2012 13 OBPR Annual Report

201213AnnualReporton
ReducingtheBurdenof
RegulationinQueensland
31October2013
KEYCONTACTS
OfficeofBestPracticeRegulation
QueenslandCompetitionAuthority
GPOBox2257
BrisbaneQLD4001
Telephone:
(07)32220555
Website:
www.qca.org.au
Email:
obpr.submissions@qca.org.au
Anyotherenquiriesorquestionsmaybedirectedto:
GregoryBounds,Director,OfficeofBestPracticeRegulation
Phone:0732220509
ii
QCA|OfficeofBestPracticeRegulation
TableofContents
TableofContents
KEYCONTACTS
II
ListofTables
iv
EXECUTIVESUMMARY
INTRODUCTIONANDBACKGROUND
1.1
Introduction
1.2
MinisterialDirectionregulatoryburden
1.3
Pagecount
1.4
Dollarestimates
1.5
MinisterialDirectionassessingregulatoryimpactstatements
REGULATORYBURDENREQUIREMENTSCOUNT
REGULATORYBURDENPAGECOUNT
15
REGULATORYBURDENCASESTUDIES
18
4.1
Reportingontheeconomicbenefitsofreform
18
4.2
CaseStudy1:Removingtherequirementformandatoryinstallationofrainwatertanks
19
4.3
Casestudy2:Removingregistrationrequirementsforspeechpathologistsanddental
technicians
21
4.4
Casestudy3:EnergymarketrestrictionsQueenslandGasScheme
22
4.5
Casestudy4:AssessingtheimpactoftheEconomicDevelopmentAct2012on
developmentprojects
27
4.6
Casestudy5:Simplifyingregulatoryapprovalsforthecoalminingindustry
29
4.7
Casestudy6:Simplifyingregulationofplumbingworks
31
4.8
Summaryofrequirementchangesforcasestudies
32
TOWARDSBESTPRACTICEREGULATION
35
5.1
Deliveringbetterregulation
35
5.2
Challengesonthepathtobetterregulation
36
5.3
TheOBPRscommitmenttoachievingbestpracticeregulation
36
REGULATORYASSESSMENTACTIVITY
38
6.1
Summaryofregulatoryassessments
38
6.2
RegulatoryproposalsexemptedbytheTreasurer
39
6.3
RegulatoryproposalsnotmeetingtheRISGuidelines
40
6.4
Deferringthereviewofexpiringregulation
40
GLOSSARY
42
APPENDIXA:MINISTERIALDIRECTIONASSESSINGREGULATORYIMPACTSTATEMENTS
45
APPENDIXB:MINISTERIALDIRECTIONREGULATORYBURDEN
47
APPENDIXC:REQUIREMENTSCOUNTDETAILEDDESCRIPTIONOFTHECOUNTINGPROCESS
49
iii
TableofContents
APPENDIXD:DETERMININGTHEREDUCTIONTARGET
59
APPENDIXE:THEREQUIREMENTSCOUNTAUDITPROCESS
61
REFERENCES
64
ListofTables
Table1:Categoriesincludedandexcludedintherequirementscount
10
Table2:Requirementscountbaselineandreductiontargetsforeachdepartment
11
Table3:Trackingthechangesinrequirementscountfrom23March2012to30June2013
13
Table4:Changeinpagecountfrom23March2012to30June2013
16
Table5:Changeinpagecountcomparedtochangeinrequirementscount
17
Table6:Casestudysummary
18
Table7:SummaryofSEQcostbenefitanalyses($m)presentvaluesin2012
20
Table8:Potentialcostsavingsduetoclosureofscheme
24
Table9:Keyassumptionsandinputs
25
Table10:SummaryofresultsQGScasestudy
26
Table11:KeyimpactsoftheEDA
27
Table12:Keylegislativechangesforthecoalminingsector
29
Table13:Miningreformsresults
30
Table14:Minorplumbingwork
31
Table15:Savingstoplumbingindustry($m)
32
Table16:Casestudyrequirementchanges
33
Table17:QueenslandGovernmentsregulatorybestpracticeprinciples
35
Table18:Regulatoryassessmentsbyproposaltype201213
38
Table19:RISsthatreceivedaLetterofAdequacy
39
Table20:ExemptionsgrantedbytheTreasurer
39
Table21:RegulatoryproposalsnotmeetingtherequirementsoftheRISGuidelines
40
Table22:Statutoryinstrumentexemptions
40
Table23:Classificationofinclusionorexclusionofregulatoryrequirementcategories
51
Table24:Milestonesoftherequirementscountprocess
57
Table25:Requirementscountresult
58
Table26:Errorratecalculation
62
Table27:Errorrateforbaselinecount30April2013
63
iv
ExecutiveSummary
EXECUTIVESUMMARY
ThisisthefirstannualreportbytheOfficeofBestPracticeRegulation(OBPR)onreducingthe
burden of regulation in Queensland. It supports the goals of the Queensland Government to
reducethecostburdenofregulationonbusinessandthecommunityandtoensurethat,where
regulationisnecessary,itisefficient,effectiveandinthepublicinterest.
The OBPR was requested to provide the responsible Ministers with an annual report by 31
October2013,onperformancebyagenciesinachievingtheGovernment'stargetsforreducing
theregulatoryburden.TheOBPRwasalsorequestedtouseabasketofmeasurestoprovide
Governmentwiththebestinformationonregulatoryburdenandthereductionsinthatburden,
usingasproxies:
changesinthenumberofregulatoryobligationsandrequirements
changesinthenumberofpagesoflegislation
dollarestimates.
In pursuit of its target to reduce the burden of regulation by 20% by 2018, the Queensland
Government has made each government agency responsible for pursuing regulatory reforms
andhasallocatedindividualpercentagetargetsthateachdepartmentmustmeettoreducethe
number of regulatory requirements in the rules that they administer. The total of the
percentage targets allocated sums to 20%, but the individual percentage target allocated to
each department varies depending on the number and types of regulation they administer.
Details of the requirements count process and the determination of departmental reduction
targetsareincludedinAppendixCofthisreport.
Thisreportprovidesacomparisonofthenumberofregulatoryrequirementscontainedacross
all the legislative instruments administered by the Queensland Government, including Acts,
regulations, codes and guidelines at the baseline date (23 March 2012), and the first annual
report date (30 June 2013). The change is disaggregated and reported for each government
department,totrackprogressatadepartmentlevelandatanaggregatelevel.
Atthebaselinedateof23March2012,therewereatotalof265,189regulatoryrequirements
acrosstheQueenslandGovernment.Overthereportingperiodto 30June2013,therewasa
reductionof9,404requirements,equivalentto4%ofthebaselinecount.
Therateofchangeinrequirementsvariesacrossdepartmentsfromareductionof40%forthe
DepartmentofLocalGovernment(whichremoved448requirements),toanincreaseof5%for
the Department of the Premier and Cabinet (which added eleven new requirements to an
alreadyverylowbaseofonly234requirements,largelyduetochangestotheLobbyistsCode
ofConduct).
At the baseline date of 23 March 2012, there were a total of 72,436 pages of legislation. By
30June2013,therehadbeenamarginaldecreaseof429pagesoflegislation,resultinginatotal
numberof72,007pagesoflegislation.However,apagecountisjustoneproxyforchangesin
the legislative burden. A comparison with the reduction in regulatory requirements, for
example,showsnocorrelationwiththechangesinthenumberofpagesoflegislation.
Inaddition,withtheassistanceofindividualgovernmentdepartmentstheOBPRhasquantified
theimpactsofsixrecentregulatoryreformstoillustratethedollarimpactofthechanges.Each
case study illustrates the positive economic benefits that have been delivered to Queensland
ExecutiveSummary
throughreformsinvarioussectors.Thesereformsincludebothpolicychangesthatresultedin
the reduction of regulatory requirements and measures to simplify and streamline regulatory
processes.
Giventhatthecostofestimatingthedollarvalueofallregulatoryreformswouldbeprohibitive,
thecasestudyapproachisapragmaticwayofprovidinganindicationtothecommunityofthe
monetarybenefitsofasampleofrecentreformsundertakenbytheQueenslandGovernment.
As departments become more practised at quantifying the expected benefits and costs of
regulatory proposals as part of the Regulatory Impact Assessment (RIS) system, it is expected
that the OBPR will be able to utilise this information to provide a more comprehensive
assessmentofthenetbenefitsofreforms.
TheOBPRwasalsodirectedbytheresponsibleMinisterstoreportannuallyoncompliancewith
theRegulatoryImpactStatementSystemGuidelines,toinformthegovernmenttherebyofthe
degree to which agencies have been applying the RIS system in the development of their
regulatory proposals. In doing so, the OBPR has highlighted some of the key challenges for
agenciesinmeetingtherequirementsoftheRISsystemandhowtheOBPRisassistingagencies
toaddressthesechallengesandtodevelopbetterregulation.
The RIS system is an important process that will assist in achieving the governments goal of
reducingregulatoryburden,asitisdesignedtoincreasetherigourwithwhichnewregulationis
made.TheRISGuidelines,administeredbytheTreasurer,describetherequiredproceduresfor
developingregulationforQueenslandGovernmentagenciesundertheRISsystem.
TheRISsystemrequiresregulatoryagenciestosubmitallregulatoryproposalstotheOBPRto
assesswhetheraConsultationRISshouldbeundertakenandifoneisrequired,ifitadequately
meets the requirements of the RIS system. In the 12 months to 30 June 2013, only a small
percentageofregulatoryproposalshavebeenconsideredlikelytoresultinsignificantimpacts,
andthereforetowarrantthepreparationofaConsultationRIS.Ofthe131PreliminaryImpact
Assessments (PIAs) considered by the OBPR, only five were required to progress to the
ConsultationRISstage.
For the RIS system to be effective in improving regulatory outcomes, it is necessary that it is
integratedearlyinthepolicydevelopmentprocess.TheOBPRhasimplementedaprogramof
ongoing engagement with agencies, to develop a better understanding of the emerging
legislative and regulatory priorities of their portfolios, and to provide training and lend early
supportwiththeapplicationofregulatoryanalysis.WheretheRISprocessisembeddedinthe
policy development processes of agencies, this should result in better regulatory outcomes.
The OBPRs program of ongoing engagement with agencies will be further advanced through
201314.
vi
IntroductionandBackground
INTRODUCTIONANDBACKGROUND
1.1
Introduction
This is the first annual report of the OBPRs work in measuring the change in the burden of
regulation in Queensland. It forms part of the Queensland Competition Authoritys (QCAs)
focusonthegovernmentsaimofreducingtheburdenofregulationby20%by2018.
The government has made a commitment to reduce regulatory burden on business and the
community. As part of this commitment, the government has implemented several major
reforms,resultingintheestablishmentoftheOBPRwithintheQCA.ThefunctionsoftheOBPR
were established through changes to the Queensland Competition Authority Act 1997 on
27June2012.
1.2
MinisterialDirectionregulatoryburden
Following the establishment of the OBPR, on 3 July 2012, the QCA received a Ministerial
Direction to investigate and report on a framework for reducing the burden of regulation,
including a proposed framework for measuring the regulatory burden of legislation, with
appropriate regulatory burden benchmarks against which Queensland Government
departmentsmaybeassessedbytheQCAonanannualbasis(p.46).Thecontextofthiswork
wastobethegovernmentstargetforthereductioninredtapeandregulation.TheMinisterial
DirectionsarereproducedinAppendixB.
In response to this direction, the QCA published an Issues Paper in August 20121, and sought
commentfrominterestedstakeholders(QCA2012b).TheIssuesPapercanvassedanumberof
methodsformeasuringtheregulatoryburden,includingtheBritishColumbia(BC)approachof
countingallregulatoryrequirements.TheQCAreceivedresponsesfrom34stakeholders.
InOctober2012,theQCApublishedtheInterimReportonMeasuringandReducingtheBurden
ofRegulation,2recommendingtheBCapproachofcountingobligationstoestablishabaseline
andmeasureprogresstowardsthe20%reductiontarget(QCA2012c).
On 19 February 2013, the Government responded to the QCAs Interim Report3. The
Governments response indicated that the QCA should establish a baseline of the regulatory
burdenasat23March2012,andthatamodifiedBCapproachshouldbeoneelementofthe
baseline. The QCA was also requested to provide an annual report on agencies progress
towardstheregulatoryburdenreductiontarget.
The government also requested delivery of a baseline count, together with recommended
reductiontargetsforeachagency.Thegovernmentsresponsespecifiedthatmeasurementof
burden reduction should use a basket of the measures to provide the government with the
bestinformationontheregulatoryburden.Thebasketofmeasuresshouldincludepagecount,
modifiedBritishColumbiaapproachanddollarcost.(2013a:p.1)
1
IssuesPaperMeasuringandReducingtheBurdenofRegulation,August2012,www.qca.org.au/files/OBPR
QCAIssuesPaperMeasuringReducingBurdenRegulation0812.pdf
2
InterimReportMeasuringandReducingtheBurdenofRegulation,October2012,
www.qca.org.au/files/OBPRQCAReportInterimMRBurdenofRegulation1112.pdf
3
TheGovernmentsresponseisavailableontheQCAswebsiteatwww.qca.org.au/files/OBPRGOV
InterimReportMRBR0213.pdf
IntroductionandBackground
InFebruary2013,theQCApublishedtheFinalReportonMeasuringandReducingtheBurdenof
Regulation4.TheFinalReportaddressedthegovernmentsresponsetotheInterimReportand
incorporatedtheresultsoffurtherresearchandconsultation.
In February 2013, the QCA commenced a BC style count of regulatory requirements in
Queensland. This was a major undertaking, involving over 100,000 pages of regulation
(includingquasiregulation) administeredby19governmentdepartments.The QCAdelivered
thefirstbaselinecount,measuringrequirementsasat23March2012,inApril2013.Thisfirst
countingprojecthadprocessedover2,600pagesperworkingday;thereforeitwasnotableto
incorporateallrelevantdetails,suchasregulatoryinstrumentssplitbetweendepartments.
TheQCAundertookfurtherrefinementofthebaselinecount,anddeliveredanupdatedresult
in June 2013, in the Final Report on Regulatory Requirements: Measurement and Targets for
Queensland Government Departments. This included both a baseline measurement and
recommended reduction targets for each department. Cabinet approved the baseline and
reductiontargetsinAugust2013,notingthatthenumbersweresubjecttomodification.The
QCAfurtherrefinedthebaselinecountafterJune2013inordertoarriveatthecurrentresult.
DetailsonthecountingapproacharesetoutinAppendixC.
Section 2 of this report presents the changes in the regulatory requirements count from
23March2012to30June2013.
1.3
Pagecount
InitsOctober2012report,theQCApresentedapagecountoftheregulatorybaselineasat23
March2012.Thispagecountfocussedonlyontheregulatoryinstrumentsadministeredbythe
Office of Queensland Parliamentary Counsel (OQPC), mainly Acts and regulations. The count
did not include guidelines, codes of practice and similar instruments administered by
departments.
In July 2013, OQPC provided the QCA with a page count of its regulatory instruments as at
30 June 2013. This report presents the change over the period from the baseline date of
23March2012(Section3).
1.4
Dollarestimates
ConsistentwiththeGovernmentsresponseof19February2013,theQCAsoughttorespondto
the request for a dollar estimate of the net benefits of reforms undertaken up to
30 June 2013. Collecting data on the full scope of reforms is methodologically difficult, and
would be prohibitively expensive (and place an undue load on departmental resources). This
report therefore presents an illustrative sample of reforms, presented as case studies
(Section4).
1.5
MinisterialDirectionassessingregulatoryimpactstatements
On 3 July 2012, the QCA also received a Ministerial Direction to assess the adequacy of
Regulatory Impact Statements (RISs) submitted by departments. Furthermore, on 4 March
2013, the QCA received another Ministerial Direction, which transferred the remaining RIS
functionsfromQueenslandTreasuryandTrade(QTT)totheQCAtoadviseagencieswhethera
RISshouldbeundertakenforregulatoryproposals.TheMinisterialDirectionisreproducedin
AppendixA.
ActivityinrelationtotheassessmentofRISsispresentedinSection6ofthisreport.
4
FinalReportMeasuringandReducingtheBurdenofRegulation,February2013(2013c)
www.qca.org.au/files/OBPRGOVFinalReportMRBR0313.pdf
RegulatoryBurdenRequirementsCount
REGULATORYBURDENREQUIREMENTSCOUNT
Inthecontextofthegovernmentsaimtoreducetheburdenofregulationonthecommunity,
theregulatoryrequirementscounthastwomainaims:
to measure change in the burden of regulation over time. OBPR aims to achieve this by
establishingabaselineat23March2012,andthenmeasuringthechangeat30Juneineach
year,commencingin2013.
toinfluencefuturebehaviourofregulatorsandpolicymakers.Thisisachievedbysignalling
in advance that the requirements count will be reported as at 30 June each year. The
Government has indicated that it will reinforce the effect on future behaviour by
incorporating requirements count indicators in the performance agreements of Directors
General,asameansofmeasuringseniorexecutivecontributionstoprogressinreducingthe
burdenofregulation.
