RIA in Flanders and Belgium : Policy and Trends Peter Van Humbeeck

1. RIA in Flanders and Belgium: Policy and TrendsPeter Van Humbeeck

3. Number of countries with a RIA-system

4. Belgium a good example? Questions such as: Is regulatory impact analysis (RIA) carried out before new regulation is adopted? Is RIA required by law or by a similarly binding legal instrument? Is a government body outside the ministry sponsoring the regulation responsible for reviewing the quality of the RIA? Is guidance on the preparation of RIA provided? Does the RIA require regulators to demonstrate that the benefits of new regulation justify the costs? Are RIA documents required to be publicly released for consultation? … Source: OECD, Governmentat a Glance

5. Outline • Whatis RIA? • Features of the Flemish RIA-system • Performance of the RIA-system • Recentdevelopments and trends • RIA in Belgium • Questions and discussion

6. There is no single generic model of RIA used internationally, but RIAs tend to include at least: a clear identification of the problem and the policy objectives an elaboration of relevant alternative policy options an examination of impacts (positive and negative) of each option an appraisal of the capacity of government agencies to implement and enforce regulation and of affected parties to comply a structured consultation with stakeholders I. Whatis RIA ?

7. Ex ante policy evaluation: RIA An evidence based and transparent process of informing policy and regulatory decisions By asking the right questions (at the right time in the right sequence) in a structured format Systematically and consistently examining selected potential impacts arising from government action or non-action and relevant other alternatives Communicating the information to decision-makers and stakeholders I. Whatis RIA ?

8. RIA aims to improve the performance of the public sector through: Analysis(‘evidence based’, ‘real world impacts’, ‘reduced policy failures’) Transparency, consultation and communication (‘responsiveness’, ‘accountability’, ‘trust’) Integrated, horizontal thinking (‘policy coherence, ‘whole of government’, ‘multiple goals’) Change of the policy/regulatory culture (‘client-oriented’, ‘credible’, ‘responsive’) I. Whatis RIA ?

9. What do I want ? Wheream I ? What do I do ? objective info alternatives choice action Regulatory Impact Analysis Structuredconsultation of stakeholders Comparison of positive and negativesocialeffects of eachoption (costs and benefits) Identification and description of the problem and the objectives Analysis of the ‘do nothing’ option’ (baseline) Identification of policyoptions Assessment of the capacifty to implement, comply and enforce the policy Oplijsting van relevante beleidsopties Preview onmonitoringand ex post evalution the policy

10. II. Features of the Flemish RIA -system Why RIA? RIA is a necessarytool in the ‘regulatoryfactory’ to producehighquality outputs (but not sufficient)

12. Publication in MON Parliament (laws) Sec. legisl Existing ‘checks and balances’ were ‘toolittle, toolate’ Final approval by GOV (IKW) Advice Council of State 2e approval by GOV (IKW) External advice (SERV, other councils, …) Minister/government decides to write out a new regulation 1st approval by GOV (IKW) Preliminary draft Note for GOV Internal advice Budget impact Advice Finance Inspectorate Impact on government personnel Legislative and plain language advice Internal guidance for technical law drafting Financial Impact for local governments

13. Publication in MON Good regulation is... Necessary and effective Efficient and balanced Easy to implement and enforce Respectful for the rules of law Coherent Simple, clear and accessible Carefully prepared and consulted Continuously relevant and suitable Parliament (laws) Sec. legisl Final approval by GOV (IKW) Advice Council of State 2e approval by GOV (IKW) External advice (SERV, other councils, …) Minister/government decides to write out a new regulation 1st approval by GOV (IKW) Preliminary draft Note for GOV Internal advice Budget impact Advice Finance Inspectorate Impact on government personnel Legislative and plain language advice Internal guidance for technical law drafting Financial Impact for local governments

14. Publication in MON Good regulation is... Necessary and effective Efficient and balanced Easy to implement and enforce Respectful for the rules of law Coherent Simple, clear and accessible Carefully prepared and consulted Continuously relevant and suitable Parliament (laws) Sec. legisl Final approval by GOV ? (IKW) Advice Council of State 2e approval by GOV (IKW) External advice (SERV, other councils, …) Minister/government decides to write out a new regulation 1st approval by GOV (IKW) Preliminary draft Note for GOV Internal advice Budget impact Advice Finance Inspectorate Impact on government personnel Legislative and plain language advice Internal guidance for technical law drafting Financial Impact for local governments

