tag:theconversation.com,2011:/us/topics/red-tape-4274/articlesRed tape – The Conversation2023-11-30T01:28:14Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2188072023-11-30T01:28:14Z2023-11-30T01:28:14ZParliamentary report slams mutual obligation, calling for total overhaul of employment services<p>A parliamentary inquiry has delivered a scathing indictment of Australia’s employment services, finding it does not serve the interests of job seekers or employers and urging the privatised system be partially wound back.</p>
<p>A rigid approach to mutual obligation is killing unemployed people’s motivation, employers are flooded with inappropriate applications, and people are not adequately assessed upfront, the inquiry has found. </p>
<p>“We have an inefficient, outsourced, fragmented social security compliance management system that sometimes gets someone a job against all odds,” the committee chair, Victorian Labor MP Julian Hill, writes in his foreword to the report into Workforce Australia Employment Services. </p>
<p>The inquiry, done by a House of Representatives committee, finds the system can’t be fixed by “tweaks”. </p>
<p>It recommends a comprehensive rebuilding of the system with a much stronger role for government, including the establishment of a new entity within the public service to drive the system and be a “hybrid provider”. </p>
<p>Employment services were privatised 25 years ago and form the federal government’s biggest single procurement outside defence.</p>
<p>The inquiry found jobseekers are subject to “excessive – often very punitive – compliance and enforcement arrangements, which have little or no positive impact on their capacity for social and economic participation”.</p>
<p>The present approach “is tying the system up in red-tape and pointlessly harming productivity in providers, driving large and small businesses away from the system, and actually making many people less employable.” </p>
<p>The inquiry urges a more tailored approach. </p>
<p>This would include counselling clients several times before moving to compliance, an adjusted sanctions regime, and having “human decisions-makers” deal with key compliance functions, removing “Robo-Cancel” automation in suspending and cancelling payments. </p>
<p>The report, titled Rebuilding Employment Services, says stakeholders painted a picture of a scheme based on fear, excessive competition and compliance. </p>
<p>Participants fear doing something wrong and losing income. Providers fear the department giving them a black mark and losing their contracts. Excessive competition is to the detriment of employers and vulnerable job seekers. </p>
<p>The report says the public service, sitting on top of the system, “is detached and seemingly disinterested in or unaware of what actually happens at the frontline or in brokering place-based solutions, sharing best practice or encouraging innovation”. </p>
<p>Instead, it is focused on procurement, contract management and key performance indicators. </p>
<p>The employment services system is underpinned by two “flawed theories”.</p>
<p>“The first is that unemployment is an individual failing […] and that clients will make efforts to secure employment if only they are beaten hard enough. </p>
<p>"The second is that choice and competition in human services will inevitably result in better services and improved employment outcomes, especially for vulnerable and long-term unemployed people,” the report says. </p>
<p>“The system is also driven by the pernicious myth of the ‘dole bluder’, reflected in a patently ridiculous level of compliance and reporting activities.</p>
<p>"Employers have made it clear that the system adds little value to their business, and that it repeatedly tries to force unsuitable jobseekers into vacancies without providing adequate incentives or support.”</p>
<p>The report says “a hunger games-style contracting model and regulatory culture drives very high turnover in providers during contracting and licensing rounds”. This leads to disruption and devastates trust. In the last round, some 22% of regions saw all providers removed. </p>
<p>The inquiry urges government be an “active steward” proving enabling services as well as some direct service delivery in “thin markets” and to rebuild capability. </p>
<p>“Consistent with the world’s best employment systems and other human services (think TAFE, education, health or aged care) a public sector core to the employment services system must be rebuilt,” Hill writes in his foreword. </p>
<p>“Australia must change our culture and mindset from the current paradigm where politicians obsessively contract employment services out and deny responsibility, to a system where service partners are contracted to work with government and employers in local communities.” </p>
<p>The new entity proposed, Employment Services Australia, would be within the department of employment and workplace relations. It would be a large “digital-hybrid provider for jobseekers”. </p>
<p>It would establish regional hubs, where possible co-located with existing services, which would undertake jobseeker assessment and referrals to services, as well as engaging with industry and employers. </p>
<p>The inquiry’s blueprint for reform recommends dialling back excessive competition in local areas, focusing on more employer engagement, and considering integrating digital employment marketplaces, such as SEEK, LinkedIn and competitors into the system.</p>
<p>The committee’s 75 recommendations include the government creating a permanent administrative traineeship position for disadvantaged jobseekers in the electorate office of each MP. This is to lead by example and expose all parliamentarians to the lived experiences of disadvantaged people. Each placement would last between nine and 18 months. </p>
<p>The report says Australia spends materially less than the OECD average on employment services overall. Taking out administrative costs and the like, Australia spends slightly more than the OECD average on case management, job placements and benefit administration. But it invests significantly less in direct job creation, start up initiatives and training.</p>
<p>In a dissenting report, Liberal MP Aaron Violi criticised some of the central recommendations.</p>
<p>“The Coalition has concerns about some of the key recommendations […] that evidently seek to water down mutual obligation requirements, pass on key employment service functions from the private to the public sector, which end up increasing the size of the bureaucracy, inflating the cost to the taxpayer and simply risk
creating more red tape.”</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/218807/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The government has released a review of the employment services system. The scathing indictment has found the current system doesn’t serve the interests of jobseekers or employers.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2107572023-09-08T12:24:18Z2023-09-08T12:24:18ZWhy managers’ attempts to empower their employees often fail – and even lead to unethical behavior<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/546547/original/file-20230906-16-vbxixf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Employees need resources, information and support from colleagues to be truly empowered.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/mistakes-are-ways-of-learning-what-works-and-what-royalty-free-image/1307840971">Layla Bird/E+ Collection/Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>A majority of American workers right now are not feeling very motivated on the job, <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-09-06/american-worker-motivation-is-falling-this-year-new-data-shows?srnd=premium">a new survey suggests</a>.</p>
<p>Management experts often encourage business leaders to motivate employees by <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/4164863">empowering them</a>. The idea is that when workers are free to make decisions and manage their workday they become more motivated, perform better and work more creatively. </p>
<p>However, for decades, employee empowerment initiatives <a href="https://hbr.org/1998/05/empowerment-the-emperors-new-clothes">have often failed</a> or <a href="https://doi.org/10.5465/ame.2000.4468067">fallen short of expectations</a>. Zappos, for example, <a href="https://www.inc.com/bill-carmody/holacracy-why-zappos-continues-to-disrupt-itself.html">was once hailed</a> for its <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/tony-hsieh-tells-how-zappos-runs-without-bosses-1445911325?mod=article_inline">no-bosses structure</a>, but that experiment has largely been <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/amazon-changes-at-zappos-slowly-dismantle-tony-hsiehs-legacy-5d393647">dismantled and abandoned</a> in recent years.</p>
<p>As a leadership scholar, I have studied the effects of leader behavior on <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?hl=en&user=UPtyxVwAAAAJ&view_op=list_works&sortby=pubdate">employee motivation</a> for over a decade. I’ve learned that when companies design and implement empowering leadership initiatives, they often overlook key factors that are necessary for empowerment to work.</p>
<p>As a result, their efforts to empower employees often result in little impact or <a href="https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2023-80196-001">are entirely ineffective</a>. In fact, they can even lead employees to <a href="https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2022-41857-001">engage in unethical behavior</a>. </p>
<p>Here are four ways, my research shows, a company can avoid common pitfalls to empowering leadership initiatives. </p>
<h2>1. Provide all needed resources</h2>
<p>Empowered employees need to know they can access whatever resources they need to succeed. For example, a marketing professional might need access to information databases, planning software and a sufficient budget for market research. Employees should also feel that additional resources to support new ideas are readily available if and when needed. </p>
<p>To do this, companies can plan and budget jobs in ways that guarantee that employees have additional, or excess, resources to draw upon. Moreover, companies can communicate frequently – verbally in team meetings and also via digital communications – not only that resources are available when needed but also that these additional resources can be obtained easily and quickly.</p>
<h2>2. Set clear goals and strategies</h2>
<p>“People can’t be self-managing without information,” business management expert <a href="https://hbr.org/2011/12/first-lets-fire-all-the-managers">Gary Hamel once noted</a>. “[T]he goal is to provide staffers with all the information they need to monitor their work and make wise decisions.”</p>
<p>In other words, companies can more effectively empower their employees if they divulge or communicate how their responsibilities fit into the bigger picture or strategic direction of the business. For example, the marketing professional mentioned above might benefit from an understanding of how a new product fits into the organization’s overall product portfolio. </p>
<p>Firms can also offer regular check-ins or town hall meetings at which everybody in the organization can ask questions about the strategic goals and vision of the company. </p>
<h2>3. Signal clear and unwavering support</h2>
<p>Employees who are truly empowered believe they have the emotional and physical support needed from colleagues – including supervisors, peers and subordinates – to do their jobs well. This entails verbal encouragement as well as offers to assist on tasks and projects. </p>
<p>Likewise, managers can emphasize that they believe in employees’ capabilities and are there to enable employee growth and autonomy. Organizations can create a company culture of support by rewarding supportive actions that promote employee self-direction.</p>
<p>My research along with management professor <a href="https://poole.ncsu.edu/people/blkirkma/">Brad Kirkman</a> shows clearly across several studies that when employees do not have access to resources, information and support, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0001100">they are not in fact empowered</a>. As a result, the desired performance-boosting effects on their job performance, proactive behavior and creativity do not take place.</p>
<h2>4. Remove red tape and other ‘bad’ stressors</h2>
<p>Unnecessary red tape, office politics, ambiguity and interpersonal conflict create a lot of negative stress for employees, which <a href="https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2005.18803921">hinders work performance</a>. These “bad” stressors are different from “good” stressors that can encourage growth. </p>
<p>For example, the marketing professional from the previous examples might have to fill out multiple lengthy forms just to request access to an information database. Or perhaps they have to play political games to garner support for funding of a much-needed planning tool. Conflict, meanwhile, can take the form of unspoken rivalry with co-workers about perceived unjust promotions or resource allocations.</p>
<p>Another study that Kirkman and I conducted showed that an empowering leadership style paired with high amounts of “bad” stressors can actually backfire and be detrimental to a company. We found that employees in those situations are <a href="https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2022-41857-001">more likely to disengage morally</a> from their work and act unethically than employees who work with less empowering leaders. </p>
<p>For example, in one of our experiments, participants were asked to solve unsolvable anagrams as part of their fictitious job. Among participants who faced higher amounts of “bad” stressors before attempting to solve the anagrams, those exposed to an empowering leader were 75% more likely to lie about solving their puzzles for the sake of their organization than those who were exposed to a leader who was described as not empowering.</p>
<p>Empowering leadership instills in employees a mindset to get things done and a desire to pay back the organization for the empowerment received. But without the information, resources and support to succeed – or when there is a lot of negative stress in employees’ work environments – people seem to switch to an expediency mindset whereby anything goes.</p>
<p>If business executives truly want to empower their employees, they cannot merely encourage managers to empower their subordinates. They must go the extra mile and address the four factors identified above. Otherwise, employees can feel left dangling in the void, struggling to prove their ability and even tempted to take actions that could eventually harm the company.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/210757/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Tobias Dennerlein does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>An expert on employee motivation explains four challenges companies should address if they truly want to empower their workers.Tobias Dennerlein, Assistant Professor of Management, Purdue UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2093202023-09-07T01:27:14Z2023-09-07T01:27:14ZRed tape can strangle your key asset as an employee: your motivation<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/540106/original/file-20230731-198058-tnsu2h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C473%2C7337%2C3746&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Are you spending more and more time at work doing paperwork and filling in forms rather than the thing you were trained and hired for? Does this busy work often seem to resist rational purpose or questioning? Does it kill your productivity, initiative, motivation and, frankly, your self-worth and sanity?</p>
<p>If any of this sounds familiar, you are experiencing a classic dilemma of the 21st-century workplace. The unique and irreplaceable human qualities for which workers are increasingly hired tend to clash badly with the rules designed to reign in their worst excesses. </p>
<p>This insight is part of recent research that applies behavioural science to bureaucracy. But more than that, the research also suggests how to design rules for employees in a way that suits human psychology.</p>
<p>Although stories of creeping bureaucracy abound in many industries, evidence – and our own experience – suggests nowhere has the problem of red tape exploded as much as it has in universities. </p>
<p>Staff complain the time they have for teaching and research is being eaten up by filling in forms and writing reports of questionable value. But this gripe goes beyond the inefficiency of bureaucratic excess. Some rules demotivate because they are interpreted as patronising.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/reform-australian-universities-by-cutting-their-bureaucracies-12781">Reform Australian universities by cutting their bureaucracies</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Red tape in the academy</h2>
<p>Academic bureaucracy is proliferating. At Yale University, for example, the number of managerial and professional staff has risen <a href="https://yaledailynews.com/blog/2021/11/10/reluctance-on-the-part-of-its-leadership-to-lead-yales-administration-increases-by-nearly-50-percent">three times faster</a> than the number of undergraduates since 2003. In Australia, leading research universities say the cost of complying with “unnecessary, redundant and duplicative regulation” has <a href="https://go8.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/Go8-Reducing-the-regulatory-overload.pdf">doubled since 2013</a>.</p>
<p>Factors contributing to this, as identified by a 2022 <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1094648/independent-review-research-bureaucracy-final-report.pdf">UK government inquiry</a>, include external demands for assurance that research is being done according to funding terms and conditions; risk-averse cultures leading to unnecessary hierarchies of approval; and growth in organisational size leading to more layers of management.</p>
<p>But while universities may be the most chronic examples, red tape is increasing in most workplaces. In the United States, the number of managers, supervisors and support staff has grown at more than twice the rate of other jobs <a href="https://hbr.org/2016/07/more-of-us-are-working-in-big-bureaucratic-organizations-than-ever-before">since the 1980s</a> – and the shift to hybrid and remote work is likely to compound this trend, as managers institute procedures to keep workers accountable.</p>
<p>As management experts Gary Hamel and Michele Zanini wrote in their 2020 book <a href="https://www.humanocracy.com/">Humanocracy</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>bureaucracy has been growing, not shrinking – a fact that is correlated, we believe, with the worrying slowdown in global productivity growth, a phenomenon that bodes for living standards and economic opportunity.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>How did it come to this? And how can organisations with bloated bureaucracies go about cutting their red tape? </p>
<h2>The perils of scientific management</h2>
<p>While all organisations need processes to run, increasing bureaucracy has led to a proliferation of what economic anthropologist David Graeber pithily termed “<a href="https://strikemag.org/bullshit-jobs/">bullshit jobs</a>”:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Huge swathes of people, in Europe and North America in particular, spend their entire working lives performing tasks they secretly believe do not really need to be performed. The moral and spiritual damage that comes from this situation is profound. It is a scar across our collective soul. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>This helps explain why productivity is slowing and worker engagement <a href="https://www.gallup.com/workplace/468233/employee-engagement-needs-rebound-2023.aspx">is declining</a>, with so many <a href="https://www.randstad.co.uk/about-us/industry-insight/great-resignation/">dissatisfied with their jobs</a>. </p>
<p>One problem is many managers are trained in “<a href="https://thebusinessprofessor.com/en_US/management-leadership-organizational-behavior/what-is-scientific-management-theory">scientific management</a>,” which aims to improve efficiency by encouraging individuals not to problem-solve but to focus instead on performing simple, repetitive tasks as effectively as possible. </p>
<p>But people aren’t cogs in machines. Rather, they relate to their organisations on a personal level. Bureaucracy undermines that relationship. </p>
<p>Unnecessary bureaucracy signals to workers that they are not to be trusted. This suggests an uncaring and low-quality relationship, to which the natural human response is to want to quit the relationship – either overtly, by resigning, or quietly, by simply making less effort.</p>
<h2>Beating the bureaucratic urge</h2>
<p>The good news is there are ways to turn the tide of red tape. </p>
<p>“Defenders of the status quo will tell you that bureaucracy is the inevitable correlate of complexity,” write Hamel and Zanini, “but our evidence suggests otherwise.”</p>
<p>We know many examples of good practice from our own experience. Some universities have <a href="https://hive.com/blog/lean-team/">lean teams</a> tasked with cutting red tape. In others, senior managers regularly visit the proverbial campfires. Some vice-chancellors retain teaching duties to stay in touch with changing demands. Leaders can glean much about the impact their middle managers’ rules have by engaging with the rank and file.</p>
<p>Canadian tech firm Shopify has created a meeting calculator to quantify the <a href="https://edition.cnn.com/2023/07/12/tech/shopify-meeting-cost-calculator/index.html">true cost of meetings</a>. It also eliminated all reoccurring meetings with three or more people. As a result, the average Shopify employee now spends <a href="https://finance.yahoo.com/news/shopify-cfo-explains-meeting-cost-105829140.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAANCOUaEMrT3DoUWmWuRsYXUSb0_wSsn4Ld3U5wYdBXVHS8HvTjQ1934NqOfpTsLOzc1rWrxGppwB99QlAJWhyEoKPP0feGAQWoxz4mzqYCpTsdYCpsu6oYBihVkvxKLpl3evpzj9ZjuZDQkQEUEWgQPvVtQTNNQUwTXGmTesbxMi">14% less time meetings</a> compared with this time last year. It serves as a reminder that time is money and there may be other ways to get things done. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/what-is-red-tape-and-why-is-it-a-problem-for-small-firms-6601">What is red tape and why is it a problem for small firms?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>For any manager who is nervous about the prospect of giving workers more autonomy and fewer forms to fill in, here are some <a href="https://www.amazon.com.au/Work-Rules-Laszlo-Bock/dp/1455554790">words of reassurance</a> from Google’s former human resources chief, Lazlo Bock:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Give people slightly more trust, freedom, and authority than you are comfortable giving them. If you’re not nervous, you haven’t given them enough. </p>
</blockquote>
<p><a href="https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/PR-08-2018-0319/full/html">Research suggests</a> managers who trust their employees elicit higher engagement and performance, and less burnout among their staff.</p>
<p>As Christian Hunt, former head of behavioural science at investment bank UBS, <a href="https://www.wiley.com/en-au/Humanizing+Rules:+Bringing+Behavioural+Science+to+Ethics+and+Compliance-p-9781394177400">explains</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>If we hire people because they’re smart, then it’s probably not a good idea to treat them in a manner that suggests we think the opposite.</p>
