant RISs prevented from proceeding |
|
July 2013 |
Two-stage RIS process (Options stage and Details stage) Non-compliant RIS can proceed to decision maker after being Independent reviews can be used in lieu of a RIS Prime Minister’s exemptions only available for defined criteria |
|
September 2013 Interim arrangements |
RIS is required for every Cabinet Submission Regulatory costs must be quantified for all regulatory proposals and offsetting regulatory costs must be identified Individuals brought into the scope of the RIS requirements |
|
March 2014 |
Evolving RIS which can be submitted to the OBPR for formal assessment at two points in the RIS’s development – an early and final assessment Option with the highest net benefit should be recommended Post-implementation review required for proposals which have a substantial and widespread impact on the economy |
July 2013 RIS Process
The July 2013 RIS process introduced a two-stage RIS process. This reflected a key recommendation of the Independent Review of the Australian Government’s Regulatory Impact Analysis Process[1] conducted by David Borthwick AO PSM and Robert Milliner. The two-stage approach aimed to provide a more effective consultation when options for implementation were being considered. This approach was a reflection of the key frustration that business and community organisations had with inadequate consultation processes under the June 2010 RIS system.
The July 2013 RIS process comprised an ‘options-stage’ RIS to consider the problem, the objective and the options; and a ‘details-stage’ RIS to present to the decision maker following consultation. This latter RIS combined the options-stage RIS with four further elements: impact analysis, consultation, conclusion/recommendation and implementation/review. OBPR’s role was to assess the adequacy of the details-stage RIS.
Feedback received during the Borthwick and Milliner Review indicated a level of concern with the OBPR’s role which could effectively block a proposal being considered by the decision maker if the RIS as assessed by the OBPR was not adequate. In response, accountability and ongoing responsibility for the quality of the RIS was in part transferred to departments and agencies in the July 2013 RIS process. The agency was required to certify at the Secretary or Deputy Secretary
(or equivalent) level that the RIS requirements had been met. Following the subsequent assessment of the details-stage RIS by the OBPR, proposals with RISs assessed as non-compliant were no longer prevented from consideration by the decision maker.
The shift in accountability was also reflected in the options stage of this RIS process. Stakeholders expressed concern that the OBPR’s focus on policy options was inappropriately drawing it into the policy deliberation process. Agencies were therefore given responsibility for the quality of the options-stage RIS as well as the options contained in it by certifying the final version of the RIS prior to its consideration by the decision maker. The OBPR played no role in assessing the quality of the options-stage RIS or the options contained within, except to ensure a minimum number and type of options were explored.
Transparency played a pivotal role in reinforcing the shift in accountability to agencies under the July 2013 RIS process. Certification letters were published on the OBPR website along with the associated RIS/independent review that was considered by the decision maker.
The Borthwick and Milliner Review noted the increasing trend of policy processes being granted a Prime Minister’s exemption from the RIS requirements, and that this may have had more to do with it being expedient to decisions the Government wanted to make. In response, criteria were introduced for when a Prime Minister’s exemption could be sought. In addition, accountability for these exemptions was embedded with the OBPR transparently outlining the specific criteria that applied in granting the exemption.
Interim Arrangements
Following the election in September 2013, the new Government began implementing one of its main election commitments – a deregulation agenda. The aim of the Government’s deregulation agenda is to enable a more productive economy by reducing regulatory burden. The key objective of the deregulation agenda is to reduce Commonwealth red tape burden by $1 billion a year. Supporting this objective were a number of initiatives including a more rigorous assessment of regulatory impacts; a comprehensive audit of the existing stock of regulatory activities of portfolios and the regulatory costs they impose; setting aside two Parliamentary sitting days per year dedicated to repealing unnecessary regulation; and the establishment of Ministerial Advisory Councils to advise the Government on its deregulation agenda.
As part of the Government’s deregulation agenda the OBPR was transferred to the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. Increasing the rigour of RIA involved a number of immediate changes to the RIS process. Firstly, the regulatory impacts on individuals were explicitly brought into the scope of the RIS requirements. Secondly, RISs were required for all Cabinet Submissions. Thirdly, quantification of regulatory costs to businesses, community organisations and individuals associated with an increase or decrease in regulation was required. Offsetting regulatory savings needed to be identified for proposals with a net regulatory cost. The interim RIS arrangements continued the two-stage (options-stage and details-stage) RIS approach that was introduced in July 2013.
March 2014 RIS process
The RIS arrangements introduced on an interim basis following the election were largely formalised in the Australian Government Guide to Regulation, the current RIS process.
In keeping with the Government’s focus on reducing regulatory burden, the RIS process reintroduced a net benefit test to guide decision makers. Moreover, the Government highlights that regulation should not be the default option. Policy makers are tasked with examining a range of options in a RIS, including a non-regulatory option, and the option with the highest net benefit must be the recommended option – even if this means not regulating.
Rather than a two-stage RIS process with two distinct RISs, the current RIS process involves an evolving RIS which must commence early in the policy making process. The development of the RIS evolves with the key decision making points in the policy’s development. The OBPR can provide an early assessment and a final assessment of the RIS. It is best practice that the RIS is subject to an early assessment once the first four RIS questions have been completed (relating to the problem, objective, options and the likely net benefit of each option) and the consultation process has been planned. Following consultation, the RIS is further developed so that all RIS questions are addressed. Prior to a final policy decision on a matter, the RIS must have been through a final assessment by the OBPR including agreement on regulatory compliance costs and offsets.
Policy makers have the ability to prepare a ‘Short Form RIS’[2] for matters that are non-regulatory, minor or machinery in nature, or where the policy is a matter of national security, public safety, natural disaster or other pressing event. Short Form RISs, which are only available for matters to be considered by Cabinet, are abbreviated forms of RISs providing an overview of the proposed policy, the options considered and the likely impacts. Regulatory costs and offsets must be quantified and agreed by the OBPR and included in the RIS. In order to preserve the restrictions associated with revealing Cabinet deliberations, there is no requirement that Short Form RISs must be published.
The RIS process for non-Cabinet regulatory decision making is relatively unchanged under the current system. A RIS is only required if the impact is likely to be measurable, however the scope for this impact has been broadened to include individuals. As with all other policy proposals, regulatory costs and offsets must be quantified and agreed with the OBPR.
While COAG RIS arrangements have not changed, lead Commonwealth agencies are now required to quantify and offset the net impact of national reforms that result in a change to Commonwealth legislation or practices, or are a result of direct Commonwealth incentives or conditions. The proportion of these costs that the Commonwealth lead agency is required to quantify and offset is based on the level of Commonwealth control over the governance or regulatory arrangements. As such, the exact portion of burden is determined on a case by case basis.
PIR arrangements have changed under the current process. A PIR must now be completed within two years of the regulations being implemented for proposals subject to a non-compliant RIS or a Prime Minister’s exemption. Previously, the requirement was for agencies to have started the PIR within one to two years of the regulation’s implementation. The OBPR has provided transitional arrangements for those PIRs that have been most impacted by the change in requirements.
PIRs are now also required for proposals which have a substantial or widespread impact on the economy. Generally, these are proposals subject to a Long Form RIS. A PIR for these proposals must be completed within five years of implementation.
Evolving role of the OBPR
Implementing the deregulation agenda involved a further shift in responsibility and accountability from the RIS process that commenced in July 2013. This is demonstrated by an agency’s ability to choose which type of RIS and consultation method to undertake and when to have the RIS assessed by the OBPR. Responsibility for these decisions rests with the relevant department. Consequently the OBPR, in striving to promote best practice in the policy development process, has changed its approach to facilitating the RIS system. This entails more of a coaching role than the traditional gatekeeper role that the OBPR has previously fulfilled. The OBPR no longer focusses advice on what agencies need to do to be compliant with the RIS process, rather it assesses best practice with reference to the ten principles for Australian Government policy makers and the seven RIS questions. The previous focus on compliance had the perverse incentive that some agencies would do just enough to ensure that a RIS was compliant rather than strive for a more superior and informative RIS.
The OBPR encourages agencies to produce the best RIS possible by providing advice on matters such as what is the appropriate RIS type and consultation method for a particular policy proposal, and when to have the RIS assessed.
The OBPR publishes information on its assessment of best practice, which may highlight areas of concern with a RIS or the process followed in its preparation. Ultimately, the OBPR can still make a determination of non-compliance if departures from best practice are serious enough.
Deregulation Units, headed by senior departmental officials, have been established in each portfolio. The Deregulation Units are supporting the shift in responsibility in the RIS process as they have been tasked with driving reductions in red tape and are the first point of contact for regulatory-related proposals initiated by a portfolio. The introduction of the Deregulation Units has also facilitated the OBPR’s task of highlighting the importance of the RIS process. The Units are better placed to communicate this to the relevant policy developing areas. With a senior departmental official heading these units, the messages are delivered with a greater sense of authority within portfolios.
Notwithstanding the shift in responsibility in the RIS process, the OBPR’s outputs have expanded, despite a reduction in resources in line with the wider public service. Since the election, the OBPR is processing significantly more preliminary assessments per month. The reason for the increase in preliminary assessments is two-fold. Firstly, all proposals considered by Cabinet now require a RIS (including regulatory burden costings), and secondly, the scope of the RIS requirements has been broadened to include the impacts on individuals.