Inordertoachieveitsaims,therequirementscountneedstosatisfythreemajorconditions:
(a)
anacceptablelevelofaccuracyinordertopresentregulatorsandpolicymakerswith
credibleoutcomes
(b)
transparency,toallowverificationofoutcomes
(c)
afocusonregulationthatimposesaburdenonthecommunity,ratherthanregulation
thatimposesaburdenongovernment,orisotherwisenotrelevanttothegovernments
policyintent.Table1givesfurtherdetailsofthisfocus.
Appendix C describes in detail the methods adopted by OBPR to ensure accuracy, credibility
andrelevance.Keyfeaturesareasfollows:
(a)
Thecountingprocessinvolvedseveralcyclesofprovidingresultstodepartmentsand
incorporatingtheircomments.Thisincludedconsultationtoreachagreementbetween
theQCAanddepartmentsonmattersofprinciple.
(b)
Theresultswereprovidedinspreadsheets,sothattheresultswouldbetransparenttoall
departments,downtothesmallestlevelofdetail.Adatabaseprogramwouldhavehad
technicaladvantagesoveraspreadsheetprogrambutwouldnothavebeenfully
transparent.
(c)
Thecountwassubjecttoanindependentauditconsistingofa15%sampleofthe
requirements,assuringanerrorratebelow3%.Fulldetailsoftheauditprocessare
describedinAppendixE.
(d)
OBPRdisaggregatedregulatoryrequirementsintospecificcategories,withdetailed
considerationofwhichcategoriesshouldbeincludedinthecountinordertoreflectthe
policyintentionofreducingtheburdenofregulationonthecommunity.Table1
summarisesthetreatmentofeachcategory,withfulldetailsinAppendixC.
Table1:Categoriesincludedandexcludedintherequirementscount
Category
Recommendation
Comments
Standardrequirements
Include
Thesegotothecoreofthegovernmentspolicy
intent.
Governmentonly(internalto
department)
Exclude
Departmentscanchoosetomodifytheirowninternal
requirementswithoutagovernmentwideprocess.
Governmentonly(appliedto
otherdepartments)
Exclude
Notpartofgovernmentspolicyintent.Maybethe
subjectofafutureproject.
Governmentowned
corporations(GOCs)
Include
GOCsshouldalignmorecloselywithprivatesector
companies.
Justiceandpolicing
Exclude
Generallynotpartofgovernmentspolicyintent.
UnlikelythattheOBPRwouldbeabletoprovide
usefulscrutinyinanyspecificarea.
Harmonisedrequirements
Include
Exclusionwouldsendthewrongpolicysignal,and
wouldallowgamingwithinthereductionprogram.
Factsheetsandother
explanatorydocuments
Exclude
Thesedonotimposeadditionalrequirements,but
facilitatecompliance.Theymayrequireseparate
scrutiny.
Voluntarycodesofpractice
Include
Codesarenotvoluntarywherenoncompliancehas
regulatoryconsequences.Exclusioncouldresultin
gaming.
Transitionalprovisions
Exclude
Transitionalprovisionsdonotimposeanadditional
burden,andenhancetransparency.
Inachievingthegovernments20%reductiontarget,theOBPRwasawarethatthetargetcould
notbeappliedequallytoalldepartmentsduetodifferencesinthenatureofregulationacross
portfolios. Appendix D shows detailed considerations in setting portfolio targets. The most
important factor was the proportion of harmonised regulation in each portfolio. Because
harmonised regulation is more difficult to reduce, the OBPR applied a lower weighting to
harmonisedrequirements,whensettingdepartmentaltargets.
TheOBPRalsorecommendedlowreductiontargets(5%)fortwodepartments:theDepartment
ofPremierandCabinet(DPC)andtheDepartmentofAboriginalandTorresStraitIslanderand
Multicultural Affairs (DATSIMA) because of the particular nature of their regulation. Table 2
shows the final outcome of these considerations on individual departmental targets. These
targetswereapprovedbyCabineton12August20135.
5
ThefiguresshowninTable2areslightlydifferenttothefiguresapprovedbyCabinet,butCabinetmade
explicitallowanceforapossiblechangeinnumbersduetofurtherrefinementoftherequirementscount.
10
Table2:Requirementscountbaselineandreductiontargetsforeachdepartment
Portfolio
Harmonised
baseline
AboriginalandTorresStraitIslanderand
MulticulturalAffairs
Reduction
target
%
Total
requirements
reduction
1,291
1,291
5%
65
8,830
11,773
20,603
17%
3,503
1,045
1,045
23%
240
4,845
6,758
11,603
17%
1,973
EnergyandWaterSupply
967
15,639
16,606
23%
3,819
EnvironmentandHeritageProtection
797
13,831
14,628
23%
3,364
Health
10,149
16,569
26,718
18%
4,809
HousingandPublicWorks
1,558
11,918
13,476
22%
2,965
JusticeandAttorneyGeneral
6,944
47,889
54,833
21%
11,515
1,108
1,108
23%
255
976
3,499
4,475
20%
895
NaturalResourcesandMines
1,546
42,268
43,814
23%
10,077
PoliceandCommunitySafety
613
613
23%
141
PremierandCabinet
234
234
5%
12
102
269
371
19%
70
StateDevelopment,Infrastructureand
Planning
8,594
8,594
23%
1,977
Tourism,MajorEvents,SmallBusinessand
theCommonwealthGames
189
189
23%
43
18,669
20,530
39,199
16%
6,272
341
5,448
5,789
22%
1,274
55,724
209,465
265,189
20%
53,269
Communities,ChildSafetyandDisability
Services
Education,TrainingandEmployment
LocalGovernment,CommunityRecovery
andResilience
NationalParks,Recreation,Sportand
Racing
Science,InformationTechnology,
InnovationandtheArts
TransportandMainRoads
TreasuryandTrade
Total
Total
baseline
Agriculture,FisheriesandForestry
General
baseline
11
Table 3 below shows the change in regulatory burden, as measured by requirements count,
overthe15monthsto30June2013.Majorfeaturesofthemeasuredchangeinclude:
Theoveralltrendacrossgovernmentisareductioninrequirementsofaround4%over
15months.Thecurrentrateofreductionisthereforearoundthesteadystateratethat
wouldberequiredtoachievethegovernmentstargetoversixyears.However,asdiscussed
furtherbelow,anticipatedreformswillhaveagreaterimpactthantheinitialreforms
capturedinTable3.
Somedepartmentsshowanincreaseinrequirementsofaround45%.
Departmentswithsmallbaselinescanshowpercentagechangesevenwheretheiractual
changeinrequirementsisnotmaterial.Forexample,theDepartmentofPremierand
Cabinetshowsa5%increaseinrequirements.Thisisachangeof11requirementsonthe
overallbaselineof265,189.
Somespecificchangesofinterestinclude:
TheDepartmentofEnvironmentandHeritageProtection(DEHP)showsthebiggest
absolutedecreaseinrequirementsof2,977.Thisrepresentsareductionof20%,andisdue
largelytothesuspensionoftheQueenslandCoastalPlanandtostreamlinedpaperwork
requirementsforminingandcoalseamgasoperations.
TheDepartmentofLocalGovernment,CommunityRecoveryandResilience(DLGCRR)
showsthebiggestpercentagedecreaseinrequirementsof40%.Thisisfromarelatively
smallbase,asDLGCRRhasverylittleregulationaffectingnongovernmentstakeholders.
Thereductionisduetoastreamliningofregulationapplyingtolocalgovernmentbusiness
entities,whichintherequirementscountfallintothesamecategoryasgeneralbusiness
entities.
TheDepartmentofCommunities,ChildSafetyandDisabilityServices(DCCSDS)showsa
reductionof20%.Thisisfromasmallbase,asmostDCCSDSregulationappliesto
governmentorisofajusticeandpolicingnature.The20%reductionisduetoa
streamliningofdisabilityservicesstandardsanddisabilityadvocacystandards.
TheDepartmentofTransportandMainRoads(DTMR)showsthelargestabsoluteincrease
inrequirements.ThelargestportionofthisisduetotheintroductionoftheHeavyVehicle
NationalLawAct2012,whichisaharmonisedinstrument.
TheDepartmentofPremierandCabinet(DPC)showsthelargestpercentageincreasein
requirementsof5%.AspreviouslynotedthisisaresultofDPCsverysmallbaselineandis
notasignificantpartofthebroaderpicture.Theincreaseof11requirementsisdueto
changesintheLobbyistsCodeofConduct.
12
Table3:Trackingthechangesinrequirementscountfrom23March2012to30June2013
Portfolio
Authoritativebaseline
AnnualReport
Difference
Harmonised
General
Total
Harmonised
General
Total
Harmonised
General
Total
%change
1,291
1,291
1,289
1,289
0%
8,830
11,773
20,603
8,918
12,504
21,422
88
731
819
4%
1,045
1,045
831
831
214
214
20%
4,845
6,758
11,603
4,845
6,663
11,508
95
95
1%
967
15,639
16,606
967
13,809
14,776
1,830
1,830
11%
797
13,831
14,628
797
10,854
11,651
2,977
2,977
20%
Health
10,149
16,569
26,718
10,289
15,160
25,449
140
1,409
1,269
5%
1,558
11,918
13,476
1,590
11,891
13,481
32
27
0%
6,944
47,889
54,833
6,938
45,336
52,274
2,553
2,559
5%
1,108
1,108
660
660
448
448
40%
976
3,499
4,475
946
3,240
4,186
30
259
289
6%
1,546
42,268
43,814
1,546
40,777
42,323
1,491
1,491
3%
613
613
613
613
0%
PremierandCabinet
234
234
245
245
11
11
5%
102
269
371
102
269
371
0%
StateDevelopment,InfrastructureandPlanning
8,594
8,594
8,000
8,000
594
594
7%
Tourism,MajorEvents,SmallBusinessandthe
CommonwealthGames
TransportandMainRoad
189
189
189
189
0%
18,669
20,530
39,199
19,881
20,917
40,798
1,212
387
1,599
4%
341
5,448
5,789
341
5,378
5,719
70
70
1%
55,724
209,465
265,189
57,160
198,625
255,785
1,436
10,840
9,404
4%
AboriginalandTorresStraitIslanderandMulticulturalAffairs
Communities,ChildSafetyandDisabilityServices
LocalGovernment,CommunityRecoveryandResilience
NationalParks,Recreation,SportandRacing
Science,InformationTechnology,InnovationandtheArts
TreasuryandTrade
Total
13
Itisimportanttonotethattherequirementscountisaproxymeasureanddoesnotcaptureall
changes in the regulatory burden. For example, the Department of Energy and Water Supply
(DEWS) has introduced reforms to dam safety assessment which reflect better regulatory
practiceandhaveproducedsavingsforindustryestimatedbyDEWStobe$150,000perannum.
Previously all water supply dams which were more than 8 metres in height and met certain
minimum capacity requirements were required to automatically undertake Failure Impact
Assessments(FIAs)todetermineiftheyhadpeopleatriskiftheyfail.Theheightrequirement
wasincreasedto10metres,andtheminimumcapacityrequirementswereincreasedaswell.
Theoveralleffectwasthatanestimated180dams,whichwouldnothaveputpeopleatriskif
theyfail,nolongerhavetodoFIAsatacostofaround$10,000to$50,000asignificantsaving.
However,thebenefitsofthisreformarenotreflectedintherequirementscount.Thereasonis
that the changes to reporting requirements are a change of scope, not a change in the
requirements themselves. While the requirements count is good as a proxy measure of
regulatorycomplexity,ithastheweaknessofnotcapturingchangesinthescopeofregulation.
It is also worth noting that many departments are planning significant reforms that are
anticipatedtoreducetheirrequirementscountinthefuture.Forexample,theDepartmentof
Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF) is undertaking a major revision of biosecurity
provisions.Thecomplexityofthesechangesentailsimplementationoveranumberofyears,so
the significant reduction is not captured in the current report, but can be expected to be
reflectedgraduallyinfuturereports.
14
RegulatoryBurdenPageCount
REGULATORYBURDENPAGECOUNT
ThegovernmentrequestedthattheOBPRreportonthechangeinthetotalnumberofpagesof
regulation as one of the measures of regulatory burden. Changes in the number of pages of
legislationcanprovideanimpressionoftheleveloflegislativeactivityoveraperiod,butgiveno
indicationoftheeffectoflegislation.
Table4showsthechangeinpagecountfromthebaselinedateof23March2012totheannual
reporting date of 30 June 2013. Exact page count numbers depend on the approach taken,
particularly with regard to elements such as the table of contents, and mirror legislation not
passedbytheQueenslandParliament.Thepagecountnumberspresentedinthischapterare
supplied by the OQPC, using a consistent approach over time to ensure that page count
numbersremaincomparable.
Table5comparesthechangeinpagecountwiththechangeinrequirementscountandshows
there is little, if any, correlation between the two. For example, the page count for the
DepartmentofCommunities,ChildSafetyandDisabilityServices(DCCDS)showsa7%increase,
whiletherequirementscountshowsa20%decrease.
The major reason for this is that the requirements count distinguishes between categories of
requirements.AssetoutinTable1above,categoriessuchasgovernmentonlyrequirements,
orjusticeandpolicingrequirements,areexcludedfromtherequirementscountbaseline,and
changesinthosecategoriesarenotmeasuredintheannualreportcountasat30June2013.
Thepagecount,ontheotherhand,makesnodistinctionbetweentypesofregulation.Italso
doesnotdistinguishbetweenregulationthatcreatesregulatoryobligationsandregulationwith
otherpurposes(suchasregulationsettingoutrightsandpowers).
Thepagecountmaysometimesbetakenasaroughindicatorofthecomplexityofregulation.
Arguably,therequirementscountismoreuseful,inthisregard,asstakeholdersarelikelytobe
moreaffectedbythenumberofobligationstheymusttakeintoconsideration,ratherthanthe
numberofpagessettingouttheseobligations.
15
Table4:Changeinpagecountfrom23March2012to30June2013
Department
23Mar12
30Jun13
Change
%Change
546
548
3,652
3,731
79
1,858
1,992
134
2,291
2,213
78
2,198
2,264
66
3,299
3,230
69
Health
4,408
3,649
759
17
2,799
2,825
26
20,900
20,875
25
1,333
1,172
161
12
1,492
1,492
10,125
10,104
21
2,716
2,741
25
PremierandCabinet
957
978
21
Science,InformationTechnology,Innovationandthe
Arts
595
600
3,471
3,503
32
CommonwealthGames
119
153
34
29
5,365
5,556
191
TreasuryandTrade
4,312
4,381
69
72,436
72,007
429
AboriginalandTorresStraitIslanderandMulticultural
Affairs
Total
16
Table5:Changeinpagecountcomparedtochangeinrequirementscount
Portfolio
A
PageCountChanges
%change23March2012
to30June2013
B
RequirementsCount
Changes
%change23March2012to
30June2013
Affairs
20
11
20
Health
17
12
40
PremierandCabinet
CommonwealthGames
29
TransportandMainRoad
TreasuryandTrade
Total
17
RegulatoryBurdenCaseStudies
REGULATORYBURDENCASESTUDIES
4.1
Reportingontheeconomicbenefitsofreform
OBPR has quantified the impacts of six recent regulatory reforms with the assistance of
individualgovernmentdepartments.Thecasestudyapproachwasseenasapragmaticwayof
providing an indication to the community of the benefits of a sample of recent reforms
undertaken by the Queensland Government given that the cost of doing so for all regulatory
reforms would be prohibitive. As departments become more practised at quantifying the
expectedbenefitsandcostsofregulatoryproposalsaspartoftheRISsystem,itisexpectedthat
ratherthanquantifyingimpactsofregulationsaftertheyhavebeenimplemented,inthefuture
OBPR will be able to report on the expected benefits and costs for regulatory proposals that
havebeenquantifiedinregulatoryimpactstatements.
Table 6 below summarises the net benefits of the six recent reforms designed to reduce
regulatoryburden.Thefirstthreereflectpolicychangesundertakenbythegovernmentwhich
resultedintheremovalofregulatoryrequirements.Thelastthreerefertomeasurestakento
simplifyandstreamlineregulatoryprocesses.
Table6:Casestudysummary
CaseStudy1Summary
Removingthe
requirementfornewly
constructedhousesto
installrainwatertanks.
Netbenefits(ChangeinPolicy)
Thebenefittothecommunityisthecostsavingofremoving
mandatorytankrequirements.Thegrossbenefitis$1.6billion
over40years.
Thecostsofremovingmandatorytankrequirementsincludethe
increasedrelianceonbulkwatersourcesandforegone
environmentalbenefits.Thecostis$518.1millionover40years.
Thenetbenefitis$1.1billionover40years.
Evaluation
Thecostsofthemandatory
requirementtoinstallrainwater
exceededthebenefitstothe
community.
CaseStudy2Summary
Removingregistration
requirementsforspeech
pathologistsanddental
technicians.
NetBenefits(ChangeinPolicy)
Thebenefittoindividualspeechpathologistsanddental
techniciansisthecostsavingassociatedwithremovingannual
registrationfees.Thebenefitsare$274and$291perannum,
respectively.
ThebenefittoGovernmentisthecostsavingofnotsubsidising
theregistrationscheme.Thebenefitis$900,000perannum.
Evaluation
Thecoststoindustryand
Governmentofregisteringspeech
pathologistsexceededthebenefits
tothecommunity.