</blockquote><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/209320/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Management jobs are proliferating much faster than other roles. But behavioural research shows the extra box-ticking can leave employees feeling stressed, patronised and demotivated.Meg Elkins, Senior Lecturer with School of Economics, Finance and Marketing and Behavioural Business Lab Member, RMIT UniversityAnanta Neelim, Senior Lecturer in Economics, Tasmanian Behavioural Lab, University of TasmaniaRobert Hoffmann, Professor of Economics, Tasmanian Behavioural Lab, University of TasmaniaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1268902019-11-15T13:28:04Z2019-11-15T13:28:04ZProposed asylum fees are part of a bid to make immigrants to the US fund their own red tape<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/301339/original/file-20191112-178532-sd71vp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Like making applicants wait in Mexico, fees could discourage asylum seekers.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Mexico-US-Asylum-Seekers/44834339facf45e7b58146b3717fd253/30/0">AP Photo/Fernando Llano</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The <a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2019/11/14/2019-24366/us-citizenship-and-immigration-services-fee-schedule-and-changes-to-certain-other-immigration">Trump administration</a> wants to make people fleeing persecution in their home countries pay for something they’ve long gotten for free: the right to apply for asylum in the United States. </p>
<p>As an immigration attorney and a law professor who has <a href="https://www.bu.edu/law/profile/sarah-r-sherman-stokes/">represented people seeking asylum for over a decade</a>, I believe this change, which could go into effect as soon as mid-December following a monthlong comment period, would be not just cruel but also unusual.</p>
<p>At present, only <a href="https://www.loc.gov/law/help/asylum-application-fees/index.php">Iran, Australia and Fiji</a> charge fees to would-be asylum-seekers. </p>
<h2>Fees for everything</h2>
<p>Making immigrants escaping harm and persecution shoulder the cost of processing their paperwork is in line with other trends in U.S. immigration law over the last several decades. <a href="https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/RL34040.html">Fees for everything</a> from green cards to naturalization are not only common but increasingly costly and mandatory.</p>
<p>“You must submit the correct fees or we will reject your form,” <a href="https://www.uscis.gov/fees">U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services</a>, the Department of Homeland Security agency that oversees these applications, warns on its website. It <a href="https://www.uscis.gov/about-us/budget-planning-performance">relies primarily on revenue from these fees</a> to cover its entire budget.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://s3.amazonaws.com/public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2019-24366.pdf">proposed rule</a> would make applying for asylum, which has always been free, cost US$50. While that might not seem like much, asylum seekers do not initially have work authorization, and many, if not most, have fled their home countries with just the clothes on their backs.</p>
<p>In my experience, charging a fee would create a significant barrier for people who flee to the United States to escape trauma and persecution. I’m also concerned that the government plans to make no exceptions. Without any possibility of a fee waiver, those who can’t pay this fee would be unable to seek asylum.</p>
<p>In addition to introducing an asylum application fee, the <a href="https://www.fragomen.com/insights/alerts/uscis-proposes-significant-changes-immigration-benefits-fee-structure">government wants to hike</a> the cost of other immigration petitions and applications by <a href="https://www.aila.org/advo-media/agency-liaison/submit-feedback-notices-requests-for-comment/advance-copy-uscis-proposed-rule-with-adjustments">as much as 532%</a>. Most proposed increases are much smaller than that, and fees for a few services would decline slightly.</p>
<p>The Trump administration says it would use the additional revenue generated to help <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/u-s-seeks-to-hike-fees-for-immigration-applications-and-impose-first-ever-asylum-charge/">fund U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services</a>, a government agency that processes immigration applications, as well as Immigration and Customs Enforcement, another agency that handles enforcement actions.</p>
<p><iframe id="8qlei" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/8qlei/3/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<h2>Established practice</h2>
<p>Immigrants who have suffered past persecution, or who fear future persecution, on account of their race, religion, nationality, political opinion or particular social group may <a href="https://theconversation.com/refugee-or-migrant-sometimes-the-line-is-blurred-79700">qualify for asylum</a>. The process can take months or years. The nation’s <a href="https://www.justice.gov/eoir/about-office">immigration courts</a> currently have <a href="https://trac.syr.edu/phptools/immigration/court_backlog">a backlog of more than 1 million cases</a>. </p>
<p>President Donald Trump often denigrates the asylum system and asylum applicants. </p>
<p>“People want to come in. <a href="https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/trump-border-04-05-19/index.html">They shouldn’t be coming in</a>,” he has said, telling asylum-seekers to “turn around.” He has also called the asylum system a “<a href="https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4790668/president-trump-mocks-asylum-seekers-calls-program-scam">scam</a>.”</p>
<p>Yet the United States is bound by both domestic and international law to provide protection to those fleeing persecution.</p>
<p>The U.S. is a signatory of United Nations treaties forged in <a href="https://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/ProtocolStatusOfRefugees.aspx">1951 and 1967</a> that spell out the <a href="https://ijrcenter.org/refugee-law/">rights of refugees</a> and asylum-seekers. <a href="https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/united-states-immigration-and-refugee-law-1921-1980">Immigration directives</a> issued and laws passed after <a href="https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/introduction-to-the-holocaust">millions of Jews</a>, <a href="https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/genocide-of-european-roma-gypsies-1939-1945">Roma</a> and others perished during the Holocaust established frameworks and systems for asylum applications and processes.</p>
<p>In short, the nation has legal obligations to allow noncitizens to seek asylum and to vet and process those cases in accordance with domestic and international laws.</p>
<p>The U.S. asylum rules and regulations on the books originated in 1974 and were <a href="http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title8-section1158&num=0&edition=prelim">refined in 1980</a>. Asylum law has evolved since then, explicitly without fees – even as fees became routine for other immigration applications. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/04/30/most-migration-us-costs-money-theres-reason-asylum-doesnt/">rationale for keeping it that way is simple</a>: The ability to pay should never stand in the way of refugees and asylum-seekers obtaining the protection to which they are legally entitled. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/273881/original/file-20190510-183089-1pg6sin.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/273881/original/file-20190510-183089-1pg6sin.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/273881/original/file-20190510-183089-1pg6sin.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=397&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/273881/original/file-20190510-183089-1pg6sin.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=397&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/273881/original/file-20190510-183089-1pg6sin.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=397&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/273881/original/file-20190510-183089-1pg6sin.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=499&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/273881/original/file-20190510-183089-1pg6sin.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=499&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/273881/original/file-20190510-183089-1pg6sin.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=499&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Unable to find asylum elsewhere, dozens of Jewish refugees spent months trying to disembark at a Latin American port until the Dutch government let them land on Curacao in the Caribbean in 1942.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Watchf-AP-I-ANT-APHS339619-WWII-So-America-Cen-/baeb10c907e94f5a8f679d15b550e4a4/457/0">AP Photo</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Immigration tolls</h2>
<p>Meanwhile, fees for other kinds of immigration applications have been rising for years, becoming <a href="https://www.vox.com/2019/3/12/18260770/immigration-fee-filing-trump-budget">increasingly onerous</a>.</p>
<p>Applying for naturalization, the process by which immigrants with legal status become citizens, cost <a href="https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/files/pressrelease/feehistory_020304.pdf">$35 in 1985</a> – the equivalent of $83 today after accounting for inflation. But the price tag for that same application is now <a href="https://www.uscis.gov/n-400">$640</a> – eight times as much.</p>
<p>Under changes proposed in November 2019, <a href="https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/USCIS-Raises-Service-Costs-564828361.html">naturalization fees</a> would nearly double to $1,170.</p>
<p><a href="https://citizenpath.com/faq/cost-become-us-citizen/">Waivers are available</a> in some cases. But as a result of this sticker shock, many longtime lawful permanent residents – that is, immigrants with green cards – <a href="https://www.kqed.org/news/11660853/immigrants-seek-stability-of-u-s-citizenship-but-cost-is-often-a-barrier">can’t afford to become citizens</a> despite their eligibility, interest and strong ties to this country through their families, businesses, religious engagement and community involvement.</p>
<p>While some immigration lawyers, like those at <a href="https://www.bu.edu/law/current-students/jd-student-resources/experiential-learning/clinics/immigrants-rights-human-trafficking-clinic/">our clinic</a> at Boston University School of Law, represent clients <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-attorneys-represent-immigrants-for-free-99734">for free</a>, such services are scarce. <a href="https://personalfinance.costhelper.com/immigration-attorney.html">Lawyers’ fees</a>, therefore, can add to the burden as well.</p>
<h2>What happens next</h2>
<p>Are asylum fees inevitable? Not necessarily.</p>
<p>The proposed changes are subject to official rule-making procedures, scheduled to last 30 days. Implementation could be delayed or blocked, however, <a href="https://www.vox.com/2019/4/30/18523990/trump-asylum-border-new">by lawsuits</a> filed on behalf of immigrants by advocacy groups. </p>
<p>Likewise, many of the other obstacles the Trump administration has placed in the paths of asylum-seekers, such as forcing them to <a href="https://psmag.com/news/trump-immigration-victory-what-will-it-mean-for-asylum-seekers">wait in Mexico</a> for their hearings and instructing authorities responsible for screening applicants to <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/immigration/us-asylum-screeners-to-take-more-confrontational-approach-as-trump-aims-to-turn-more-migrants-away-at-the-border/2019/05/07/3b15e076-70de-11e9-9eb4-0828f5389013_story.html">become more confrontational</a> during preliminary interviews, might not withstand court challenges. </p>
<p>Through it all, one thing is clear. <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2019/05/01/asylum-seekers-leave-everything-behind-theres-no-way-they-can-pay-trumps-fee/">Most asylum-seekers come with nothing</a>. What little savings they have are often used to pay for their journey to the United States and their basic needs upon arrival. </p>
<p>If they are detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement and are fortunate enough to have the opportunity and ability to <a href="https://www.aboutbail.com/pages/how-immigration-bail-bonds-work">get out on bail</a>, any funds they have remaining are quickly depleted.</p>
<p>Making it harder for asylum-seekers to access protection is sure to leave many in dire straits.</p>
<p><em>This is an updated version of an article originally published on <a href="https://theconversation.com/charging-asylum-application-fees-is-the-latest-way-the-us-could-make-immigrants-pay-for-its-red-tape-116404">May 13, 2019</a>.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/126890/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Sarah R. Sherman-Stokes is affiliated with the Boston University School of Law Immigrants' Rights and Human Trafficking Program which provides free legal services to asylum seekers and noncitizens facing deportation. </span></em></p>Fees for everything from green cards to naturalization are not only common, but increasingly costly and mandatory.Sarah R. Sherman-Stokes, Lecturer and Clinical Instructor of Law; Associate Director of the Immigrants’ Rights and Human Trafficking Clinic, Boston UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1215612019-08-12T19:59:38Z2019-08-12T19:59:38ZRed tape in aged care shouldn’t force staff to prioritise ticking boxes over residents’ outcomes<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/287634/original/file-20190812-71913-1gmysg0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The aged care royal commission has looked at regulation in aged care.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">From shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Last week’s hearings at the <a href="https://agedcare.royalcommission.gov.au/hearings/Pages/post-hearing-submissions.aspx">aged care royal commission</a> in Brisbane looked at regulation in aged care. While rules and regulations are designed to safeguard residents, bureaucratic “red tape” also contributes to the failings in aged care. </p>
<p>The fear among nursing home staff of failing a review visit by an Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission surveyor has been known to shift the focus from care for residents to meeting paper trail requirements.</p>
<p>The best outcome for aged care residents and their families would be new reporting requirements <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/335110268_The_Distinction_between_Process_and_Outcomes_Focused_Governance_and_Accountability_Frameworks">centred on outcomes rather than processes</a>. Their primary focus should be on the mediation of critical incidents – that is, looking at what caused them and how they could be prevented in future – and the maintenance of health.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/our-ailing-aged-care-system-shows-you-cant-skimp-on-nursing-care-115565">Our ailing aged care system shows you can't skimp on nursing care</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>How did we get here?</h2>
<p>The crisis in the aged care sector has emerged over time. At least in part, systemic problems in organisations <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/%28SICI%291099-1735%28199603%2913%3A1%3C13%3A%3AAID-SRES66%3E3.0.CO%3B2-O">arise from interactions</a> among its key players. These interactions must be aligned to achieve its <a href="https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/e33a/5f696b7af6c2eaa3fdbefe94dbf42234bebe.pdf">common goals</a>. </p>
<p>But the key players in the aged care system pursue divergent agendas. Regulators focus on process adherence, while staff struggle with their limited capacity to manage the complex needs of residents. Meanwhile, proprietors focus on economic viability.</p>
<p>The prevailing approach of dealing with the problem of a particular key player in isolation will not solve the problems of aged care as a whole. </p>
<h2>Governance and accountability</h2>
<p>Our research suggests the need for a major culture shift in the aged care system.</p>
<p>Around the world, governments are being urged to put less emphasis on <a href="http://johnbraithwaite.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Regulating-Aged-Care-Ritualis.pdf">process measurement</a> and more on <a href="http://www.iqg.com.br/uploads/biblioteca/the_strategy.pdf">outcome transparency</a>. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/weve-had-20-aged-care-reviews-in-20-years-will-the-royal-commission-be-any-different-103347">We've had 20 aged care reviews in 20 years – will the royal commission be any different?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Peter Drucker, a well-known management consultant, educator and author, once said “management is doing things right; leadership is doing the right things”. </p>
<p>Ticking the boxes of a protocol to demonstrate “regulatory compliance” – that is, doing things right – is no longer an option on its own. Residents and their families expect staff to be attentive to residents’ changing <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19674233">physical, emotional, social and cognitive needs</a>; that is, doing the right things.</p>
<p>These insights tell us the aged care system needs to be <a href="https://www.springer.com/gp/book/9783319646046">redesigned</a>.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/nearly-2-out-of-3-nursing-homes-are-understaffed-these-10-charts-explain-why-aged-care-is-in-crisis-114182">Nearly 2 out of 3 nursing homes are understaffed. These 10 charts explain why aged care is in crisis</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>What would this look like in practice?</h2>
<p>Let’s consider two common aged care problems – falls and diabetes – whose management is significantly influenced by the chosen accountability framework. The differences between an outcomes-based approach (that is, adapting care to problems in their context) and a process-based approach (adhering to a protocol) are stark.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/287636/original/file-20190812-71921-u53rxr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/287636/original/file-20190812-71921-u53rxr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/287636/original/file-20190812-71921-u53rxr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/287636/original/file-20190812-71921-u53rxr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/287636/original/file-20190812-71921-u53rxr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=425&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/287636/original/file-20190812-71921-u53rxr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=425&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/287636/original/file-20190812-71921-u53rxr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=425&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The extent to which staff in aged care are required to focus on documentation may detract from their capacity to care for residents.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">From shutterstock.com</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The first example: a resident has a fall. Rather than only assessing her for injuries and vital signs (as per protocol), staff would also assess potential reasons for the fall – for example, lack of mobility, pain, low blood pressure, or polypharmacy (taking multiple prescription medications at once) – and involve allied health professionals in preventive and rehabilitative care. This could include muscle strengthening exercises, gait and balance retraining, pain management and medication review. These are measures that could reduce the likelihood of the patient falling again, thereby improving her outcomes.</p>
<p>And let’s take a resident with normally stable diabetes, who one day records an elevated blood sugar reading. Rather than just giving him more insulin, staff would also assess potential underlying reasons for the elevated reading. These could include loss of appetite, an infection, or an episode of <a href="https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/delirium/symptoms-causes/syc-20371386">delirium</a>.</p>
<h2>The royal commission should do many things, but adding red tape isn’t one of them</h2>
<p>Increasing frailty and/or significant memory decline are the main reasons for admission to an aged care facility. These people are particularly vulnerable as their health changes frequently and rapidly. </p>
<p>Being bogged down by <a href="http://johnbraithwaite.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Regulating-Aged-Care-Ritualis.pdf">regulatory ritualism</a> reduces the time staff have available to spend on residents’ physical, social, emotional and cognitive needs. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/dont-wait-for-a-crisis-start-planning-your-aged-care-now-113572">Don't wait for a crisis – start planning your aged care now</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>True accountability in aged care is achieved by demonstrating how the provided care has impacted a resident’s well-being. In that regard, the Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission should provide leadership and primarily act as an educator, helping facilities to become <a href="https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/163984/the-fifth-discipline-by-peter-m-senge/9780385517256/">learning organisations</a>. If an aged care facility fails to “learn and improve”, then sanctions and penalties become necessary.</p>
<p>More bureaucracy would only serve to perpetuate the current crisis, and would fail those residents and families who have suffered from <a href="https://agedcare.royalcommission.gov.au">the current failings in the sector</a>.</p>
<p><em>Len Gainsford, a former adjunct research fellow in accounting & governance at Swinburne University of Technology, contributed to this article.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/121561/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Joachim Sturmberg is Foundation President of the International Society for Systems and Complexity Sciences for Health (ISSCSH). </span></em></p>Bureaucratic ‘red tape’ has contributed to the current crisis in our aged care system. We need a system of accountability that focuses more on residents’ outcomes, and less on processes.Joachim Sturmberg, Conjoint Associate Professor of General Practice, University of NewcastleLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1203922019-08-02T12:22:41Z2019-08-02T12:22:41ZThe White House is upending decades of protocol for policy-making<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/286518/original/file-20190731-186809-1835ta4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Ford, Carter, George H.W. Bush and Clinton led four of the first administrations to fully embrace policy analysis.</span> </figcaption></figure><p>Whether it’s <a href="https://www.propublica.org/article/asylum-seekers-that-followed-trump-rule-now-dont-qualify-because-of-new-trump-rule">overhauling asylum procedures</a>, adding a question about <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-the-supreme-court-asked-for-an-explanation-of-the-2020-census-citizenship-question-119567">citizenship to the 2020 Census</a>, or rolling back <a href="https://arstechnica.com/cars/2019/06/17-automakers-ask-trump-to-hold-off-on-fuel-economy-rollback/">fuel standards</a>, a pattern has emerged when the Trump administration changes policies and creates new ones.</p>