15. Publication in MON Good regulation is... Necessary and effective Efficient and balanced Easy to implement and enforce Respectful for the rule of law Coherent Simple, clear and accessible Carefully prepared and consulted Continuously relevant and suitable Parliament (laws) Sec. legisl Final approval by GOV (IKW) Advice Council of State ? 2e approval by GOV (IKW) External advice (SERV, other councils, …) Minister/government decides to write out a new regulation 1st approval by GOV (IKW) Preliminary draft Note for GOV Internal advice Budget impact Advice Finance Inspectorate Impact on government personnel Legislative and plain language advice Internal guidance for technical law drafting Financial Impact for local governments

16. Publication in MON Good regulation is... Necessary and effective Efficient and balanced Easy to implement and enforce Respectful for the rule of law Coherent Simple, clear and accessible Carefully prepared and consulted Continuously relevant and suitable ? Parliament (laws) Sec. legisl Final approval by GOV (IKW) Advice Council of State 2e approval by GOV (IKW) External advice (SERV, other councils, …) Minister/government decides to write out a new regulation 1st approval by GOV (IKW) Preliminary draft Note for GOV Internal advice Impact on Budget Advice Finance Inspectorate Impact on government personnel Legislative and plain language advice Internal guidance for technical law drafting Financial Impact for local governments

17. Publication in MON Regulatory Policy Measures (proposed 1999 – implemented 2005) Transparency Analysis of all effects Open, early consultation Capacity Ex post evaluation Parliament (laws) Sec. legisl Final approval by GOV (IKW) Advice Council of State 2e approval by GOV (IKW) External advice (SERV, other councils, …) Minister/government decides to write out a new regulation 1st approval by GOV (IKW) Preliminary draft Note for GOV Internal advice Budget impact Advice Finance Inspectorate Impact on government personnel Legislative and plain language advice Internal guidance for technical law drafting Financial Impact for local governments

18. Publication in MON Regulatory Policy Measures (2005) Transparency Ex ante analysis Open, early consultation Capacity Ex post evaluation Parliament (laws) Sec. legisl Final approval by GOV (IKW) Advice Council of State Register of draft regulations 2e approval by GOV (IKW) External advice (SERV, other councils, …) Minister/government decides to write out a new regulation 1st approval by GOV Regulatory agenda (IKW) Preliminary draft Note for GOV Internal advice Budget impact Advice Finance Inspectorate Impact on government personnel Legislative and plain language advice Internal guidance for technical law drafting Financial Impact for local governments

19. Publication in MON Regulatory Policy Measures (2005) Transparency Ex ante analysis Open, early consultation Capacity Ex post evaluation Parliament (laws) Sec. legisl Final approval by GOV (IKW) Advice Council of State Register of draft regulations 2e approval by GOV (IKW) External advice (SERV, other councils, …) Minister/government decides to write out a new regulation 1st approval by GOV Regulatory agenda (IKW) Preliminary draft Note for GOV Internal advice + RIA + RIA Advice Finance Inspectorate Legislative and plain language advice Internal guidance for technical law drafting RIA -advice

20. Publication in MON Regulatory Policy Measures (2005) Transparency Ex ante analysis Open, early consultation Capacity Ex post evaluation Parliament (laws) Sec. legisl Final approval by GOV (IKW) Advice Council of State Register of draft regulations 1st approval by GOV (IKW) Note for GOV + RIA Minister/government decides to write out a new regulation External advice (SERV, other councils, …) + consultation Regulatory agenda (green/white paper) Preliminary draft Internal advice + consultation + RIA Advice Finance Inspectorate Legislative and plain language advice Internal guidance for technical law drafting RIA -advice

21. Publication in MON Regulatory Policy Measures (2005) Transparency Ex ante analysis Open, early consultation Capacity Ex post evaluation Parliament (laws) Sec. legisl Final approval by GOV (IKW) Advice Council of State Register of draft regulations 1st approval by GOV (IKW) Note for GOV Unit Unit Unit + RIA Oversight Minister/government decides to write out a new regulation External advice (SERV, other councils, …) + consultation Regulatory agenda (white paper) Preliminary draft Internal advice + consultation + RIA Advice Finance Inspectorate Legislative and plain language advice Internal guidance for technical law drafting RIA -advice

22. Publication in MON Regulatory Policy Measures (2005) Transparency Ex ante analysis Open, early consultation Capacity Ex post evaluation Parliament (laws) Sec. legisl Final approval by GOV (IKW) Advice Council of State Register of draft regulations Ex post 1st approval by GOV (IKW) Note for GOV Unit Unit Unit + RIA Oversight Minister/government decides to write out a new regulation External advice (SERV, other councils, …) + consultation Regulatory agenda (white paper) Preliminary draft Internal advice + consultation + RIA Advice Finance Inspectorate Legislative and plain language advice Internal guidance for technical law drafting RIA -advice