A large focus of the Government’s deregulation agenda is the commitment to reduce red tape by $1 billion a year. For the purpose of calculating the overall red tape reduction, it is a requirement that the regulatory costs associated with a RIS are quantified and that these, along with any offsetting regulatory savings, are agreed by the OBPR prior to consideration by the decision maker. Departments and agencies are responsible for quantifying the regulatory costs and offsets, and in agreeing to the costings, the OBPR is effectively quality assuring them.
OBPR agreement is not required for regulatory costings outside the RIS process. These are generally non-Cabinet decision maker proposals which are non-regulatory, or have a minor or machinery impact on businesses, community organisations or individuals. In these circumstances, departments and agencies are responsible for self-assessing the regulatory costs and reporting these directly to the Office of Deregulation in the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet.
The OBPR has produced an extensive range of guidance notes detailing the application of the RIS process. It has also spent considerable time educating portfolios on the new regulatory
costing process.
The OBPR has redeveloped the Business Cost Calculator (BCC) to more precisely measure burden under the Regulatory Burden Measurement framework. The new costing tool software is the Regulatory Burden Measure (RBM) https://rbm.obpr.gov.au.
Reporting on compliance with the RIS requirements has evolved over the four processes that existed during the year. Firstly, for the legacy RISs assessed under the June 2010 system, the OBPR simply reported on its assessment of whether the RISs were adequate. With the introduction of the two-stage RIS process in July 2013, the OBPR reported on the agency’s compliance with the RIS requirements at the details-stage. Agencies self-assessed their compliance with the options-stage requirements in the detail-stage RIS, and this assessment was subsequently reported by the OBPR.
Reporting on the Government’s interim RIS process, which applied between September 2013 and March 2014, largely reflected the July 2013 process.
Under the current RIS process, the OBPR reports on whether the RIS is compliant with the RIS requirements and whether it is consistent with best practice. Serious departures from best practice can lead to a finding of non-compliance and a requirement to complete a PIR within two years.
Compliance with the various reporting arrangements is detailed in subsequent chapters of this report.
1.2 Engagement
Stakeholder engagement
The OBPR’s interaction with departments and agencies has increased considerably to help embed the new RIS system in their organisations. OBPR participates in regular senior executive level reference group meetings on deregulation, as well as officer level deregulation community of practice meetings. Both forums allow the OBPR to provide advice on various costing and
RIS-related processes.
Deregulation Units, for their part, have been an important conduit for raising the profile of regulatory analysis in their portfolios. Most have been actively promoting cultural change within their departments through a range of means including delivering deregulation-themed training
and developing portfolio-specific information on RIA for their intranets.
The OBPR continued to provide initial advice letters to departments and agencies during the year. The letters, which were first introduced in 2012-13, provide advice on what the OBPR considers to be the appropriate RIS type and consultation method for each new regulatory proposal, and guide the agency in understanding what would be best practice for their RIS process. Under the current RIS system, more weight is placed on the advice contained in these letters now that departments and agencies are responsible for the decisions they make on the type of RIS undertaken and the consultation method.
Throughout the year, the OBPR has also been engaged with a range of stakeholders, including industry groups and community organisations. These meetings have raised stakeholders’ understanding of the RIS process. They have also given the OBPR a better understanding of issues that are affecting these stakeholders from their perspective, providing an important balance to information provided by agencies in their RISs.
Another strategy the OBPR uses to engage with stakeholders is its monthly e-newsletter, which is distributed to a number of peak bodies representing various business and community organisations. The e-newsletter helps peak bodies keep abreast of RIA developments, focusses on recent RIS issues and provides updates on OBPR activities. Requests to be added to the distribution list can be sent to helpdesk-OBPR@pmc.gov.au.
An important role of the OBPR is to ensure transparency in the RIS process for stakeholders. The OBPR reports on compliance with Australian Government and COAG RIS requirements on its website (http://ris.dpmc.gov.au/) as soon as practicable after the decision is announced. Information on compliance with the PIR requirements are updated and published on the website
on a quarterly basis.
The OBPR (@OBPRGov) can also be followed on Twitter at: https://www.twitter.com/OBPRGov. OBPR uses Twitter to complement the compliance information on its website, and to draw attention to general information on RIS processes, relevant academic work or articles, and regulatory policy developments in other countries.
Outpostings
At the request of departments and agencies, the OBPR provides outposted officers (on a cost offsetting basis) to assist agencies in the preparation of RISs and post-implementation reviews (PIRs). The initiative covers Australian Government and COAG RIS requirements. Agencies utilise a variety of approaches when engaging an OBPR outposted officer. These range from assistance in providing overarching guidance about the RIS requirements to more technical support, including on cost-benefit analysis. The RIS or PIR remains the responsibility of the agency under the outposting initiative. To avoid any conflict of interest, outposted officers are not involved in the assessment of compliance of the RIS/PIR that they have been involved with.
In 2013-14, OBPR staff were seconded to work at the Departments of Industry, Innovation, Climate Change, Science, Research and Tertiary Education; Environment; Defence; Communications; and Immigration and Border Protection. These secondments assisted in the development of RISs for energy efficiency proposals, the repeal of the Carbon Tax, ‘one stop shop’ for environmental approvals; management arrangements for Woomera Prohibited Area; and the emissions reduction fund. The secondments also provided general advice on RIS matters and costing methodology.
Training
One of the core functions of the OBPR is to provide training to policy makers on the RIS process. The OBPR’s face-to-face training takes several forms: general and more comprehensive seminars for officers in agencies; group training focused on specific agencies; and one-on-one advice during the development of regulatory proposals such as the preparation of a RIS or the quantification of regulatory costs.
The comprehensive seminars, which are held quarterly, cover all aspects of RIA, including training on preparing a RIS, undertaking cost-benefit analysis, and using the BCC/RBM.
In 2013–14, RIS training was provided to around 520 Commonwealth, State and Territory officers from a number of departments and agencies. Of these, 80 officers also received training in cost-benefit analysis and use of the BCC. The numbers trained were considerably higher than the previous year (199 officers in 2012–13). This is a reflection of the multiple RIS processes operating at various stages of the year, and in anticipation of the new RIS arrangements prior to the publication of the Guide and the associated guidance material.
International Engagement
Australia enjoys a strong international reputation in RIA. As a result, officials from foreign governments continue to express interest in sharing in Australia’s experiences in RIA. This is highlighted by the frequent foreign government requests for the OBPR to travel to their countries to provide training or seminars on RIA. These requests are fulfilled by the OBPR on a cost-neutral basis. In 2013-14 OBPR officials travelled to:
- Thailand to present on the topic of “The importance of good regulatory practice” at an East Asian Summit Regulatory Roundtable;
- Taiwan to present on the Australian Government RIA system at the “Conference on Regulatory Impact Analysis”;
- Malaysia as part of an OECD mission to provide mentoring and training to senior Malaysian officials; and
- New Zealand to present on the Australian Government RIA system at an ASEAN workshop on “Enhancing Domestic Regulation”.
In 2013-14, the OBPR received a number of requests to meet with delegations of officials or representatives from other national governments including:
- a study tour from Laos of 14 officials (from six government agencies) who were visiting Australia to learn more about RIA;
- a delegation of 14 officials from the Legislative Affairs Office of the People’s Republic of China;
- a delegation of senior officials from the Office of the Prime Minister of the Republic of Korea; and
- officials from the Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations.
The OBPR has also met with, and responded to information requests from, officials from various Embassies in Canberra seeking information on RIA in Australia.
1.3 Lighter touch regulation
The Guide states that different groups are affected differently by regulation. For example, small businesses are disproportionately affected by regulation as the extra workload of the new obligations is spread among fewer staff. As such, a mix of options should be considered when addressing a problem. In particular, these include lighter touch or non-regulatory options where the target group is less likely to pose a risk, or that risk is small.
In administrating the Government’s RIS process, the OBPR encourages departments and agencies to consider policy options that may achieve desired outcomes without regulation or using a light touch regulatory approach. Such considerations can also have the effect of reducing the red tape burden on businesses, community organisations or individuals. In promoting such policy considerations, the OBPR has been raising awareness across the Australian Public Service of the use of behavioural insights and randomised control trials in terms of evidence-based decision making.
Behavioural insights draws on research in fields such as behavioural economics, psychology, neuroscience and other behavioural sciences. It could improve government policies and services by offering a more accurate understanding of how people will behave in response to certain policy settings. Many international examples show that by utilising behavioural insights policy makers can achieve their objectives in a more cost-effective manner, and without the need for heavy-handed, coercive regulation.
Related to this is the use of randomised control trials, which allow real-world, small-scale assessments of the effectiveness of new interventions compared to current policy. They are a cost-effective way to illustrate to policy makers what works and have been increasingly used internationally for evaluation of new and existing programmes. Such trials can also reveal any unexpected outcomes or loopholes before full-scale implementation. Results from trials often show that the effectiveness of a policy can be impacted by seemingly minor elements or policy interventions. Where trials are not possible, the OBPR strongly encourages the use of insights from trials and experiments conducted elsewhere.