<p>An announcement is made, media attention follows, the policy is formally proposed and finalized – generating more news coverage along the way. In many cases, judges suspend the new policy as <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/11/8/18076324/daca-supreme-court-trump-when-lawsuit">lawsuits work their way through</a> the system. <a href="https://www.brookings.edu/research/trumps-deregulatory-efforts-keep-losing-in-court-and-the-losses-could-make-it-harder-for-future-administrations-to-deregulate/">Unusually</a>, the Supreme Court often ends up determining whether the new policy can go into effect.</p>
<p><a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/10841806.2000.11643493">All presidents since the 1960s</a> have embraced a process known as <a href="https://www.britannica.com/topic/policy-analysis">policy analysis</a> that requires careful consideration and deliberation at every step of the way. In most cases, the public also gets to weigh in before a final decision is made. Based on <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=R1CcxM8AAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">my research</a> about regulatory decision-making, I’ve observed a sea change in how Trump’s team is dealing with public policy compared to previous administrations.</p>
<h2>Administrative Procedure Act</h2>
<p>For the <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177%2F003231879404600211">first 150 years of this country’s history</a>, Congress, not presidents, decided on policies by enacting laws. </p>
<p>Starting <a href="https://www.fda.gov/about-fda/fda-basics/when-and-why-was-fda-formed">around 1900</a>, lawmakers began to delegate this task to independent agencies, such as the Securities and Exchange Commission, and to government agencies under the president’s control. The pace of this shift stepped up <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/article-1/section-1/delegation-of-legislative-power">during the New Deal</a>, three decades later.</p>
<p>But because this arrangement can empower unelected bureaucrats, <a href="https://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2448&context=facpubs">questions about accountability</a> arose. Chief among them: Could decisions made by unelected officials that affected millions of people be allowed in a democracy? Requiring public participation and systematic analysis became routine and required for most policy changes as a result.</p>
<p>The mandate for public participation came first.</p>
<p>In 1946, Congress passed the <a href="https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-administrative-procedure-act">Administrative Procedure Act</a>. It established <a href="https://www.justia.com/administrative-law/rulemaking-writing-agency-regulations/notice-and-comment/">rulemaking procedures</a> that required agencies creating new policies to alert the public, seek comments, and then consider that input before making most policies final. <a href="https://www.doi.org/10.2307/1073060">Many states followed suit</a> with their own versions of this measure.</p>
<h2>Silent Spring</h2>
<p>The environmental, worker safety, and other social movements that arose during the 1960s and early 1970s led Congress to create agencies like the <a href="https://archive.epa.gov/epa/aboutepa/birth-epa.html">Environmental Protection Agency</a> and the <a href="https://www.osha.gov/as/opa/osha-at-30.html">Occupational Safety and Health Administration</a>. Lawmakers then delegated authority to make policy to those new agencies regarding the issues within their purview.</p>
<p>For example, the public pressure for greater automobile safety in the wake of consumer safety activist Ralph Nader’s book “<a href="https://nader.org/books/unsafe-at-any-speed/">Unsafe at Any Speed</a>” prompted Congress to empower the Department of Transportation to more strictly regulate automakers. Scientist <a href="https://www.womenshistory.org/education-resources/biographies/rachel-carson">Rachel Carson’s</a> “<a href="http://www.rachelcarson.org/SilentSpring.aspx">Silent Spring</a>,” a seminal book that exposed the damage caused by pesticides, expedited the passage of <a href="https://environmentallaw.uslegal.com/federal-laws/clean-air-act/">numerous environmental statutes</a> in the <a href="http://www.environmentandsociety.org/exhibitions/silent-spring/overview">U.S. and elsewhere</a> and the creation of the <a href="https://ceq.doe.gov/">EPA during the Nixon administration</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/286639/original/file-20190801-169696-b0micg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/286639/original/file-20190801-169696-b0micg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/286639/original/file-20190801-169696-b0micg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/286639/original/file-20190801-169696-b0micg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/286639/original/file-20190801-169696-b0micg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/286639/original/file-20190801-169696-b0micg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/286639/original/file-20190801-169696-b0micg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/286639/original/file-20190801-169696-b0micg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Alice Rivlin championed the practice of methodically assessing the potential impact of new policies and policy changes, while letting the public weigh in.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Financial-Meltdown/443af838982c4b7795573f72e68d3ebe/23/0">AP Photo/Haraz N. Ghanbari</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In the wake of these new responsibilities, <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/23065473?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents">starting with Gerald Ford</a>, all presidents, Republican and Democratic alike implemented and refined the requirements for analysis and input from the public prior to the unveiling of new policies. The analysis requirement championed by pioneers like <a href="https://www.brookings.edu/podcast-episode/alice-rivlin-a-career-spent-making-better-public-policy/">Alice Rivlin</a>, who served as President Bill Clinton’s budget chief, has led to <a href="https://doi.org/10.4337/9781784714765">many successes</a>.</p>
<p>One example is when the <a href="https://archive.epa.gov/epa/aboutepa/lead-poisoning-historical-perspective.html">EPA decided in the 1980s</a> to require the <a href="https://web.mit.edu/ckolstad/www/Newell.pdf">removal of all lead from gasoline</a> because the analysis of costs and benefits showed how many lives would be saved or improved by its elimination. I relayed another success story in my <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/13876988.2017.1286019">policy analysis textbook</a>: when the Department of Homeland Security scaled back its proposal for stringent requirements on <a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2014/01/13/2014-00415/aircraft-repair-station-security">aircraft repair stations</a> in 2014. The Obama administration took this step after finding the costs to be too high for minimal security benefits.</p>
<p>These mandatory analyses forced agencies to use basic economic principles to calculate costs and benefits and to make the <a href="https://www.reginfo.gov/public/jsp/Utilities/EO_Redirect.myjsp">calculations available to the public</a>. </p>
<p>But this approach can also fail, at least partly because it can make decisions seem overly technocratic. That’s often the case when values are at stake, such as deciding whether protecting an <a href="https://law.utexas.edu/faculty/publications/1995-The-Science-Charade-in-Toxic-Risk-Regulation">endangered species</a> is worth increasing the cost of <a href="https://www.eenews.net/stories/1060092887">construction and infrastructure projects</a> – or blocking them altogether. </p>
<figure class="align-left zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/286641/original/file-20190801-169672-1ev0ibt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/286641/original/file-20190801-169672-1ev0ibt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/286641/original/file-20190801-169672-1ev0ibt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/286641/original/file-20190801-169672-1ev0ibt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/286641/original/file-20190801-169672-1ev0ibt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/286641/original/file-20190801-169672-1ev0ibt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/286641/original/file-20190801-169672-1ev0ibt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/286641/original/file-20190801-169672-1ev0ibt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Workers who make tunnels and toil in them are at risk for inhaling airborne silica, which can cause lung disease.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Associated-Press-Domestic-News-Nevada-United-St-/31e4ff58e3e6da11af9f0014c2589dfb/4/0">AP Photo/Laura Rauch</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>What’s more, following the requisite steps can also mean the rule-making process takes not just years but decades. OSHA, for example, has taken decades to issue some <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/1372818?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents">rules that protect workers</a>. Its <a href="https://www.politico.com/agenda/story/2016/03/the-regulation-that-took-four-decades-to-finalize-000078">industrial quartz</a> regulations, for instance, reportedly took 45 years to finish. Technically known as crystalline silica, the substance, when finely ground up for manufacturing or <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/updates/silicupd.html">blasted during construction</a>, can cause workers to contract <a href="https://www.lung.org/lung-health-and-diseases/lung-disease-lookup/silicosis/silicosis-symptoms-causes-risk.html">silicosis</a>, an incurable lung disease, and lung cancer.</p>
<h2>Shifting gears</h2>
<p>The Trump administration hasn’t declared that it’s doing anything different. It hasn’t, as far as I know, ever declared that “policy analysis is bad” or said, “Let’s ignore the public and ignore expertise.”</p>
<p>But the public record shows that <a href="https://www.epi.org/press/dol-scrubs-economic-analysis-that-showed-its-tip-pooling-rule-would-be-terrible-for-workers/">Trump’s team has either ignored</a>, <a href="https://thehill.com/opinion/energy-environment/451095-clean-power-plan-repeal-shows-strengths-and-limits-of-policy">manipulated</a> or <a href="https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa-administrator-pruitt-proposes-cost-benefit-analysis-reform">subverted</a> the requirements for analysis and <a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3049004">participation</a> on numerous policy actions that range from addressing climate change to the division of waiters'tips.</p>
<p>Whether a federal agency analyzes its decisions or asks for public input on them may seem like the ultimate in inside baseball. But processes make a difference. I believe that its failure to follow the long-established policy analysis process is a key reason why Trump administration is <a href="https://www.brookings.edu/research/trumps-deregulatory-efforts-keep-losing-in-court-and-the-losses-could-make-it-harder-for-future-administrations-to-deregulate/">losing many court battles</a>. </p>
<p>[ <em><a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=thanksforreading">Thanks for reading! We can send you The Conversation’s stories every day in an informative email. Sign up today.</a></em> ]</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/120392/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Stuart Shapiro does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The process known as policy analysis requires careful consideration and deliberation. In most cases, the public also gets to weigh in.Stuart Shapiro, Professor of Planning and Public Policy, Rutgers UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1009022018-08-02T13:37:36Z2018-08-02T13:37:36ZWhy small businesses really do struggle to understand red tape<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/230214/original/file-20180801-136661-zdamz9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/red-tape-around-briefcase-labeled-brexit-1038794731?src=GDsjsSNbfh7p0UD3tCA6mw-1-6">Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Regulations are a part of everyday life. They cover everything from the <a href="https://www.ofwat.gov.uk/regulated-companies/price-review/">cost and quality</a> of the things we buy, to <a href="https://www.gov.uk/browse/employing-people/contracts">conditions of employment</a> and the way our <a href="https://www.planningportal.co.uk/info/200128/building_control">homes are constructed</a>. Yet most of the time they go unnoticed. </p>
<p>As a set of rules which specify the minimum standards companies and individuals should follow, regulations are put in place because they are deemed to be in the broad public interest. Yet they only work when they are followed – and this only happens when the people responsible for implementing them understand what they should be doing. </p>
<p>A gap in knowledge could be the difference between one firm correctly using safety equipment and another firm putting their employees and customers at risk by not even knowing such equipment exists. Part of the difficulty in complying with regulations is they can be complex and often changed. This means firms have to work hard to keep their knowledge and procedures up to date. What was required ten or 20 years ago is often no longer the case now. </p>
<p>Small firms often find regulation particularly challenging simply because they don’t have the capacity to devote time or money to learning about it. It doesn’t help that regulations are often considered as unnecessary “red tape”, full of rules which appear to lack common sense. Should it really be illegal, for example, for companies selling bottled water to inform potential customers that drinking it will <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/8897662/EU-bans-claim-that-water-can-prevent-dehydration.html">help with rehydration</a>?</p>
<p>Even the recent changes in General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) – all those emails asking you to sign up to mailing lists – which were publicised for years before the deadline, were complex. There is still plenty of confusion about what is actually required, so unsurprisingly, many firms have <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44208456">struggled to meet</a> their new obligations.</p>
<p><a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12314">Our research</a> on some of the smallest firms in the UK tourist sector found that many owners and managers demonstrated considerable overconfidence when it comes to regulations. Many admitted having imperfect regulatory knowledge in areas fundamental to their operations, but still continued to run their businesses anyway. </p>
<p>This is worrying. All firms should have a functioning knowledge of the basic rules on employment, fire safety, discrimination, and health and safety. Would you prefer to stay at a bed & breakfast run by people who didn’t they should have conducted a <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/11085/payingguests.pdf">fire risk assessment</a> (and subsequently developed plans and installed equipment), or at an alternative establishment which complies with such requirements?</p>
<p>Trade associations are often considered a key source of support for small firms, assisting with limitations firms face because they are small. During our study we found that they do indeed provide lots of helpful information on things like rules and regulations. </p>
<h2>Understanding the rule book</h2>
<p>Yet, surprisingly, we found that membership of trade associations doesn’t really improve what micro-firm owners and managers actually <em>know</em> about regulation. It just makes them think they know more.</p>
<p>This means they risk making poor business decisions, potential prosecution for breaking the law, and even unnecessarily risk public safety – all because of their own misunderstanding of what the law really requires. This is likely to be caused by information overload and a false sense of security created by receiving – but not necessarily reading – the detailed information provided.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/230248/original/file-20180801-136661-p1r136.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/230248/original/file-20180801-136661-p1r136.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/230248/original/file-20180801-136661-p1r136.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/230248/original/file-20180801-136661-p1r136.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/230248/original/file-20180801-136661-p1r136.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/230248/original/file-20180801-136661-p1r136.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/230248/original/file-20180801-136661-p1r136.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Pick the one which understands the regulations.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/traditional-bed-breakfast-sign-surrounded-by-141263332?src=FASAQXfRe3lFq4Gshl2eAg-1-0">Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>We also found that firms with a positive approach towards regulation generally had greater knowledge, so perhaps a healthy attitude is an important part of learning more. </p>
<p>This all suggests that we need to move away from viewing rules and regulations as being meddlesome and unwelcome red tape. Instead, businesses need to consider them positively as sensible measures which protect them – and the public. Trade associations could play a key role here, given their regular communication and trusted status with member firms. But they also need to find new ways of making sure the information they provide is both understood and acted upon.</p>
<p>While the debate about <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/eu-referendum-2016">Brexit continues</a> in the UK, politicians should keep in mind that firms are struggling to learn about and implement rules and regulations which already exist. </p>
<p>If Brexit results in significant changes in what companies should be doing – even if that means cutting red tape as some politicians claim – then the smallest companies are likely going to find it hugely challenging to make sure they know what they should be doing, never mind actually doing it.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/100902/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Phil Tomlinson receives funding from the Regional Studies Association under the RSA Expo scheme and from the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) to fund two business acceleration hubs in the South West of England.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>J. Robert Branston and Marc Betton do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>And Brexit could make things even more challenging.J. Robert Branston, Senior Lecturer (Associate Professor) in Business Economics, University of BathMarc Betton, Researcher, University of BathPhil Tomlinson, Associate Professor in Business Economics, Deputy Director Centre for Governance, Regulation and Industrial Strategy (CGR&IS), University of BathLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/930942018-03-18T11:05:33Z2018-03-18T11:05:33ZRamaphosa makes noises about backing small business. It’s about time<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/210056/original/file-20180313-30961-1z04r7d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">South Africa needs to harness the small business sector to jump-start its economy</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>South Africa’s new president, Cyril Rampahosa, is promising to free up and propel the country’s small business sector and its natural partner entrepreneurship, a long overdue move that could help the country realise strong economic growth.</p>
<p>South Africa has been trapped in a <a href="https://theconversation.com/south-africa-can-expect-zero-growth-its-problems-are-largely-homemade-62943">low growth trajectory</a> for about 10 years. This has made it difficult to reduce high levels of poverty, inequality and unemployment. For a while now, many have pointed out that harnessing the small business sector and entrepreneurship lies at the centre of the solution. </p>
<p>Ramaphosa has added his voice to this chorus. Coming from a man whose had close <a href="https://theconversation.com/who-is-cyril-ramaphosa-a-profile-of-the-new-leader-of-south-africa-89456">links to business</a>, the president’s promise to support entrepreneurship and small business development deserves to be taken seriously.</p>
<p>In his hope-filled 2018 state of the nation <a href="http://www.thepresidency.gov.za/speeches/state-nation-address-president-republic-south-africa%2C-mr-cyril-ramaphosa">address</a>, he touched the essence of what drives entrepreneurship. He said:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>While change can produce uncertainty, even anxiety, it also offers great opportunities for renewal and revitalisation, and for progress.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>It is precisely at the nexus of uncertainty and opportunity that entrepreneurship takes place. According to the traditional neoclassical view, <a href="https://www.ujuh.co.za/dimensions-of-entrepreneurship-explained/">entrepreneurship</a> is the ‘mystical’ element that delivers external shocks to a state of equilibrium in the marketplace by introducing new products and services.</p>
<p>Without the presence of these two factors – lucrative opportunities and enterprising individuals – very little renewal or revitalisation will take place in South Africa. </p>
<p>Ramaphosa knows this. But it won’t be easy, even for him. The neglect and the damage caused to the small business sector and the culture of entrepreneurship over the years is huge. Years of red tape, corruption, bad policies, ill equipped small business support institutions and monopolistic behaviours have stifled entrepreneurial activity.</p>
<p>But the situation won’t change unless a close and detailed look is taken at the accumulated problems. And solutions that are designed must take into account a multitude of factors.</p>
<h2>A lack of entrepreneurial activity</h2>
<p>There’s growing evidence showing that developing countries offer more entrepreneurial opportunities. There’s also <a href="https://www.infodev.org/infodev-files/growth_entrepreneurship_in_developing_countries_-_a_preliminary_literature_review_-_february_2016_-_infodev.pdf">evidence</a> that these are being matched by higher rates of opportunity driven entrepreneurs entering the market.</p>
<p>A recent <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/post/How_can_we_transform_necessity_entrepreneurs_into_opportunity_entrepreneurs">study</a> found that more than half (69%) of entrepreneurs in developing countries chose to pursue an opportunity as a basis for their entrepreneurial motivations, rather than starting out of necessity.</p>