CaseStudy3Summary
Closureofthe
QueenslandGasScheme
(QGS).
NetBenefits(ChangeinPolicy)
Thenetbenefitisestimatedtobe$290millionover5years.
Thebenefitsarepotentialcostsavingstothecommunityand
regulatedentitiesassociatedwiththeclosureoftheQGS.These
benefitsare$278millionand$12million,respectively.
CaseStudy4Summary
Streamliningthe
developmentapplication
andassessmentprocess
forselectedprojects.
NetBenefits(NoChangeinPolicy)
Thebenefitsarethecostsavingtodevelopers.Thebenefitis
$135.5millionover10years.
Thecostisthepotentialadverseconsequencesofstreamlining
developmentapplicationsandassessments.Thepotentialcost
hasnotbeenquantified.
NetBenefits(NoChangeinPolicy)
Thenetbenefitis$200.4millionover40years.
ThebenefitsarecostsavingstoindustryandGovernment.The
benefitsare$129.9millionand$70.5million,respectively.
Netbenefits(NoChangeinPolicy)
Thenetbenefitfor201213and20132014is$6millionand
$18million,respectively.
Thenetbenefitisacostsavingtoindustry.
CaseStudy5Summary
Simplifyingregulatory
approvalsforthecoal
miningindustry.
CaseStudy6Summary
Simplifyingregulationof
plumbingworks.
18
Evaluation
TheclosureoftheQGSwillreduce
theburdenofregulationfor
regulatedentitiesandisexpected
toputsomedownwardpressureon
electricityprices.
Evaluation
TheEconomicDevelopmentAct
2012reducesregulatoryburden
associatedwiththedevelopment
applicationandassessmentprocess
forselectedprojects.
Evaluation
Reducestheregulatoryburden
associatedwithcoalmining
approvals.
Evaluation
Simplifyingtheregulationof
plumbingworksresultsin
substantialreductioninregulatory
burden.
4.2
CaseStudy1:Removingtherequirementformandatoryinstallationof
rainwatertanks
Overview
TheQueenslandDevelopmentCode(QDC)MandatoryParts4.2and4.3wereintroducedby
the previous Queensland Government in 2007 and 2008 as part of a range of water
conservation strategies in response to dwindling water supplies in the southeast of the
State.
These required local governments to achieve water saving targets for new houses and
alternativewatersourcesforcommercialbuildings.Toachievethesetargets,waterhadto
besourcedbymeansotherthantheuseofreticulatedtownwatersupply.Innewhouses,the
supplysourceisprimarilyrainwatertanks.
However,therewasconcernthattheGovernmentwasunnecessarilyaddingtotheexpense
ofhomeconstructionandownership.Therefore,tofulfilitscommitmentstolowerthecost
of living for families, the Government announced in its SixMonth Action Plan
(JulyDecember 2012) that a review of laws mandating rainwater tanks on new buildings
wouldbeundertaken.
Reviewofregulatoryrequirement
The OBPR was directed in September 2012 to investigate and report on the repeal of the
mandatoryrequirementandadvisewhetherthiswouldbeofnetbenefittothecommunityasa
whole.
This included a review of the cost to homeowners and businesses of complying with the
requirementandthebenefitsofdeferringbulkwaterinfrastructureinvestment.TheOBPRwas
alsodirectedtoadviseonwhetheranyothernetbenefitsthathadnotbeenidentifiedcouldbe
incorporated.
Benefitsandcosts
In its report, the OBPR undertook a costbenefit analysis of the mandatory requirement to
installrainwatertanksintheSouthEastQueensland(SEQ)region.
Benefits
The installation of rainwater tanks helps to reduce demand from bulk water sources such as
dams.Itwascalculatedthattheremovalofmandatoryrainwatertankinstallations,basedon
water use data, may increase demand enough for bulk water augmentation to be required
three years earlier than if rainwater tanks remained mandatory. Increased demand also
increasestheoperatingexpenditureofthebulkwaterentity,suchastheadditionaltreatment
ofwatersupplies.
Rainwater tanks may also play a part in reducing environmental pollutants from stormwater
runoff.Forexample,innewhousingdevelopmentsbioretentionareasarecommonlydeveloped
toachievepollutantloadreductiontargets.Theseareascollectstormwaterrunoffandremove
contaminantsandsedimentation.Asrainwatertankscanproduceareductioninpollutants,itis
plausiblethatrainwatertankscanreducethesizeofadevelopmentsbioretentionareas.
19
Costs
The primary cost of the requirement was the cost to purchase and internally plumb the
rainwatertankintoanew home.Therearealsoadditionalongoingoperatingcostsincluding
theelectricitycostsofpumpingandrequiredmaintenanceofthetankanditsfittings.
Resultsofanalysis
The OBPR concluded that in SEQ the costs of the mandatory requirement to install rainwater
clearlyexceededthebenefitstothecommunity.Thiswasconsistentacrossarangeofscenarios
to reflect upper, medium and lower bounds of rainwater tank costs and infrastructure and
environmentalbenefits.
Underamediumbenefitsscenario,thenetcostwascalculatedat$1.13billionover40years.
Even under a higher benefits scenario, which reduced the cost of purchasing and installing a
tank but increased the potential environment benefit, there was a likely net cost of over
$500million.ThisisdetailedbelowinTable7.
Table7:SummaryofSEQcostbenefitanalyses($m)presentvaluesin2012
LowBenefits
MediumBenefits
HighBenefits
224.4
518.1
1,030.7
Costs
1,706.7
1,645.3
1,553.2
NetPresentValue
1,482.3
1,127.2
522.5
Benefits
Source: Queensland Competition Authority (2012a), Assessment of Proposed Repeal of Water Saving
Regulations,November.
Based on the SEQ analysis, extension to projected new dwellings statewide could potentially
generate substantial additional benefits. However, costs and benefits may vary between
differentareasofthestate,leadingtodifferentoutcomes.
Consequently,theOBPRsreportalsoconsideredthecityofCairnstodeterminewhetherthere
would be a different result outside SEQ. Under a medium benefits scenario, the mandatory
requirementrepresentedanestimatednetcostof$57millionover40years.
Whilethemandatoryrequirementhasbeenremoved,newhomeownersstillhavetheabilityto
voluntarilyinstallarainwatertank.Thegovernmenthasannouncedthatcouncilsmaybeable
to choose to retain mandatory rainwater tank requirements in the future, provided they can
demonstrateanetbenefittothecommunity.
Evaluation
On 14 December 2012, the Minister for Housing and Public Works announced that the
mandatoryrequirementfornewlyconstructedresidentialandcommercialpropertiestoinstall
watersavingdeviceswouldberepealed.Thiscameintoeffecton1February2013.
Based on the OBPRs analysis, the removal of the requirement, if passed directly on to new
homeowners who choose not to install a rainwater tank, could deliver an upfront saving of
approximately$3,500.
Considering the costs and benefits to the community of rainwater tank installations for new
houses, the potential net savings from the removal of these requirements is estimated at
$1.13billionover40years.
20
4.3
Casestudy2:Removingregistrationrequirementsforspeech
pathologistsanddentaltechnicians
Overview
On27March2013,theDentalTechniciansRegistrationAct2001andtheSpeechPathologists
Registration Act 2001, which govern the registration of speech pathologists and dental
techniciansinQueenslandwererepealed.Atthetime,therewere1,522registeredspeech
pathologistsand878registereddentaltechnicians.
Thiscasestudyexaminestheimpactsofthecessationofprofessionalregistrationofspeech
pathologistsanddentaltechnicians.
Issue
Occupational regulation is established by government to protect the public by ensuring the
qualityofprofessionalservicesthroughmandatoryentryrequirementsandbusinesspractices.
The Council of Australian Governments decided in 2008 to establish a single National
Registration and Accreditation Scheme for regulation of health professions. This provided an
opportunityfortheQueenslandGovernmenttoreviewstateoccupationalregistrationschemes
forhealthprofessions,includingdentaltechniciansandspeechpathologisttoensurebenefitsto
thepublicoutweighedthecostsofregistration.
By1July2012,14healthprofessionsbecamenationallyregulatedandspeechpathologistsand
dental technicians were the only remaining professions registered under the Queensland
scheme.ThesetwoprofessionsweredeemedbytheAustralianHealthWorkforceMinisterial
Council to have either a very low, or no risk to the public and therefore did not meet the
criteriatotransitiontothenationalregistrationscheme.AtthetimeQueenslandwastheonly
Australianjurisdictionthatregisteredtheseprofessions.
Consequently,theQueenslandGovernmentcompletedanassessmentofthepotentialimpacts
of abolishing the professional registration scheme for the two professions. The assessment
concluded that deregistration of either profession was unlikely to represent risks to the
community. The assessment also recognised that registration of professionals working with
children and disabled adults would be maintained under another state regulatory framework
which requires all individuals working with children and disabled adults to undergo criminal
historychecks(andobtainabluecardoryellowcard).
FinancialImplications
Historically, Queenslands registration scheme for speech pathologists and dental technicians
wasselffundedbyregistrants.QueenslandHealthhasadvisedthattheexistingregistrationfees
would have been insufficient to cover the costs of administration of the scheme without a
governmentsubsidy(orincreaseinregistrationfees)of$900,000perannum.
Benefitsandcosts
Benefits
The OBPR has calculated that this regulatory reform will save the industry and government
$15.29 million over ten years in registration fees and government subsidisation. The key
benefits to the industry include annual savings of $274 per speech pathologist and
$291perdentalassistant.
21
Costs
Speech pathologists and dental technicians working with children or disabled adults are
required to obtain a blue or yellow card. The card costs $72.50 and is valid for three years.
Previously, these professionals were exempt from this requirement due to their registered
healthpractitionerstatus.
Speech pathologists wishing to register with Medicare are required to have a practising
membership with Speech Pathology Australia. Annual membership with Speech Pathology
Australia costs $517. Prior to the repeal of the registration regulation, registered speech
pathologists were exempt from requiring Speech Pathology Australia membership for the
purposes of Medicare. However, Queensland Health expects that most private practitioners
hold Speech Pathology Australia membership regardless of Medicare registration, as it gives
membersaccesstoprofessionalandclinicalguidelinesandongoingprofessionaldevelopment.
4.4
Casestudy3:EnergymarketrestrictionsQueenslandGasScheme
Overview
This case study examines and quantifies the potential impacts of the closure of the
QueenslandGasScheme(QGS).TheQGSwasestablishedin2005topromotethestate'sgas
industryandreducegreenhousegasemissions.
A review by the Queensland Government identified that the QGS has met its objective in
maturing the gas industry and duplicates the function of the Australian carbon pricing
mechanism (CPM). Based on the findings of this review, the Government decided to close
theQGSon31December2013.
The potential cost saving due to the closure of the QGS is estimated to be between $290
millionand$633.6millionover5years.
Background
UndertheQGS,liablepartiesarerequiredtosourceaprescribedpercentageoftheirelectricity
from gasfired generation. The liable parties are comprised of electricity retailers and large
industrialusersofelectricity.Theliableloadofelectricityiscalculatedbasedonaprescribed
percentage(currently15%)oftheelectricitydeliveredbyretailerstoitscustomersandusedby
largeindustrialcustomers.
Theparticipationofeligiblegasgeneratorsintheschemeisoptional.Accreditationunderthe
QGSwillbegrantedtoageneratoronthebasisthatitdoesorwillgenerateelectricity:
(a) fromaneligiblefuelsource
(b) aboveabaseline(representingexistinggasfiredgenerationasatMay2000)
(c) whichsupportselectricityloadinQueensland.
Accredited generators can create Gas Electricity Certificates (GECs) for each megawatthour
(MWh)ofeligiblegasfiredelectricitytheyproduce.
LiablepartiesarerequiredtopurchaseandsurrendertheappropriatenumberofGECstothe
regulator(DepartmentofEnergyandWaterSupply)inordertomeettheirobligationunderthis
scheme each year. The GECs are transferable and a liable party can purchase them from
anotherparty.
22
The trading of GECs offers accredited generators an additional revenue stream, which offsets
the higher cost of gasfired generation relative to coalfired generation. This arrangement
creates an incentive for gasfired generation of electricity by making it more costeffective
relativetocoalfiredgeneration.
FurtherdetailsontheoperationoftheQGSareavailableat
www.business.qld.gov.au/industry/energy/gas/queenslandgasscheme
Issues
After the introduction of the Australian Government's carbon pricing mechanism (CPM) in
July2012,theQueenslandGovernmentconductedareviewoftheQGS.
ItidentifiedthattheQGSwouldlikelyduplicatethefunctionandtheexpectedimpactsofthe
CPMinputtingapriceoncarbonemissions.
ThereviewalsoconcludedthattheQGShadmetoneofitskeyobjectives,whichistoestablish
amaturegasindustryinthestate.TheDepartmentofEnergyandWaterSupply(DEWS)noted
thatithassuccessfullydiversifiedQueensland'senergymixtowardsgreateruseofgas.In its
2012 annual report on the QGS, DEWS identified that, as a proportion of Queensland's
electricitygenerationmix,gasfiredelectricitygenerationhasincreasedfromaround2%in2005
tothecurrentlevelofalmost20%6.
DEWSalsonotedthattheQGShasassistedinencouragingthedevelopmentofnewgassources
and infrastructure in the state.7 According to the Australian Government Department of
Resources,EnergyandTourism,Queensland'sgasproductionhasincreasedfrom71petajoules
(PJ)in200405to243PJin201011.8
However,itisuncleartowhatextentthegreateruseofgasinQueensland'sgenerationmixand
thegrowthinthestate'sgasproductioncouldbeattributedtotheQGS.
Giventhegovernment'sassessmentthattheQGSachieveditsobjectiveinmaturingthestate's
gasindustryandtoavoidduplicatingthefunctionoftheCPM,itannouncedthatitwouldclose
theschemeon31December2013.
Thegovernmentexpectsthatclosureoftheschemewillreducetheburdenofregulationand
lowerthecostoflivingbyplacingadegreeofdownwardpressureonelectricityprices.
6
QueenslandGasScheme2012LiableYearAnnualReport,
www.business.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/9198/2012annualreport.pdf
7
QueenslandGasScheme,www.business.qld.gov.au/industry/energy/gas/queenslandgasscheme
8
EnergyinAustralia2011,www.ret.gov.au/energy/Documents/factsstatspubs/EnergyinAustralia2011.pdf
EnergyinAustralia2012,www.bree.gov.au/documents/publications/energyinaust/energyinaustralia
2012.pdf
23
Overviewofthemethodologyofanalysis
Acostbenefitanalysiswasundertakentoquantifythepotentialimpactsoftheclosureofthe
QGS.
Threekeypotentialcostsavingswereidentifiedintheanalysis,assummarisedinTable8below.
Table8:Potentialcostsavingsduetoclosureofscheme
Stakeholder
PotentialCostSavings
Community
Reducedcosttocommunityassociatedwithtransitioningtoamorecost
efficientelectricitygenerationmix
RegulatedEntities
Reducedcosttoregulatedstakeholdersassociatedwiththeremovalof
registration,reportingandfeerequirementsundertheQGS
Government
Reducedcosttogovernmentassociatedwiththeremovalofthe
administrationandenforcementoftheQGS
TheforecastsforthePlanningScenario(PS)andSlowRateofChangescenario(SRC)developed
by the Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) were adopted for the purpose of our
analysis.
ThePSisbasedonAEMO'sbestestimateoffuturedirectionsofmajorglobalandlocaldriversin
theenergymarket.ItaccountsfortheAustralianTreasury'scorepolicyscenariocarbonprice.
FindingsderivedusingthePS'sforecastswillbecomparedagainstresultsderivedfromtheSRC's
forecasts,whichweremodelledasasensitivityreflectingslowereconomicgrowthandacarbon
pricewhicheffectivelydeclinestozeroafteraninitialtwoyearcarbonpriceperiod.9
On this basis, two base cases with QGS in force were developed for comparison with two
alternativecaseswhereQGSwasremoved.
9AustralianEnergyMarketOperator(2012),2012ScenarioDescriptions,January,
www.aemo.com.au/planning/24180005.pdf
24
Thekeyassumptionsandinputsadoptedinthismodellingaresummarisedbelow:
Table9:Keyassumptionsandinputs
AssumptionType
GeneralAssumptions
Scenarios
Projections
Assumption/Input
BaseYearofAnalysis
201314
EvaluationPeriod
5years(201314till201718)
RealDiscountRate
7%
InflationRate
2.5%
Planning(PS)
AEMO'sscenarioreflectingthebestestimateof
futuredirectionsofmajorglobalandlocaldriversin
theenergymarket.
SlowRateofChange(SRC)
AEMO'sscenarioreflectingprimarilyaslower
economicgrowthandacarbonpricewhich
effectivelydeclinestozeroafteraninitialtwoyear
carbonpriceperiodintheenergymarket.
ElectricityDemand
ElectricitydemandinQueenslandforecastbyAEMO
forbothPSandSRCwereadopted.
GasfiredElectricity
Generation(withQGS)
Accreditedgeneratorswereassumedtogenerate
enoughelectricitytocreatetheminimumnumberof
GECsrequiredforliablepartiestofulfiltheir
obligations(underbothPSandSRC).This
assumptionenabledustoderivetheassumedgas
generationofelectricity.