2. Summary of Compliance
This chapter reports in aggregate on compliance with the respective RIS requirements by Australian Government portfolios and by COAG councils and national standard-setting bodies (NSSBs).
2.1 Australian Government’s RIS requirements
This publication reports on department and agency compliance with the requirements of the RIS system operating at the time of the announcement of the proposal in 2013–14. More information on the RIS systems that operated in 2013-14 is contained in Chapter 1.
2.2 Australian Government compliance
Compliance with the Australian Government RIS requirements is measured by compliance with the requirement to prepare and publish an adequate RIS (unless a Prime Minister’s exemption is granted) or whether an adequate PIR has been completed by the required due date.
Short Form RISs are not considered for the purpose of Australian Government RIS compliance reporting as they are only used for matters proceeding to Cabinet and are not required to be released to the public.
Aggregate compliance
For regulatory proposals announced in 2013–14, of the 48 RISs required at the decision-making stage, 47 RISs were prepared and assessed as compliant, giving a compliance rate of 98 per cent. This is up from the compliance rate of 97 per cent achieved in 2012–13 (Table 2.1). The Prime Minister granted exceptional circumstances in one case, compared to eight in 2012–13.
Table 2.1: Australian Government RIS[3] compliance 2010–11 to 2013–14
|
Stage |
2010–11 |
% |
2011–12 |
% |
2012–13 |
% |
2013–14 ratios |
% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Decision-making stage |
47/63 |
75 |
69/78 |
88 |
64/66 |
97 |
47/48 |
98 |
|
Transparency stagea |
45/63 |
71 |
70/78 |
90 |
62/66 |
94 |
47/48 |
98 |
|
Exceptional circumstances |
14 |
|
5 |
|
8 |
|
1 |
|
a The number of RISs required at the transparency stage can be lower than at the decision-making stage because some regulations are subject to multiple decision-making processes. For example, RISs are required for treaties at two separate decision-making stages.
Exceptional circumstances
Although a RIS was not prepared for the Qantas Sale Amendment Bill 2014, the relevant department has complied with the requirements but will need to complete a PIR within two years of the regulation being implemented (Table 2.2). Further information is provided in Chapter 5.
Table 2.2: Proposals granted Prime Minister’s ‘exceptional circumstances’ 2013–14
|
Proposal |
Portfolio |
Announced |
|---|---|---|
|
Qantas Sale Amendment Bill 2014 |
Infrastructure and Regional Development |
3 March 2014 |
Non-compliance
In the absence of ‘exceptional circumstances’ being granted by the Prime Minister, a regulatory proposal with more than a minor or machinery impact on business, community organisations or individuals should not proceed to a decision maker unless it has complied with the RIS requirements. A PIR is required when a proposal proceeds to the decision maker without an adequate RIS.
In 2013–14, only one proposal proceeded to the decision maker without the support of an adequate RIS (Table 2.3). Further details of RIS compliance by portfolio can be found at Chapter 3.
Table 2.3: Australian Government non-compliant proposals 2013–14
|
Proposal |
Portfolio |
Announced |
|---|---|---|
|
Australian Education Regulation |
Education |
25 July 2013 |
Post-implementation reviews
Australian Government agencies are required to undertake a PIR of regulation that did not have a compliant RIS, unless the impact was of a minor or machinery nature and the regulation did not substantially alter previous arrangements, or where the Prime Minister granted an exemption because of exceptional circumstances. In this instance a PIR is required to be completed within two years of the implementation of the regulation. In addition to this, a PIR is required to be completed within five years of implementation for any regulatory change that has a substantial or widespread impact on the economy.
The number of PIRs required as a result of regulatory proposals announced in 2013–14 has continued a downward trend after peaking in 2010–11. The number of Prime Minister’s exemptions has also fallen from the previous year to one. There was also one non-compliant regulatory decision in 2013–14 for which a PIR will be required, significantly lower than in the past several years. Meanwhile, there are three PIRs required under the new category of regulatory changes with a substantial or widespread impact on the economy. Table 2.4 shows PIR numbers by source for the period 2010–11 to 2013–14.
Table 2.4: Post-implementation review numbers 2010–11 to 2013–14
|
Source |
2010–11 |
2011–12 |
2012–13 |
2013–14 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Compliant – Prime Minister’s Exemption |
14 |
5 |
8 |
1 |
|
Non-Compliant |
16 |
9 |
2 |
1 |
|
Regulatory changes with substantial or widespread impacts on the economya |
n/a |
n/a |
n/a |
3 |
|
Totalb |
30 |
14 |
10 |
5 |
a In this instance a PIR is required to be completed within five years of implementation.
b Care should be taken when comparing the 2013-14 total figure with those from previous years as this year’s total includes PIRs required as a result of regulatory changes with substantial or widespread impacts on the economy for which a RIS was prepared.
There were a total of 76 PIRs required as at 30 June 2014, of which eight were non-compliant for not having been completed by the due date (Table 2.5). Of the remaining 68 PIRs, in 18 cases the regulation has not yet been implemented and 50 PIRs fall within the timeframe for completion and have not been completed.
In 2013-14, there were 10 PIRs published, of which seven were from Treasury.
Table 2.5: Outstanding Post-implementation review status as at 30 June 2014
|
PIR Status |
Number |
|---|---|
|
Compliant |
|
|
Not implemented |
18 |
|
Implemented (within the PIR due date) |
50 |
|
Non-compliant |
8 |
|
Total |
76 |
As listed in Table 2.6, five portfolios, Agriculture, Attorney-General’s, Environment, Health and Infrastructure and Regional Development, had a non-compliant PIR in 2013–14. The reason for non-compliance was because each PIR had not been completed within the required timeframe.
Table 2.6: Post-implementation review non-compliance 2013–14
|
Post-implementation review |
Portfolio |
|---|---|
|
Fishing Area Closure and Revised Monitoring Arrangementsa |
Agriculture |
|
Resale Royalty Right for Visual Artists Bill 2008 |
Attorney-General’s |
|
Enhancements from the Review of the Australian Independent Screen Production Sector |
Attorney-General’s |
|
Renewable Energy (Electricity Amendment Regulations 2010 (No. 3)) |
Environment |
|
Renewable Energy (Electricity) Amendment Act 2009 and Renewable Energy (Electricity) (Charge) Amendment Act 2009 |
Environment |
|
Renewable Energy (Electricity) Amendment Regulations 2010 (No. 8), Renewable Energy (Electricity) Amendment Regulations 2011 (No. 2) and Renewable Energy (Electricity) Amendment Regulations 2012 (No. 8) |
Environment |
|
Fifth Community Pharmacy Agreementa |
Health |
|
Aviation Transport Security Amendment (Additional Screening Measures) Act 2007; Aviation Transport Security Amendment Regulations 2007 (No. 4) |
Infrastructure and Regional Development |
a This PIR has been completed and published since 30 June 2014.
2.3 COAG best practice regulation requirements
Regulation making also occurs at a national or inter-jurisdictional level among eight COAG councils and NSSBs. In 1995, COAG agreed a set of principles and guidelines for such activities. In 2007, COAG strengthened these requirements and released the COAG Guide. The major element of the COAG Guide is the preparation of RISs for those national regulatory decisions that:
‘…would encourage or force business or individuals to pursue their interests in ways they would not otherwise have done.’ (COAG Guide, p.3).
COAG requires a RIS to be prepared at two stages: first for community consultation with parties likely to be affected by the regulatory proposal; and the second or decision RIS, reflecting feedback from the community, to assist the decision maker. The final RIS should be made public as soon as possible after the decision is announced. At each stage, the OBPR is required by COAG to assess whether:
- the COAG RIS guidelines have been followed;
- the type and level of analysis in the RIS is adequate and commensurate with the potential economic and social impacts of the proposal; and
- the RIS demonstrates that the preferred option results in the greatest net benefit to the community.
In addition, as required under the March 2014 Australian Government RIS requirements, the regulatory costs and offsets attributable to the Commonwealth from COAG and NSSB RIS processes must be agreed by the OBPR before a decision is made by COAG, the Ministerial Council or the standard setting body.
2.4 COAG compliance
Compliance with the COAG best practice regulation requirements is measured by compliance with the requirement to prepare and publish an adequate consultation RIS and a decision RIS.
Aggregate compliance
The OBPR identified eight proposals that required the preparation of a RIS under the COAG requirements in 2013–14 (see Chapter 4 for more detail).
Of the eight proposals, seven adequate RISs were prepared for the decision-making stage, resulting in a compliance rate of 88 per cent – up from 86 per cent in 2012–13. At the consultation stage, there were also seven adequate RISs prepared, with the resulting compliance rate of 88 per cent, which was a decrease from 93 per cent in 2012–13. Further commentary is provided in Chapter 4.
Table 2.7: Compliance with the COAG RIS requirements, 2010–11 to 2013–14
|
Stage |
2010–11 |
% |
2011–12 |
% |
2012–13 |
% |
2013–14 ratios |
% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Consultation stage |
8/9 |
89 |
13/16 |
81 |
13/14 |
93 |
7/8 |
88 |
|
Decision-making stage |
9/10 |
90 |
13/16 |
81 |
12/14 |
86 |
7/8 |
88 |
Non-compliance
COAG’s best practice regulation requirements were not met in one instance in 2013–14. The regulatory decision was non-compliant at both the consultation stage and at the decision-making stage. Table 2.8 provides further details of this regulatory decision.