<p>South Africa has an unusually low share of employers and self-employed people in the labour force. It also has a relatively low share of working age adults in employment. This is a major factor behind the country’s high <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-lesser-known-and-scarier-facts-about-unemployment-in-south-africa-83055">joblessness</a> .</p>
<p>In fact, South Africa’s <a href="http://www.gemconsortium.org/country-profile/108">total entrepreneurial activity</a> rate, which measures the prevalence of starting a business from a country’s working age population, remains among the lowest in the peer group of developing nations. The series of Global Entrepreneurship Monitor <a href="http://www.gemconsortium.org/country-profile/108">reports</a>, show that just 9.2% of South African adults were involved in starting up a business in 2015. This compares poorly to the average of 15% in comparable countries like Malaysia, Latvia, Romania, Argentina and Brazil. Ecuador has an entrepreneurial activity rates of 34%, Chile 26%.</p>
<p>Even more disconcerting is the fact that in South Africa many initiatives and programmes sponsored by national government are not yielding much. Many institutions supporting small business development are dogged by bureaucratic inefficiencies and inter-departmental conflicts. </p>
<p>The major weakness of these national institutions is centralised coordination. They are not well suited to react quickly and dynamically.</p>
<p>There is also enormous red tape facing small businesses and entrepreneurs. For instance South Africa’s labour laws have been found to be a significant <a href="https://www.oecd.org/eco/surveys/2017-OECD-Economic-Survey-South-Africa-overview-2017.pdf">regulatory obstacle</a> to small business growth. And small business is also subjected to long and gruelling delays to get permits and licences. This makes for a corruption rife environment. </p>
<p>Ramaphosa has acknowledged the negative impact of bureaucracy, red tape and corruption on the economy and for start-ups and enterprise growth. </p>
<p>What’s needed now is action.</p>
<h2>Hostility towards small business</h2>
<p>The structure of the South African economy is often overlooked as a factor of small business and entrepreneurship. The country’s economy has traditionally been hostile towards small businesses. This is largely due to its distinctive economic history, which created <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-the-dominance-of-big-players-is-bad-for-south-africas-economy-92058">highly concentrated markets</a>.</p>
<p>Several industries in South Africa can be categorised as tight oligopolies, where several large firms dominate the competitive landscape. They hold considerable market power and are protected by high entry barriers. Small businesses are kept at bay. </p>
<p>About <a href="http://www.seda.org.za/Publications/Publications/The%20Small,%20Medium%20and%20Micro%20Enterprise%20Sector%20of%20South%20Africa%20Commissioned%20by%20Seda.pdf">half</a> of the country’s small businesses are in business services and retail. In the informal sector the self-employed are overwhelmingly in retail. </p>
<p>It’s hard for South African small businesses to penetrate lucrative sectors such as electricity, gas, water and manufacturing. Entry barriers are extremely high which leaves old monopolies in a comfortable place to the detriment of the broader economy.</p>
<h2>Reinventing entrepreneurship</h2>
<p>If entrepreneurship is to be rekindled the first thing that needs to happen is some readjustment in the structure of the country’s economy. Key adjustments should ensure:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>An environment that offers equal access to opportunities, development tools and access to resources. </p></li>
<li><p>A robust and interactive entrepreneurship ecosystem system that connects everything – from suppliers, distribution channels, universities to venture capital.</p></li>
<li><p>Improved access to finance as well as market access for small businesses.</p></li>
<li><p>Long-term investments in entrepreneurial capital which mainly requires quality education.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>South Africa must realise that small businesses are not simply smaller versions of big business. They are vulnerable because they’re small and new. They need a supportive environment and a mix of responsive policy interventions. </p>
<p>But entrepreneurs can’t simply sit back and blame the environment. Entrepreneurs need to develop a hard-headed awareness of market realities and hard-won business truths. Entrepreneurship requires individuals to take action.</p>
<p>Small scale entrepreneurs must be alive to the <a href="http://www.wbs.ac.za/news/entrepreneurship-is-on-the-agenda-again-more-hype-or-real-action.php">dictum</a> which says: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Big businesses are not against you; they are merely for themselves.</p>
</blockquote><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/93094/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Boris Urban does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Trapped in low growth trajectory, South Africa needs to boost small business development.Boris Urban, Professor Wits Business School, University of the WitwatersrandLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/800312017-06-28T09:47:39Z2017-06-28T09:47:39ZAfter Grenfell, regulation must not be a dirty word<p>Camden Council has been <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-40389997/camden-tower-evacuations-residents-angry">evacuating residents</a> from four tower blocks in north London in response to concerns over their fire safety, and a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/27/may-orders-national-inquiry-after-100-failure-rate-in-high-rise-cladding-tests">total of 120</a> local authority and housing association-owned tower blocks across England have now been shown to have cladding that is “dangerously combustible”. Tests are continuing.</p>
<p>A concerted effort is now being made to keep residents safe. The prime minister, Theresa May, <a href="https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2017-06-21/debates/16CAF0D8-37D0-41D6-AE61-264FD03429CB/DebateOnTheAddress">has called the immediate response</a> to the Grenfell fire a “failure of the state, local and national”. It is right the current action is being taken but it is necessarily rushed and reactive. So it’s time to start looking more generally at the current approach to the governance of these kinds of built environment issues in Britain.</p>
<h2>Building regulations</h2>
<p>The exact causes, circumstances and response to the fire will be subject to a judge-led inquiry. It is clear that <a href="http://theconversation.com/fact-check-is-the-type-of-cladding-used-on-grenfell-tower-actually-banned-in-britain-79803">building regulations</a> will form part of that inquiry, for example whether the cladding and insulation on the exterior of Grenfell Tower complied with regulations – which would suggest that regulations may be at fault. If the cladding is found to have failed to comply with regulations, it would suggest problems in contracting and inspection regimes. Either answer suggests that further failings of the state may emerge.</p>
<p>I am currently engaged in research on the impact of deregulating planning controls governing the change of use of office buildings to residential use in England and have seen examples of very low-quality housing being delivered through this. Deregulation has long-term consequences in both built and <a href="https://www.rspb.org.uk/Images/usingregulation_tcm9-408677.pdf">natural environments</a>. And the consequences of poor decisions or regulation can take years to emerge.</p>
<h2>Capacity issues</h2>
<p>Austerity, deregulation and privatisation are important elements in the tragic story of the Grenfell fire. The Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG), responsible for planning and building regulations in England, <a href="https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/civil-service-staff-numbers-under-coalition-government-2010-2015">lost more than 35% of its staff</a> (the biggest percentage reduction of any central government department) between 2010 and 2015. The National Audit Office <a href="https://www.nao.org.uk/report/central-government-staff-costs/">expressed concern</a> that such cuts might “damage the delivery of public services”. The local council, Kensington and Chelsea, lost 24% of its staff between <a href="https://www.rbkc.gov.uk/wamdocs/Corporate%20Workforce%20Report%202013.pdf">2008</a> and 2016. </p>
<p>Across the UK, local government has lost one-third of its funding since 2010. The biggest hit departments have often been those responsible for <a href="http://www.rtpi.org.uk/briefing-room/rtpi-blog/four-reasons-why-cuts-to-planning-are-a-false-economy/">planning and building control</a>.</p>
<p>At the same time, the former coalition and Conservative governments promised a “bonfire of red tape” with a “one-in-two-out” rule governing new regulation. And the delivery of local services now involves a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/public-leaders-network/2016/mar/04/councils-outsourcing-local-authorities-contract-services">complex web</a> of public and private companies. Building regulation enforcement is partially privatised to a system of “<a href="https://www.gov.uk/building-regulations-approval/how-to-apply">approved inspectors</a>”.</p>
<p>This creeping privatisation is an issue. It is interesting that the 2016 <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2016/22/pdfs/ukpga_20160022_en.pdf">Housing and Planning Act</a> contained proposals <a href="https://www.ashfords.co.uk/article/privatising-the-planning-system">to allow</a> a similar “alternative provider” approach to planning applications as already exists for building regulations in England. It is not hyperbolic to wonder if there is a conflict of interest in allowing a system whereby a private developer can chose to send their planning application to an approved private consultant of their choosing to process rather than the local authority. This slow movement towards privatisation of regulation in this area should be halted.</p>
<p>All of these factors combine to weaken the state and its abilities to keep people safe. Looking forward, important questions need to be asked in response to all three. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/175880/original/file-20170627-7455-1h903jb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/175880/original/file-20170627-7455-1h903jb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/175880/original/file-20170627-7455-1h903jb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/175880/original/file-20170627-7455-1h903jb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/175880/original/file-20170627-7455-1h903jb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/175880/original/file-20170627-7455-1h903jb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/175880/original/file-20170627-7455-1h903jb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Handing over to ‘alternative provider’.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/closeup-businessman-passing-golden-relay-baton-576692542?src=D_wG5qHXEWcz-iNjwNC9xA-2-69">Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The state needs labour in order to actually function. If there aren’t people in central government to proactively revise and update regulations and in local government to effectively enforce them, that is a state failure. It is surprising that the part of the building regulations dealing with fire safety haven’t been updated since a coroner’s inquest called for them to be <a href="https://www.lambeth.gov.uk/sites/default/files/ec-letter-to-DCLG-pursuant-to-rule43-28March2013.pdf">revised in 2013</a>. There is a sense that there was also a lack of response to other <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40283980">cladding-related fires</a> in other countries. </p>
<p>It seems likely that there will now be changes to building regulations – which are complex – but future updates should be done through having sufficient staff to scan the horizon for potential dangers and keep on top of developing good regulation rather than having to wait for a catastrophe to happen.</p>
<p>Regulation is not a dirty word – and it is vital for keeping people safe and allowing us to enjoy a reasonable quality of life. There have been <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/2017/03/28/brexit-golden-chance-throw-eu-regulations-bonfire/">calls</a> to use Brexit as an opportunity for further deregulation, including around building standards and <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/22/government-backed-red-tape-group-eu-fire-safety-rules-grenfell-fire">fire safety</a>, and attempts to <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/grenfell-tower-fire-safety-rules-sprinklers-brandon-lewis-warn-house-building-social-housing-tory-a7790921.html">resist regulation</a> that would require sprinklers in high-rise buildings. </p>
<p>It seems too much to hope that the complete mindset around regulation will change, but perhaps there might at least be a pause on further deregulation when it comes to buildings in the UK. There should also be some thought about whether certain parts of the building regulations should apply retrospectively to older buildings rather than just applying higher standards to new construction only.</p>
<p>The UK is not a poor country. That 79 people can die in a fire in its richest city is deeply distressing, but unfortunately this tragedy appears to have been avoidable. Looking ahead, we need a greater appreciation of the role of those who uphold standards in the built environment, and to ensure that both the central and local governments have the proper tools to keep buildings and those who live, work and play in them safe.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/80031/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Ben Clifford receives funding from the RICS Research Trust</span></em></p>Perhaps there might at least now be a pause on further deregulation when it comes to buildings in the UKBen Clifford, Lecturer in Spatial Planning and Government, UCLLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/602802016-06-01T12:52:28Z2016-06-01T12:52:28ZLeaving EU would be bad for women – but staying in doesn’t look too great either<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/124659/original/image-20160531-1955-6he2xj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/keoni101/5253162589/in/photolist-91cQdM-fCfd2y-5eWnBX-3e4YzH-bni9AN-qARaQG-5ZczcE-ejzBNx-gfApNf-nPutmS-s1TpFW-7CPQG5-rctLVi-7wWybn-bhdBGv-dWzsnu-baDuk6-3fXhnw-dMEUPY-pTWU4g-bvSTWi-gSfuSL-3cDnEc-7hBDz3-4QgfDB-cZwkEj-vVqzqE-9xwd3T-aQp65a-agsY8i-9MfqTj-nPq7Ta-boqcrP-9csVRK-bEvo2R-9RC9cp-7mMpy2-9McDWi-4qXCGz-cZwk9h-92dDdo-khXjtk-6aPg4N-9dHnuV-6JPwzT-4o7siF-3cDvxD-abocVy-DSXJE5-6aKa9z">Keoni Cabral</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The discriminatory <a href="http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2016/05/19/is-it-really-that-difficult-to-find-women-to-talk-about-the-eu/">silencing of women</a> in the EU referendum debate has <a href="http://yorkfestivalofideas.com/2016/focus-days/eu-referendum/">long-term implications</a> – whether Britain votes to leave or remain in the European Union. </p>
<p>Male politicians and male business leaders have dominated the debate so far. The people signing open letters to support the economic cases for both <a href="http://www.itv.com/news/2016-02-23/business-leaders-letter-to-the-times-in-full/">remain</a> and <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/15/eu-referendum-more-than-300-business-leaders-back-a-brexit/">leave</a> are often mostly men and the <a href="https://theconversation.com/three-men-and-a-vote-eu-referendum-is-turning-into-a-tory-boys-own-story-59853">top 10 most visible commentators</a> are men. Men have received 91% of press coverage and 84% of television coverage on the referendum.</p>
<p>Arguments over whether media coverage displays a <a href="http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/02/who-will-watch-for-bbc-bias-in-the-eu-referendum-campaign/">remain</a> or <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/eu-referendum-national-press-biased-in-favour-of-brexit-says-study-a7043446.html">leave</a> bias, and the BBC’s concerns about balance and <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/editorialguidelines/guidelines/appendix8">impartiality</a>, are eclipsed by this startling male bias.</p>
<p>This discriminatory coverage means the debate is being framed in a certain way. The leave camp has focused on escaping Europe’s red tape, while the remain camp is emphasising economic <a href="http://news.cbi.org.uk/news/cbi-to-make-economic-case-to-remain-in-eu-after-reaffirming-strong-member-mandate/">competitiveness</a>. Neither are good for women.</p>
<h2>Cutting red tape or women’s rights?</h2>
<p>Promises to unravel what is seen on the pro-Brexit side as European red tape are actually a threat to gender equality at work. Women rely on EU law to make sure their rights get meaningful protection.</p>
<p>The EU has ensured that part-time workers get equal access to <a href="http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A62011CJ0385">pensions</a>, recognised that pregnancy discrimination is <a href="http://ec.europa.eu/justice/gender-equality/files/your_rights/sex_discrimination_in_relation_to_part_time_and_fixed_term_final_en.pdf">automatically</a> sex discrimination, and moved to protect <a href="https://www.tuc.org.uk/sites/default/files/UK%20employment%20rights%20and%20the%20EU.pdf">annual leave rights</a> when on maternity leave.</p>
<p>The UK, on the other hand, has proved a poor guarantor of gender equality rights. The European Court has repeatedly corrected the <a href="https://www.tuc.org.uk/sites/default/files/Brexit%2520Legal%2520Opinion.pdf">“unprogressive tendencies of the domestic courts”</a>.</p>
<p>Pro-Brexit employment minister Priti Patel says <a href="http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/priti_patel_speech_at_the_spring_conference_of_the_association_of_licensed_multiple_retailers">complying with EU regulations</a> costs British businesses more than £33bn a year. But a closer look at the <a href="http://openeurope.org.uk/intelligence/britain-and-the-eu/top-100-eu-rules-cost-britain-33-3bn/">research</a> she uses to make this claim reveals that these regulations <a href="http://openeurope.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Open_Europe_Top100_costliest_EU_regulations.pdf">include</a> the <a href="http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv%3Ac10416">part-time workers directive</a> (which ensures equal rights for this group), the <a href="http://ec.europa.eu/justice/gender-equality/files/your_rights/eu_gender_equality_law_update2013_en.pdf">gender equality directive</a>, and <a href="http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/observatories/eurwork/comparative-information/the-eu-parental-leave-agreement-and-directive-implications-for-national-law-and-practice">the parental leave directive</a>, all of which have been instrumental in improving working conditions for women.</p>
<p>Gender equality law is routinely thrown into the mix when eurosceptics talk about administrative meddling from Brussels – and has been for years. In 2012, British MEP Martin Callanan (then the chair of the European Conservatives and Reformists Group) <a href="http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+CRE+20120201+ITEM-012+DOC+XML+V0//EN&query=INTERV&detail=3-025-000">said</a> he wanted to “scrap … the Pregnant Workers Directive and all of the other barriers to actually employing people if we really want to create jobs in Europe”.</p>
<p>So we should be careful about accepting the language of cutting “red tape” and look behind the arguments at the laws and rights in question - many of which have direct significance for women. </p>
<h2>Economics and equality</h2>
<p>The remain side is, in many ways, just as bad. Red tape rhetoric inflects the language of those promoting a “business case” for remaining in the EU.</p>
<p>A <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/249969/TaskForce-report-15-October.pdf">report</a> commissioned by the government in 2013 concluded that an EU proposal on increasing rights to maternity pay was a piece of red tape that should be withdrawn. Companies, it said, “need to be given the space to deliver growth and jobs – without being hamstrung by new and costly maternity rules”.</p>
<p>Even the European Commission uses the language of cost when talking about maternity pay. It has <a href="http://ec.europa.eu/atwork/pdf/cwp_2015_withdrawals_en.pdf">withdrawn</a> proposals to offer better maternity pay as part of a <a href="http://ec.europa.eu/smart-regulation/refit/index_en.htm">plan</a> to make EU law “simpler” and reduce “regulatory costs”.</p>
<p>So women’s rights at work are at risk whatever the outcome of the referendum. Prime Minister David Cameron has pledged to push for a series of reforms if the UK remains in the EU. This <a href="http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/meetings/european-council/2016/02/EUCO-Conclusions_pdf/">“new settlement”</a> emphasises “competitiveness” and involves a commitment to lower “administrative burdens and compliance costs on economic operators” and repeal “unnecessary legislation”, without any explanation as to what is “unnecessary” or burdensome.</p>
<p>Since the British government appears to categorise maternity rights as red tape, the signs are not good. The deal includes 14 references to administrative or regulatory burdens for employers, and not a single reference to gender equality or non-discrimination.</p>
<h2>EU echo chamber</h2>
<p>The language of cost, burdens and red tape have been adopted across the board in this debate to refer to what are actually equal rights issues.</p>
<p>This assumes that men’s interests are neutral and economically rational. They are treated as reflecting the interests of the whole economy. The economy is being “manthropomorphised”.</p>
<p>But gender equality creates economic goods. Male-dominated EU institutions have <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-eu-talks-the-talk-on-gender-equality-but-in-a-male-voice-55966">long been interested</a> in working women, not due to altrusim, but because of potential economic gains. Increased gender equality could boost economic growth between <a href="http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-09-1527_en.htm?locale=en">15% and 45%</a> according to the EU’s own estimates.</p>
<p>The European Commission argues that difficulties faced by women reintegrating into the labour market after having children lead not only to “a high risk of poverty for women” but also “a waste of resources for the EU economy and sub-optimal allocation of skills and competences acquired through education by women”. It also found that European companies with more women on their boards had a <a href="http://ec.europa.eu/justice/gender-equality/files/women-on-boards_en.pdf">42% higher return in sales</a>, 66% higher return on invested capital and 53% higher return on equity. Keeping women in work by helping them manage maternity and caring responsibilities is not therefore <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09649069.2012.675462">just a women’s issue</a> – it is vital to the economy.</p>
