CTU Submission on the Regulatory Responsibility Bill

Submission to the Commerce Select Committee, Augsut 2007

Click here to download a printable version of this submssion (MS Word, 217k)

Summary

The CTU does not support the Regulatory Responsibility Bill. The CTU contends that it is a sign of a developed economy and society that there is a reasonable spread of regulation to ensure that rights and responsibilities are balanced and that regulations meet high standards of transparency, consistency, plain language, and minimum regulation for the purpose required.

Many are quick to call for regulation in areas that affect them, but criticise regulations that protect the rights of others and the reaction to regulation often lies in the eye of the beholder. For instance, the average employer may approve strongly of regulations that prohibit strikes by workers under certain circumstances. But this same employer may resent regulations on the minimum wage or dismissal procedures. Many voters will dislike excessive regulation, but strongly criticise governments when there is inadequate regulation of (say) food hygiene, national security or border control. .

The quality of regulation is an important issue on its own. But debate about quality inevitably spills over into discussion about the extent of regulation. There was massive deregulation after 1984. While the merits or otherwise of those reforms will continue to be debated, the obsession with deregulation in favour of market mechanisms contributed to huge inequities of wealth distribution, a decline in public services, the near collapse of key strategic assets such as our railway system, a reduction in industry training and skill development, and the loss of many employment conditions and protections. We welcome the rebalancing in regulation after a long period of excessive and harmful deregulation.