GasfiredElectricity
Generation(withoutQGS)
Optimisedelectricitygenerationmixbytechnology
type(withoutQGS)forecastbyAEMOforbothPS
andSRCwereadopted.
ShortRunMarginalCost
(SRMC)ofGenerators
SRMCforcoalandgasfiredgenerators(underboth
PSandSRC)werederivedusingtechnical
parametersofgenerators,fuelcostsandcarbon
pricingscenariosobtainedfromAEMO.
ReportingandFee
RequirementsunderQGS
Costsassociatedwithmandatoryperiodicreporting
andannualfeespayabletotheregulatorborneby
regulatedentitiesundertheQGS.
AdministrationofQGS
AdministrativecostofQGSconsistsofemployee
relatedcostandthecostinvolvedinoperatingand
maintainingaGECregistry.
For further details on the methodology framework, inputs and rationale behind the
assumptionsadoptedpleaserefertotheQCAsFindings,Methodology,InputsandAssumptions
QueenslandGasSchemeCaseStudy(2013a).
25
CostsandBenefits
Table10:SummaryofresultsQGScasestudy
Stakeholder
PotentialCostSavingsoverthenextfiveyears(PV,201314$million)
PlanningScenario(PS)
SlowRateofChangeScenario(SRC)
Community
278
622.1
RegulatedEntities
12
11.5
Total
290
633.6
The 5 year Present Value (PV) of the potential cost savings of the closure of the QGS are
estimated to be $290 million under the Planning Scenario (PS) and $633.6 million under the
SlowRateofChangeScenario(SRC).
These potential cost savings can be primarily attributed to reduced cost to the community
associated with transitioning to a more cost efficient electricity generation mix, as a result of
theclosureoftheQGS.
Regulatedentitiesaccrue$12millionunderPSand$11.5millionunderSRCofthesepotential
costsavings.Thepotentialcostsavingsaccruedbyregulatedentitiesareduetotheremovalof
registration,reportingandfeerequirementsundertheQGS.
The government will also experience reduced cost from the removal of the requirement as
administrator and enforcer of the QGS. It is estimated that the government will reduce its
expenditureby$1.4millioninpresentvaluetermsover5yearsforbothscenarios.
However,giventhatcostofadministrationandenforcementoftheQGSisfullyfundedbythe
fees paid by regulated entities, this reduced governmental cost has been captured under the
savingsaccruedbyregulatedentities.
Fordetailedbreakdownoftheresults,pleaserefertoQCAsFindings,Methodology,Inputsand
AssumptionsQueenslandGasSchemeCaseStudy(2013a).
Evaluation
The closure of the QGS will reduce the burden of regulation for regulated entities and is
expectedtoexertdownwardpressureonelectricityprices.
Itisimportanttonotethatthisanalysisdoesnotmodeltheelectricitypricingimplicationsdue
totheclosureofthescheme.Instead,theanalysisseekstomodeltheminimumcostborneby
societyduetoalesscostefficientelectricitygenerationmixunderthescheme.However,the
potentialcostsavingsdonotnecessarilydenoteadecreaseinfutureelectricitypricesasthere
aremanyothermoresignificantcostdriversintheenergymarketwhichaffectprices.
26
4.5
Casestudy4:AssessingtheimpactoftheEconomicDevelopmentAct
2012ondevelopmentprojects
Overview
ThiscasestudyassessestheimpactoftheEconomicDevelopmentAct2012(EDA)onselected
developmentprojectsagainstthebasecaseundertheSustainablePlanningAct2009(SPA).
DevelopmentprojectsassessedundertheEDAaresubjecttoastreamlinedapplicationand
assessment process. The benefits of streamlining development processes are estimated to
be $135.5 million over 10 years. This assumes an equal or higher level of assurance that
approvedprojectsareinthegeneralinterestofthewidercommunity,whencomparedwith
standardprocesses.
Issue
TheSPAprovidestheframeworkfortheplanningandassessmentofdevelopmentprojects.For
someprojects,theSPAframeworkcanbeunnecessarilyonerous.Thismaydelaythedeliveryof
importantdevelopmentprojectsordiscourageinvestorsfromundertakingaparticularproject
altogether.
Initiative
TheEDAallowsspecificsitestobedeclaredPriorityDevelopmentAreas.Prioritydevelopments
undergoastreamlinedapplicationandassessmentprocesscomparedtoSPA.Thestreamlined
assessmentprocessundertheEDAisachievedbyremoving:
therequirementfordevelopmentapplicationstobereferredtospecialiststateagencies
forassessment(e.g.theDepartmentofEnvironmentandHeritageProtection)
therightofthirdpartiestoappealthedevelopmentassessmentdecisioninthePlanning
andEnvironmentCourt.
The removal of these elements places additional importance on the robustness of the
assessmentprocessundertheEDA.
Assessment
Table11:KeyimpactsoftheEDA
Stakeholder
Benefits
Costs
Community
Increasedincentivesfordeveloperstoundertakeprojects
leadingtohigherqualitydevelopmentatreducedcosts
Increasedriskofapproving
developmentthatimposesa
netcostonthecommunity
Government
Reducedcosttogovernmentassociatedwithplanningand
assessment$13.3millionover10years
Developers
Reducedcosttodevelopersassociatedwithplanningand
assessment$20.5millionover10years
Avoidedprojectdelaycosts$101.7millionover10years
Benefitsandcosts
Benefits
The10yearPresentValue(PV)ofthebenefitsoftheEDAplanningandassessmentprocessis
estimated to be $135.5 million or $17.5 million discounted over 10 years. These quantified
27
benefits can primarily be attributed to the development costs avoided by removing referral
agencyrequirementsandthirdpartyappealrights.
Developers accrue $122.2 million of these benefits, including $101.7 million avoided holding
costsassociatedwithprojectsdelays.Theremaining$20.5millionisduetolowercostsincurred
during the development application and assessment process. Cost savings under the EDA are
avoidedplanning,assessment(e.g.respondingtoinformationrequestsfromreferralagencies)
andappealcosts(e.g.legalcosts).
Benefits to the government in terms of cost savings are estimated at $13.3 million over 10
years. Cost savings comprise reduced effort and expenses that result from removing referral
agenciesandappealsprocesses.
Inadditiontothebenefitsquantifiedabove,theremayalsobebenefitstothecommunitythat
are unquantifiable. For example, the streamlined process may increase incentives for
developerstoundertakeprojectsleadingtohigherqualitydevelopmentatreducedcosts.
Costs
There are potential adverse consequences associated with removing referral agencies and
appealsprocesses.Planningprocessesareimportantforpreventingdevelopmentprojectsthat
are not in the interest of the wider community. Though it has not been assessed, there is a
theoreticalriskthattheEDAmayrepresentsometradeoffbetweenstreamlinedprocessesand
increasedriskofapprovingdevelopmentsthatimposeunintendedcostsonthecommunity.
Evaluation
The EDA reduces regulatory burden associated with the development application and
assessment process for selected projects. The benefits of reducing regulatory burden are
substantial. However, it is important to note that, in some cases, reducing the burden of
regulationmayalsoincreasetheriskofundesirableoutcomes.Theserisksshouldbeconsidered
whenimplementingredtapereductioninitiatives.ForfurtherdetailspleaserefertoSynergies
report, Impact assessment of the planning and development assessment processes under the
EconomicDevelopmentAct2012.
28
4.6
Casestudy5:Simplifyingregulatoryapprovalsforthecoalmining
industry
Overview
RecentlegislativeamendmentstoallowtheMinistertograntandrenewcoalminingleases,
along with a more streamlined environmental approvals process, have reduced delays for
coalminingprojectsandwillcontinuetodoso.Thenetbenefitofthesekeyamendmentsas
itrelatestothecoalminingsectorisestimatedtobe$200.4million.
Streamlining the permit approvals process is an important initiative of the Queensland
Government to reduce red tape for the coal mining and exploration industry. The project
commenced in January 2009 and over the past five years the Government launched Mines
OnlineandtheMyMinesOnlinetofacilitateafasterandmoreintegratedapplicationsprocess
and introduced Mines Legislation (Streamlining) Amendment Act 2012. A key change is to
allow the Minister to grant and renew coal mining leases. This is complementary to the
EnvironmentalProtection(GreentapeReduction)andOtherLegislationAmendmentAct2012
which has created a single and fasttracked process for obtaining environmental approvals.
Theseamendmentsareapartofanongoingprocesstoreduceregulatoryburden.
Description
The purpose of this case study is to estimate the net benefits of the Mines Legislation
(Streamlining)AmendmentAct2012andEnvironmentalProtection(GreentapeReduction)and
OtherLegislationAmendmentAct2012asitrelatestoQueensland'scoalminingindustry.The
methodologyinvolves:
areviewofthekeyamendedActs,theMineralResourcesAct1989andEnvironmental
ProtectionAct1994
alimitedsurveyofthecoalminingindustrytounderstandhowtheamendments
translateintotimesavings
thedevelopmentofacashflowanalysismodeltocapturethetimevalueofanearlier
returnoninvestmentsandearlierreceiptofroyaltypayments.
Reviewofregulatoryrequirementsandconsultationwithdepartments
A review of the legislation suggests that three key amendments are the primary drivers
underlyingthestreamliningofprocessestheywilldeliverthelargestsavingsthroughreduced
timedelays.Thethreekeyamendmentsarelistedbelow.
Table12:Keylegislativechangesforthecoalminingsector
Keylegislativeamendment
TheMinistermaygrantandrenewminingleases(previouslyundertakenbytheGovernorinCouncil).
IfanEnvironmentalImpactsStatement(EIS)hasbeenundertakenasapartofaprojectandtheprojecthas
notchanged,thentheproponentwillnothavetoduplicatetheinformationintheenvironmentalauthority
application.
IfanEIShasbeenundertakenasapartofaprojectandtheenvironmentalriskshavenotchanged,thenthe
proponentwillnotberequiredtoreplicatethepublicnotificationprocess.
29
Evaluation
A discounted cashflow analysis was undertaken to estimate the net benefit, firstly, to the
Queenslandcoalmineownersintheformofanearlierreturnoninvestment;andsecondly,to
the government in the form of an earlier receipt of royalty payments. It should be noted,
however, that this approach does not capture the wider economic, social or environmental
benefits and the cost of compliance. A survey of industry members and consultation with
departmentssuggeststhatthesavingsfromreduceddelays,whileimportant,arehighlyvariable
anddifficulttoascertain.
The QCAs modelling shows that a threemonth time saving is estimated to deliver savings of
$129.9milliontomineownersand$70.5milliontothegovernmentover40years.Thisisbased
onthefollowingassumptions:
(a)
atypicalcoking/thermalcoalmineof3.4milliontonnesperannum(mtpa)
(b)
realdiscountrateof4.4%
(c)
aforecastof24newmines(3.4mtpaeach)comingonlineoverthenext40yearsadding
approximately81.3mtpabyyear2053
(d)
cokingcoaloperationalcostof$97.8pertonne,atasalepriceof$165pertonne
(e)
athermalcoaloperationalcostof$83.9pertonne,atasalepriceof$104.5pertonne
(f)
royaltypaidtoGovernmentistheroyaltyratemultipliedbyrevenueminusdeductions.
Thedelayperiodwasvariedtotestthesensitivityof theresultstothisimportantparameter.
TheresultsarepresentedinTable13below.
Table13:Miningreformsresults
Delayperiod
Mineowners
Government
Total
$millions
$millions
$millions
Onemonth
43.1
23.4
66.5
Twomonths
86.5
46.9
133.3
Threemonths
129.9
70.5
200.4
Fourmonths
173.5
94.1
267.6
Fivemonths
217.3
117.8
335.1
For further details on the methodology framework, inputs and rationale behind the
assumptionsadoptedpleaserefertotheQCAsFindings,Methodology,InputsandAssumptions
Simplifyingregulatoryapprovalsforthecoalminingindustry(2013b).
Whatifanalysis
Itisachallengingtasktoquantifyhowlegislativeamendmentscauseuncertaintyandimpacton
theappetiteoftheindustrytoinvest.Toputthisintoperspective,weaskedthequestionwhat
ifthelegislativechangeswerejustsufficienttopersuadeamineownertoinvestinQueensland
insteadofSouthAmerica?Ourmodellingshowsthatacoalmineproducing3.4mtpa,which
commences operations in year 2025, will contribute $2 billion towards Australia's Gross
DomesticProduct,over25years.
30
4.7
Casestudy6:Simplifyingregulationofplumbingworks
Overview
InNovember2012,thegovernmentreducedtheburdenofregulationonplumbersthrough
reformstothePlumbingandDrainageAct2002.
Thereformsintroducedacategoryofnotifiableworkforroutineplumbingwork,covering
around 75% of plumbing and drainage work in Queensland. This includes most work
performedinexistinghomes,suchas:
(a)
kitchenandbathroomadditionsandrenovations
(b)
installingorreplacinghotwaterheatersincludingelectric,solarorheat
pumphotwaterheaters
(c)
installingadditionalfixturessuchastoilets,showersandsinks
(d)
extendingoralteringpipework.
Issues
Before the reforms were introduced, these types of work were subject to local government
approval,whichrequired:
anapplicationfeeof$300to$1,600,dependingonthelocalgovernmentareaandtype
ofwork
completionofathreepageapplicationform
atimedelayofupto20daysforapprovals,withadditionaldelayswaitingforinspections
atdifferentstagesofwork.
The new process involves lodging a simpler form within 10 business days of completing the
notifiable work. The lodgement fees are $25.90 for electronic lodgement, and $35 for paper
lodgement.TheDepartmentofHousingandPublicWorks(DHPW)considersthatitisimportant
tomaintainpaperlodgementasanoption,asmanyplumbersarenotfullyskilledinelectronic
lodgement.
The Plumbing Industry Council audits the lodgement of forms, while local governments audit
notifiableworkintheirregion.DHPWgiveslocalgovernmentsfundingforauditingupto5%of
notifiablework,whichissourcedfromlodgementfeerevenue.
Thereformsalsobroadenedthecategoryofminorwork,whichdoesnotrequireapprovalor
notification.Theexpandedcategoryofminorworkincludesreplacingtoiletcisterns,installing
pumpsorwaterfilters,andmostrepairsandmaintenancework.
Table14:Minorplumbingwork
Typeofwork
Before1November2012
After1November2012
Installingnewitemsinabathroom
renovation
Costof$300$1,600
3pageapplicationform
Delayofupto20daysforapprovals,
withadditionaldelaysforinspections
Costof$25.90(electronic
lodgement)or$35(paper
lodgement)
Onlineformcompletedin5
minutes
Notimedelaysforapprovalsor
inspections
Extendinganylengthofexisting
watersupplypiping
Installinganewelectricorgashot
waterheater
Replacingplumbingordrainage
pipework
31
Typeofwork
Before1November2012
After1November2012
Installinganapparatussuchasa
pumpordomesticwaterfilter
Costof$300$1,600
Noformsorpayment
inspections
Mustbeperformedbya
licensedperson
Replacingadomesticwaterfilter
cartridge
Mustbeperformedbyalicensed
person
Maybeperformedbyan
unlicensedperson
Replacingatoiletcistern
Costof$300$1,600
Noformsorpayment
inspections
Mustbeperformedbya
licensedperson
(TablebasedonPlumbingIndustryCouncilfactsheetNotifiablework.)10
Thereformshavemadeasignificantdifferencetotheworkofplumbers.Apartfromthehigh
feesandlengthyformsrequired,thepreviousprocessinvolvedunpredictableapprovaldelays
and did not allow for efficient scheduling of work. In some cases, other trades on a project
wereunabletocontinueworkingwhiletheywaitedfortheplumbingtaskstobecompleted.
The high regulatory burden of the previous system resulted in many licensees performing
routineplumbingworkwithoutnotificationorapproval,whichcouldcauseproblemsforfuture
plumbing work. The number of forms being lodged with Plumbing Industry Council has
increasedfromapproximately100perdaywhenthenewsystemcommenced,toapproximately
260perday.Itisexpectedthatthisnumberwillcontinuetoincreasetoaround500formsper
day,asawarenessofthereformsandnotifiableworkauditprogramsincreases.
Benefitsandcosts
ThechangesarerevenueneutralfortheGovernment,asadministrationandauditsarefunded
by application fees. The savings to the community from reduced fees for approvals are
estimated inTable 15 below. These savings do not include savings for the plumbing industry
from reduced time for lodging forms and reduced delays in waiting for approvals and
inspections. The forward estimate of $18 million savings each year is based on a lodgement
rateof1500formsperweek(300perday).
Table15:Savingstoplumbingindustry($m)
Savingtocommunity
4.8
201213
6
201314
18
201415
18
201516
18
201617
18
201718
18
Summaryofrequirementchangesforcasestudies
The case studies above demonstrate quantifiable benefits from regulatory reforms. These
specificinitiativesalsogenerallyresultinareductionintherequirementscount,althoughthe
pagecountisnotnecessarilyreduced.
Table16notesthechange inthenumberofpagesof legislationandregulatoryrequirements
resultingfromeachofthereformsdiscussedinthecasestudies.