<p>With women’s voices being drowned out in the referendum debate we risk significant backsliding whatever the outcome. But the business case against gender equality is premised on a convenient fallacy – that discrimination in the favour of men makes economic sense. It is a fallacy that flourishes in a nearly all-male environment.</p>
<p>That is the insidious echo-chamber effect of male-dominated referendum coverage; in contrast to the heavy-handed labelling of “women’s rights”, there is a striking failure to recognise when men’s interests are being served.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/60280/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Charlotte O'Brien receives funding from the Economic and Social Research Council. She is a member of the Labour Party. She is one of the speakers at an EU referendum event at the York Festival of Ideas on 16 June. This article does not reflect the views of the research councils. </span></em></p>Both sides of the debate are promising to cut European red tape – which seems to mean cutting equality laws.Charlotte O'Brien, Senior Lecturer in Law, University of YorkLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/532202016-04-24T14:01:59Z2016-04-24T14:01:59ZDo wind vent holes in banners make a difference? We used a wind tunnel to find out<p>The next time you see a banner hung across a street or from a bridge, or hoisted as part of a street march, protest or demonstration, take a closer look. You may see that the banner has holes or slits cut into it.</p>
<p>But why would someone cut holes into a perfectly good banner?</p>
<p>These are so-called “wind vents”, and for some reason people have been mutilating their banners with these holes in the belief that their presence will significantly reduce the wind loading on the banner.</p>
<p>But does a banner with holes or slits really have an easier time in the wind than an equivalent banner that is hole free?</p>
<h2>History and legislation</h2>
<p>It is not known when people started to cut holes into their banners. There is very little written about the practice, and much of the knowledge appears to come via word of mouth or has been transferred from other wind related domains.</p>
<p>What is obvious from the <a href="http://www.simplysignsandbanners.com/1/post/2011/05/wind-slits-are-they-effective.html">websites of the world’s sign and banner makers</a> is that they are <a href="http://boeksigns.com/banner-wind-vents/">frustrated with having to cut holes into their lovingly-made creations</a>.</p>
<p>Some banner makers <a href="https://www.esigns.com/wind-slits.html">simply refuse</a>, and tell their customers that if they want holes, then they can cut them themselves.</p>
<p>The apparent importance of banner wind vents has led some local governments around the world to make them mandatory for banners installed in certain locations. No vent holes, no banner allowed!</p>
<p>The <a href="http://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/laws-permits/laws-permits-businesses/light-brisbane-hang-bridge-banner/lighting-banner-packages/guidelines-hanging-bridge-banner">regulations of the Brisbane City Council</a>, in Queensland, Australia, state that for banners to be installed on the city’s iconic Story Bridge, they “must be provided with wind vent holes” and that “wind holes (vents) need to be spaced at approx. 3m intervals”.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/116452/original/image-20160325-17859-p641wg.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/116452/original/image-20160325-17859-p641wg.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/116452/original/image-20160325-17859-p641wg.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=169&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/116452/original/image-20160325-17859-p641wg.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=169&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/116452/original/image-20160325-17859-p641wg.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=169&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/116452/original/image-20160325-17859-p641wg.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=212&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/116452/original/image-20160325-17859-p641wg.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=212&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/116452/original/image-20160325-17859-p641wg.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=212&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Brisbane City Council’s Story Bridge banner design guide indicating location of ‘wind vent holes’.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Brisbane City Council design guide</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The small town of Springville, Utah, USA, states in <a href="http://www.springville.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/BannerInfoAppPacket.pdf">its regulations</a> that at least 20% of the area of the banner must be made up of holes. It suggests “half moon shaped vents 4-6 inches wide and facing down throughout the banner”.</p>
<h2>Understanding the aerodynamics</h2>
<p>To understand what, if anything, wind vents do for our banners, we need to visit the work of aerodynamics specialists.</p>
<p>In 1956, B. G. de Bray, an aerodynamics expert at the UK’s Royal Aircraft Establishment, performed <a href="http://naca.central.cranfield.ac.uk/reports/arc/cp/0323.pdf">a series of wind tunnel tests</a> to show how flat plates with holes in them performed in a moving air stream. He was interested in how plates could be used for airbrakes on aircraft as they land.</p>
<p>His experiments showed that perforations (holes) make the air flow more stable but that there was “only a comparatively small reduction in drag coefficient”. He shows a graph recording the relationship between the area of the holes and the change in drag coefficient of a flat plate. The graph indicates that making 20% of a banner’s area holes will reduce the drag by around 5% in a wind of 150km/h.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/116451/original/image-20160325-17840-10iy0tz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/116451/original/image-20160325-17840-10iy0tz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/116451/original/image-20160325-17840-10iy0tz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=251&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/116451/original/image-20160325-17840-10iy0tz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=251&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/116451/original/image-20160325-17840-10iy0tz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=251&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/116451/original/image-20160325-17840-10iy0tz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=316&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/116451/original/image-20160325-17840-10iy0tz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=316&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/116451/original/image-20160325-17840-10iy0tz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=316&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">These figures are taken from de Bray’s 1956 work on wind tunnel testing of flat plates with holes and how drag relates to hole area in a 150km/h wind. Note that CD designates the drag coefficient, which is a normalised way of representing force that accounts for plate size (or in our case the banner) and wind speed. Doing this allows the wind tunnel data to be scaled to full-size.</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>When we consider de Bray’s other finding – that holes do make the air flow more stable – we can look at a common example of this in action in round parachutes.</p>
<p>Billowing structures that fill with air on the windward side, such as round parachutes, become unstable when there are no holes in the structure. The air tends to spill almost randomly from the structure’s edge. This makes the structure flap around in the wind in a seemingly random manner.</p>
<p>This was discovered in the early days of parachute development. In the late 1700s, a number of parachute developers were killed due to accidents relating to their unstable and oscillating chutes.</p>
<p>In 1804, Frenchman Joseph Lelandes invented the apex vent, a hole in the top of the parachute. This appeared to solve the problem of stability but did not appear to reduce the drag, ideal for parachuting where you need the drag.</p>
<p>Since then there have been many studies showing the <a href="http://www.hindawi.com/journals/isrn/2013/320563/">benefits of holes in round parachutes</a>. One group even found during their <a href="https://www.wpi.edu/Pubs/E-project/Available/E-project-042407-112440/unrestricted/Brighenti_Duffen_Head_Vented_Parachutes_MQP.pdf">experiments</a> that vent holes in round parachutes slightly increase the drag on the chute while making it more stable.</p>
<h2>Wind tunnel tests</h2>
<p>Following in de Bray’s footsteps, we decided to turn to wind tunnel experiments to assess just how much impact those holes had on wind forces. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/sIS3Ujk3ytw?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>We conducted a series of simple experiments where we put scaled versions of banners in a wind tunnel and measured the wind forces. We did this for a range of wind speeds and number of vents (holes). We then measured how the forces changed from test to test.</p>
<p>We performed experiments where vents were rectangular holes cut in the fabric and others where the vents were rectangular holes cut on three sides and allowed to hinge at the top (flaps).</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/119728/original/image-20160421-27001-jv64yi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/119728/original/image-20160421-27001-jv64yi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/119728/original/image-20160421-27001-jv64yi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=642&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/119728/original/image-20160421-27001-jv64yi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=642&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/119728/original/image-20160421-27001-jv64yi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=642&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/119728/original/image-20160421-27001-jv64yi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=807&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/119728/original/image-20160421-27001-jv64yi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=807&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/119728/original/image-20160421-27001-jv64yi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=807&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A test banner with 7% of its area made of holes in the wind tunnel.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Author supplied</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/119750/original/image-20160422-27007-9magqg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/119750/original/image-20160422-27007-9magqg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/119750/original/image-20160422-27007-9magqg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/119750/original/image-20160422-27007-9magqg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/119750/original/image-20160422-27007-9magqg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/119750/original/image-20160422-27007-9magqg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/119750/original/image-20160422-27007-9magqg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/119750/original/image-20160422-27007-9magqg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">As for above, but showing a banner with 7% porosity and hinged flaps.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Author supplied</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Experimental wind speeds tested ranged from approximately 25km/h to 100km/h and the range of vent hole area to total banner area ratios (porosity) assessed was from zero (no holes in the banner) to approximately 20%, which coincides with the Springville regulations and makes a pretty holy banner.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/119742/original/image-20160422-26976-z94hoe.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/119742/original/image-20160422-26976-z94hoe.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=497&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/119742/original/image-20160422-26976-z94hoe.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=497&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/119742/original/image-20160422-26976-z94hoe.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=497&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/119742/original/image-20160422-26976-z94hoe.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=624&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/119742/original/image-20160422-26976-z94hoe.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=624&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/119742/original/image-20160422-26976-z94hoe.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=624&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A plot showing drag on the banner versus porosity of the banner for the 100km/h tests over the range of banner porosities. The vertical axis shows the drag coefficient (CD) ratio, which is the wind force measured on the porous banner divided by the wind force on the solid banner. A porosity of 0.1 is 10% holes/vents/flaps.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Author supplied</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>A value of 1 in the figure (above) would indicate that the vents have done nothing and a value of 0.9 would suggest there has been a 10% reduction in load.</p>
<p>It is clear that wind vents do reduce the wind load on a banner, but as de Bray showed, the reduction in load is relatively small until porosity becomes large.</p>
<p>The reduction in drag force is greater for holes and hinged flaps than found by de Bray (and others) for uniformly perforated plates or fabrics.</p>
<p>The wind speed makes a difference. At low wind speeds the presence of vents can actually increase the wind load on a banner, which in our test was found to be up to 5%.</p>
<p>In general though, force coefficients decreased as wind speeds increase. This was particularly the case for the banners with flaps, where these vents became more open as the wind speed increased.</p>
<p>So the type of vent makes a big difference. Banners with holes rather than hinged flaps experienced lower wind loads. Both of these vent types experience lower loads than on uniformly perforated plates, which perform similarly to porous mesh fabrics. </p>
<p>With these points in mind, we return to the Brisbane City Council’s regulations for placing banners on the Storey Bridge. It is now possible to calculate the effect of their prescribed wind vents.</p>
<p>If we assume that they would like holes, and the maximum size of a banner is 18m wide by 0.9m high, then our best guess estimate is a semi-circular hole radius of 25cm noting also that five wind holes are required. We calculate that at most, 3% of the banner will be holes.</p>
<p>Interpolating our figure this would give us a 2% reduction in wind load. A sign of 98% the area of the maximum would be 18m wide and 0.88m high and would only require you to trim 2cm off the bottom of the sign to create a sign of equivalent drag to the one with five holes in it! It hardly seems worth the effort.</p>
<h2>The verdict</h2>
<p>The science shows us that flat structures behave one way, and billowing air-filled structures behave a different way. It seems that our legislators have been confused and applied results from parachutes to flat banners.</p>
<p>If you have a banner tied in such a way that it will remain relatively flat in the wind, then it seems that the benefits of putting in vents are minimal unless you make your banner into Swiss cheese.</p>
<p>You are simply better off making a slightly small banner to achieve the same reduction in load.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/53220/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Matthew Mason receives funding from Australian Research Council and the Bushfire and Natural Hazards Cooperative Research Centre. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jonathan Roberts is an Associate Investigator with the Australian Centre for Robotic Vision and co-founder of the UAV Challenge flying robot competition. </span></em></p>Attend any ANZAC Day parade and you might see people carrying banners with holes cut in them. They’re supposed to cut any drag or wind resistance but do they do any good?Matthew Mason, Lecturer in Civil Engineering, The University of QueenslandJonathan Roberts, Professor in Robotics, Queensland University of TechnologyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/522872015-12-16T05:10:53Z2015-12-16T05:10:53ZHow can we save lives in hospitals? Start by looking for and investigating red flags<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/106160/original/image-20151215-25618-tvrry.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">State health departments should continuously monitor the hospital activity data it collects for red flags. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-162942002/stock-photo-side-view-of-thoughtful-pregnant-woman-with-hands-on-stomach-sitting-on-hospital-bed.html?src=qUxHZNLTGCubfBzBXNnwwA-3-61">Tyler Olson/Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Earlier this month, the Victorian Health Department released the results of an <a href="https://www2.health.vic.gov.au/about/publications/researchandreports/review-dhhs-management-djerriwarrh-health-services">independent review</a> into its handling of the tragic events at Bacchus Marsh hospital between 2013 and 2014. </p>
<p>Over this period, seven babies suffered avoidable deaths as a result of deficiencies in clinical care. The review shows a serious failure of clinical governance, with the responsible health service (Djerriwarrh) failing to respond appropriately to a number of serious safety breaches and complaints about the hospital.</p>
<p>The report raises the question: would public reporting of hospital safety measures have brought unsafe practices to light much earlier, perhaps triggering timely and potentially life-saving intervention?</p>
<p>Public reporting has a <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0003497511016651">long history</a> – dating back at least to Florence Nightingale – but its effect is at best indirect. It relies on hospitals acting to improve performance because of perceived reputational risk or from market pressure. In situations of oversupply or monopoly supply, neither motivation may be important.</p>
<p>Public reporting is a second-best solution. A far better improvement strategy is to make sure, through performance monitoring and regulatory strategies, that hospitals own their performance issues and act on them.</p>
<h2>Public in the dark about poor safety</h2>
<p>Before news of the deaths broke in October, the Bacchus Marsh community would have had no idea how unsafe their hospital’s obstetric practice was.</p>
<p>The My Hospitals website <a href="http://www.myhospitals.gov.au/hospital/210203020/djerriwarrh-health-service-bacchus-marsh/healthcare-associated-infections">gave no sign</a> of any problems. Though it was designed to give the public easy access to hospital performance information, My Hospitals publishes only two indicators for hospital safety: hand hygiene compliance and rates of staph infections. Neither tells you much about overall safety at a hospital, particularly in smaller hospitals where staph cases are extremely rare.</p>
<p>Those who like to keep a close eye on their local health service’s <a href="http://djhs.org.au/fileadmin/filemount/pdf_files/DjHS_Annual_Report_2013-14.pdf">annual report</a> might have noticed that Bacchus Marsh hospital failed a safety review in 2013. As is the case with most official reports, however, the information was strategically presented, so readers could easily have missed the gravity of this disclosure.</p>
<p>The public would have known that one of the obstetricians at the hospital had been reported for unsafe practice, had the responsible body investigated the complaint in a timely fashion. As it was, it took the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (AHPRA) <a href="https://www.ahpra.gov.au/News/2015-10-16-media-release.aspx">28 months</a> to conduct its investigation. The restricted conditions on the doctor’s registration were not made public until June 2015, by which time he had retired.</p>
<p>Finally, the public did not know about the hospital’s high fetal and infant (perinatal) death rate. These rates are calculated from five years of data and <a href="https://www2.health.vic.gov.au/about/publications/ResearchAndReports/2/3/0/1/9/victorian-perinatal-services-performance-indicators-2012-13">published for all hospitals</a> – except those with fewer than five perinatal deaths in any one year of analysis. This rule excluded Bacchus Marsh.</p>
<h2>Pros and cons of public reporting</h2>
<p>Public reporting in Australia is in its infancy and its impact has not been evaluated. The research evidence, mainly from the United States’ experience, on the value of performance “report cards” is <a href="http://annals.org/article.aspx?articleid=738899">mixed</a>. </p>
<p>Well-designed information can be <a href="http://journals.lww.com/lww-medicalcare/Abstract/2009/01000/Public_Reporting_in_Health_Care__How_Do_Consumers.1.aspx">useful to patients</a>, though surgeons <a href="http://circoutcomes.ahajournals.org/content/6/6/643.short">may not alert their patients</a> to it. A bad report card also doesn’t seem to affect the number of referrals a surgeon gets from doctors and specialists. Report cards may therefore <a href="http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMsa064964">not stimulate</a> improvement in hospital quality.</p>
<p>Inevitably, things will sometimes go wrong in hospitals. What matters is that the organisation is able to learn from those events and reduce the likelihood they will happen again. That will happen if clinicians have information about their performance relative to peers in other hospitals. </p>
<p>Such a change <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26308399">relies on everyone</a> involved feeling able to report errors and “near misses” without thinking they will be singled out and blamed. What hospitals must aim for is a “just and trusting culture”. </p>
<p>One problem with report cards is that it is easy for a hospital to be “named and shamed” in the media, as has <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/victorias-worst-hospitals-for-baby-deaths-revealed-20151020-gkdy82.html">happened recently</a>. </p>
<p>This in turn may create a “name and shame” culture internally. When people fear adverse consequences from reporting problems, they tend to stop reporting them. The problems may never be picked up at all, whether internally or by the public. Report cards thus need to be handled with care.</p>
<h2>A better way</h2>
<p>A much better solution is for state health departments themselves to monitor continuously the hospital activity data they collect for red flags. </p>
<p>If departments follow up early danger signs with clinical audits that are designed to support improvement, rather than punish failure, the government can strengthen safety while minimising the risk of hospitals under-reporting. </p>