Table 2.8: COAG non-compliant decisions in 2013–14
|
Regulatory decision |
COAG Council |
Date of decision |
Compliant at consultation |
Compliant at decision |
Final RIS published |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Endorsement of Health Star Calculator for |
Legislative and Governance Forum on Food Regulation |
Dec 2013 |
No |
No |
No |
3. Australian Government Compliance by Portfolio
Compliance with the Australian Government’s RIS requirements for proposals announced during 2013–14 is reported by portfolio and department/agency in this chapter.
The OBPR administered and reported on four different RIS systems at various times during the year. As a consequence, the compliance information reported on in this chapter reflects the RIS arrangements that each RIS was assessed under. A description of these RIS systems and the reporting arrangements is outlined in Chapter 1.
In 2013–14, fourteen portfolios were required to prepare RISs. Of these, thirteen complied with the requirements in full. The Department of Education did not comply with the requirements for its only proposal in 2013-14.
Each RIS and the OBPR’s compliance assessment of that RIS are published on the OBPR website as soon as practicable after the announcement. Where a RIS involves new or amended legislation, the RIS is also required to be tabled with the explanatory material in the Parliament.
Compliance with the requirements at the final assessment stage for each portfolio is illustrated in Table 3.1. Detailed compliance results by department and agency follows. Further details on any of the listed regulatory decisions can be obtained from the OBPR website.
Table 3.1: Regulatory Impact Analysis compliance by portfolio 2013–14 (final assessment stage)
|
Portfolio |
Regulation Impact Compliant |
Regulation Impact Non-Compliant |
Exceptional circumstances |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Department of Agriculture |
3 |
|
|
|
Attorney-General’s Department |
4 |
|
|
|
Department of Communications |
4 |
|
|
|
Department of Defence |
1 |
|
|
|
Department of Education |
|
1 |
|
|
Department of Employment |
5 |
|
|
|
Department of Environment |
2 |
|
|
|
Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade |
1 |
|
|
|
Department of Health |
4 |
|
|
|
Department of Immigration and Border Protection |
1 |
|
|
|
Department of Industry |
4 |
|
|
|
Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development |
3 |
|
1 |
|
Department of Social Services |
3 |
|
|
|
The Treasury |
12 |
|
|
|
Total |
47 |
1 |
1 |
3.1 Detailed compliance results by department or agency
The following tables show more detailed compliance by portfolio, department and agency. The Prime Minister’s exemption for exceptional circumstances is also identified.
3.1.1 Agriculture – Department of Agriculture
RIS compliance – Interim September 2013 system
|
Title of regulatory proposal Description of regulatory proposal |
Options- |
Details- |
Details-stage RIS published |
PIR required |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Regulation for Onion Levy Increase |
N/a |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
Regulation for Mushroom Levy Increase |
N/a |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
N/a An options-stage RIS was not required.
RIS compliance – March 2014 system
|
Title of regulatory proposal Description of regulatory proposal |
RIS status |
PIR required |
|---|---|---|
|
Mandatory Code of Conduct for Grain Export Terminals (Bulk Wheat Exports) |
Published for consultationa |
No |
a This RIS was prepared for consultation and was subject to an early assessment by the OBPR.
3.1.2 Agriculture – Australian Fisheries Management Authority
RIS compliance – July 2013 system
|
Title of regulatory proposal Description of regulatory proposal |
Options- |
Details- |
Details-stage RIS published |
PIR required |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Managing Interactions with Dolphins in the Gillnet Hook and Trap Sector of the Southern and Eastern Scalefish and Shark Fishery |
N/a |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
N/a An options-stage RIS was not required.
3.1.3 Attorney-General’s – Attorney-General’s Department
RIS compliance – July 2013 system
|
Title of regulatory proposal Description of regulatory proposal |
Options- |
Details- |
Details-stage RIS published |
PIR required |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Reforms to the Native Title Systema |
N/a |
Yes |
Yesb |
No |
a This matter was previously reported under the Department of Families, Housing, Community Services
and Indigenous Affairs. However, on 3 October 2013 Native title matters were transferred to the
Attorney-General’s Department.
b The agency has assessed that an independent review or other mechanism has undertaken analysis of a regulatory proposal equivalent to a RIS. The OBPR does not assess independent reviews.
N/a An options-stage RIS was not required.
RIS compliance – Interim September 2013 system
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
Options- |
Details- |
Details-stage RIS published |
PIR required |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Cost Recovery for the Marriage Celebrants Programme |
N/a |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
Amendments to the Personal Property Securities Act 2009 |
N/a |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
N/a An options-stage RIS was not required.
RIS compliance – March 2014 system
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
RIS status |
PIR required |
|---|---|---|
|
Ban the Importation of Substances which Mimic the Effects of Illicit Drugs |
Published for consultationa |
No |
a This RIS was prepared for consultation and was subject to an early assessment by the OBPR.
3.1.4 Attorney-General’s – Australian Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre
RIS compliance – Interim September 2013 system
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
Options- |
Details- |
Details-stage RIS published |
PIR required |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Proposed Reform to Strengthen Customer Due Diligence |
N/a |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
N/a An options-stage RIS was not required.
3.1.5 Communications – Department of Communications
RIS compliance – June 2010 system
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
RIS adequate |
RIS published |
PIR required |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Cellular Mobile Repeaters: Proposed Amendments to the Radio communications Regulations 1993a |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
a This matter was previously reported under the Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy. However, on 18 September 2013 the Radiocommunications Act 1992 was transferred to the Department of Communications.
3.1.6 Communications – Australian Communications and Media Authority
RIS compliance – June 2010 system
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
RIS adequate |
RIS published |
PIR required |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Consideration of Options to Address the Impact on Stakeholders of the Annual Numbering Charge on Four Types of Short-digit Access Codes |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
International Mobile Roaming Industry Standard |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
Proposed Changes to the Regulation of Cellular Mobile Repeaters |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
3.1.7 Defence – Department of Defence
RIS compliance – Interim September 2013 system
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
Options- |
Details- |
Details-stage RIS published |
PIR required |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Management Arrangements for the Woomera Prohibited Area |
N/a |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
N/a An options-stage RIS was not required.
3.1.8 Education – Department of Education
RIS compliance – June 2010 system
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
RIS adequate |
RIS published |
PIR required |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Australian Education Regulationa |
No |
No |
Yes |
a This matter was previously reported under the Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. However, on 18 September 2013 education policy was transferred to the Department of Education.
3.1.9 Employment – Department of Employment
RIS compliance – Interim September 2013 system
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
Options- |
Details- |
Details-stage RIS published |
PIR required |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Registered Organisations Imposes additional statutory obligations on registered organisations. |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
Licensing and Other Amendments under Allow national employers to become licensees in the Comcare Scheme and be covered by the Commonwealth workers compensation scheme, among other changes. |
N/a |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
Amendments to the Fair Work Act 2009 |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
N/a An options-stage RIS was not required.
RIS compliance – March 2014 system
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
RIS status |
PIR required |
|---|---|---|
|
Revocation of Fair Work Principles and Commonwealth Cleaning Service Guidelines |
Finalised, published, compliant and best practice |
No |
|
Advance release of the Building Code 2014 |
Finalised, published, compliant and not best practicea |
No |
a The agency has assessed that an independent review or other mechanism has undertaken analysis of a regulatory proposal equivalent to a RIS. The OBPR does not assess independent reviews. While the OBPR found the Department of Employment to be compliant with the RIS requirements, it was not consistent with best practice because the self-assessment of the independent review and agreement to regulatory costs occurred after the final decision.
3.1.10 Environment – Department of Environment
RIS compliance – Interim September 2013 system
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
Options- |
Details- |
Details-stage RIS published |
PIR required |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Repeal of the Carbon Tax |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
Shortages of Some Species of |
N/a |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
N/a An options-stage RIS was not required.
RIS compliance – March 2014 system
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
RIS status |
PIR required |
|---|---|---|
|
Emissions Reduction Fund White Paper |
Published for consultationa |
No |
a A White Paper was certified by the Department of the Environment as having undertaken analysis of a regulatory proposal equivalent to a RIS for initial decisions on the Emissions Reduction Fund. The OBPR does not assess independent reviews.
3.1.11 Foreign Affairs and Trade – Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade
RIS compliance – Interim September 2013 system
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
Negotiations- |
Signing- |
Final RIS published |
PIR required |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Korea-Australia Free Trade Agreement |
Yesa |
Yes |
Yesb |
No |
a The RIS for the decision to enter into negotiations was prepared in 2009-10.
b The final RIS was tabled in Parliament with the National Interest Analysis and the draft treaty text.
3.1.12 Health – Department of Health
RIS compliance – June 2010 system
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
RIS adequate |
RIS published |
PIR required |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Premarket Scrutiny of Medical Devicesa |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
Changes to the Required Advisory Statement for Medicine Labelsa |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
a This matter was previously reported under the Department of Health and Ageing. However, on 18 September 2013 the regulation of therapeutic goods was transferred to the Department of Health.