10
NotifiableWorkfactsheet
www.hpw.qld.gov.au/construction/buildingplumbing/plumbing/notifiablework/pages/default.aspx
32
Table16:Casestudyrequirementchanges
CaseStudy
LegislativeChanges
PageCount
Removingthe
requirementfor
newlyconstructed
housestoinstall
rainwatertanks
Amendments(notrepeal)to:
a) QueenslandDevelopmentCode
(QDC)MandatoryParts(MP)4.2
and4.3
b) BuildingRegulation2006
c) StandardPlumbingandDrainage
Regulation2003
Removing
registration
requirementsfor
speechpathologists
anddental
technicians
Thefollowinginstrumentswere
Reductionof
repealed:
a) SpeechPathologistsRegistration
a) 135pages
Act2001
b) SpeechPathologistsRegistration
b) 7pages
Regulation2001
c) DentalTechniciansRegistration
c) 142pages
Act2001
d) DentalTechniciansRegistration
d) 8pages
Regulation2002
Totalreduction:292pages
Reductionofstandard
requirements
a) 447
b) 12
c) 225
d) 0
Totalreduction:684requirements
Closureofthe
QueenslandGas
Scheme(QGS)
Thechaptersofthefollowing
instrumentsidentifiedwillexpireon
30June2014
a) Chapter5AoftheElectricityAct
1994
b) Chapter6oftheElectricity
Regulation2006
Reductionofstandard
requirements
NoreductioninPage
countsfortheregulation
orQDCMP4.2.
Reductionof2pagesfor
QDCMP4.3.
Reductionof
a)
b)
a)
b)
356
29
Totalreduction:140pages Totalreduction:385requirements
Reductionof
repealed:
a)UrbanLandDevelopmentAuthority
a) 98
Act2007
b)UrbanLandDevelopmentAuthority
Regulation2008
b)
c)UrbanLandDevelopmentAuthority
(VegetationManagement)Bylaw
2009
c)
d)IndustrialDevelopmentAct1963
d)
33
Nochangeinrequirementsfor
QDCinstrumentsbetween
baselinecountand30June2013
Whiletheinstallationofatankis
nolongermandatory,whenatank
isinstalledvoluntarilythereare
stillrequirementstoadhereto
137pages
3pages
Increaseof
Streamliningthe
introduced:
development
applicationand
a) 146
a)EconomicDevelopmentAct2012
assessmentprocess
forselectedprojects
b) 12
b)EconomicDevelopmentRegulation
2013
c) 29
c)EconomicDevelopment(Vegetation
Management)Bylaw2013
RequirementsCount
Increaseofstandard
requirements
a) 83
b)
12
c)
60
Reductionofstandard
requirements
a) 242
10
b)
16
c)
103
d)
29
14
Totalincrease:36pages
CaseStudy
Simplifying
regulatoryapprovals
forthecoalmining
industry
LegislativeChanges
PageCount
Amendmentstothefollowing
Reductionof
instrumentssimplifiedregulatory
approvalsforthecoalminingindustry:
a) 0
a) MineralResourcesAct1989
b) EnvironmentalProtectionAct
1994
Simplifying
regulationof
plumbingworks
b)
Amendmentstothe
a) PlumbingandDrainageAct2002
17
RequirementsCount
Reductionof
a)
14
b)
186
Totalreduction:17pages
Increaseof
Reductionof
a)
Totalincrease:6pages
a)
11
34
TowardsBestPracticeRegulation
TOWARDSBESTPRACTICEREGULATION
5.1
Deliveringbetterregulation
Regulation is often necessary to achieve economic, social and environmental objectives.
Therefore, it is important to ensure that all regulation is effective in addressing the policy
problem and in delivers net benefits to the Queensland community. To this end, the
government is committed to ensuring that all regulatory processes are consistent with the
QueenslandGovernmentsRegulatoryBestPracticePrincipleslistedinTable17below.
Abestpracticeapproachtoregulationcarefullyandcomprehensivelyassessestheimpactsofa
proposedregulationonbusiness,communityandgovernmentandensuresthosewhodesign,
implementandapproveregulationhaveconsideredandfullyunderstanditspotentialimpacts.
Whereregulationisnecessary,agenciesarerequiredtoensureitminimisescoststobusiness,
communityandgovernmentandmaximisesthebenefitstotheQueenslandeconomy.
Table17:QueenslandGovernmentsregulatorybestpracticeprinciples
TheQueenslandGovernmenthascommittedtoensuringthatallregulatoryprocessesareconsistentwith
thefollowingprinciples:
(a)
establishingacaseforactionbeforeaddressingaproblem
(b)
arangeoffeasiblepolicyoptionsmustbeconsidered,includingselfregulatory,coregulatoryand
nonregulatoryapproaches,andtheirbenefitsandcostsassessed
(c)
adoptingtheoptionthatgeneratesthegreatestnetbenefitforthecommunity
(d)
inaccordancewiththeCompetitionPrinciplesAgreement,legislationshouldnotrestrictcompetition
unlessitcanbedemonstratedthat:
(i)
thebenefitsoftherestrictionstothecommunityasawholeoutweighthecosts
(ii)
theobjectivesoftheregulationcanonlybeachievedbyrestrictingcompetition.
(e)
providingeffectiveguidancetorelevantregulatorsandregulatedpartiesinordertoensurethatthe
policyintentandexpectedcompliancerequirementsoftheregulationareclear
(f)
ensuringthatregulationremainsrelevantandeffectiveovertime
(g)
consultingeffectivelywithaffectedkeystakeholdersatallstagesoftheregulatorycycle
(h)
governmentactionshouldbeeffectiveandproportionaltotheissuebeingaddressed.
Source:QueenslandGovernment,RegulatoryImpactStatementSystemGuidelines,p13.
TheobjectivesoftheRegulatoryImpactStatement(RIS)system
The Regulatory Impact Statement System Guidelines approved by the Treasurer and Minister
for Trade (the Treasurer) form an important process that will assist in achieving the
governments goal of reducing regulatory burden. It is designed to increase the rigour with
which new regulation is made. The RIS Guidelines describe the required procedures for
developingregulationforQueenslandGovernmentagenciesundertheRISsystem.
ThepurposeoftheRISsystemistoreducetheregulatoryburdeninQueenslandbyrequiring
agenciestodevelopregulatoryproposalsinaccordancewithregulatorybestpracticeprinciples
andtoassistofficersworkingonthedevelopment,assessmentandimprovementofregulation,
toproducebetterregulation.
35
ThekeyobjectivesoftheRISsystemare:
(a)
toensurethereisathoroughassessmentoftheneedforregulation
(b)
tocommunicateandconsultwithaffectedstakeholdersonregulatoryproposals
(c)
toimprovethequalityandstandardofregulation
(d)
toimprovethequalityofregulatorypolicythroughinformationprovidedtoCabinetand
decisionmakers,andthosedeveloping,assessingandmaintainingregulationin
accordancewithregulatorybestpracticeprinciples
(e)
toensure,whereregulationisnecessary,thatitisdesignedtominimisecomplianceand
administrativecostsforbusiness,communityandgovernmentandmaximisethebenefits
totheQueenslandeconomy.
Source:QueenslandGovernment,RegulatoryImpactStatementSystemGuidelines,p1213.
5.2
Challengesonthepathtobetterregulation
Forthe Governmenttomeetitstargetofreducingregulatoryburdenby20%by 2018andto
ensurethatanynewregulationisnecessary,appropriate,efficientandeffective,itisimportant
that the principles of good regulation are considered by agencies early in the policy
developmentprocess.
ThepotentialbenefitsfromusingtheRISsystemarenotlikelytobefullyrealisedunlessthese
principles are well integrated into the policy processes of agencies and support the Cabinet
process. Since assuming responsibility for improving the quality of regulation, the OBPR has
notedissues withthecomprehensivenessoftheinitialinformationprovidedbyagencies,and
the quality of analysis provided in the proposals submitted by agencies for assessment. The
typesofchallengesexperiencedwiththeintegrationofregulatoryimpactassessmentintothe
policyprocessesofagenciesaretypicalofevolvingregulatoryimpactassessmentsystems, and
includethefollowing:
a) Thecaseforgovernmentactionisoftennotwellestablished.Proposalsfromagencies
oftenassumethatregulationisanecessarysolutiontoanidentifiedproblemwithoutgiving
dueconsiderationtoalternativenonregulatorymeansofachievingpolicyobjectives.
b) Confusingmeanswithends.Thepolicyobjectivesarenotclearlyidentifiedandareoften
confusedwiththemeansbywhichtheobjectiveswillbeachieved,whichunderminesthe
analysis.
c) Theidentificationandclearpresentationofthebenefitsandcostsofeachoptionareoften
notsufficientlydeveloped,makingitdifficulttoproperlyidentifywhichoftheoptionsis
likelytoprovidethehighestnetbenefittothecommunity.
d) Considerationisonlyaffordedtodeterminetheimpactsonparticularsectorsofthe
community(forexamplebusiness),whiletheimpactsonthebroadercommunityarenot
sufficientlytakenintoaccount.
5.3
TheOBPRscommitmenttoachievingbestpracticeregulation
The OBPR is undertaking a program of activities with the objective of engaging with agencies
earlytoassistthemtomeetthegovernmentsobjectivesofensuringthat,whereregulationis
deemed appropriate, it is both efficient and effective. The following provides an overview of
theOBPRsactivitiesthatseektoachievetheseends.
Adviceandguidance
TheOBPRprovidesadvicetoagenciesbasedontherequirementsoftheRISGuidelinesandthe
GovernmentsRegulatoryBestPracticePrinciples.
36
ImprovingtheRISguidelines
InApril2013,theOBPRsonlineversionoftheRISGuidelineswentlive.Thewebbasedversion
has been designed to be more userfriendly and improve their use by agencies. The online
version contains a level of interactivity for the user by providing a stepbystep guide to the
process of developing a regulatory assessment, whether a Request for Exclusion, Preliminary
ImpactAssessment(PIA)oraRegulatoryImpactStatement(RIS).
AsthecustodianoftheRISGuidelinesandRIStemplatedocumentation,QueenslandTreasury
andTrade(QTT)isresponsibleformakinganychangestothesedocuments.Therefore,where
minor, ad hoc changes have been identified to improve functionality, the OBPR sends these
recommendationstotheQTTforitsconsiderationandaction.TheOBPRwillbeundertakinga
more comprehensive review of the RIS Guidelines and RIS templates, and plans to provide
adviceonproposedchangestotheQTTinthefirstquarterof2014.
Engagingwithagencies
The OBPR has developed a program of ongoing engagement with agencies to gain a better
understandingoftheirforwardlegislativeandregulatoryprogramstoassistandadviseagencies
more effectively on how the RIS process can help improve the development of regulatory
proposals.Specifically,theOBPRhasestablishedfourteamswiththeresponsibilityforagroup
ofportfolioareas.Eachteamisthekeypointofcontactonallregulatoryissuesforeachoftheir
respectiveportfolios.
Training
The OBPR has provided training to agencies on costbenefit analysis (CBA) at three twoday
workshops. The training was provided by an expert in CBA at no cost to agency staff. It
introduced the key activities and skills required to undertake a basic CBA for a Regulatory
ImpactStatement(RIS).Allcourseparticipantswereprovidedwiththeirownworkstationsto
enablethemtoworkthrougheachofthecasestudyexamplescoveredinthecourse.
TheOBPRisalsopreparingaprogramoftrainingontheRISsystemtoprovideagencystaffwith
theskillstoworkthroughtheRISprocess,consideranddeveloppolicyresponsesandundertake
qualityanalysisofpotentialregulatoryimpacts.Thistrainingisplannedtobegininlate2013.
Regulatorycomplaintsmechanism
The establishment of a formal complaints mechanism in relation to regulatory matters was
recommended in OBPRs Final Report on Reducing and Measuring the Burden of Regulation.
After receiving support from the Queensland Government, the complaints mechanism was
establishedon18June2013.
The complaints mechanism is intended to be an avenue for individuals, businesses and
community organisations to raise issues in relation to regulatory matters. Through this,
inefficientorineffectiveregulationcanbeidentifiedandreviewed.
OncetheOBPRreceivesacomplaint,itrecordsthisinformationinitscomplaintsregisterand
thenforwardsthefeedbackorconcerntotheagencyresponsibleforadministeringtherelevant
regulation.Theagencyisthentaskedwithreviewingthecomplaintandprovidingaresponseto
thepersonororganisationraisingtheconcern.TheagencyisalsorequestedtonotifytheOBPR
ofitsresponsetothecomplainant.
Given the complaints mechanism was only established at the end of this financial year, the
OBPRwillbeginprovidingasummaryofthecomplaintsreceivedinthe201314OBPRAnnual
Report.
37
RegulatoryAssessmentActivity
REGULATORYASSESSMENTACTIVITY
6.1
Summaryofregulatoryassessments
The OBPRs responsibility to assess the adequacy of Consultation and Decision Regulatory
ImpactStatements(RISs)commencedon2July2012.ItsresponsibilitytoassessRequeststo
excluderegulatoryproposalsfromtheRISsystemandPreliminaryImpactAssessments(PIAs)
todetermineifaRISisrequiredcommencedon4March2013.
GiventhelargenumberofRequestsforExclusionandPIAs,theOBPRexperiencedasignificant
increase in the volume and nature of the assessment work it undertakes on regulatory
proposals. The nature of the assessment undertaken for Requests for Exclusion and PIAs
contrasts with that for Regulatory Impact Statements (RISs), which are fewer in number but
involveamoreintensiveprocessofassessment.Dependingonthequalityandcomplexityofa
Consultation RIS submitted for review, three or four drafts may be necessary before it meets
therequirementsoftheRISGuidelinesandreceiveaLetterofAdequacy.
Only a small percentage of regulatory proposals have been considered likely to result in
significantadverseimpacts,andthereforetowarrantthepreparationofaConsultationRIS.For
the 131 PIAs assessed by OBPR, between 4 March and 30 June 2013, only five have been
progressedtotheConsultationRISstage.
Table 18 below displays the number of assessments that were completed for Requests for
Exclusion, PIAs and Consultation RISs during 201213, as well as the average time taken to
completeeachassessmentordraftofaRIS.
The OBPR received 10 Consultation RISs, which were underway prior to the OBPR acquiring
responsibility for advising whether a RIS is required. Five were assessed as fully meeting the
requirements of the RIS Guidelines and three of these progressed to the Decision RIS stage,
whilethetwootherproposalshavenotyetproceededtotheDecisionRISstage.Theremaining
five proposals were not finalised by 30 June 2013 and their progress will be reported in the
201314OBPRAnnualReport.
Table18:Regulatoryassessmentsbyproposaltype201213
Typeofassessment
Number
Averagetimeofassessment
(days)
Requestsforexclusion
104
3.6
Preliminaryimpactassessment
131
5.2
Draftregulatoryimpact
statements(ConsultationRISs)
10
6.5
244
4.3
Total/average
Table19liststhefiveregulatoryproposalsforwhichRISswereissuedwithLettersofAdequacy.
AcopyoftheRISdocumentsandtheOBPRsLettersofAdequacyareavailableontheOBPRs
website.
38
Table19:RISsthatreceivedaLetterofAdequacy
Regulatoryproposal
GreentapeReduction:
ReviewofEnvironmentally
RelevantActivities
ConsultationRIS
DecisionRIS
6.2
Summaryofproposal
Assessmentdate
ThisproposalincludedchangestotheEnvironmental
ProtectionRegulation2008aspartoftheGovernment's
broaderGreentapeReductionprojectwhichsoughtto
streamline,integrateandcoordinateregulatory
requirementsunderQueensland'sEnvironmental
ProtectionAct1994.
September2012
March2013
ReviewofProtectedPlants
LegislativeFramework
ConsultationRIS
DecisionRIS
Thisreflectedareviewoftheexpiringregulatory
instrumentsrelatingtothemanagementofprotected
plantsundertheNatureConservationAct1992.
February2013
June2013
ReviewofElectricalSafety
Regulation2002
ConsultationRIS
DecisionRIS
Thisproposalwasbasedonareviewoftheexpiring
ElectricalSafetyRegulation2002andincorporated
amendmentsaimedatimprovingtheregulation.
March2013
June2013
Amendmentstothe
PetroleumandGasHealth
andSafetyFeePost
ImplementationReview
ConsultationRIS.
In2010theGovernmentexemptedaproposalthat
changedthewaythatthePetroleumandGasInspectorate
wasfunded,duetotheunprecedentedgrowthin
petroleumandgasindustriesinQueenslandandthe
increasedresourceandadministrationcostsonthe
Inspectorate.
ReviewofQueensland's
MineSafetyFramework
ConsultationRIS
Thisproposalincludedchangesaimedatimprovingmine
safetyinQueenslandandtoalignitwiththeNationalMine
SafetyFramework.
April2013
June2013
RegulatoryproposalsexemptedbytheTreasurer
According to the RIS Guidelines, the Treasurer will consider granting an exemption from the
requirementtoprepareanRISwhen:
a) animmediateregulatoryresponseisrequired,or
b) noticeoftheproposalmayrendertheruleineffectiveorunfairlyadvantageordisadvantage
anypersonlikelytobeaffectedbytheregulation.
