58 – 2 – SUPREME AUDIT INSTITUTIONS’ INPUT INTO POLICY FORMULATION
5/10 Of peer SAIs looked at:
The effective and efficient application of regulatory tools, including: diagnosis of regulatory issues that cut across levels of government, impact assessments, ex post review of regulatory stock, and reporting on performance of regulatory outcomes.
The examples below show that peer SAIs also contribute to the evaluation of regulatory tools, for example, in assessing burden reduction programmes and the adequacy of RIA. . SAIs work may be complementary to that of regulatory oversight bodies or to the executive’s own regulatory management. Their contribution may be particularly useful in providing broad expertise on financial controls to contextualise how regulatory processes (ex ante or ex post) are functioning in the face of fiscal constraints. Examples of SAI work in this area include:
In 2013, France’s Cour des Comptes released The tax administration’s relationship with private individuals and businesses (Les relations de l’administration fiscale avec les particuliers et les entreprises). This report explored the relationship between the tax administration, businesses and private individuals and highlighted the complexity of the administration’s regulations (Cour des Comptes, 2012).
Under the banner of administrative burden simplification, the UK’s NAO released a report (NAO, 2012) that examines case studies of departments attempting to reduce the burden of regulation in order to improve performance. It describes efforts to streamline procedures in the United Kingdom, in the context of the “one-in, two-out” policy and the “Red Tape Challenge”.5 The report also assessed the UK’s regulatory impact assessment (RIA) system in 2012, focusing on the processes for departmental control of regulations in select government departments, in a similar manner to the exercise of controls on spending. The NAO found that departmental processes to manage proposed regulatory interventions functioned well and met the Better Regulation Executive guidance and Regulatory Policy Committee requirements. However, it also found that departments are trying to manage the flow and burden of regulations rather than seeing them as a resource, that, similar to financial resources, should be managed to support the achievement of departmental objectives (OECD, forthcoming; NAO, 2012).
Another NAO report, Using alternatives to regulation to achieve policy objectives, presents findings relating to the assessment and consideration of alternative approaches to regulation, and the barriers in certain departments that impede their adoption, such as prejudice against new and innovative solutions (NAO, 2014b).
BAI is in practice of auditing government regulatory reforms in order to support their effective implementation and execution. A range of audits have focused on the appropriateness and implementation of systems, management, and tools of regulation policy as well as regulation in major sectors such as education, finance, establishing factory and facility safety, for instance (BAI, 2006; 2007; 2009a; 2009b; 2015a; 2015b).
SUPREME AUDIT INSTITUTIONS AND GOOD GOVERNANCE: OVERSIGHT, INSIGHT AND FORESIGHT © OECD 2016