RIS compliance – March 2014 system
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
RIS status |
PIR required |
|---|---|---|
|
Protection of Images and Indicia for Major Sporting Events |
Finalised, published, compliant and best practice |
No |
3.1.13 Health – Private Health Insurance Administration Council
RIS compliance – Interim September 2013 system
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
Options- |
Details- |
Details-stage RIS published |
PIR required |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Reform of Capital Adequacy and Solvency Standards |
N/a |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
N/a An options-stage RIS was not required.
3.1.14 Immigration and Border Protection – Department of Immigration and Border Protection
RIS compliance – March 2014 system
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
RIS status |
PIR required |
|---|---|---|
|
Migration Amendment (Offshore Resource Activity) Repeal Bill 2014 |
Finalised, published, compliant and not best practicea |
No |
a See OBPR website for details.
3.1.15 Industry – Department of Industry
RIS compliance – Interim September 2013 system
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
Options- |
Details- |
Details-stage RIS published |
PIR required |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Streamlining Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Activities |
N/a |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
Export of Patented Pharmaceuticals to Countries Experiencing a Health Crisis |
N/a |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
N/a An options-stage RIS was not required.
RIS compliance – March 2014 system
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
RIS status |
PIR required |
|---|---|---|
|
Removal of Australian Industry |
Finalised, published, compliant and best practice |
No |
|
Repeal of the Energy Efficiency |
Finalised, published, compliant and best practice |
No |
3.1.16 Infrastructure and Regional Development – Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development
RIS compliance – June 2010 system
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
RIS adequate |
RIS published |
PIR required |
|---|---|---|---|
|
National Heavy Vehicle Braking Strategy Phase I – Antilock Braking Systemsa |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
a This matter was previously reported under the Department of Infrastructure and Transport. However, on
18 September 2013 the Motor Vehicle Standards Act 1989 was transferred to the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development.
RIS compliance – July 2013 system
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
Options- |
Details- |
Details-stage RIS published |
PIR required |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Electronic Stability Control for Light Commercial Vehicles |
N/a |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
Brake Assist Systems |
N/a |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
N/a An options-stage RIS was not required.
RIS compliance – Interim September 2013 system
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
Options- |
Details- |
Details-stage RIS published |
PIR required |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Qantas Sale Amendment Bill 2014 |
E/c |
E/c |
.. |
Yes |
E/c Exceptional circumstances were granted by the Prime Minister.
.. Not applicable
3.1.17 Social Services – Department of Social Services
RIS compliance – Interim September 2013 system
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
Options- |
Details- |
Details-stage RIS published |
PIR required |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Remove Mandatory Employer Role |
N/a |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
Regulation of Aged Care Accommodation Payments |
N/a |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
Repeal of the Australian Charities and |
N/a |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
N/a An options-stage RIS was not required.
3.1.18 Treasury – The Treasury
RIS compliance – Interim September 2013 system
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
Options- |
Details- |
Details-stage RIS published |
PIR required |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Minerals Resource Rent Tax and Associated Measures |
N/a |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
Future of Financial Advice Amendments |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yesa |
|
Proposed Changes to Franchising Regulation |
N/a |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
Streamlining Disclosure and Liability Requirements |
N/a |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
N/a An options-stage RIS was not required.
a A Post-implementation Review is automatically required because the proposal was noted as having a major economic impact.
RIS compliance – March 2014 system
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
RIS status |
PIR required |
|---|---|---|
|
Implementation of the United States Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act in Australia |
Finalised, published, compliant and not best practicea |
Yesb |
|
Changing the Schedule for Increasing the Superannuation Guarantee |
Finalised, published, compliant and not best practicec |
No |
a The RIS was not consistent with best practice because, having regard to the significance of the proposal and the scale of the impacts, the RIS did not contain a commensurate level of detailed analysis.
b A Post-implementation Review is automatically required because the proposal was noted as having a substantial or widespread economic impact.
c The RIS was not consistent with best practice because it would have benefited from a more balanced discussion of the business certainty outcomes under the status quo, as well as the uncertainties associated with household incomes and savings behaviours resulting from the changes.
3.1.19 Treasury – Australian Accounting Standards Board
RIS compliance – March 2014 system
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
RIS status |
PIR required |
|---|---|---|
|
Replacement Accounting Standard for Superannuation Entities |
Finalised, published, compliant and not best practicea |
No |
a The RIS was not consistent with best practice because it did not assess the impacts on stakeholders’ financial statements.
3.1.20 Treasury – Australian Prudential Regulation Authority
RIS compliance – Interim September 2013 system
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
Options- |
Details- |
Details-stage RIS published |
PIR required |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Harmonising Cross-industry Risk management Requirements |
N/a |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
Implementing Basel III liquidity reforms in Australia |
N/a |
Yes |
Yes |
Yesa |
a A Post-implementation Review is automatically required because the proposal was noted as having a major economic impact.
N/a An options-stage RIS was not required.
3.1.21 Treasury – Australian Securities and Investments Commission
RIS compliance – June 2010 system
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
RIS adequate |
RIS published |
PIR required |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Over-the-Counter Derivatives Transaction Reporting Regime |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
Australian Market Structure: Further Proposals |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
3.1.22 Treasury – Reserve Bank of Australia
RIS compliance – Interim September 2013 system
|
Title of regulatory proposal Description of regulatory proposal |
Options- |
Details- |
Details-stage RIS published |
PIR required |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Payment Card Access Regimes Allows non-ADI entities to participate in Mastercard and Visa credit and debit schemes. |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
4. Compliance by COAG Council
The OBPR is required to report on compliance by COAG councils and national standard-setting bodies (NSSBs) with the COAG Guide. The reporting requirement flows from the COAG Agreement to Implement the National Competition Policy and Related Reforms (COAG 1995).
The COAG Guide states that:
If regulatory options are being considered (such as self-regulation where governments
expect businesses to comply, quasi-regulation, co-regulation and ‘black letter law’) then ministerial councils must subject these options to a regulatory impact assessment process through the preparation of a draft [consultation] and final [decision] Regulation Impact Statement. (COAG Guide, p. 7)
In this context, the COAG Guide defines regulation as:
The broad range of legally enforceable instruments which impose mandatory requirements upon business and the community, as well as those government voluntary codes and advisory instruments for which there is a reasonable expectation of widespread compliance. (COAG Guide, p. 3)
As required in the COAG Guide, the OBPR assesses RISs at two stages: consultation and decision. The OBPR advises the decision-making body at each decision-making stage whether the analysis contained in the RIS meets COAG’s adequacy criteria. The OBPR in making its assessment considers the seven elements specified under COAG’s RIS guidelines — problem, objectives, options, impact analysis, consultation, evaluation and conclusion, and implementation and review.
It is expected that the level of analysis in a draft [consultation] RIS would be lower than the level of analysis in the final [decision] RIS. This is because the impacts of options are sometimes unclear. The community consultation process is designed to allow interested parties and stakeholders to help identify such impacts. In such cases the OBPR may focus its assessment primarily on the first three parts of the draft [consultation] RIS, the problem, objectives and options section of the RIS. (COAG Guide, p. 8)
The COAG Guide emphasises transparency by requiring RISs to be made public.
After a decision is taken, the final RIS, which should be of a standard suitable for publication, will generally be made public. (COAG Guide, p. 9)
On 16 August 2010, COAG agreed that COAG RISs will be published on the OBPR website after the regulatory decision has been publicly announced.
At its meeting on 13 December 2013, COAG agreed that its Council system should be streamlined over the next 12-18 months. The 22 COAG Councils that existed at the time were replaced by eight Councils. COAG also agreed that where there are important areas of Commonwealth and State cooperation outside the Council system, Ministers may meet on an ad hoc basis. As a result, reporting on compliance in this chapter includes some Councils that have since been abolished.
4.1 Compliance by COAG council and national standard-setting bodies
During 2013–14, five COAG councils made decisions which triggered the COAG best practice regulation requirements. Four COAG councils were fully compliant, while the Legislative and Governance Forum on Food Regulation was not (see Table 4.1).
This chapter also contains information on the 11 consultation RISs that have been made public but for which no regulatory decisions have been made.
Table 4.1: Compliance with COAG’s RIS requirements (consultation, decision-making and publishing stage) 2013–14
|
COAG Council/ NSSB |
Consultation |
Decision |
Published |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
Compliant |
Non-compliant |
Compliant |
Non-compliant |
Compliant |
Non-compliant |
|
Legislative and Governance Forum on Food regulation |
|
1 |
|
1 |
|
1 |
|
Standing Council on Energy and Resources |
1 |
|
1 |
|
1 |
|
|
Standing Council on Environment and Water |
1 |
|
1 |
|
1 |
|
|
Standing Council on Federal Financial Relations |
4 |
|
4 |
|
4 |
|
|
Standing Council on Transport and Infrastructure |
1 |
|
1 |
|
1 |
|
|
Total |
7 |
1 |
7 |
1 |
7 |
1 |
4.2 Detailed compliance results by COAG council and national standard-setting bodies
The following tables show more detailed compliance by COAG council and NSSB at the consultation and decision-making stages.