Where an exemption is provided, a postimplementation review (PIR) must be commenced
within two years of the implementation of the regulation, unless the Treasurer waives this
requirement.Table20providesalistofregulatoryproposalsgrantedaTreasurersexemption
fromtherequirementtoundertakeaRISin201213.
Table20:ExemptionsgrantedbytheTreasurer
Proposal
AmendmentstotheIndustrial
RelationsAct1999
Reasonforexemption
Exemptiongranteddueto
immediateresponsecriteria
Date
8May2013
PIRrequired
OBPRnotadvised
AmendmentstotheDraftCoastal
ProtectionStatePlanningRegulatory
Provision2013
28May2013
PIRisrequired
31May2013
NoPIRrequired
3June2013
NoPIRrequired
EmergencyManagement,Fireand
RescueLevy
AmendmentstotheElectricityAct
1994
39
6.3
RegulatoryproposalsnotmeetingtheRISGuidelines
Itisalsonecessarytoreportonregulationthathasbeenmadewithoutundergoingthesteps
required by the RIS Guidelines. The OBPR is aware of two regulatory proposals progressed
during201213(listedinTable21)thatdidnotmeettherequirementsoftheRISGuidelines.
Table21:RegulatoryproposalsnotmeetingtherequirementsoftheRISGuidelines
Proposal
Reason
AmendmentofdefinitionofworkerundertheWorkersCompensationand
RehabilitationAct2003.
RISrequested,butnot
provided
IndustrialRelationsandOtherLegislationAmendmentBill2013.
PIArequired,butnot
provided
6.4
Deferringthereviewofexpiringregulation
Sunset clauses are requirements for legislation to expire after a certain period if not remade
(typicallyeveryfiveto10years).InQueensland,part7oftheStatutoryInstrumentsAct1992
(SIA) specifies that subordinate legislation will expire every 10 years or sooner unless a
regulationismadeexemptingitfromexpiry.Therationaleforsunsetclausesistoensurethat
thestockofregulationremainsuptodateandrelevant.
Under this arrangement, each sunsetting regulation must be reviewed, and if remade must
followthesameproceduralrequirementsasnewregulation,includingthosespecifiedintheRIS
Guidelines.
Theefficacy ofsunsetclausesisreduced whenlegislativemechanismsareusedrepeatedlyto
delaytheexpiryofsubordinatelegislationwithoutreview.TheProductivityCommission(2012)
also noted that for sunset provisions to be effective, exemptions and deferrals need to be
containedtolimitunduedeferralofreview.
In Queensland, exemptions from expiry are provided under sections 56 and 56A of the SIA.
Section 56 provides fiveyear extensions for legislation that is substantially uniform or
complementary with the Commonwealth or other states. Section 56A provides oneyear
extensionsforotherlegislation.ThesearesetoutinTable22below.
Table22:Statutoryinstrumentexemptions
Section56
Section56A
Uniformsubordinatelegislation
Othersubordinatelegislation
Extensionof5years
Extensionof1year
Nogroundsforexemptionrequired
Groundsforexemption:
Replacementbeingdraftedandtobereadywithinayear
Noreplacement,subordinatelegislationtolapse
GoverningActsubjecttoreview
Unlimitednumberofrepeatextensions
Unlimitednumberofrepeatextensionwheregoverning
Actunderreview
Instrumentstoexpirein2013:3
Instrumentstoexpirein2013:105
Instrumentsextendedin2013:3
Instrumentsextendedin2013:78
Instrumentswithmultipleextensionsgranted:3
Instrumentswithmultipleextensionsgranted:53
*As at 1 September 2012. It is important to note legislation due to expire on 31 August or 1 September 2013
under the SIA may have been repealed prior to 1 September 2012. During the period 1 January 2008 to
1September2012however,theQCAisawareofonlyoneregulationbeingrepealed.
40
TheOBPRnotesthatasignificantamountofQueenslandlegislationwillreceiveanextensionin
201314. Extensions will be provided to 81 of the 108 uniform and other legislation due to
expire either on 31 August 2013 or 1 September 2013. Of these, 56 have already been
extendedinpreviousyears.TheStockRegulation1988,forexample,wasduetoexpirein1998,
buthasreceived16consecutiveoneyearextensions.
There are a number of other regulations which have been extended multiple times. For
example, Apiaries Regulation 1998 has been extended six times, Interactive Gambling (Player
Protection)Regulation1998hasbeenextendedsixtimes,CasinoControlRegulation1999has
beenextendedfivetimes.Afulllistoflegislationreceivingexemptionin2013canbefoundin
Schedule2oftheStatutoryInstrumentsRegulation2012.
The OBPR considers that potential community benefits may be realised if the legislation was
reviewed and remade, rather than being extended. This was the original intention of sunset
clauses.
Whiletherecanbelegitimatereasonsfordeferringtheexpiryoflegislation,suchasallowingfor
the thematic or packaged review of related primary and subordinate legislation, the OBPR
considers that extensions should only be granted in exceptional circumstances to avoid
frustratingtheintentoftheSIA.Itislikelythatsomeoftheregulationthathasbeenextended
couldreasonablyhavebeenreviewedandremadeorupdatedasnecessarypriortoexpiry.
Governmentagenciesareawarethatsubordinatelegislationhasafirmexpirydateandshould
plantoconductsunsetreviewsaccordingly.Thisincludestakingintoconsiderationthatremade
regulationisrequiredtoundergoreviewundertheRISsystem.TheRISGuidelinesstatethat:
TheregulatoryreviewundertheRISsystemshouldbecompletedinadvanceofthisexpirydate
iftheregulationisproposedtocontinuebeyonditsinitial10yearoperation.Thisshouldavoida
regulationexpiringundertheSIAwhilea10yearreviewoftheregulationisbeingcompleted.
41
GLOSSARY
GLOSSARY
A
AEMO
AustralianElectricityMarketOperator
BC
BritishColumbia
BREE
BureauofResourcesandEnergyEconomics
CBA
CostBenefitAnalysis
COAG
CouncilofAustralianGovernments
CPM
CarbonPricingMechanism
DAFF
DepartmentofAgriculture,FisheriesandForestry
DCCSDS
DepartmentofCommunities,ChildSafetyandDisabilityServices
DETE
DepartmentofEducation,TrainingandEmployment
DEWS
DepartmentofEnergyandWaterSupply
DEHP
DepartmentofEnvironmentHeritageandProtection
DHPW
DepartmentofHousingandPublicWorks
DJAG
DepartmentofJusticeandAttorneyGeneral
DLGCRR
DepartmentofLocalGovernment,CommunityRecoveryandResilience
DNRM
DepartmentofNaturalResourcesandMines
DSDIP
DepartmentofStateDevelopment,InfrastructureandPlanning
DPC
DepartmentofthePremierandCabinet
DTMR
DepartmentofTransportandMainRoads
EDA
EconomicDevelopmentAct2012
EIS
EnvironmentalImpactsStatement
GEC
GasElectricityCertificate
GOC
GovernmentOwnedCorporation
MWh
MegaWatthour
mtpa
milliontonnesperannum
OBPR
OQPC
OfficeofBestPracticeRegulation
OfficeoftheQueenslandParliamentaryCounsel
42
GLOSSARY
PJ
PetraJoules
PS
PlanningScenario
PIA
PreliminaryImpactAssessment
PV
PresentValue
QCA
QueenslandCompetitionAuthority
QDC
QueenslandDevelopmentCode
QGS
QueenslandGasScheme
QTT
QueenslandTreasuryandTrade
RIS
RegulatoryImpactStatement
RET
RenewableEnergyTarget
SRC
SlowRateofChangescenario
SEQ
SouthEastQueensland
SIA
StatutoryInstrumentsAct1992
SPA
SustainablePlanningAct2009
tonne
43
GLOSSARY
Acts
DentalTechniciansRegistrationAct2001
EconomicDevelopmentAct2012
EnvironmentalProtection(GreentapeReduction)andOtherLegislationAmendmentAct2012
EnvironmentalProtectionAct1994
HeavyVehicleNationalLawAct2012
MineralResourcesAct1989
MinesLegislation(Streamlining)AmendmentAct2012
PlumbingandDrainageAct2002
QueenslandCompetitionAuthorityAct1997
SpeechPathologistsRegistrationAct2001
StatutoryInstrumentsAct1992
SustainablePlanningAct2009
Regulations
ApiariesRegulation1998
CasinoControlRegulation1999
InteractiveGambling(PlayerProtection)Regulation1998
StockRegulation1988
44
QCA|OfficeofBestPractice
APPENDIXA:MINISTERIALDIRECTIONASSESSINGREGULATORY
IMPACTSTATEMENTS
45
46
47
48
APPENDIXC:REQUIREMENTSCOUNTDETAILEDDESCRIPTIONOF
THECOUNTINGPROCESS
Thepurposeofthisappendixistodescribetheprocessofcountingrequirementsinordertoestablishthe
baselinenumberandthentocountthechangefromthebaselinedate(23March2012)tothefirstannual
report date (30 June 2013). There are separate appendices describing the process of assigning a
reductiontargettoeachdepartment(AppendixD)andauditingthecount(AppendixE).
Approachtorequirementscountmeasurement
The project of measuring regulatory requirements has farreaching implications for Queensland
Government agencies, as it establishes the baseline for the governments 20% reduction target. The
reductiontargetislikelytobereflectedintheperformanceagreementsofDirectorGeneralsandother
seniorexecutives.Asaresult,OBPRworkedtoensurethat:
(a)
themeasurementprocesswasfullytransparenttodepartments
(b)
departmentshadconfidenceintheoutcome.
TheOBPRrejectedfromtheoutsetanyblackboxstrategyforcountingrequirements.Ratherthanuse
customised software or database software such as Microsoft Access, the OBPR chose to work with
MicrosoftExcel.AllQueenslandGovernmentagenciesarelicensedtouseExcelandarefamiliarwithit,so
theywereabletoverify(andifnecessaryreplicate)thedetailsofthecount.Databasesoftwarewould
havesimplifiedtheOBPRstask,butislesstransparent.
TheOBPRsupplieddepartmentswithspreadsheetsshowinghowthecountappliedtoeachsubsectionof
legislation.IftheOBPRhadonlysuppliedthenumberofregulatoryrequirementsintheportfolioorin
wholelegislativeinstruments,departmentswouldhavebeenunabletoverifytheresults.Supplyingfull
detailsalsorevealedtheambiguitiesanderrorsinvolvedinthecountingprocess.Nevertheless,exposure
tofulldetailshasmadedepartmentsmoreawareofthetruesignificanceofthecount.Theobligations
count is not an exact census of all regulatory requirements in Queensland but it provides a generally
accuratesummationofregulatoryrequirementsandwillbeausefulguideinassessingregulatoryreform.
For an extra level of assurance in the counting process, the OBPR engaged an independent auditor to
verifythecount.Thismeantthatdepartmentswithlimitedresourcesdidnotneedtoapplyafullaudit
process but could choose to focus on areas where they would add the most value. The OBPR supplied
departments with full details of the audit (once again, down to the level of each subsection), so they
couldhaveconfidenceintheauditprocessandquestionanyapparentanomalies.
Guidelines
Inordertoensureaconsistentcountacrossdepartments,theOBPRdevelopedasetofguidelinesforthe
count.ThefinalversionoftheguidelinesisavailableontheQCAswebsite.
Theguidelineswentthroughanumberofiterations.Asafirststep,theOBPRconsultedtheguidelines
usedtocountregulatoryrestrictionsinBritishColumbia(BC).TheOBPRmadenumerouschangestothe
BC guidelines, with the aim of aligning the approach more closely with the policy aims of the 20%
reductiontarget.
The OBPR sent the first draft to all departments for comment and input. A number of departments
provided comments related to specific features of their legislation which did not receive adequate
treatmentinthefirstdraft.TheOBPRusedthesecommentstocreatethenextversion,beingparticularly
careful to avoid perverse incentives which might have arisen from some quirks in the drafting of
49
regulation.Oncetherequirementscountstarted,itbecameapparentthattheguidelinesrequiredfurther
refinement.Inparticular,itwasnecessarytoaddamoredetailedtreatmentofoptionalrequirements.
Thenextversionoftheguidelinesspecifiedmorecloselythedifferencebetweenoptionalrequirements
anddifferentrequirementsapplyingindifferentcircumstances.Forexample,aspeedlimitof60km/hon
weekendsand40km/honweekdaysisnotanoptionalrequirementrather,tworequirementsapplying
indifferentcircumstances.However,aregulatoryrequirementtoinstalleitherairbagsorantilockbrakes
in a car would be an optional requirement, if the manufacturer had discretion to choose between the
two.
The guidelines now account for most quirks and anomalies encountered in the counting process, and
shouldrequirelittle(ifany)furtherrevision.However,theOBPRispreparedtomakefurtherrevisionsas
necessary.
Implementationofmeasurement
The OBPR began scoping the measurement project in September and October 2012, and it quickly
becameapparentthatthetaskwastoolargetocompleteinternally.TheOBPRdevelopeddrafttermsof
reference for the project in November 2012, and sent them to potential bidders for comment. Final
termsofreference,withaninvitationtobid,weresentouton21December2012.
Therewereanumberofoptionsforcompletingthecount:
(a)
UseinternaltheOBPRresources.Thiswouldprobablybetheleastcostoption,butpresented
somepracticalproblems.TheOBPRslimitedresourceswouldmakeitaprotractedprojectand
wouldrequireallotherworktobeputonhold.
(b)
Haveeachdepartmentdoitsowncount.Thisoptionpresentedarangeofproblems.Itwould
placeanundueburdenondepartmentalresources,entailapotentialconflictofinterest,and
possiblyleadtoproblemsofinconsistentcounts.TheOBPRsunderstandingofthecountprocess
inBCsuggestedthatacentralcountwaspreferable.
(c)
Havethecountdonebyoneormoreconsultants.Thiswasthehighestcostoption,butcouldbe
achievedquickly,withgenerallygoodqualitycontrol.
Duetothesize,complexityandtightdeadlineoftheproject,theOBPRselectedKPMGandErnst&Young.
TheOBPRalsodecidedtoengageathird,independent,companytoaudittheresultssuppliedbythetwo
consultants,andselectedClaytonUtzasauditor.
Inordertofocusconsultantresourcesoncountingratherthanancillarytechnicaltasks,theOBPRsupplied
consultants with documents in Excel format where possible. The Office of Queensland Parliamentary
Counsel (OQPC) provided useful assistance. The OQPC is responsible for primary and subordinate
legislation (mainly Acts and regulations), which form the greater part of Queensland regulation (over
70,000 pages). The OQPC enabled OBPR to obtain that body of regulation, as applicable at 23 March
2012,inExcelformat.TheconversionprocessbeganinNovember2012,andtookaroundtwomonths,
with a number of iterations to iron out technical quirks associated with the conversion to Excel.
Guidelines, codes of practice and similar documents are not held by any one agency, so consultants
implementedtheirownconversionforthesedocuments.
The counting process began on 13 February 2013, with a specified delivery date of 8 April 2013. The
volumeofregulationrequiringassessmentwasestimatedat90,000pages,whichpresentedthechallenge
ofanalysingaround2,600pagesperworkingday.ThisbodyofregulationincludedActs,regulations,and
quasiregulationsuchasguidelinesandcodesofpractice.Inthecourseofcounting,furtherexamplesof
quasiregulationcametolight,andeventuallytheprojectprocessedover100,000pagesofregulation.
50
As well as counting regulatory requirements, the consultants were required to categorise them. The
reasonwassothattheOBPRcouldeventuallyframerecommendationsfocussingonthecoreelementsof
the20%reductiontarget,andmakeadjustmentstoallowforspecifictypesofregulation.Table23below
setsoutthedifferentcategoriesofrequirements,andhowtheywereeventuallyincorporatedinOBPRs
recommendations.
The counting process also incorporated input from departments. Results of the count are set out
Table25.
Auditprocess
The OBPR specified an audit process based on a truly independent assessment. The mechanism to
achieve this was referred to in the project as the double blind process. Rather than start with the
consultants counts and assess their accuracy, the auditors started with their own count and then
compared their results with the consultants results. Both the auditor and the consultants completed
theircountwithoutknowledgeoftheothercount,hencethetermdoubleblind.
Themostthoroughauditwouldinvolveanindependentcountofthefullbodyofregulation,i.e.a100%
audit.Thatwould,however,atleastdoublethecostoftheproject,andtheOBPRdidnotconsiderthis
cost effective. The OBPR settled on a15% audit using a random sample, rather than a targeted 15%,
whichwouldbesubjecttounknownselectionbias.
Details of the audit process are set out in Appendix E. The OBPR was generally satisfied with the
outcomes.Thefirstauditresultsidentifiedsomeanomalies,andenabledtheconsultantstoavoidthose
anomaliesintheremainderoftheprocess.
SomedepartmentsalertedOBPRtoasystematicerrorinanumberofspreadsheets,namelythatthesum
ofrequirementswasincorrectbecause therangespecified forthe sumdidnotcoverallrelevantrows.
OBPRinstitutedaseparateprocessofscrutinytodetectandcorrectthiserrorwhereitarose.Ultimately,
the fact that departments detected this error confirmed the importance of the transparency of Excel
spreadsheets.Anequivalenterrorinadatabaseoutputwouldprobablyhavepassedundetected.