<p>Routine use of data to monitor performance and prioritise safety audits should already be commonplace. The data has been available for decades now and is still under-used. </p>
<p>Only after its own safety scandal in 2005 did Queensland Health <a href="https://www.health.qld.gov.au/psu/reports/docs/lta5.pdf">begin using such data</a> to monitor safety. The case will probably be the same in Victoria, if the department draws the right lessons from the wrongs at Bacchus Marsh.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/52287/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Stephen Duckett was responsible for the design of Queensland's approach to monitoring quality and safety of health care following the Bundaberg Hospital scandal.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Terri Jackson has previously received research funding from the Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care, and from the Victorian Department of Health and Human Services. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Danielle Romanes does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Seven babies died unnecessarily at Bacchus Marsh hospital between 2013 and 2014. The My Hospitals website and other reporting mechanisms gave no sign of any problems.Stephen Duckett, Director, Health Program, Grattan InstituteDanielle Romanes, Associate, Grattan InstituteTerri Jackson, Adjunct associate professor, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/439312015-06-26T10:49:04Z2015-06-26T10:49:04ZEU leaders know the plan, but need convincing of Cameron’s motivations<p>David Cameron has opened discussions at the <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-real-reason-cameron-is-outlining-his-eu-plans-over-dinner-in-brussels-43865">European Council</a> about the changes he wants to see in the European Union ahead of a UK referendum on membership.</p>
<p>This is an unprecedented step. It is the first time an EU leader has set out political conditions for a country to stay in the EU.</p>
<p>Cameron held individual meeting and calls with each of the leaders ahead of the Brussels summit on June 25, so his negotiation points will not have come as news to them. But he is still keeping the detail light, and crucially, is cagey on his motivations.</p>
<p>This matters because co-operation from his fellow leaders may well hinge on what those motivations are. </p>
<p>The key issues on the table include handing greater powers to national parliaments, cutting red tape, allowing the UK to <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/jan/23/david-cameron-uk-exemption-eu">opt out</a> of the principle of “ever closer union”, and restricting welfare entitlements for EU migrants.</p>
<p>What he means by giving more power to national parliaments is very vague at the moment. Does he want to repatriate powers from the EU? And if so, which ones? Or does it mean more oversight over EU legislation? If so, Cameron’s request may be more of a rhetorical tool than a substantive demand. The British government has not exactly shown enormous interest in <a href="mailto:https://theconversation.com/theres-more-to-europe-than-in-or-out-and-britain-desperately-needs-to-talk-about-it-39392">scrutinising EU legislation</a> over the past few years.</p>
<p>The issue of red tape is not particularly controversial, and it seems that Junker’s Commission has made this one of its <a href="mailto:http://www.eubusiness.com/news-eu/politics-tax.z74">top priorities</a>. And freeing the UK’s commitment to the “ever closer union” may not necessarily require a full EU Treaty change. The EU’s legal machinery may find a way to include this in an additional UK-specific annex.</p>
<h2>The big ask</h2>
<p>At this point probably the most sticky issue relates to EU migration. Cameron has previously stated that he wants to limit immigration through <a href="mailto:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/11172379/David-Camerons-plans-to-limit-immigration-through-quotas-for-EU-workers-is-illegal-European-President-says.html">quotas for EU workers</a>. This is problematic as it infringes upon a fundamental EU freedom. The European Council’s President Donald Tusk has reportedly stated that the fundamental values of the EU <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33278440">“are not for sale and so are non-negotiable</a>”.</p>
<p>Cameron appears to have already toned down his rhetoric on this issue, and is now focusing his argument on benefits for EU migrants. He wants, for a start, to repatriate EU migrants after six months if they are unemployed. This is controversial as it goes against the fundamental EU principle of free movement. It is also potentially hard to implement, as it will require very rigid immigration controls. It is unclear how the government will track these EU migrants in the first place.</p>
<p>He also wants longer transition periods for EU migrants before they can claim tax credits and have access to social housing. The question here is whether this could be legally implemented through UK legislation without EU Treaty change. </p>
<p>Cameron’s argument will be that since the UK system is non contributory – unlike other EU member states – this change does not necessarily contravene EU legislation. Perhaps less controversially, he wants to stop migrants claiming benefits for children living outside the UK. These proposals have already been criticised by the <a href="mailto:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-33253209">adviser</a> to the Polish PM who argued that this might be tantamount to discrimination.</p>
<p>And here lies the problem. Cameron’s success may depend on what his goal actually is. Is the objective to stop EU migrants from abusing the UK welfare state or to stop them moving to the UK altogether? If it’s the former, some EU leaders may concede to some of his demands. But if it’s the latter, Cameron is unlikely to be a winner in the EU.</p>
<p>Cameron will now present his full reform plan at the next European Council in December. The PM has already conceded that <a href="mailto:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33278440">Treaty change may not be possible</a>, so it looks like he will have to be very pragmatic regarding what he asks of EU partners. And he’ll not only need to be convincing about the changes he wants – but why he wants them.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/43931/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
David Cameron has opened discussions at the European Council about the changes he wants to see in the European Union ahead of a UK referendum on membership. This is an unprecedented step. It is the first…Sofia Vasilopoulou, Lecturer, Department of Politics, University of YorkLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/391742015-04-20T20:06:03Z2015-04-20T20:06:03ZDumping of markets advisory board is another independent voice lost<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/77718/original/image-20150413-4084-15nxsn5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=5%2C26%2C488%2C425&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The rationale for cutting advisory bodies has been reducing red tape - but the loss can often be a valuable counter-opinion.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Image sourced from shutterstock.com</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>When is reducing red tape not reducing red tape? When the phrase is used to support the removal of advocacy capacity within any sector of our community. Peak bodies, government bodies and other regulators and supervisory organisations are critical in protecting the interests of vulnerable people and the wider community. </p>
<p>To remove the advocacy agencies that advise or comment, or to reduce the capacity of peak bodies to advocate, is to materially weaken the democratic process as well as place at risk those vulnerable people. </p>
<p>Additionally, it can place government’s own policy agenda at risk. These advocacy bodies often assist government by providing much-needed information which increases the opportunity for policy realisation. </p>
<p>But government has shown it has a tin ear to those advocating on behalf of people who need our support and, even more dangerously for it, has pursued its ideological objectives even when the evidence is clear that a particular direction is manifestly wrong or it runs counter to other announced policy. </p>
<p>This happened again in March this year when the Senate Committee on Economics Legislation issued a report that supported the government’s intention to decommission the <a href="http://www.camac.gov.au/">Corporations And Markets Advisory Committee</a> (CAMAC). </p>
<p>CAMAC was set up to advise the Commonwealth government in relation to financial reporting and financial markets. Over recent years the organisation has provided the government and broader community with important, independent advice relating to subjects as diverse as shareholder interests, derivatives trading and managed investment schemes. </p>
<p>All areas where independent, non-finance-industry-sourced advice remains extremely important in ensuring the full analysis of finance markets arrangements are communicated to government by those without an interest in the outcome. </p>
<p>Despite its very modest budget and a number of successes — which have triggered considerable support amongst those with an interest in this area — CAMAC is to be decommissioned. According to the Committee’s majority report, the recommendation was made as a way of cutting costs and reducing red tape. </p>
<p>However, the Senate Committee’s recommendation flies in the face of the almost unanimous tenor of the submissions to the committee which all (save one) supported the retention of what has been a very cheap but very valuable source of credible and, importantly, independent advice for the government.</p>
<p>Perhaps the origin of this antipathy toward CAMAC came out of the CAMAC’s 2013 report into the administration of charitable trusts and its 2014 report into <a href="http://www.treasury.gov.au/ConsultationsandReviews/Consultations/2014/Crowd-sourced-Equity-Funding">Crowd Sourced Equity Funding</a>. Both reports recommended regulatory frameworks and increased transparency, and it is likely this is advice that the government did not want to hear. </p>
<p>The CAMAC example is not unusual. There are many examples where significant community objections as well as hard evidence have been subordinated to government intentions. The now delayed <a href="https://theconversation.com/watching-over-the-helpers-why-regulation-of-charities-matters-19971">proposed removal of the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission (ACNC)</a>, the cuts to Legal Aid programs and the cuts to key peak bodies are all examples where the Commonwealth government has ignored informed opinion and also, somewhat strangely, undermined its own policy objectives. </p>
<p>Most insidiously though, much of this antipathy has been aimed at those organisations that have advocacy responsibilities.</p>
<p>The primary rationale deployed in support of reductions in the advocacy capacity of both government agencies and industry peak bodies has been the perceived need for the reduction of red tape and for the achievement of budget savings. Politically this is an attractive rationale. </p>
<p>However, it is the definition of red tape that becomes critical because one person’s red tape is another person’s protective shield. Government can inadvertently do harm — to itself and to the community — by pursuing budget cuts without balancing the advice being offered with its ideological objectives.</p>
<p>As frustrating as the frequent deployment of the red tape argument is, the assumption amongst ministers seems to have been that those organisations with an advocacy purpose are purely focused on developing arguments aimed at derailing government policy. The fact is, advocacy groups do advocate against some government policy (as you would expect them to do in a democracy), however, they also represent channels for critical feedback to government in the context of the best ways to achieve policy outcomes. </p>
<p>This feedback can assist government in achieving its stated policy intentions. For instance, the government recently announced that it aims to increase work participation rates of people with disability. This is laudable but, at the same time, funding for a number of related and important programs has been cut significantly thus reducing the government’s likelihood of success. </p>
<p>Compared to government agencies and portfolios, advocacy groups often have a broader and fuller understanding of all aspects of a particular problem, are often closely tied into other peak groups and are practised at synthesising complex information from multiple sources and applying the outcomes in the interests of the recipient or their constituents.</p>
<p>The removal of effective information, advisory and advocacy arrangements is not red-tape reduction, but avoidance of alternate opinions. Just because something is uncomfortable for government to hear, doesn’t mean it’s wrong or that advocates are malicious. </p>
<p>The government’s recent back-flips attest to the need for it to listen well and listen early. It doesn’t own all the right answers.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/39174/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>David Gilchrist has received research funding from a number of Not-for-profit industry groups as well as state and Commonwealth government agencies.</span></em></p>The decommissioning of the Corporations and Markets Advisory Committee mans the government loses an independent source of advice - at a time they arguably need it.David Gilchrist, Professor, Curtin UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/403082015-04-17T01:31:31Z2015-04-17T01:31:31ZCoal seam gas can provide certainty in a time of market chaos<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/78302/original/image-20150416-5615-sn3pit.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Australia's gas market is entering a time of change: increasing supply, such as coal seam gas, can provide certainty. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/kostynracing/3153297752">Ben Jenkins/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">CC BY-NC-ND</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>You may have seen conflicting reports lately about Australia’s gas supply. On one hand, the recently released <a href="http://ewp.industry.gov.au/sites/test.ewp.industry.gov.au/files/EnergyWhitePaper.pdf">Energy White Paper</a> assumes the gas market is facing a looming shortage. </p>
<p>On the other hand, an Australian Energy Market Operator <a href="http://www.aemo.com.au/News-and-Events/News/News/2015-Gas-Statement-of-Opportunities">report</a> released this week forecasts there will be no significant shortage in the short term. </p>
<p>The white paper uses its assumption to argue for developing other gas sources, particularly unconventional ones such as coal seam gas. And the <a href="http://www.industry.gov.au/Energy/EnergyMarkets/Documents/Domestic-Gas-Strategy.pdf">Domestic Gas Strategy</a>, also released this week, makes clear it’s full steam ahead on coal seam gas. </p>
<p>But if there’s no shortage, will we still need coal seam gas? </p>
<h2>Is there a gas crisis?</h2>
<p>One of the underlying assumptions of the <a href="http://ewp.industry.gov.au/sites/test.ewp.industry.gov.au/files/EnergyWhitePaper.pdf">white paper</a> is that unconventional gas projects such as <a href="https://theconversation.com/au/topics/coal-seam-gas">coal seam gas</a> are necessary because conventional gas reserves have been depleted. The reasons for this supposedly looming shortage are regulatory barriers and moratoriums.</p>
<p>The paper notes that gas shortages, “whether real or perceived”, have the potential to destabilise local gas markets. </p>
<p>There is, however, a strong suggestion that concerns about gas shortages are misplaced. The AEMO <a href="http://www.aemo.com.au/News-and-Events/News/News/2015-Gas-Statement-of-Opportunities">report</a> forecasts no shortage in supply gas for any of Australia’s eastern and southeastern gas markets over the short term to 2019.</p>
<p>There are several different reasons for this. </p>
<p>First, lower consumption in Queensland and New South Wales combined with improvements in infrastructure have lowered supply concerns. </p>
<p>The expanded capacity of the Victoria-NSW connection and upgrades to pipelines between South Australia and the eastern states have reduced the prospect of a shortage over the next few years. </p>
<h2>Australia enters the international market</h2>
<p>Matt Zema, managing director and chief executive of AEMO, <a href="http://www.aemo.com.au/News-and-Events/News/News/2015-Gas-Statement-of-Opportunities">noted</a> that this shift in forecast is the product of a dynamic gas landscape and stems from the fact that the eastern and south eastern markets are experiencing rapid change. </p>
<p>This change corresponds with the start of LNG exports. Major LNG production is occurring both in Australia and internationally. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.chevronaustralia.com/our-businesses/gorgon">Gorgon LNG plant</a> from Chevron is predicted to produce 15.6 million tonnes of LNG each year. The <a href="http://www.santosglng.com/the-project.aspx">Gladstone facility</a> in which Santos is involved is predicted to product 7.8 million tonnes each year. </p>
<p>Australia Pacific LNG along with Origin Energy and Conoco Phillips (United States) and Sinopec (China) are also predicted to produce 7-10 cargoes by the end of 2015, prior to their longer term contractual commitments taking effect in 2016. </p>
<p>Further, whilst the Darwin Bayu-Undon plant is contracted for supply until 2023, the prospect of any expansion of LNG production in Darwin as an alternative to developing floating LNG facilities, will also contribute to supply. </p>
<p>These forecasts indicate that the future production of LNG is likely to outnumber demand and that any shortage in the supply of gas will be temporary. The overall prediction is that if 50% of all non-approved LNG capacity goes ahead, there will be excess production by 2020. </p>
<h2>Did the white paper get it right?</h2>
<p>So, while it seems less likely there will be shortages in gas supply, it remains likely that gas prices will continue to increase towards the international price. </p>
<p>In this changing context, the white paper argues that the best response is to actively increase competition, particularly to ensure additional supply, which could include unconventional sources such as coal seam gas. </p>
<p>This is consistent with the recent decision by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission to hold a 12 month <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/accc-inquiry-into-eastern-and-southern-australian-wholesale-gas-prices">public inquiry</a> into whether wholesale gas prices on the east coast and South Australia are being driven up by insufficient competition. </p>
<p>In 2013 the <a href="http://www.industry.gov.au/Energy/EnergyMarkets/Documents/EasternAustralianDomesticGasMarketStudy.pdf">Eastern Australian Domestic Market Gas Study</a> by the Department of Industry and Bureau of Resources and Energy Economics noted that LNG production is likely to subject the east coast gas market to forces that are in part determined on a global stage. </p>
<p>In an opaque, long-term contract-based market environment, where it’s difficult to make forecasts, managing risk can be hard. This makes it difficult to accurately predict the ability of the market to respond to new and large factors in the supply and demand balance such as the impact that the export market will have upon gas pricing. </p>
<p>In light of this, there continues to be a high risk that domestic gas prices will exceed export prices. In the absence of a domestic reservation policy, the Energy White Paper seeks to manage this risk by ensuring enough gas supply. </p>
<p>But as the white paper concedes, an increase in gas supply must be balanced by a rigorous risk-management framework. Environment, human health and worker safety must be carefully protected. The federal government has endorsed two frameworks to address issues around <a href="http://www.scer.gov.au/files/2013/09/National-Harmonised-Regulatory-Framework-for-Natural-Gas-from-Coal-Seams.pdf">coal seam gas</a> and <a href="http://www.scer.gov.au/files/2013/12/Endorsed-MLUF.pdf">land conflict</a>. </p>
<p>In summary, the white paper and its strong focus on developing further gas supplies provides a robust policy response in a time of market change and uncertainty thanks to the export. It seeks to encourage competition within the upstream domestic gas sector and improve the diversity of supply. </p>
<p>After many years of steady market conditions, gas consumers are going to have to adjust to higher prices. One of the most effective economic responses to this is to implement a policy framework that promotes more supply, including unconventional sources such as coal seam gas. Whether the risk of shortages is real or perceived, the white paper promotes certainty in a highly volatile environment.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/40308/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Samantha Hepburn consults to parties involved in the resources sector through EMI Partners which she co-founded in 2015. EMI Partners consults to governments, land owners, commercial organisations and NGOs.</span></em></p>Australia’s “looming gas shortage” - the basis for calls to deregulate coal seam gas - may not be real after all. But gas prices are still set to rise, and that’s an area where coal seam gas could help.Samantha Hepburn, Professor, Faculty of Business and Law, Deakin UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/244772014-08-07T20:30:57Z2014-08-07T20:30:57ZMetadata and jobseeker plans contradict red tape target<p>The Australian government’s target of A$1 billion of red-tape savings for the year is now in sight ($700 million up to March 2014 and a claimed $300 million from the carbon tax repeal plus Future of Financial Advice repeal). But just three months before the next repeal day - slated for October 29 - the government has announced two new regulatory measures which will squander much of the savings and defy the very process established to prevent red tape. </p>
<p>Deregulation, or red-tape reduction has been a “thing” for all governments. Regulatory Impact Statements, which are supposed to weed out poor proposals, have been around for 20 years. In March the government mandated impact statements for all proposals with regulatory implications.</p>
<p>Accompanying the red-tape reduction bills is <a href="https://www.cuttingredtape.gov.au/handbook/australian-government-guide-regulation">“The Australian Government Guide to Regulation”</a> with 10 principles and seven “critical questions” for regulatory impact statements. The guide spells out how policymakers should do their job and the clear message is: no impact statement, no regulation.</p>
<p>The principles, nine of which are sensible and already widely used, are:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Regulation should not be the default option</p></li>
<li><p>Regulation should only be imposed where there is a net benefit</p></li>
<li><p>The cost burden of all new regulation must be fully offset by reductions in other regulation</p></li>
<li><p>Every regulatory policy change must have a regulatory impact statement</p></li>
<li><p>Genuine and timely consultation will be undertaken with all stakeholders</p></li>