4.2.1 Agriculture Ministers’ Forum
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
Date of decision |
Consultation |
Decision RIS compliant |
Final RIS published |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Australian Animal Welfare Standards and Guidelines – Exhibited Animals |
* |
Yes |
.. |
.. |
* A decision has not been made as at 30 June 2014.
.. Not applicable
4.2.2 Australian Building Codes Board
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
Date of decision |
Consultation |
Decision RIS compliant |
Final RIS published |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Fire Hose Reels in New Residential Buildings |
* |
Yes |
.. |
.. |
* A decision has not been made as at 30 June 2014.
.. Not applicable
4.2.3 Consumer Affairs Australia and New Zealand
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
Date of decision |
Consultation |
Decision RIS compliant |
Final RIS published |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Extending Unfair Contract Term Protections to Small Business |
* |
Yes |
.. |
.. |
* A decision has not been made as at 30 June 2014.
.. Not applicable
4.2.4 Equipment Energy Efficiency (E3) Committee
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
Date of decision |
Consultation |
Decision RIS compliant |
Final RIS published |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Heat Pump Water Heaters |
* |
Yes |
.. |
.. |
|
Electric Storage Water Heaters |
* |
Yes |
.. |
.. |
* A decision has not been made as at 30 June 2014.
.. Not applicable
4.2.5 Food Standards Australia New Zealand
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
Date of decision |
Consultation |
Decision RIS compliant |
Final RIS published |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Primary Production and Processing Standard for Meat and Meat Products |
* |
Yes |
.. |
.. |
|
Maximum Level of Tutin in Honey |
* |
Yes |
.. |
.. |
* A decision has not been made as at 30 June 2014.
.. Not applicable
4.2.6 Legislative and Governance Forum on Food Regulation
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
Date of decision |
Consultation |
Decision RIS compliant |
Final RIS published |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Endorsement of Health Star Calculator for front-of-pack labelling |
December 2013 |
No |
No |
No |
4.2.7 Safe Work Australia
|
Title of regulatory proposal Description of regulatory proposal |
Date of decision |
Consultation |
Decision RIS compliant |
Final RIS published |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Draft Model Code of Practice: Managing Risks in Stevedoring |
* |
Yes |
.. |
.. |
|
Improving the Model Work Health and Safety Laws |
* |
Yes |
.. |
.. |
* A decision has not been made as at 30 June 2014.
.. Not applicable
4.2.8 Standing Council on Energy and Resources
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
Date of decision |
Consultation |
Decision RIS compliant |
Final RIS published |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Gas Transmission Pipeline Capacity Trading |
13 Dec 2013 |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
4.2.9 Standing Council on Environment and Water
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
Date of decision |
Consultation |
Decision RIS compliant |
Final RIS published |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Northern Territory Container Deposit Scheme |
August 2013 |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
4.2.10 Standing Council on Primary Industries
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
Date of decision |
Consultation |
Decision RIS compliant |
Final RIS published |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
National Livestock Identification System |
* |
Yes |
.. |
.. |
* A decision has not been made as at 30 June 2014.
.. Not applicable
4.2.11 Standing Council on Federal Financial Relations
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
Date of decision |
Consultation |
Decision RIS compliant |
Final RIS published |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
National Injury Insurance Scheme |
* |
Yes |
.. |
.. |
|
National Licensing for Electrical Occupations |
13 Dec 2013 |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
National Licensing for Plumbing and Gasfitting Occupations |
13 Dec 2013 |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
National Licensing for Refrigeration and |
13 Dec 2013 |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
National Licensing for Property Occupations |
13 Dec 2013 |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
* A decision has not been made as at 30 June 2014.
.. Not applicable
4.2.12 Standing Council on Transport and Infrastructure
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
Date of decision |
Consultation |
Decision RIS compliant |
Final RIS published |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
National Standard for Commercial Vessels: Arrangement, Accommodation and Personal Safety |
15 Nov 2013 |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
5. Post-implementation Review Status by Portfolio
This chapter provides a description of regulations that require a post-implementation review (PIR) as at 30 June 2014. Information on the PIR commencement and due dates as well as the compliance status is also provided. PIRs from previous years which have not previously been completed and published are also listed.
Table 5.1 shows the compliance status of outstanding PIRs by portfolio. As of 30 June 2014, there are twelve portfolios that are required to undertake PIRs, along with one PIR required for a cross-portfolio proposal. Treasury has 22 PIRs outstanding, while Communications has 12 and Employment 11.
The five departments with non-compliant PIRs are Agriculture, Attorney-General’s, Environment, Health and Infrastructure and Regional Development.
A PIR is required to be completed within five years of implementation for all regulatory changes that have a substantial or widespread impact on the economy. PIRs must also be completed within two years where an adequate RIS was not prepared for the final stage of the regulatory change, the change has affected businesses, community organisations or individuals, and the change was neither minor nor machinery in nature. If a PIR is not completed within the required timeframe, the OBPR may report the agency as non-compliant with the Government’s PIR requirements. Until such time, the agency is regarded as being compliant with the PIR requirements, and is reported as such in the following tables.
Table 5.1: Outstanding Post-implementation reviews’ compliance by portfolio as at 30 June 2014
Portfolio |
Compliant |
Non-compliant |
|---|---|---|
|
Department of Agriculture |
|
1 |
|
Attorney-General’s Department |
2 |
2 |
|
Department of Communications |
12 |
|
|
Department of Defence |
1 |
|
|
Department of Education |
2 |
|
|
Department of Employment |
11 |
|
|
Department of Environment |
3 |
3 |
|
Department of Health |
3 |
1 |
|
Department of Immigration and Border Protection |
3 |
|
|
Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development |
4 |
1 |
|
Department of Social Services |
4 |
|
|
The Treasury |
22 |
|
|
Department of Defence/Department of Industry |
1 |
|
|
Total |
68 |
8 |
In 2013-14, 10 PIRs were published. Information on these PIRs is in Chapter 5.1. Information on the 76 PIRs that remain to be completed is in Chapter 5.2.
5.1 PIRs Published During 2013-14
5.1.1 Communications – Department of Communications
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
Reason for PIR |
Implementation date |
Date PIR published |
PIR status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Broadcasting & Datacasting Services (Parental Lock) Technical Standard 2010a |
Non-compliance |
April 2011 |
December 2013 |
Completed Published |
a This matter was previously reported under the Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy. However, on 18 September 2013 this matter was transferred to the Department of Communications.
5.1.2 Industry – Department of Industry
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
Reason for PIR |
Implementation date |
Date PIR published |
PIR status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Extension of the Energy Efficiency Opportunities Program to Major New Developments and Expansion Projectsa |
Non-compliance |
July 2013 |
July 2014 |
Completed Publishedb |
a This matter was previously reported under the Department of Resources, Energy and Tourism. However,
on 18 September 2013 this matter was transferred to the Department of Industry.
b A RIS was prepared for the repeal of the Energy Efficiency Opportunities Program which was assessed by
the OBPR as meeting the PIR requirements for this proposal. The RIS was published in 2014-15.
5.1.3 Treasury – The Treasury
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
Reason for PIR |
Implementation date |
Date PIR published |
PIR status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Tax Laws Amendment (2009 Budget Measures No. 1) Bill 2009 |
E/c |
July 2009 |
August 2013 |
Completed Published |
|
Tax Laws Amendment (2009 Budget Measures No. 2) Bill 2009 |
E/c |
July 2009 |
January 2014 |
Completed Published |
|
Corporations Amendment (Improving Accountability on Termination Payments) Bill 2009 |
Non-compliance |
November 2009 |
December 2013 |
Completed Published |
|
Tax Laws Amendment (2009 Budget Measures No. 2) Bill 2009 & Income Tax (TFN Withholding Tax (ESS)) |
E/c |
December 2009 |
January 2014 |
Completed Published |
|
Farm Management Deposits |
Non-compliance |
May 2010 |
February 2014 |
Completed Published |
|
Government Response to Australia’s Future Tax System Review |
E/c |
July 2012 |
January 2014 |
Completed Published |
|
Government Response to Australia’s Future Tax System Review |
E/c |
May 2011 |
January 2014 |
Completed Published |
E/c Exceptional circumstances were granted by the Prime Minister.
5.1.4 Cross Portfolio – Department of Industry, Innovation, Climate Change, Science, Research and Tertiary Education / Department of Immigration and Citizenship
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
Reason for PIR |
Implementation date |
Date PIR published |
PIR status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Job Ready Programa |
E/c |
January 2010 |
July 2013 |
Completed Published |
a This PIR was published in July 2013 by the then Department of Industry, Innovation, Climate Change, Science, Research and Tertiary Education and Department of Immigration and Citizenship.
E/c Exceptional circumstances were granted by the Prime Minister.
5.2 PIR Status by department or agency
5.2.1 Agriculture – Australian Fisheries Management Authority
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
Reason for PIR |
Implementation date |
Due Date |
PIR Compliance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Fishing Area Closure and Revised Monitoring Arrangements |
Non-compliance |
April 2011 |
October 2013 |
Non-Complianta |
a This PIR has been completed and published since 30 June 2014.