Categoriesincludedandexcludedinthebaseline
Regulatory requirements are not uniform in nature and the different impact of different types of
requirements requires some analysis in order to ensure the most effective application of the
governmentsgoalofreducingtheburdenofregulationby20%by2018.Overthecourseoftheproject
The OBPR engaged in extensive discussion both internally and with departments in order to come to a
consideredview.Table23belowsummarisestheOBPRspreferredapproachandisdiscussedinfurther
detailbelow.
Table23:Classificationofinclusionorexclusionofregulatoryrequirementcategories
Category
Governmentonly(internalto
department)
Governmentonly(appliedtoother
departments)
Governmentownedcorporations(GOCs)
Recommendation
Include
Exclude
Justiceandpolicing
Exclude
Include
Exclude
Include
51
Comments
Thesegotothecoreofthegovernmentspolicyintent.
Departmentscanchoosetomodifytheirowninternal
requirementswithoutagovernmentwideprocess.
Notpartofthegovernmentspolicyintent.Maybethe
subjectofafutureproject.
GOCsshouldalignmorecloselywithprivatesector
companies.
Generallynotpartofthegovernmentspolicyintent.
UnlikelythattheOBPRwouldbeabletoprovideuseful
scrutinyinanyspecificarea.
Exclusionwouldsendthewrongpolicysignalandwould
allowgamingofthereductionprogram.
Category
Factsheetsandotherexplanatory
documents
Recommendation
Exclude
Include
Exclude
Comments
Thesedonotimposeadditionalrequirementsbut
facilitatecompliance.Theymayrequireseparate
scrutiny.
Wherenoncompliancewithcodeshasregulatory
consequences,theyarenotvoluntary.Exclusioncould
resultingaming.
Transitionalprovisionsdonotimposeanadditional
burdenandenhancetransparency.
Standard requirements are those imposed on individuals and businesses in Queensland. These are
unambiguouslythefocusofthegovernmentsaimofreducingtheburdenofregulationby20%by2018.
Governmentonly(internaltodepartments)
Departmentshavealargebodyofinstrumentstoregulatetheirinternalworkingsinareassuchashuman
resources, information technology and facilities management. They are not directly relevant to the
Governmentspolicyintentofreducingtheburdenofregulationonthecommunityanddepartmentsare
abletomanagetheirinternalregulationwithoutinterventionfromgovernmentwidereformprocesses.
Governmentonly(appliedtootherdepartments)
Departmentsaresubjecttowholeofgovernmentrequirementsinabroadrangeofareas.Forexample,
the Chief Information Office specifies in its print services policy that, unless exempt for good reason,
printersingovernmentdepartmentsshouldbesettoprintmonochrome,doublesidedanddraftquality.
QueenslandStateArchiveshaveasuiteofdocumentssettingouthowdepartmentsshouldarchiveemails
andotherelectronicdocuments.Suchrestrictionsexistforarangeofreasons,andsomeofthemmay
haveanetadverseimpactongovernmentadministration.However,theyarenotdirectlyrelevanttothe
governments policy of reducing the burden of regulation on the community, and the OBPR therefore
proposesnottocountthemintheregulatorybaseline.
Dependingonthegovernmentspolicyprioritiesinmatterssuchasthecostofgovernmentandautonomy
indepartmentaladministrationtheremaybeaneedtoexaminesuchrequirementsinthefuture.
GovernmentOwnedCorporations(GOCs)
GovernmentOwnedCorporations(GOCs)aresubjecttonumerousrestrictionsnotimposedasregulatory
requirementsonprivatesectorcompanies.Theserestrictionsgenerallyexisttoensureprobityintheuse
of public funds or consistency with the Governments policy priorities. In some cases private sector
companieshavesimilarprobitymechanismsbuttheyareinternalmattersratherthanexternallyimposed
regulations.
Forreasonsofcompetitiveneutrality,regulationofGOCsshouldbealignedmorecloselywithregulation
of private sector companies. The extra probity required for public funds can be a matter of internal
administrationratherthanexternalregulation.
Justiceandpolicing
Justice and policing requirements have long been exempt from scrutiny under the Regulatory Impact
Statement(RIS)process.ThedefinitionforthepurposesofRISexemptionisregulationrelatingtopolice
powers and administration, general criminal laws, the administration of courts and tribunals and
correctiveservices.
52
Mostofthesecategoriesareclearlybeyondtheambitofthegovernmentspolicyintentionsinreducing
theburdenofregulation.TheoneareaofpossibleinteresttotheOBPRistheadministrationofcourtsas
itappliestoresolutionofcontractualandbusinessdisputesawellfunctioningsystemlowersbusiness
costs.Howevertheadministrationofcourtsisahighlyspecialisedareaandamajorpointofinterestfor
the legal profession. The OBPR considers that reforms in this area are a matter for specific legal
profession reform, rather than general regulatory reform. As a result, the OBPR prefers to exclude all
justiceandpolicingrequirementsfromtheregulatoryrequirementsbaselinecount.
Harmonised requirements form a growing proportion of the regulatory burden in Queensland. The
OBPRsinterimandfinalreportsidentifyharmonisationasbeingamongthetoptenprioritiesforreview,
sinceitisnotalwaysclearthatharmonisationbringsnetbenefits.
Fromanadministrativepointofview,harmonisationcanbeimplementedinanumberofways:
(a)
Legislationisharmonisedandadministrationislargelytransferredtoacentralbody.Queensland
hasadoptedthisapproachfortheregulationofenergytransmissionanddistribution.
(b)
Legislationisharmonisedwithadministrationremainingmainlyatstatelevelandsomefunctions
arecentralised.Thisistheapproachtakenforbuildingregulation,wherethecentralbodystaskis
limitedtomaintainingandupdatingtheNationalConstructionCode,whichisadministeredbystate
bodies.Inthecaseofbuildingregulationtherearealsomechanismsforspecificstateexemptions.
(c)
Astateregulatoradoptsanationalcodeorguidelinewithnotransferofresponsibilities.Thisisthe
case,forexample,withQueenslandsadoptionofthe(national)ModelCodeofPracticeforthe
WelfareofAnimalsHusbandryofCaptivebredEmus.TheNationalEmuCodeisadocument
createdbythePrimaryIndustriesMinisterialCouncil,andpublishedbyCommonwealthScientific
andIndustrialResearchOrganisation(CSIRO).ItsapplicationinQueenslandinvolvesnotransferof
administrativeresponsibilities.
If harmonised regulation is not included in the requirements count the differing administrative
arrangementscreatedifferentincentivesfordepartments.Departmentsareunlikelytotransferfunctions
toacentralbodysimplyinordertoreducetheirrequirementscount.However,adoptionofharmonised
requirementscanbeanattractivepropositionifitreducestherequirementscountandinvolvesnolossof
administrativefunctions(asinthecaseoftheNationalEmuCode).Insuchacase,thedepartmenthasno
incentive to question whether the harmonised regulation is better or worse than the statebased
regulationitisreplacing.
The process also works in reverse. If it becomes clear that a harmonised instrument regulating a
particularsectorisdysfunctional,therelevantdepartmentwillresistareturntostatebasedregulationif
this results in an increased requirements count. Furthermore, if not motivated by the requirements
count, departments may use harmonisation as a screen for inaction, using the argument that
modifications are outside their control. This has been a frequent theme in discussions to date some
departments have been reluctant to consider that they have the option of modifying harmonised
instruments,creatingexemptionsorrevertingtostatebasedregulation.
53
Thedepartmentalargumentofbeingunabletomodifyharmonisedinstrumentsactuallypointstosome
fundamentalproblemsofharmonisation11:
(a)
Itcancreateregulationbeyondtheeffectivecontrolofanyministerorparliament.
(b)
Whencircumstanceschange,oranomaliesbecomeapparent,itcanbedifficultorimpossibleto
modifytherelevantregulation.
(c)
Becauseresponsibilityfortheregulationisdiffused,itispossiblethat,onceintroduced,itwillnever
besubjecttoscrutinybyaregulatoryreviewbody.
InthecourseofstakeholderconsultationfortheOBPRreportonMeasuringandReducingtheBurdenof
Regulation,harmonisationwasafrequentsourceofcomplaint.OBPRwouldbesendingthewrongpolicy
signal if its tracking of requirements shows a decrease in burden, where there is in fact an increase
becauseofharmonisation.
OBPR therefore considers that harmonised regulation should be included in the baseline requirements
count.
Atthesametime,OBPRrecognisestheadditionaldifficultyofmodifyingharmonisedregulation.Forthis
reason,OBPRhasusedadifferentweightingforthiscategorywhendevelopingrecommendedreduction
targets.Theeffectofalowerreductiontargetforharmonisedinstrumentsisahigherreductiontargetfor
all other instruments, in order to maintain an overall 20% reduction. The different weighting for
harmonisedinstrumentsleavessomeperverseincentivefordepartmentstofavourharmonisation,buta
fullreductiontargetforharmonisedinstrumentswouldleavesomedepartmentswithunattainablegoals.
Factsheetsandotherexplanatorydocuments
Many departments have issued fact sheets and similar explanatory documents. The aim of these
documentsistoexplainexistingregulatoryrequirementsandfacilitatecompliance,ratherthantoimpose
newrequirements.Forthisreason,thesedocumentsshouldbeexcludedfromtherequirementscount.
However, there are problems with the variable quality of these documents. Because some documents
expound regulatory requirements in general terms, without detailed regulatory references, it can be
difficulttoverifythattheycontainonlypreexistingrequirements.Fixingthisproblemisalowprioritybut
maymeritattentioninthefuture,onthegroundsthatstakeholdersshouldalwayshaveaclearideaof
theirregulatoryobligations.
Examplesofwellwrittenexplanatorydocuments,wheretheregulatoryunderpinningisclear,include:
(a)
TheQueenslandStateArchivesplainEnglishguidetothePublicRecordsAct200212.
(b)
TheLandholdersguidetotheRegrowthVegetationCodepublishedbytheDepartmentofNatural
ResourcesandMines(DNRM)13.
(c)
TheDepartmentofEnvironmentandHeritageProtectionfactsheetonTheQueenslandHeritage
Register14.
11
GeneralissuesofharmonisationarediscussedinOBPRsreportonmeasuringandreducingtheburdenof
regulation,andintheOBPRcommissionedreportbyProfessorHenryErgasofDeloitteAccessEconomics,
availableatwww.qca.org.au/files/OBPRDELErgasReportC&BRegHarmon1212.pdf
12
Availableatwww.archives.qld.gov.au/Recordkeeping/GRKDownloads/Documents/PRAplainenglishguide.pdf
13
Availableatwww.nrm.qld.gov.au/vegetation/pdf/regrowthguidecodesept2011.pdf
14
Availableatwww.ehp.qld.gov.au/heritage/documents/fs_h1_qld_heritage_register.pdf
54
Many departments have guidelines and codes of practice labelled as voluntary. Departments have
frequentlysuggestedthatthesecodesshouldbeexcludedfromthebaselinecountandatthesametime
haveacknowledgedthatcompliance(ornoncompliance)withthecodeshasregulatoryconsequences.
OBPRhasincludedinthecountthoseinstrumentswithregulatoryconsequences.Theseconsequences
canincludelossoflicence,amoreonerousinspectionregime,orincreasedexposuretoprosecutioninthe
event of noncompliance. The effect of such consequences is similar to, and sometimes stronger than,
regulatoryrequirementssetoutinblackletterlaw.
Thereisalsothequestionofstrategicbehaviourbydepartments.IfActsandRegulationsarecountedin
thebaselinebutcodesandguidelinesarenot,itispossiblethatdepartmentswillreducetheircountby
transferring requirements from included instruments to excluded instruments. The unintended
consequencecouldactuallybeanincreaseintheregulatoryburdensincedepartmentswouldalmostby
defaultutiliseregulatoryinstrumentsnotscrutinisedbyParliamentandnotsubjecttoRegulatoryImpact
Statement(RIS)assessment.
Transitionalprovisionsexistasabridgetonewregulatoryrequirementsandcountingthemduplicatesa
portion of the count, as they do not impose additional requirements. The OBPR understands that
transitionalprovisionsmakeregulationmoretransparent.Countingthemwouldprovideanincentivefor
departmentstodeletethem,makingregulationlesstransparent.
Transitional provisions account for requirements equivalent to around 2.4% of the total regulatory
baseline.Theirimpactisinsignificantoverall,butcanbesignificantforspecificpiecesoflegislation.
Consultationwithdepartments
InitialconsultationleadingtoApril2013report
TheOBPRfirstcanvassedaBritishColumbia(BC)stylerequirementscountinitsAugust2012IssuesPaper
on Measuring and Reducing the Burden of Regulation15. The QCA wrote to DirectorsGeneral of all
QueenslandGovernmentdepartmentsseekingcomment.Fouragenciesmadepublicsubmissionsonthe
IssuesPaperbutnonecommentedspecificallyontheBCapproachtomeasuringtheregulatoryburden16.
InDecember2012,theQCAwroteagaintoDirectorsGeneralsseekingcommentsonthedraftcounting
guidelines and on OBPRs tentative list of codes of practice and guidelines for each department. The
OBPRreceivedextensiveinputarisingfromthis,bothinwrittenformandinthecourseofmeetingswith
departments.Asaresult,theOBPRmadesomerevisionstotheguidelinesandimprovedtheaccuracyof
itslistofcodesandguidelines.
InMarch2013,theOBPRheldaninformationandtrainingsessionforalldepartments,with80peoplein
attendance.Inthecourseofafullmorning,OBPRintroducedallthepeoplewhowouldbeworkingonthe
project,fieldedalargenumberofquestionsandcomments,andworkedthroughsomeexamplesofhow
tocountrequirements.Departmentsexpressedreservationsabouttheapplicationofa20%reductionto
their portfolio, and also pointed to anomalies in the counting guidelines. The OBPR used this input to
refine and update the guidelines. One theme emerging from the session was departments pointing to
specificlegislationintheirportfoliothatshouldnotbesubjecttoa20%reduction.OBPRclarifiedthatthe
15
TheIssuesPaperisavailableatwww.qca.org.au/files/OBPRQCAIssuesPaper
MeasuringReducingBurdenRegulation0812.pdf
16
PublicsubmissionsinresponsetotheIssuesPaperareavailableatwww.qca.org.au/OBPR/rbr/IssuesPaper/
55
20%reductiondidnotapplytoeverypieceoflegislation,buttotheportfolioasawhole.Departments
havethediscretiontoapplythereductionwheretheyconsidermostappropriate.Thisthemeofspecific
instruments,andOBPRsresponse,aroseanumberoftimesthroughoutthecourseoftheproject.
Once the counting process commenced, the OBPR maintained extensive contact with departments to
clarifyspecificdetails.Themostsignificantinputfromdepartmentswascommentonthecountandaudit
spreadsheetsoncethecountforeachportfoliowascompleted.TheOBPRsuppliedthespreadsheetswith
arequesttocommentonspecificmatters:
(a)
theaccuracyofthecountandaudit
(b)
identificationofjusticeandpolicingrequirements
(c)
identificationofharmonisedinstruments
(d)
instrumentssplitbetweendepartments
(e)
reasonswhytheportfolioshouldhaveahigherorlowerreductiontarget
(f)
identificationofgovernmentonlyinstruments.
Becauseofthecompressedtimeframeoftheproject,departmentshadonlyfourworkingdaystoprovide
comment.TheOBPRreceivedverydetailedandusefulinputandwasabletoincorporatenearlyallthe
input to improve the accuracy of the count, with one noteworthy exception.
ThesplitofinstrumentsbetweendepartmentsturnedouttobemorecomplexthananticipatedandOBPR
wasnotabletoincorporatealltherelevantinformation.TheOBPRinformeddepartmentsthatitwould
incorporate this information as part of refinements leading up to the first annual report on progress in
reducingtheburdenofregulation.
Anumberofdepartmentsputforwardreasonswhytheirreductiontargetshouldbelowerthanaverage.
TheOBPRwasnotabletoaccommodatealloftheserequests,sinceitwouldeitherhavecompromised
the overall 20% reduction target, or led to a significant increase in the reduction target for other
departments. Nevertheless, the OBPR was able to recommend special consideration for two
departments,asdescribedinAppendixD.
AssoonasitwaspossibletocompileapreliminaryversionoftherequirementscountresultstheOBPR
senttheresults,andproposedtargetreductions,toDirectorsGeneralsofalldepartments.Theresponse
wasgenerallypositive,asdepartmentscouldunderstandthereasoningbehindtheproposedtargets.
ConsultationafterApril2013
After the completion of the count in April 2013, it was apparent that further work would improve the
accuracy of the count. The OBPR commenced almost immediately on work to incorporate information
that had not been processed in the extremely tight timeline. There was a continuous dialogue with
departments,leadinguptoanewreportinJune2013.Thisreportwassubmittedtothegovernment,and
wasconsideredandapprovedbyCabinetinAugust2013.
TheOBPRconvenedanalldepartmentmeetinginJune2013toexplainhowthecountingprocesswould
workintheleaduptotheannualreportinOctober2013.OBPRalsohostedanumberoftrainingsessions
in the counting method so that departments would be able to undertake more detailed verification of
theirdeliveredcounts.