<li><p>Policymakers must consult one another to avoid overlapping burdens</p></li>
<li><p>Information used to make regulatory decisions should be published at the earliest opportunity</p></li>
<li><p>Regulators must implement regulations with common sense, empathy and respect</p></li>
<li><p>All regulation must be reviewed periodically</p></li>
<li><p>Deregulation units must be involved in the policy making process.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>Principle 3 requiring that proponents of new rules must fully offset their costs by reducing existing regulatory burdens, even though all other policy aims are met, is irrational in that it imposes an obligation independent of the merits. </p>
<h2>Blowing the savings</h2>
<p>Within three months of the next repeal day, measures have been announced which apparently ignore most of the principles and will chew up much of the claimed savings. Plans to require many of the nation’s 740,000 plus job seekers to apply for 40 jobs each per month as a condition for receiving unemployment benefits will result in what a small business journal described as “a red tape nightmare”. </p>
<p>Under the new policy, which was released without a now mandatory impact statement, job seekers will be forced to apply for 40 jobs a month (up from 20), and for those under 30 years of age, perform up to 25 hours of community service. No costings are given for the burden on the unemployed nor for the administrative costs to employers of dealing with nearly 15 million extra job applications every month. </p>
<p>The Council of Small Business of Australia warns the scheme will result in small businesses being inundated with job applications from people who do not want jobs. In an extraordinary response, the government claims businesses will not have to respond to the deluge of applications. </p>
<p>Another policy that will contribute to the mountain of red tape is the more quantifiable costs of recently announced plans requiring telecommunications and internet service providers to retain data related to online activity. According to ISP iiNet the scheme, which it has <a href="http://www.afr.com/p/national/data_retention_policy_chaotic_confusing_eVIJIr7yj2ZfPcpKV0R19H">called</a> “chaotic and confusing”, will cost A$130 million a year increasing to A$200 million after two years. </p>
<h2>Have we seen this before?</h2>
<p>Following a decade of declining productivity and economic difficulties in 1995, all of the states and the Commonwealth agreed to implement Australia’s National Competition Policy. A key element of the policy was systematically reviewing 1800 national state and local laws to reduce anti-competitive elements.</p>
<p>Implemented over a period of 10 years the policy led to major microeconomic reforms which yielded a significant payoff in productivity and income growth. In a thorough evaluation of the national competition policy and related reforms, the <a href="http://www.pc.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0016/46033/ncp.pdf">Productivity Commission found</a> that productivity and price changes in key infrastructure sectors in the 1990s – to which the policy reforms contributed – have increased Australia’s GDP by 2.5%, or $20 billion per annum.</p>
<p>The take-home message is that carefully planned and serious economic reforms are possible and beneficial, however measures based more on theatrical display are unlikely to enhance welfare in any meaningful or lasting sense.</p>
<p>October 29’s Repeal Day has slated changes to coastal shipping, corporations law, heavy vehicle transport and the 457 visa system in the firing line.</p>
<p>By departing from its own red tape rules in relation to changes in the unemployment benefits system and the data retention scheme, the capacity for the government to deliver is very much on trial. It seems that good economics of the regulatory impact statement process will be ignored when the political benefits of new regulations trump them.</p>
<p>It is too early to tell but perhaps the government’s current anti-regulatory mantra of “deregulation good, regulation bad” may one day change to “deregulation good, sensible regulation better”.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/24477/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Allan Asher is affiliated with the Regulatory Institutions Newtwork (REGNET) at the Australian National Universityand The Foundation for Effecetive Regulation and Governance (FEMAG)</span></em></p>The Australian government’s target of A$1 billion of red-tape savings for the year is now in sight ($700 million up to March 2014 and a claimed $300 million from the carbon tax repeal plus Future of Financial…Allan Asher, Visitor, Regulatory Institutions Network (RegNet) & Chair of Foundation for Effective Markets and Governennce, Australian National UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/280622014-06-18T05:05:14Z2014-06-18T05:05:14ZSkilled migration strategy falls victim to red tape busters<p>Although few working Australians would be familiar with the work of the Australian Workforce and Productivity Agency, all of us depend on it to some degree.</p>
<p>In a shortsighted move, the government has decided to abolish the agency, and the Australian Workforce and Productivity Agency <a href="http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Fems%2Fr5253_ems_e36ef79f-e03d-48af-81d9-ac0c095e9700%22">Repeal Bill</a> is currently before the Senate.</p>
<h2>What does the agency do?</h2>
<p>The AWPA identifies skill shortages in the domestic economy, and those it deems too severe to be met by the current domestic workforce are then added to the Skilled Occupation List. An overseas worker can apply for permanent residency in Australia, so long as they possess the necessary skills. For other skill shortages, AWPA advocates greater domestic training and investment, thereby encouraging the government to invest in developing the local workforce.</p>
<p>Other major contributions of AWPA include its development of a series of comprehensive national workforce development strategies, its initiation of key sectoral skills reports which uncover the needs of industries including retail, engineering and manufacturing, and its role in directing attention towards not just skills development but the better use of skills in the workplace. Each of these initiatives would not have occurred without AWPA’s leadership.</p>
<p>Not every decision of AWPA (and its predecessor Skills Australia) has been universally popular. Indeed, not every decision has been right. But the agency provides an invaluable, independent voice that all federal governments can learn from.</p>
<p>Unfortunately the government has shut its eyes to AWPA’s important role. The AWPA repeal bill will see the activities of AWPA subsumed into the Department of Industry. The government says this will be more efficient and reduce red tape.</p>
<p>But this is completely out of step with what other countries are doing in this area.</p>
<h2>Small government</h2>
<p>Even in the United Kingdom, AWPA’s equivalent, the Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) has escaped the deregulatory zeal of the conservative Cameron government and its so called “Red Tape Challenge”. </p>
<p>Britain’s MAC has played a critical role in conducting independent labour market analysis. It has earned a reputation for careful analysis of the data and evidence on skill shortages that has helped to win support from both the government and the public. Of course there are stakeholders who disagree with some of the MAC’s recommendations, but the committee’s willingness to consider both top-down labour market indicators and bottom-up evidence from employers has been critical to its success. </p>
<p>Even if the MAC deems there to be a skill shortage, it does not always recommend an increased intake of migrant workers. Its findings can trigger government actions to reduce shortages in the future by initiating a formal review of the training system that trains British workers for the occupation in question.</p>
<p>Australia could learn from the British approach to identifying and meeting domestic skill shortages. Instead of abolishing the one, independent, federal agency with expertise in this area, the government should be increasing its investment in AWPA. This agency is critical to the integrity of Australia’s permanent migration program and its role should be expanded (as in the UK) to include the temporary migration program, namely the subclass 457 visa.</p>
<h2>An independent view on 457 visas</h2>
<p>In addition to compiling the Skilled Occupation List, AWPA should also put together the list of occupations for which the subclass 457 visa can be used. This would most definitely improve the efficacy of Australia’s temporary labour migration program.</p>
<p>With youth unemployment on the rise and with the recent federal budget reducing payments for the unemployed, it is essential we provide employment opportunities and career pathways for Australians. </p>
<p>While it might be simpler, quicker and easier to plug many skill shortages with temporary or permanent migrant workers, a better, more visionary response would be to invest in the training of the domestic workforce where possible. The AWPA has provided a critical independent voice in this regard.</p>
<p>The decision to abolish AWPA is not any reflection of the quality and importance of the work it has been doing. Instead, it is a byproduct of the Abbott government’s ideological preoccupation with deregulating and reducing the size of government. The real casualty of this shortsighted decision will be Australian jobs and the skills development of the domestic workforce.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/28062/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Joanna Howe does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Although few working Australians would be familiar with the work of the Australian Workforce and Productivity Agency, all of us depend on it to some degree. In a shortsighted move, the government has decided…Joanna Howe, Lecturer in Law, University of AdelaideLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/246592014-04-01T00:42:51Z2014-04-01T00:42:51ZCharitable treatment by regulator belies church complaints<p>The <a href="http://www.acnc.gov.au/ACNC/Comms/Med_R/MR_010.aspx">Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission</a> (ACNC) was created by the former federal Labor government and began operation in December 2012. It is so new that some charities are yet to be required to submit their first annual information statement. But the Coalition government, acting on an election promise, has introduced <a href="http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r5202">legislation</a> to abolish the commission as part of its <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-03-19/red-tape-repeal-to-scrap-charities-watchdog/5330788">red tape reduction</a> program. </p>
<p>The <a href="http://www.probonoaustralia.com.au/news/2014/03/acnc-creates-%E2%80%98red-tape-nightmare%E2%80%99-catholic-education#">Catholic Church</a> is among the loudest voices against the ACNC. Cardinal George Pell <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2013/church-lobby-in-win-over-charities-watchdog-20130831-2sxqs.html">reportedly lobbied</a> the government to abolish it. The church claims that the ACNC places an unreasonable burden upon it and its associated organisations.</p>
<p>Religious charities have some of the lowest reporting obligations of all ACNC-registered charities. </p>
<p>Registration is voluntary. However, charities wishing to access <a href="http://www.acnc.gov.au/ACNC/FTS/Fact_ConcAvail.aspx">tax exemptions</a> must register with the ACNC. The <a href="http://www.acnc.gov.au/ACNC/FTS/Fact_CharSize.aspx">size of the charity</a> determines the level of reporting required. Charities are classified as small, medium or large depending on their revenue.</p>
<p>All charities are required to provide annual information statements to the ACNC. <a href="https://www.acnc.gov.au/ACNC/Pblctns/Factsheets/ACNC/FTS/Fact_CharSize.aspx">From 2014</a>, the content of these statements varies depending on the size of the charity. Medium and large charities must also submit audited annual financial reports. </p>
<p>Basic religious charities are not required to provide any financial information to the ACNC. They are exempt from financial questions in the annual information statement and do not need to provide annual financial reports regardless of size. Basic religious charities are the only type of charity to receive this level of exemption from reporting obligations. </p>
<p>Even this low level of reporting may appear onerous to a small religious group. However, the annual information statement primarily consists of basic identifying information and questions, which require charities to select an answer from a drop-down menu or from a <a href="http://www.acnc.gov.au/ACNC/Comms/Multimedia/VidComCharityTipsFillingAIS2013.aspx">check box list</a>.</p>
<h2>What is a basic religious charity?</h2>
<p>A basic religious charity is a special subgroup of charities for the advancement of religion. The ACNC recognises <a href="http://www.acnc.gov.au/ACNC/Pblctns/Factsheets/FS_Charity/ACNC/FTS/Fact_Charity.aspx?hkey=052e737a-59f4-4af7-a460-27386217863d#purposehttp://example.com/">12 different charitable purposes</a>, including advancing religion, advancing health, advancing culture, promoting or protecting human rights and preventing or relieving the suffering of animals. </p>
<p>Which type of charity an organisation registers as depends on its purpose. For example, the <a href="http://www.acnc.gov.au/RN52B75Q?ID=C48443BE-FE4F-4306-969F-030BC63BC474&noleft=1">University of Western Australia</a> is registered as a charity for advancing education. A charity with more than one purpose must register all of these purposes. For example, the <a href="http://www.acnc.gov.au/RN52B75Q?ID=A3CB62C3-69ED-41F1-ADC8-7F5276625A0C&noleft=1">Mandandanji Charitable Trust</a> is registered as having seven charitable purposes. </p>
<p>Charities that register as having the purpose of advancing religion can register as basic religious charities if they meet the criteria. Most individual churches and parishes would qualify as a basic religious charity.</p>
<p>To register as a basic religious charity the charity must:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>Be entitled to be registered as a religious charity; and</p></li>
<li><p>Not be entitled to register as any other type of charity.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>In addition, the charity must not:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>Be a corporation registered under the Corporations Act 2001;</p></li>
<li><p>Be an Indigenous corporation under the Corporations (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander) Act 2006;</p></li>
<li><p>Be a corporation registered under the Companies Act 1985 of Norfolk Island;</p></li>
<li><p>Be an incorporated association in any state or territory;</p></li>
<li><p>Be endorsed as a deductible gift recipient;</p></li>
<li><p>Have been allowed by the ACNC to report as part of a group; or</p></li>
<li><p>Have received more than $100,000 in government grants in the current or previous two financial years.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>This may appear to be a long list of exclusions, but most parishes and individual churches would meet these requirements – including Roman Catholic parishes. For example, the <a href="http://www.acnc.gov.au/RN52B75Q?ID=DA45636E-E504-47D9-9690-2FE19D76ABF2&noleft=1">Catholic Parish of St Mary North Sydney Lavender Bay</a> is registered as a basic religious charity. </p>
<p>Not all religious charities will qualify as a basic religious charity. A religious school would also need to register as a charity for advancing education. That would disqualify it from registration as a basic religious charity.</p>
<h2>Less red tape or more?</h2>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/44959/original/9xsrmy37-1395964577.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/44959/original/9xsrmy37-1395964577.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=643&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/44959/original/9xsrmy37-1395964577.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=643&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/44959/original/9xsrmy37-1395964577.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=643&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/44959/original/9xsrmy37-1395964577.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=807&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/44959/original/9xsrmy37-1395964577.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=807&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/44959/original/9xsrmy37-1395964577.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=807&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Social services minister Kevin Andrews says scrapping the charities regulator will cut red tape.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/88279155@N03/10786753425/in/photolist-hrbVZk-7UbtiV-7UeJUj-7UeKHL-7UeKiC-7UeHD7-7UeLFW-995F2E-992DiV-992wtx-995L87-995Jyh-992ySF-995Dzo-992y3P-992Ane-992Cr2-995Jef-995EJ5-992zp2-995Lnb-995GW3-992Cbv-995Hny-992wXv-995FNh-8X8MjQ-8X8Mn1-8X8Me5-8X8Mi7-8X5Lic-8X8Mgd-8X5LbB-8X8MkY-8X5LhH-8X5Lfa-8X8MgW-8X5Lje-8X5L7Z-8X5LiT-dMq4Ly-dMq1EE-dMq1PQ-dMjskz-dMq4Xj-dMq5jh-hrdura-hrctPd-hrcRRN-hrceVG-hrdHEe">Flickr/Tony O'Hare</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The <a href="http://ministers.treasury.gov.au/DisplayDocs.aspx?doc=pressreleases/2012/163.htm&pageID=003&min=djba&Year=&DocType=0">original aim</a> of the ACNC was to “drive work to cut red tape for charities and support transparency and accountability” and to operate as a “report-once, use-often reporting framework”. The Abbott government appears to have deemed it a failure despite <a href="http://www.acnc.gov.au/ACNC/Comms/Med_R/MR_070.aspx">evidence</a> to the contrary. </p>
<p>Most religious charities that are excluded from the category of basic religious charity had reporting requirements to other regulators such as ASIC before the ACNC was created. The aim of the ACNC is to reduce red tape with a system that allows charities to report only to the commission. Other organisations such as ASIC would then access the information they need from the ACNC.</p>
<p>This process is <a href="https://theconversation.com/watching-over-the-helpers-why-regulation-of-charities-matters-19971">already under way</a>. Scrapping the ACNC will not remove reporting requirements to these other organisations and may in fact increase red tape. </p>
<p>Admittedly, prior to the ACNC, most charities classified as basic religious charities are unlikely to have had any reporting obligations. However, the reporting now required is a small price to pay for the tax benefits and status that come with being a charity.</p>
<p>The ACNC has launched a <a href="http://www.acnc.gov.au/ACNC/Comms/Med_R/MR_071.aspx">survey</a> asking charities about their experiences of red tape. It will be interesting to see what the results show.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/24659/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Renae Barker is the Diocesan Advocate of the Anglican Diocese of Bunbury and an ex officio member of their Board of Trustees. </span></em></p>The Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission (ACNC) was created by the former federal Labor government and began operation in December 2012. It is so new that some charities are yet to be required…Renae Barker, Lecturer in Law , The University of Western AustraliaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/244822014-03-25T19:40:09Z2014-03-25T19:40:09ZRepeal day an exercise in deregulation smoke and mirrors<p>Repeal day – a political stunt copied from David Cameron’s government in the UK – will go ahead in Australia this Wednesday. </p>
<p>The very fact the government plans to repeal some 10,000 regulations suggests past governments have failed to undertake inventories of their legislation and regulations, or systematically review which ones should remain.</p>
<p>The government intends (until it forgets) to have two “repeal days” per year, repealing in total around A$1 billion of regulation that has outlived its usefulness. </p>
<p>We are told that we have erected a “culture of compliance and enforcement that stifles productivity” and that by eliminating all unnecessary regulation we will be liberated. These are bold, even courageous, ambitions.</p>
<p>There’s various reasons the government has chosen to go down this route. It gets business off its back for one. Business constantly complains about unnecessary regulation and deregulation is one thing that they can almost all agree upon.</p>
<p>Deregulating anachronistic regulations also doesn’t cost much, which is a plus in a fiscally stringent context. Abolishing “red tape” enables the government to look active, setting the agenda. And the champion of the latest initiative, Josh Frydenberg, will see the endeavour as likely to enhance his promotion from his parliamentary secretary position into the ministry. </p>
<p>But deregulation exercises are all about smoke and mirrors. Parliament is unrelentingly cranking out thousands of new amendments and regulations each session, yet governments will periodically want to appear to be reducing the regulatory burden on the community and especially business – as a productivity measure. </p>
<p>Reporting requirements, compliance frameworks and other accountability impositions are increasing at a far faster rate than any rolling back of out-dated regulations (ask any small business, NGO, voluntary association or even sporting club).</p>
<p>There are some big deceptions behind the Abbott-Frydenberg initiative. One is that they claim the abolition of these regulations sitting on the statute books will miraculously save millions of dollars and make us more competitive. Yet most of the ones destined for abolition are truly anachronistic laws and regulations (some decades and even centuries old) that hardly apply to modern business.</p>
<h2>Real reform, or abolishing obsolescence?</h2>
<p>The prime minister cited a regulation imposed in the 1970s over the conversion from imperial measures to metric – who seriously believes the abolition of this irrelevant oversight will liberate business to be more productive? Other examples include obsolete regulations that applied to state-based naval installations over 114 years ago and to the construction phase of the Snowy Mountains hydro-scheme in the 1940s. These examples illustrate that the government is largely abolishing obsolescence rather than culling modern-day regulations.</p>
<p>Another deception is that most of the irritant regulations mentioned in the speeches by both the prime minister and the parliamentary secretary are matters of state and local government regulation – shopping hours, retailing restrictions, product size rules and labelling. These are the regulations that can “suffocate small business” (but also sometimes protect them), yet the Commonwealth is not a party to them. </p>
<p>Some areas or regulation involve duplication where previous Commonwealth governments have attempted to over-write its own regulations and requirements onto matters of state jurisdiction (for example, aged care facilities).</p>
<h2>You’re saving how much?</h2>
<p>And who has tallied how much we will supposedly save – the answer is bureaucrats. Officials in every department have been instructed to go back through their old statutes and “find” ones that no-one can remember and dish these up for “deregulation”, and in doing so estimate how much could be “saved” if they were onerous to comply with or administer. The dollars “saved” should be treated with caution.</p>