23. II. Features of the Flemish RIA -system • RIA objectives • Improve regulatory quality • use evidence-based techniques to compare regulatory options • increase transparency, foster consultation and improve justification regulatory solutions • promote ‘whole of government’ approach (policy coherence, horizontal thinking) Source: RIA-guide

24. II. Features of the Flemish RIA -system • RIA scope (cf. governmentcricular, not in decree) • RIA is mandatory for most regulations • RIA should be proportional. This means that the scope as well as the depth of a RIA must be proportionate with the importance of the regulation and the expected extent of the effects • There is no quantitative threshold or screening • Regulatory agenda: less RIAs but better RIAs

25. II. Features of the Flemish RIA -system • RIA process • “RIA is most effective in an early stage of the regulatory preparation” • “RIA is a team effort” • “Support and quality control by the central Regulatory Management Unit and by departemental RIA coordinators” • “Final responsibility lies with the person or agency that prepares the new regulation and with the minister who submits the draft regulation to the Government” • Analytical requirements were kept simple and flexible

26. II. Features of the Flemish RIA -system RIA procedure

27. II. Features of the Flemish RIA -system RIA product

28. II. Features of the Flemish RIA -system

29. III. Performance of the RIA -system • Design is rather good • Formal compliance is high • Number of RIA’s is high (587 in 7 years) • Average quality is low • Impact on policy decisions is poor • No or slow change in the policy culture

32. III. Performance of the RIA -system • Design is rather good • Formal compliance is rather high • Number of RIA’s is high (587 in 7 years) • Average quality is low • Impact on policy decisions is poor • No or slow change in the policy culture

34. III. Performance of the RIA -system • Important weaknesses still are: • little consideration of alternative policy instruments and lack of consideration of relevant alternative options, • inadequate analysis of costs and benefits of options and insufficient examination of all relevant effects, • weak and limited empirical underpinning and quantitative assessment of effects, few quantitative data in all sections • insufficiently clear and balanced trade-offs; comparison of options obscure or methodologically weak; • efforts to consult with stakeholders limited, opaque or unbalanced;

35. III. Performance of the RIA -system • Some reasons for implementation gap: • Startingtoo late • Lack of skills • Weakoversight and control • Inadequate resources • And especially: needfor support from the highest level

36. IV. Recentdevelopments and trends Unfinished business • How to maximise political commitment to RIA? • How to integrate RIA at the heart of the policy making process and avoid formalism? • How to allocate responsibilities for RIA? • How to raise RIA-quality? • How to cope with emerging new and competing “sectoral” ex ante tests?

37. IV. Recentdevelopments and trends Recent developments • Renewed adoption of a better regulation policy by government • mandatory phasing of each RIA (pre RIA and final RIA) • Use of road maps and early process planning via the regulatory agenda 2.0 • Consultation code • Updated RIA-manual and RIA-training • More transparency and better accessibility of draft and final RIAs

38. IV. Recentdevelopments and trends Remainingchallenges • Actual RIA practice? • Policy culture • Internal and external scrunity • Broader community of believers (esp. high level) • Integration of sectoral tests and SIA • SIA vs. RIA makesnosense ! (RIA integrating tool)

39. V. RIA in Belgium RIA at federal level = SIA + Kafka testRIA in Walloniaand Brussels = onlyKafka test • Kafka-testforadministrativeburdens, but plans forbroadeningtowards RIA (result of 2010 OECD review) • Sustainability Impact Assessmentfor analysis of the impact of proposed policy measures on: • Economy, social welfare and environment • Present andfuturegenerations • Belgium and the rest of the world • Article 4 of the Royal Decree of 22 September 2004 defines SIA as ‘the full range of methods that are utilized to study the possible social, economic and environmental effects of a proposed policy of one of the governmental services concerned, before taking a final decision in the relevant case.’”

40. V. RIA in Belgium SIA-process • 3 SIA forms (one of which has to bepresented to GOV, depending on the result of the SIA procedure) • Exemption form • Quick scan form (no major impacts) • Summary form (summary of SIA-report, onlyfor major impacts) • SIA procedure • Screening • Scoping • SIA

41. V. RIA in Belgium SIA-product • SIA-quick scan (scoping) • Impactmatrix - Qualitativeanswers • 33 indicators (10 ECON, 10 SOC, 10 ENV, 3 GOV) • Effects short / long term andlocal / global • SIA-report (screening) (cf. RIA) • Problemdefinition • Policy objective • Policy options • Analysis of effects of policy options • Consultation • Conclusionsandrecommendations

42. V. RIA in Belgium SIA-system: evaluation • Formal compliance high, but almost no SIAs performed • OECD review: too sophisticated (a form of super impact assessment) and “It does not make sense to continue, at least over the longer term, with two separate processes” (SIA and Kafka/RIA)

43. VI. Questions and discussion