5.2.2 Attorney-General’s – Attorney-General’s Department
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
Reason for PIR |
Implementation date |
Due |
PIR Compliance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Banning the Importation of Unauthorised Psychoactive Substancesa |
Non-compliance |
Not implemented |
.. |
Compliant |
|
Resale Royalty Right for Visual Artists Bill 2008b |
Non-compliance |
June 2010 |
June 2013c |
Non-Compliant |
|
Enhancements from the Review of the Australian Independent Screen Production Sectorb |
Non-compliance |
September 2011 |
September 2013 |
Non-Compliant |
a The policy options were revised and a compliant RIS was subsequently completed for the options that were implemented. As a consequence, OBPR have agreed that a PIR no longer needs to be conducted for the options that were not implemented. PIR compliance tables will be updated in 2014-15 to reflect this.
b These matters were previously reported under Regional Australia, Local Government, Arts and Sport. However, on 18 September 2013 these matters were transferred to the Attorney-General’s Department.
c OBPR agreed that commencement of this PIR could be delayed to allow the agency to collect data. However, the PIR was not completed by the revised due date.
.. Not applicable
5.2.3 Attorney-General’s – Australian Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
Reason for PIR |
Implementation date |
Due |
PIR Compliance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Cancellation and Suspension of a Remittance Dealer’s Registration |
Non-compliance |
October 2011 |
June 2015a |
Compliant |
a The OBPR agreed to allow additional time for the agency to complete this PIR, to enable it to be conducted as part of a statutory review of the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Rules.
5.2.4 Communications – Department of Communications
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
Reason for PIR |
Implementation date |
Due Date |
PIR Compliance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Changes to the Anti-siphoning Systema |
E/c |
Not implementedd |
.. |
Compliant |
|
National Broadband Network (NBN) Decisionsa |
E/c |
April 2009 |
July 2014b |
Compliant |
|
National Broadband Network (NBN) Decisionsa |
E/c |
December |
July 2014b |
Compliant |
|
Improved Competition in Telecommunications Marketsa |
E/c |
June 2016 |
June 2018 |
Compliant |
|
Problem Gamblinga |
Non-compliance |
July 2013 |
July 2015 |
Compliant |
|
Problem Gamblinga |
Non-compliance |
Not implementedd |
.. |
Compliant |
|
Problem Gamblinga |
Non-compliance |
Not implementedd |
.. |
Compliant |
|
Extension of Telstra Retail Price Controls to June 2014a |
E/c |
June 2012 |
December 2014c |
Compliant |
|
Convergence Reviewa |
E/c |
January 2013 |
January 2015 |
Compliant |
|
Convergence Reviewa |
E/c |
Not implementedd |
.. |
Compliant |
|
Convergence Reviewa |
E/c |
Not Implementedd |
.. |
Compliant |
|
Convergence Reviewa |
E/c |
March 2013 |
March 2015 |
Compliant |
a These matters were previously reported under the Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy. However, on 18 September 2013 these matters were transferred to the Department of Communications.
b Three statutory reviews will be collectively assessed in relation to these NBN PIR requirements.
c As a result of changes to the timing requirements for PIRs, the OBPR provided the Department with an extension to the revised deadline for this PIR under transitional arrangements for the new requirements.
d This proposal no longer reflects current government policy and has not been implemented. As a consequence, the OBPR has agreed that a PIR no longer needs to be conducted for this proposal and will update the PIR compliance tables in 2014-15 to reflect this.
E/c Exceptional circumstances were granted by the Prime Minister.
.. Not applicable
5.2.5 Defence – Department of Defence
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
Reason for PIR |
Implementation date |
Due Date |
PIR Compliance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Defence Trade Cooperation Treaty with the United States |
Non-compliance |
June 2013 |
June 2015 |
Compliant |
5.2.6 Education – Department of Education
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
Reason for PIR |
Implementation date |
Due |
PIR Compliance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Australian Education Regulationa |
Non-compliance |
January 2014 |
January 2016 |
Compliant |
|
Tuition Protection Service and Other Related Measuresb |
Non-compliancec |
July 2012 |
December 2014d |
Compliant |
a This matter was previously reported under the Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. However, on 18 September 2013 this matter was transferred to the Department of Education.
b This matter was previously reported under the Department of Industry, Innovation, Climate Change, Science, Research and Tertiary Education. However, on 18 September 2013 this matter was transferred to the Department of Education.
c An adequate RIS was not provided to the decision maker. However, an implementation RIS was completed for the transparency stage. A PIR is still required to be completed within two years of implementation.
d As a result of changes to the timing requirements for PIRs, the OBPR provided the Department with an extension to the revised deadline for this PIR under transitional arrangements for the new requirements.
5.2.7 Employment – Department of Employment
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
Reason for PIR |
Implementation date |
Due |
PIR Compliance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Protection for Outworkers in the Textile, Clothing and Footwear Industrya |
E/c |
July 2012 |
December 2014c |
Compliant |
|
Amendments to the Transfer of Business Provisions in the Fair Work Act 2009a |
E/c |
December 2012 |
December 2014 |
Compliant |
|
Amendments to the Fair Work Act 2009a,b |
E/c |
July 2013 |
July 2015 |
Compliant |
|
Amendments to the Fair Work Act 2009a,b |
E/c |
January 2014 |
January 2016 |
Compliant |
|
Amendments to the Fair Work Act 2009a,b |
E/c |
July 2013 |
July 2015 |
Compliant |
|
Amendments to the Fair Work Act 2009a,b |
E/c |
July 2013 |
July 2015 |
Compliant |
|
Amendments to the Fair Work Act 2009a,b |
E/c |
July 2013 |
July 2015 |
Compliant |
|
Amendments to the Fair Work Act 2009a,b Creates a definition of workplace bullying and allowing an employee who has suffered bullying at work the right to seek an order from the Fair Work Commission. |
E/c |
January 2014 |
January 2016 |
Compliant |
|
Amendments to the Fair Work Act 2009a,b Amends right of entry provisions in relation to the location of discussions and interviews, as well as transport and accommodation arrangements for the facilitation of entry to premises in remote areas by permit holders. |
E/c |
January 2014 |
January 2016 |
Compliant |
|
Amendments to the Fair Work Act 2009a,b Requires the Fair Work Commission to take into account the need to provide additional remuneration for employees working over-time; unsocial, irregular or unpredictable hours; working on weekends or public holidays; or working shifts when making or varying a modern award. |
E/c |
January 2014 |
January 2016 |
Compliant |
|
Amendments to the Fair Work Act 2009a,b Amendments to bargaining for greenfields agreements. |
E/c |
Not implemented |
.. |
Compliant |
a These matters were previously reported under the Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. However, on 18 September 2013 these matters were transferred to the Department of Employment.
b These measures relate to two decisions to amend the Fair Work Act 2009 announced in 2013-14.
c As a result of changes to the timing requirements for PIRs, the OBPR provided the Department with an extension to the revised deadline for this PIR under transitional arrangements for the new requirements.
E/c Exceptional circumstances were granted by the Prime Minister.
.. Not applicable
5.2.8 Environment – Department of the Environment
|
Title of regulatory proposal Description of regulatory proposal |
Reason for PIR |
Implementation date |
Due Date |
PIR Compliance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Renewable Energy (Electricity Amendment Regulations 2010 (No. 3))a |
Non-compliance |
June 2010 |
October 2012 |
Non-Compliantb |
|
Renewable Energy (Electricity) Amendment Act 2009 and Renewable Energy (Electricity) (Charge) Amendment Act 2009a,c |
Non-compliance |
December 2010 |
October 2012 |
Non- |
|
Renewable Energy (Electricity) Amendment Regulations 2010 (No. 8), Renewable Energy (Electricity) Amendment Regulations 2011 (No. 2) and Renewable Energy (Electricity) Amendment Regulations 2012 (No. 8)a,c,d |
Non-compliance |
December 2010 |
October 2012 |
Non-Compliantb |
|
Phase Out of the Solar Credits Mechanisma,d |
E/c |
January 2013 |
January 2015 |
Compliant |
|
New fishing activities of size and scale unprecedented in Commonwealth marine arease |
E/c |
September 2012 |
December 2014f |
Compliant |
|
Greater Protection for Water Resourcese |
E/c |
June 2013 |
June 2015 |
Compliant |
a These matters were previously reported under the Department of Industry, Innovation, Climate Change, Science, Research and Tertiary Education. However, on 18 September 2013 these matters were transferred to the Department of the Environment.
b The Department of Environment is currently in the process of finalising this PIR for publication.
c The completion date for these PIRs was extended to allow information to be included from a review undertaken by the Climate Change Authority.
d A single PIR was prepared for the Government’s decisions in late 2010, mid-2011 and late 2012 to bring forward the phase-out of the solar credits mechanism under the Renewable Energy Target.
e These matters were previously reported under the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities. However, on 18 September 2013 these matters were transferred to the Department of the Environment.
f As a result of changes to the timing requirements for PIRs, the OBPR provided the Department with an extension to the revised deadline for this PIR under transitional arrangements for the new requirements.
E/c Exceptional circumstances were granted by the Prime Minister.