<p>There is also delicious irony lurking behind the government’s latest deregulation policy – the introduction of a new across-the-board regulatory requirement that every policy proposal to introduce (or abolish) regulation must be accompanied by a Regulatory Impact Statement. So, we’ll deregulate by placing another regulatory burden on departments who will have to construct pro-forma assessments of proposed changes.</p>
<p>The government has sneaked through some ideological regulatory cutting along the way. The regulator overseeing charities is being abolished (to please the big faith-based charities) and the regulations governing financial advisers are being watered down (responding to their lobbying, not the public interest). But if one examines the list of acts to be abolished most are irrelevant oversights that have long since been de-operationalised.</p>
<p>Cynics may suggest that a more positive contribution to deregulation might be for the federal parliament to ban all additional legislative activity for a year or two, and give everyone a breather, while investing time in harmonising irksome regulations at the local level.</p>
<p>Legislative instruments such as tax, industrial relations, safety, environment, superannuation are all tinkered with ad nauseum; I don’t see governments reversing this trend with pious announcements of “repeal days”.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/24482/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>John Wanna does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Repeal day – a political stunt copied from David Cameron’s government in the UK – will go ahead in Australia this Wednesday. The very fact the government plans to repeal some 10,000 regulations suggests…John Wanna, Sir John Bunting Chair of Public Administration , Australian National UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/246382014-03-25T19:40:05Z2014-03-25T19:40:05ZTackle fast-tracking of approvals to close nexus between politicians and developers<p>Prime Minister Tony Abbott’s planned repeal of 9500 redundant regulations and 1000 Acts of Parliament could loosen dangerously close ties between politicians and developers. While such ties are problematic in many parts of Australia, the recent investigation of the Obeid family by NSW’s Independent Commission Against Corruption has brought this issue to the forefront. </p>
<p>Research that I undertook when I was leading a 2011 bid for a Cooperative Research Centre in Heritage demonstrates that the nexus between politicians and developers in Australia has become perilously close. Over the last decade, red tape involved in the heritage approvals process has resulted in a dramatic increase in direct ministerial approvals for developments. </p>
<p>In New South Wales, for example, the use of ministerial <a href="http://majorprojects.planning.nsw.gov.au/index.pl?action=search&page_id=&search=&authority_id=&search_site_type_id=&reference_table=&status_id=&decider=&from_date=15%2F2%2F2011&to_date=3%2F3%2F2011&x=68&y=17">approvals for major projects or infrastructure</a> rocketed from a total of nine during 2001-2005 to 457 in 2010. Forty-three were approved in the two weeks prior to the state government going into caretaker mode. </p>
<p>Red tape is needed to reduce risk and to ensure transparent and equitable processes. However, too much red tape stifles investment. Moreover, frustrated developers seek greater use of ministerial “call in” powers to circumvent slow approvals. </p>
<p>Australia’s current heritage approvals process is fragmented across jurisdictions, between agencies and between Indigenous and non-Indigenous heritage. This has produced mountains of uncoordinated, non-standardised data. This data is inaccessible, often redundant and usually incomplete. </p>
<p>Decision-making power is dispersed across numerous agencies. Decisions depend on the interpretation and knowledge of individuals rather than on a solid evidence base. We need integrated data-sets that make it possible to determine what is common from what is rare or unique. Common approaches to data collection, storage and use should produce consistent decision-making.</p>
<p>The escalation of ministerial approvals for major developments in NSW emerged in 2005. The Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 was <a href="http://www.planning.nsw.gov.au/en-us/developmentproposals/developmentassessmentsystems/part3aassessmentsystem.aspx">amended to include Part 3A</a> for major projects of state and regional significance. Part 3A determined that the only planning approval required was that of the NSW planning minister. Each project had a spend in excess of $50 million. </p>
<p>With Part 3A, both concept and project approval from the minister had statutory force. Part 3A projects circumvented local council approval and both state heritage acts. These projects did not need approvals under either the Heritage Act, 1977 or the National Parks and Wildlife Act, 1974. Moreover, Part 3A projects were protected from emergency protection orders and third party legal challenges under State environmental or planning statutes. </p>
<p>While the aim of Part 3A was to provide up-front certainty for long-term or complex projects, this provision was abused. When the Liberal government came to power in NSW Part 3A was replaced by two separate assessment frameworks. One is for state significant development. The other is for state significant infrastructure. Importantly, the new system constrains the “call-in” powers of the Minister. </p>
<p>It was anticipated that the number of applications designated as state significant would drop by half. Nevertheless, the level of ministerial approvals for major development projects is still way beyond what it was a decade ago. </p>
<p>Throughout Australia fast-tracking major projects through ministerial approval has become a viable alternative to following due process. Occasional exemptions have become routine and the nexus between politicians and developers has grown murkier.</p>
<p>A sustainable alternative to relying on ministerial approvals for large developments is to lessen delays in heritage approvals. Reducing red tape is one part of this.</p>
<p>Developers need access to sound information. A standardised, integrated and coordinated information system would support sound decision-making. A comprehensive database would make it possible to assess if a cultural heritage place is unique, or one of thousands. Such a system would make it possible to classify and rank heritage assets. It would provide an evidence base for determining what can go and what needs protection.</p>
<p>Uncertainty over heritage approvals is costing investment and jobs throughout Australia. In the resource sector, for example, <a href="http://www.fraserinstitute.org/research-news/display.aspx?id=20902">The Fraser Institute’s annual Global Survey of Mining Companies</a> consistently identifies uncertainty over the protection of wilderness, parks and archaeological sites as a strong deterrent to investment across Australia. </p>
<p>There is an economic need for a streamlined information system that reduces the approvals delay and provides certainty for developers. Such certainty needs to be based on good, irrefutable data. In addition, decision-making should be informed by community values in order to pre-empt conflict and provide long-term confidence.</p>
<p>Australia’s cultural heritage is recognised globally as unique. It includes the world’s oldest continuous cultural traditions, some of the first evidence for modern human behaviours and rich rock art complexes. In addition, it includes the histories of more than 200 migrant groups. </p>
<p>This important heritage needs to be protected. However, we need to grow Australia’s economy and we can’t keep everything. Decisions have to be made about what we pass on to the next generation as heritage and what we let go. These decisions need to be transparent, fair and consistent.</p>
<p>Reliance on ministerial approvals raises concerns about transparency and challenges the integrity of the system. It is possible that the current corruption cases in NSW are only the tip of the iceberg.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/24638/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Claire Smith has received research and community project funding from a number of mining companies, including BHP-Billiton and Rio Tinto.</span></em></p>Prime Minister Tony Abbott’s planned repeal of 9500 redundant regulations and 1000 Acts of Parliament could loosen dangerously close ties between politicians and developers. While such ties are problematic…Claire Smith, Professor of Archaeology, Flinders UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/199712013-12-26T22:13:08Z2013-12-26T22:13:08ZWatching over the helpers: why regulation of charities matters<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/38237/original/2wpm68j7-1387413643.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The minister responsible for the not-for-profit sector Kevin Andrews will abolish the regulatory body that monitors tax concessions. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Kevin Andrews, the minister responsible for the not-for-profit sector, has confirmed that the government will abolish the Australian Charities and Not-for-profit Commission (ACNC) that began operation just 12 months ago. </p>
<p>One of the main functions of the ACNC is to regulate charities claiming tax concessions which include income tax exemption, gift deductibility, FBT and GST concessions, which Treasury has estimated costs A$5 billion in foregone revenue. </p>
<p>The coalition government wants to return the ACNC’s regulatory functions back to the Australian Taxation Office and replace it with a “Centre of Excellence”, which will have a mandate of supporting the not-for-profit sector, rather than regulating it.</p>
<p>But how much evidence has there been that the ACNC has been a tyrannical bureaucrat? And will its abolition weaken the regulation of those who seek to exploit the system?</p>
<h2>Red tape and the ACNC</h2>
<p>Andrews has <a href="http://kevinandrews.com.au/media/transcript/national-press-club-not-for-profit-sector-forum">cited excessive red tape</a> as one of the reasons for the Commission’s abolition:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>…the establishment of the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission was proposed with the object to protect and enhance public trust and confidence for the not-for-profit sector by establishing a national regulatory framework. Nowhere has the mischief that requires this new monolithic regulatory structure, or that justifies the sweeping powers of the ACNC, been identified.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Just how fair is this charge of excessive red tape? Presumably this refers to the requirement to provide information in the form of annual reporting. The statutory reporting framework adopts a tiered approach so that “small” charities - those with less than $250,000 revenue per year (78% of all registered charities) - do not have to submit a financial report. These small charities need only complete an online annual statement with 20 questions aimed at ensuring the charity is complying with its charitable purposes. </p>
<p>The Commission’s website has guides that provide detail about what is required and the Commission operates an advice service to assist charities with queries. It may be that some charities are confusing the reporting required by the Commission with other requirements such as the need to apply for a fundraising licence. Fundraising is regulated by the states and each jurisdiction has quite different requirements, making it potentially confusing.</p>
<p>It has also been said that there is unnecessary duplication of information required. Before the Commission commenced operation, 40% of charities were set up under state law as incorporated associations and had reporting obligations to state authorities. </p>
<p>Approximately 20% were structured as companies limited by guarantee and reported to the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC), while about 40% had no public reporting obligations whatsoever. This group covers bodies that have not incorporated - for example, smaller bodies that operate with a committee and some religious organisations. </p>
<p>As a result of an agreement with ASIC, companies limited by guarantee now only report to the ACNC. A COAG working group is also looking at ways to harmonise the reporting requirements between the states and the ACNC to share information and thus reduce duplication in reporting to different agencies.</p>
<p>The 40% of entities which previously had no obligations to report will now have increased obligations - but again this is arguably necessary to justify access to tax concessions and retain public confidence in the integrity of the not-for-profit sector.</p>
<h2>Accountability in the sector</h2>
<p>One important point that seems to be missed is that the reason for the Commission is to ensure minimum levels of transperancy and accountabilty. The value of having a regulator was summed up by the 2001 report under the Howard government which said that “a clear and consistent accountability framework would help to maintain and enhance public confidence in the integrity of charities and related entities”.</p>
<p>This report recommended establishing an independent administrative body to monitor the accountability of charities accessing tax concessions, as well as providing advice and support to the sector. Similar recommendations were made again in 2008 by a Senate Committee; in 2010 by the Productivity Commission and also by the Henry Tax Review.</p>
<p>Before the Commission was created, charities had to be endorsed by the ATO to access various tax concessions and before this, charities and related entities self-assessed their eligibility.</p>
<p>Under the ATO regime, there were no annual or other reporting requirements for charities, although the ATO could revoke endorsement if it became aware of wrongdoing. Realistically, the Tax Office did not have time or resources to regulate the activities of charities. So, in one sense, some regulation is the price these organisations pay for access to the tax concessions.</p>
<h2>Light touch versus firm policing</h2>
<p>A final point should be made about reports that the ACNC has not vigorously pursued charities suspected of wrongdoing. Clearly the Commission has a difficult line to walk with trying to assist charities on the one hand and ensuring that wrongdoing by those operating charities is appropriately dealt with on the other. </p>
<p>The Commission has said it decided on a “light touch” approach to regulation and compliance, starting with the presumption that charities act honestly and prudently, although it recognised it would be necessary at some stage to deal with those who use charities to obtain private benefits or who engage in fraudulent activities.</p>
<p>According to a pre-election survey, more than 80% of organisations within the sector are happy working with the ACNC and see an independent regulator as preferable to the situation where the Tax Office determined access to tax concessions.</p>
<p>Yet, the Minister still maintains that he is articulating the concerns of stakeholders. Hopefully the government will undertake further consultation before abolishing a body that can enhance the integrity of the sector and justify the revenue foregone through the tax system. </p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/19971/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Professor O’Connell was a member of the Tax Concession Working Group established by the Assistant Treasurer in 2012.</span></em></p>Kevin Andrews, the minister responsible for the not-for-profit sector, has confirmed that the government will abolish the Australian Charities and Not-for-profit Commission (ACNC) that began operation…Ann O'Connell, Professor of Law, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/107392012-11-15T19:30:28Z2012-11-15T19:30:28ZRules and regulations - or red tape? Perception is everything for directors<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/17674/original/k4hdx8xw-1352955626.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">What is red tape for one company might be a saving grace for another - but a new survey of directors show a high proportion believe it affects their company's profitability.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Flickr/eblaser</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Which one of the following from last century’s corporate office is still around – blotting paper, carbon paper, telex machines, dictation machines, Sellotape, red tape? </p>
<p>Well there is some Sellotape to be found but the far and away winner is red tape – and it is still causing problems.</p>
<p>The Australian Institute of Company Directors has just released its 84 page “Director Sentiment Index: Research Findings for the second half of 2012”. The survey indicates that directors are largely unhappy with the rules and regulations that govern them, including “red tape”. </p>
<p>The overall director sentiment as measured by the survey was, as in the first half of the year, pessimistic, but more so.</p>
<p>When compliance standards are evolving constantly to meet consumer expectations it is essential that directors be disenfranchised from the classically negative view of red tape. It is after all a basic component of the obligations directors agree to take on upon election to office. </p>
<p>In the broadest sense the proactivity required under their duty of care and diligence in s180 Corporations Act assumes that the base layer of management – the administrative, form-filling, document lodging duties – be carried out effectively.</p>
<p>The Business Sentiment Index indicates that more than 40% of directors believe that legal judgments negatively affect their business decision making and willingness to continue on a board, and more than half believe that legal judgments negatively affect their willingness to accept new board appointments. Presumably they mean judgments in ASIC’s favour.</p>
<p>Current governance requirements were considered onerous by 57% of the respondents and 44% believe that director liability and compliance requirements negatively impact their willingness to serve on a board. The survey, of 540 respondents, also found that red tape consumed around 26% of the directors’ commitments and that 39% of respondents considered red tape a significant impediment to productivity. </p>
<p>For 92% of respondents, administration costs, complying with regulations, and understanding obligations formed the aspects of red tape having the most impact on business and 22% of directors considered too much regulation and red tape to be one of the top three current economic challenges. The Director Sentiment Index does not define red tape.</p>
<p>One person’s red tape is another’s saving grace, and whereas the understanding of the concept of red tape in general is fairly well understood, what it actually entails requires a particular familiarity with the circumstances.</p>
<p>In a simple sense red tape gets in the way – so is anything that gets in the way red tape? What gets in the way of directors? This will depend on who they see as their stakeholders. </p>
<p>There is a fine line between regulation that requires lodgement, reporting, and record keeping (in the Corporations Act or under employment and industrial legislation) and regulation that requires attention to substantive matters of safety, health, or in relation to the Corporations Act, solvency (s 588G and s 436A), diligent decision-making (s 180), time-critical periods (statutory demands). </p>
<p>Standards of corporate governance, particularly in relation to listed companies, go beyond issues of personal integrity and focus on the implementation of mechanisms that deliver a “checks and balances” approach. </p>
<p>Several of the ASX Corporate Governance Principles and Recommendations could be seen to cover red tape (however it is defined), particularly Principle 1 – Lay solid foundations for management and oversight; and Principle 4 – Safeguard integrity in financial reporting.</p>
<p>So when does the law become simply red tape? For example the <a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/FCA/2011/717.html">Centro decision</a> certainly creates the need for a more detailed approach to financial statements – would directors see this as merely more red tape? </p>
<p>There is also the recent <a href="http://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/action/PJUDG?s=1000,jgmtid=161729">James Hardie sentencing decision</a> in the Supreme Court of Appeal, where Justice Barrett opened up issues in relation to how boards should proceed to their decisions – so that consultation is not the beginning and end of deliberations, but merely a starting point from which individual board members can then form their own views and decide accordingly upon a vote. In other words, not the adoption of an informal collegiate approach. </p>
<p>At paragraph 11 of the judgment, Justice Barrett sets out that: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>“The culmination of the process must be such that it possible to see (and to record) that each member, by a process of voting, actively supports the proposition before the meeting or actively opposes that proposition; or that the member refrains from both support and opposition.” </p>
</blockquote>
<p>This is obviously important guidance and good governance, but how would directors view this guidance – as red tape? Clearly the manner in which boards decide affects stakeholders, and good governance process and accountability are essential. </p>
<p>There is also going to be a difference regarding the impact of red tape between executive and non-executive directors. It would be expected, and most investors would hope, that non-executives are spared thinking about, for instance, lodgement issues. Executives and management would handle delegation of these matters. </p>
<p>Words are often used imprecisely, particularly if the imprecision can carry some extra message. The Directors Sentiment Index suggests that approximately a quarter of directors see complying with regulations and understanding obligations, that is “red tape”, as restrictive of their role as profit-makers. </p>
<p>When this statistic is combined with the directors’ negative view of legal decision-making it is possible to discern the extent of the disincentive arising from the impact of the law. The danger is that everything becomes the dreaded red tape and directors’ outlook and attitude to important regulatory issues lumps all regulation together. </p>
<p>Red tape is a pervasive and damaging bureaucratic malady. Yet it is also an important function of the checks and balances necessary for good corporate governance. What is important is that directors don’t perceive critical regulatory obligations as red tape and as a result dismiss their importance. </p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/10739/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michael Quilter does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Which one of the following from last century’s corporate office is still around – blotting paper, carbon paper, telex machines, dictation machines, Sellotape, red tape? Well there is some Sellotape to…Michael Quilter, Senior Lecturer, Department of Accounting and Corporate Governance, Macquarie UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.