In the leadup to the annual report, there were two cycles of departmental input and adjustment of
numbers. In each case departments had 10 working days to comment on their numbers. This was a
significantimprovementonthepreAprilprocess,wherethetimetableonlyallowedfourworkingdaysfor
comment.
56
AsignificantfeatureofthepostAprilconsultationwasthattheprocesscouldaccommodateinstruments
split between departments. Incorporation of this final detail ran quite smoothly, with departments
agreeingamongthemselveshowinstrumentsshouldbesplit,withminimalneedforOBPRinvolvement.
The departments then provided the OBPR with the outcome of their discussions. Table 24 outlines the
milestonesoftherequirementscountprocess.
Table24:Milestonesoftherequirementscountprocess
PublicationofInterimReport,recommendingrequirementscount
31October2012
IssueofTermsofReferencetopotentialconsultants
21December2012
Commencementofrequirementscount
13February2013
ResponsebytheGovernmenttotheInterimReport
19February2013
Firstreportonrequirementscountandrecommendedreductions
30April2013
Revisedreportonrequirementscountandrecommendedreductions
28June2013
FurtherconsultationwithDepartments
JulyOctober2013
Firstannualreportonreducingtheburdenofregulation
31October2013
57
Table25:Requirementscountresult
Portfolio
Total
requirements
Exclusions
Harmonised
baseline
General
baseline
Total
baseline
AboriginalandTorresStrait
IslanderandMulticulturalAffairs
2,511
1,220
1,291
1,291
27,169
6,566
8,830
11,773
20,603
Communities,ChildSafetyand
DisabilityServices
23,480
22,435
1,045
1,045
Education,Trainingand
Employment
28,548
16,945
4,845
6,758
11,603
23,568
6,962
967
15,639
16,606
EnvironmentandHeritage
Protection
22,267
7,639
797
13,831
14,628
Health
54,617
27,899
10,149
16,569
26,718
18,231
4,755
1,558
11,918
13,476
107,499
52,666
6,944
47,889
54,833
LocalGovernment,Community
RecoveryandResilience
7,726
6,618
1,108
1,108
NationalParks,Recreation,Sport
andRacing
10,107
5,632
976
3,499
4,475
64,814
21,000
1,546
42,268
43,814
12,510
11,897
613
613
PremierandCabinet
2,757
2,523
234
234
Science,InformationTechnology,
InnovationandtheArts
2,536
2,165
102
269
371
StateDevelopment,Infrastructure
andPlanning
15,200
6,606
8,594
8,594
Tourism,MajorEvents,Small
BusinessandtheCommonwealth
Games
342
153
189
189
47,176
7,977
18,669
20,530
39,199
TreasuryandTrade
24,488
18,699
341
5,448
5,789
495,546
230,357
55,724
209,465
265,189
Total
58
Thepurposeofthisappendixistodescribetheprocessofassigningreductiontargetstoeachportfolio.
Theprocessofdeterminingthereductiontarget
Insettingreductiontargetsforindividualdepartments,theOBPRweighedupanumberofconsiderations:
(a)
theoverallreductionmustamountto20%
(b)
thereductionshouldbetargetedsothatitmakesagenuineimpactontheburdenofregulation
(c)
departmentaltargetsneedtoberealisticandachievable.
Many departments put forward reasons why their reduction target should be lower than average and
OBPR was not able to accommodate all these requests. Nevertheless, the OBPR made two important
adjustmentstoreductiontargets:
(a)
Incalculatingeachdepartmentsoverallreductiontarget,theOBPRrecommendsalowertargetfor
harmonisedrequirements.Thismakesasmalldifferencetodepartmentswithnoharmonised
requirementsbutmakesasignificantdifferencetoothers.TheDepartmentofAgriculture,
FisheriesandForestry(DAFF),forexample,hasabaselinecomprisingroughly43%harmonised
requirements.Applyingafullreductiontargettothoserequirements,whicharedifficulttoreduce,
wouldinsomewaysbeequivalenttoalmostdoublingthereductionforthenonharmonised
requirements,sincetheywouldbethemostlikelysourceofanyreductions.
(b)
TheOBPRrecommendsalowerreductiontargetfortwodepartments.Thebaselinecountfor
thesedepartmentsaccountedforonly0.6%oftheoverallbaselinecount,sotheirreducedtarget
makesaminordifferencetothetargetforotherdepartments.
Specialconsideration(lowertargets)
The Department of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander and Multicultural Affairs (DATSIMA) has a
baseline forming around 0.5% of the governmentwide total. The DATSIMAs nongovernment
restrictionsfallintothreebroadcategories:
(a)
CulturalheritagerestrictionsintheAboriginalCulturalHeritageAct2003,theTorresStraitIslander
CulturalHeritageAct2003,andsimilarinstruments.Theseaccountforaround65%ofthe
restrictionsinthedepartmentsbaseline.
(b)
GeneralwelfareandsocialresponsibilityprovisionsintheFamilyResponsibilitiesCommissionAct
2008.
(c)
JusticeandpolicingmatterssetoutininstrumentsliketheAboriginalandTorresStraitIslander
Communities(Justice,LandandOtherMatters)Act1984.
The OBPR does not consider that these types of regulatory provisions should be subject to a 20%
reduction.Itmaybepossibletoreducethenumberofrestrictionsbycombiningthetwoculturalheritage
Acts(whichareverysimilar),buttheywereenactedatthesametime,suggestingthatParliamenthada
good reason to keep themseparate. The OBPR therefore recommended a 5% reduction target for the
DATSIMA.
The Department of Premier and Cabinet (DPC) has a baseline forming approximately 0.1% of the
governmentwide total. The DPCs nongovernment restrictions are all related to the machinery of
government and good governance. They cover matters such as protection of whistleblowers, security
requirementsforvisitorstoParliament,andregistrationoflobbyists.TheOBPRdoesnotconsiderthat
59
these types of regulatory provisions should be subject to a 20% reduction. The OBPR therefore
recommendeda5%reductiontargetfortheDPC.
Calculationofreductiontargets
Inrecommendingreductiontargetsfordepartments,OBPRappliedatargetreductionof23.4%togeneral
requirements,and8%toharmonisedrequirements.Theweightedaverageofthesetworeductionrates
leads to an overall reduction of 20%. Details are set out in Table 26 below. The OBPR rounded the
percentagereductionforeachdepartmenttoawholenumber,toavoidthefalseprecisionoffractionsof
percentages.
Table26:RegulatoryrequirementsandrecommendedreductiontargetsbyDepartment
Portfolio
Harmonised
General
Total
Reduction
target
Total
requirements
reduction
1,291
1,291
5%
65
8,830
11,773
20,603
17%
3,503
1,045
1,045
23%
240
4,845
6,758
11,603
17%
1,973
967
15,639
16,606
23%
3,819
797
13,831
14,628
23%
3,364
AboriginalandTorresStraitIslanderand
MulticulturalAffairs
Health
10,149
16,569
26,718
18%
4,809
1,558
11,918
13,476
22%
2,965
Justice&AttorneyGeneral
6,944
47,889
54,833
21%
11,515
1,108
1,108
23%
255
976
3,499
4,475
20%
895
1,546
42,268
43,814
23%
10,077
613
613
23%
141
Premier&Cabinet
234
234
5%
12
Science,InformationTechnology,Innovationand
theArts
102
269
371
19%
70
8,594
8,594
23%
1,977
CommonwealthGames
189
189
23%
43
18,669
20,530
39,199
16%
6,272
341
5,448
5,789
22%
1,274
55,724
209,465
265,189
20%
53,269
LocalGovernment
TreasuryandTrade
Total
60
Thepurposeofthisappendixistoprovideadetaileddescriptionoftheprocessforauditing15%ofthe
requirementscountinordertoensureanacceptableerrorrate.
Thedetailedstepsoftheauditprocesswereasfollows:
(a)
TheOBPRsuppliedtheauditorwithspreadsheetscontainingregulation,butwithnocount.The
consultantsusedthesamespreadsheetsfortheircounts.
(b)
Theauditorusedarandomnumbergeneratortoselect15%oftheregulationforscrutiny.
(c)
TheauditorcompletedarequirementscountoftheselectionandsuppliedthistoOBPR.
(d)
OncetheOBPRhadtheauditorscount,itsuppliedtheauditorwiththeconsultantscount.
(e)
Theauditorthencomparedtheircountwiththeconsultantscounts.Wheretheresultswerethe
samenofurtherinvestigationwasnecessary.
(f)
Wheretheresultsdifferedtheauditorappliedcloserscrutinytodeterminewhichcountwas
correct.Thethreepossibilitieswerethattheconsultantscountwasright,theconsultantmadean
error,orthecountwasambiguous.Ambiguitiesarosewheretheregulationcouldbeinterpretedin
anumberofwaysorwherethecountguidelinesdidnotclarifytheexactapproachrequired.
(g)
TheauditorthencalculatedtheerrorrateandsentthefullcomparisonresultstoOBPRandtothe
consultant.
(h)
Uponreceivingtheresultstheconsultantexaminedtheitemsmarkedaserrors.Theaimofthis
examinationwastoverifythattheywereinfacterrorsandtoincorporateanylessonsintothe
consultantscountingprocedure.
(i)
Theconsultantandtheauditorthenhadadiscussion(withtheOBPRfacilitatingthemeeting),
wheretheconsultantcouldputforwardargumentswhysomeitemsmarkedaserrorsmightnotin
factbeerrors.
(j)
Basedonthediscussiontheauditorproducedanupdatedauditanderrorrate.
(k)
TheOBPRthensentthisauditresulttothedepartmentconcerned,alongwiththefullconsultant
countandasummarybreakupofrestrictions.
(l)
Atthesametime,theconsultantsrecountedindividualinstrumentsidentifiedashavingan
unacceptablyhigherrorrate(over5%).
Oneofthekeyoutputsoftheauditprocessistheerrorrateattheinstrumentandportfoliolevel.The
errorrateisameasurementtooltoallowtheOBPRtodiscernthequalityandrobustnessofthecounting
processandthereforeacceptthecountorrequiretheconsultantstorecount.
The general principle of the error rate is to capture the number of errors divided by the number of
potentialerrors.
61
For each line of text audited the auditor makes a determination on the consultant's count and
categorisation.ExamplesofeacharesetoutinTable26below.
(a)
"Agree"indicatesthattheauditorhasindependentlycometothesamecountand/or
categorisation(Line1)oraftersomeconsiderationagreeswiththeconsultant'scountand/or
categorisation(Line2).
(b)
"Ambiguous"indicatesthattheauditorhasindependentlycometoadifferentcountand/or
categorisation.Howeverthereasonsforthediscrepancymaybeduetouncertaintysurrounding(a)
theinterpretationoftheGuidelinesor(b)interpretationoftheinstrumentandhencethereismerit
tobothanswers(Line3).
(c)
"Error"indicatesthattheauditorhasindependentlycometoadifferentcountand/or
categorisationandaftersomeconsiderationdisagreeswiththeconsultant'sinterpretation(Line
11).Thatis,arequirementhasnotbeenidentifiedwhereitshouldhavebeen,arequirementhas
beenidentifiedwhereitshouldnothavebeenorarequirementhasbeencorrectlyidentifiedbut
miscategorisedintothesubcategories(Governmentonly,GOCorstandard).
The number of "potential" errors is the number of times the consultant may incorrectly count or
miscategorisecomparedtothetrueanswer.Forexample:
(a)
Whentheauditorconcludesthatthereshouldbebothacountandcategorisation,thenthe
numberofpotentialerrorsistwo.
(b)
Whentheauditorconcludesthatthereshouldonlybeacountbutnotacategorisationthenthe
numberofpotentialerrorsisone(Line7andLine11).
Thenumberoferrorsisthenumberoftimestheconsultantshasincorrectlycountedormiscategorised
compared to the true answer. This is denoted by the "Error" determination in the table below which
showsafewexamplesoftheerrorratecalculation.
Table26:Errorratecalculation
Auditor'scount
Count
Cat
Auditor'sdecision
Count
Cat
No.of
errors
No.of
potential
errors
Error
Rate
Zeroerrors
Line1
GOC
GOC
Agree
Agree
0/2
Line2
Gov't
Misc
Agree
Agree
0/2
Line3
Gov't
Misc
Ambiguous
Ambiguous
0/2
Line4
Gov't
Misc
Agree
Ambiguous
0/2
Line5
Gov't
Misc
Agree
Ambiguous
0/2
Line6
Misc
Misc
Ambiguous
Agree
0/2
Line7
n/a
n/a
Agree
Agree
0/1
Line8
Misc
n/a
Agree
Agree
0/2
Oneerror
Line9
GOC
Gov't
Agree
Error
1/2
Line10
Misc
Misc
Error
Agree
1/2
Line11
Misc
n/a
Error
n/a
1/1
Twoerrors
Line12
Gov't
Misc
Error
Error
2/2
Line13
n/a
Misc
Error
Error
2/2
Total
Consultant'scount
Count
Cat
7/24or29%
62
Table27:Errorrateforbaselinecount30April2013
Department
Errorrate
Affairs
1.3%
1.11%
Communities,ChildSafety&DisabilityServices
1.15%
0.87%
0.81%
0.78%
Health
0.8%
0.78%
1.65%
LocalGovernment
1.44%
0.53%
2.51%
1.04%
PremierandCabinet
1.19%
1.05%
1.33%
CommonwealthGames
0.00%
1.74%
TreasuryandTrade
1.15%
63
REFERENCES
REFERENCES
AustralianEnergyMarketOperator(2012),2012ScenarioDescriptions,January.
CommonwealthScientificandIndustrialResearchOrganisation(CSIRO)Publishing(2006),ModelCodeof
PracticefortheWelfareofAnimals:HusbandryofCaptiveBredEmus.
EnergyinAustralia2011,www.ret.gov.au/energy/Documents/factsstatspubs/EnergyinAustralia
2011.pdf
EnergyinAustralia2012,www.bree.gov.au/documents/publications/energyinaust/energyinaustralia
2012.pdf
Ergas,H.(2012),AnAssessmentofNationalHarmonisation,ReportpreparedforOfficeofBestPractice
Regulation,QueenslandCompetitionAuthority,December.
MinistryofJobs,TourismandSkillsTraining,ProvinceofBritishColumbia(undated),Regulatory
RequirementsCountMethodology.
ProductivityCommission(2012),RegulatoryImpactAnalysis:Benchmarking,ResearchReport,Canberra.
www.pc.gov.au/projects/study/riabenchmarking/report
QueenslandCompetitionAuthority(2012a),AssessmentofProposedRepealofWaterSavingRegulations,
November.
QueenslandCompetitionAuthority(2012b),MeasuringandReducingtheBurdenofRegulation,Issues
Paper,August.
QueenslandCompetitionAuthority(2012c),MeasuringandReducingtheBurdenofRegulation,Interim
Report,October.
QueenslandCompetitionAuthority(2013a)Findings,Methodology,InputsandAssumptionsQueensland
GasSchemeStudy,(forthcoming).
QueenslandCompetitionAuthority(2013b),Findings,Methodology,InputsandAssumptionsSimplifying
regulatoryapprovalsfortheminingindustry,(forthcoming).
QueenslandCompetitionAuthority(2013c),MeasuringandReducingtheBurdenofRegulation,Final
Report,February.
QueenslandDepartmentofAgriculture,FisheriesandForestry(2006),QueenslandDairyFarming
EnvironmentalCodeofPractice.
QueenslandDepartmentofEnvironmentandHeritageProtection(2012),FactSheet:TheQueensland
HeritageRegister,September.
QueenslandDepartmentofNaturalResourcesandMines(2011),Landholdersguidetotheregrowth
vegetationcode,September.
QueenslandGasScheme2012LiableYearAnnualReport,
www.business.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/9198/2012annualreport.pdf
QueenslandGasScheme,www.business.qld.gov.au/industry/energy/gas/queenslandgasscheme
QueenslandGovernment(2013),BusinessandIndustryPortal,QueenslandGasScheme,
www.business.qld.gov.au/industry/energy/gas/queenslandgasscheme
64
REFERENCES
QueenslandGovernment(2013),QueenslandGovernmentResponsetotheOBPRInterimReportona
FrameworkforReducingtheBurdenofRegulation,February.
QueenslandGovernment(2013),RegulatoryImpactStatementSystemGuidelines,July.
QueenslandGovernmentChiefInformationOffice(2012),PrintServices,
www.qgcio.qld.gov.au/products/qgeadocuments/547business/2733printservices
QueenslandStateArchives(2009),PublicRecordsAct2002,APlainEnglishGuide,November.
QueenslandTreasuryandTrade(2013a),QueenslandGovernmentResponsetotheOBPRInterimReport
onaframeworkforreducingtheburdenofregulation,February.
QueenslandTreasuryandTrade(2013b),RegulatoryImpactStatementSystemGuidelines,March.
www.aemo.com.au/planning/24180005.pdf
SynergiesEconomicConsulting(2013),Impactassessmentoftheplanninganddevelopmentassessment
processesundertheEconomicDevelopmentAct2012,September.
65

2012 13 OBPR Annual Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2012 13 OBPR Annual Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

201213AnnualReporton

You might also like