5.2.9 Health – Department of Health
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
Reason for PIR |
Implementation date |
Due |
PIR Compliance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Fifth Community Pharmacy Agreementa |
Non-compliance |
July 2010 |
July 2012 |
Non-compliantb |
|
Fairer Private Health Insurance Incentives Bill 2009a |
E/c |
July 2012 |
December 2014c |
Compliant |
|
Tobacco Plain Packaginga |
Non-compliance |
December 2012 |
June 2015d |
Compliant |
|
Eligibility for Medicare Funding for Diagnostic Radiology Servicesa |
E/c |
November 2012 |
December 2014c |
Compliant |
a These matters were previously reported under the Department of Health and Ageing. However, on
18 September 2013 these matters were transferred to the Department of Health.
b This PIR has been completed and published since 30 June 2014.
c As a result of changes to the timing requirements for PIRs, the OBPR provided the Department with an extension to the revised deadline for this PIR under transitional arrangements for the new requirements.
d OBPR has granted an extension to the due date for this PIR to June 2015 to enable the inclusion of relevant material expected to be available in the first half of 2015.
E/c Exceptional circumstances were granted by the Prime Minister.
5.2.10 Immigration and Border Protection – Department of Immigration and Border Protection
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
Reason for PIR |
Implementation date |
Due |
PIR Compliance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Reforms to the Temporary Work (Skilled) (Subclass 457) Visa Programa |
Non-compliance |
July 2013 |
July 2015 |
Compliant |
|
Labour Market Testing for 457 Visa Sponsorsa |
E/c |
November 2013 |
November 2015 |
Compliant |
|
Organised Crime on the Waterfrontc |
Non-compliance |
Not implementedb |
.. |
Compliant |
a This matter was previously reported under the Department of Immigration and Citizenship. However, on
18 September 2013 this matter was transferred to the Department of Immigration and Border Protection.
b Although certain parts of this package have already been implemented, the main regulatory aspects have not yet been implemented.
c Responsibility for this PIR was transferred from the Attorney-General’s Department to the Department of Immigration and Border Protection.
E/c Exceptional circumstances were granted by the Prime Minister.
5.2.11 Infrastructure and Regional Development – Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
Reason for PIR |
Implementation date |
Due |
PIR Compliance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Aviation Transport Security Amendment (Additional Screening Measures) Act 2007; Aviation Transport Security Amendment Regulations 2007 (No. 4)a |
Non-compliance |
September |
September 2009 |
Non-Compliant |
|
Tripartite Deeds for 9 Federally Leased Airportsa |
Non-compliance |
July 2013 |
July 2015 |
Compliant |
|
Tripartite Deeds for 12 Australian Privatised Airportsa |
Non-compliance |
July 2013 |
July 2015 |
Compliant |
|
Aviation Transport Security Amendment Regulations 2009 (No. 3)a |
Non-compliance |
Not implementedb |
.. |
Compliant |
|
Qantas Sale Amendment Bill 2014 |
E/c |
Not implemented |
.. |
Compliant |
a These matters were previously reported under the Department of Infrastructure and Transport. However,
on 18 September 2013 they were transferred to the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development.
b This proposal no longer reflects current government policy and has not been implemented. As a consequence, the OBPR has agreed that a PIR no longer needs to be conducted for this proposal and will update the PIR compliance tables in 2014-15 to reflect this.
.. Not applicable
E/c Exceptional circumstances were granted by the Prime Minister.
5.2.12 Social Services – Department of Social Services
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
Reason for PIR |
Implementation date |
Due Date |
PIR Compliance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Problem Gamblinga |
Non-compliance |
Not implementedb |
.. |
Compliant |
|
Problem Gamblinga |
Non-compliance |
February 2014 |
February 2016 |
Compliant |
|
Problem Gamblinga |
Non-compliance |
Not implementedb |
.. |
Compliant |
|
Problem Gamblinga |
Non-compliance |
Not implementedb |
.. |
Compliant |
a These matters were previously reported under the Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs. However, on 18 September 2013 these matters were transferred to the Department of Social Services.
b These proposals no longer reflect current government policy and have not been implemented. As a consequence, the OBPR has agreed that PIRs no longer need to be conducted for these proposals and will update the PIR compliance tables in 2014-15 to reflect this.
.. Not applicable
5.2.13 Treasury – The Treasury
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
Reason for PIR |
Implementation date |
Due |
PIR Compliance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Regulation of Litigation Funding |
Non-compliance |
January 2013 |
January 2015 |
Compliant |
|
Future of Financial Advice |
Non-compliance |
July 2013 |
July 2015 |
Compliant |
|
Future of Financial Advice |
Non-compliance |
July 2013 |
July 2015 |
Compliant |
|
Future of Financial Advice |
Non-compliance |
July 2013 |
July 2015 |
Compliant |
|
Future of Financial Advice |
Non-compliance |
July 2013 |
July 2015 |
Compliant |
|
Future of Financial Advice |
Non-compliance |
July 2013 |
July 2015 |
Compliant |
|
Taxation of Financial Arrangements – Amendments to Tax Hedging Rules |
Non-compliance |
Not implementeda |
.. |
Compliant |
|
Government’s Response to the Super System Review (Cooper Review) |
E/c |
July 2013 |
July 2015 |
Compliantb |
|
Competitive and Sustainable Banking System |
E/c |
July 2011 |
July 2014c |
Compliant |
|
Competitive and Sustainable Banking System |
E/c |
October 2011 |
July 2014c |
Compliant |
|
Government Response to Australia’s Future Tax System Review |
E/c |
July 2012 |
December 2014d |
Compliant |
|
Government Response to Australia’s Future Tax System Review |
E/c |
July 2012 |
December 2014d |
Compliant |
|
Government Response to Australia’s Future Tax System Review |
E/c |
July 2014 |
July 2016 |
Compliant |
|
Government Response to Australia’s Future Tax System Review |
E/c |
January 2014 |
January 2016 |
Compliant |
|
Government Response to Australia’s Future Tax System Review |
E/c |
July 2012 |
December 2014d |
Compliant |
|
Duty Free Allowances – Cigarettes and Tobacco |
E/c |
September 2012 |
December 2014d |
Compliant |
|
Stronger Super Reforms – Aspects of MySuper |
E/c |
July 2013 |
July 2015 |
Compliant |
|
Implementation of the United States Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act in Australia. |
Substantial impact |
Not implemented |
.. |
Compliant |
|
Future of Financial Advice Amendments |
Substantial impact |
Not implemented |
.. |
Compliant |
a This proposal no longer reflects current government policy and has not been implemented. As a consequence, the OBPR has agreed that a PIR no longer needs to be conducted for this proposal and will update the PIR compliance tables in 2014-15 to reflect this.
b Elements of this proposal have been subject to regulatory impact analysis (through separate RISs), and therefore will not need to be considered by the PIR.
c The Department was allowed more time in order to include additional information requested by the OBPR in the PIR.
d As a result of changes to the timing requirements for PIRs, the OBPR provided the Department with an extension to the revised deadline for this PIR under transitional arrangements for the new requirements.
E/c Exceptional circumstances were granted by the Prime Minister.
.. Not applicable
5.2.14 Treasury – Australian Accounting Standards Board
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
Reason for PIR |
Implementation date |
Due Date |
PIR Compliance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Amendments to Australian Accounting Standards AASB 1 & 7 |
Non-compliant |
November 2010 |
June 2015a |
Compliant |
|
Reducing the Financial Reporting Burden: A Second Tier of Requirements for General Purpose Financial Statements |
Non-compliant |
June 2010 |
June 2015b |
Compliant |
a The OBPR agreed to the AASB’s request to defer the commencement date for the PIR to allow necessary data to be available for the review, having regard to the financial cycle for the relevant requirements.
b The OBPR agreed to the AASB’s request to defer the commencement date for the PIR to coincide with an expected review of the relevant standards by the International Accounting Standards Board.
5.2.15 Treasury – Australian Prudential Regulation Authority
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
Reason for PIR |
Implementation date |
Due Date |
PIR Compliance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Implementing Basel III Liquidity Reforms in Australia |
Substantial impact |
Not implemented |
.. |
Compliant |
.. Not applicable
5.2.16 Cross Portfolio – Department of Defence / Department of Industry
|
Title of regulatory proposal |
Reason for PIR |
Implementation date |
Due Date |
PIR Compliance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Government’s Response to the Review of the Woomera Prohibited Areaa |
E/c |
Not implemented |
.. |
Compliant |
a This matter was previously reported under the Department of Resources, Energy and Tourism. However, on
18 September 2013 this matter was transferred to the Department of Industry.
E/c Exceptional circumstances were granted by the Prime Minister.
.. Not applicable
[1] Borthwick, D & Milliner R, 2012, Independent Review of the Australian Government’s Regulatory Impact Analysis Process, https://pmc.gov.au/deregulation/obpr/riar/riareview_final_gov_response… (accessed 16 January 2015).
[2] Under the March 2014 RIS system, there are three categories of RIS – Short Form, Standard Form and
Long Form. A full description of each of these categories is contained in the Australian Government
Guide to Regulation.
[3] Australian Government RIS compliance includes independent reviews used in lieu of a RIS.