Triggering actions for transparent regulations
Tuesday, 28 October 2008
THE Regulatory Reforms Commission (RRC) has been a welcome step on the part of the present government to promote business activities in the country. The RRC was put under the charge of a respected former bureaucrat, having intimate knowledge of the discouraging sides to official regulations that hamper business. But the well-intentioned move has not produced so much results as were expected after the launching of this commission.
A host of factors has been frustrating its activities. The Chairman of the RRC in an earlier press interview cited many factors for the rather not much encouraging presence of this body in terms of actual outcome. One factor stressed at that time was the duration of the existence of the commission. It was to automatically become a defunct organisation without a further lease of its life by October of the present year. But that disadvantage was removed with the Chief Adviser (CA) extending its tenure by another two years. The move indicated otherwise the desire from the highest level of the government that the RRC should continue even after the imminent expiry of the tenure of the present caretaker government to try and accomplish its objectives.
Of course, it may be stated now that smooth functioning of the RRC under a new elected government may be hazarded by the latter's lack of enthusiasm about it. But that is another matter. The way has been cleared for the longer-term functioning of the RRC that should put to rest the anxieties on the part of all concerned about its early demise. Its chairman who was abroad for a considerable time for medical treatment, can now be expected to resume his duties with full vigour. The real challenge for this body is the full political support of the government, particularly after the forthcoming general election, coupled with taking on of its tasks by the RRC itself with more energy and resolve than anything else. All concerned should be working hard for enabling the RRC to make a bigger impact on the business scene. But probably more all round activism is what is essentially required from the RRC. However, certainly this body could have achieved more by now, if it would have received the earnest cooperation from the government ministries and departments which are the objects of its reformatory actions. The mind-sets and vested interests in the Board of Investments (BOI), the Ministry of Industries (MOI) and the Registrar of the Joint Stock Companies, the offices of Land Registrars and many others where, in the name of regulations, potential investors are put off by the excess of regulatory activities, will require to undergo major changes if the reform process is to make any headway. The mentality of the functionaries of these organisations does essentially remain still obstructionist -- more for regulatory overkill of business than for promoting them in a transparent way.
All concerned do also need to appreciate the fact that government bodies justify their existence considerably as regulatory ones. They cannot change their orientation overnight. The related reform process should proceed on the basis of a clear perception about how best and specifically in what areas the governmental organisations can combine their roles as regulatory bodies with the need to be also truly enterprise-promoting bodies. The RRC will have to take the lead role here for setting an effective reform process into action. The government will need to facilitate this by extending full support to it. A focussed, not a defused, attention to the issues of major concern should be the priority of all reform-oriented actions to this effect.
A host of factors has been frustrating its activities. The Chairman of the RRC in an earlier press interview cited many factors for the rather not much encouraging presence of this body in terms of actual outcome. One factor stressed at that time was the duration of the existence of the commission. It was to automatically become a defunct organisation without a further lease of its life by October of the present year. But that disadvantage was removed with the Chief Adviser (CA) extending its tenure by another two years. The move indicated otherwise the desire from the highest level of the government that the RRC should continue even after the imminent expiry of the tenure of the present caretaker government to try and accomplish its objectives.
Of course, it may be stated now that smooth functioning of the RRC under a new elected government may be hazarded by the latter's lack of enthusiasm about it. But that is another matter. The way has been cleared for the longer-term functioning of the RRC that should put to rest the anxieties on the part of all concerned about its early demise. Its chairman who was abroad for a considerable time for medical treatment, can now be expected to resume his duties with full vigour. The real challenge for this body is the full political support of the government, particularly after the forthcoming general election, coupled with taking on of its tasks by the RRC itself with more energy and resolve than anything else. All concerned should be working hard for enabling the RRC to make a bigger impact on the business scene. But probably more all round activism is what is essentially required from the RRC. However, certainly this body could have achieved more by now, if it would have received the earnest cooperation from the government ministries and departments which are the objects of its reformatory actions. The mind-sets and vested interests in the Board of Investments (BOI), the Ministry of Industries (MOI) and the Registrar of the Joint Stock Companies, the offices of Land Registrars and many others where, in the name of regulations, potential investors are put off by the excess of regulatory activities, will require to undergo major changes if the reform process is to make any headway. The mentality of the functionaries of these organisations does essentially remain still obstructionist -- more for regulatory overkill of business than for promoting them in a transparent way.
All concerned do also need to appreciate the fact that government bodies justify their existence considerably as regulatory ones. They cannot change their orientation overnight. The related reform process should proceed on the basis of a clear perception about how best and specifically in what areas the governmental organisations can combine their roles as regulatory bodies with the need to be also truly enterprise-promoting bodies. The RRC will have to take the lead role here for setting an effective reform process into action. The government will need to facilitate this by extending full support to it. A focussed, not a defused, attention to the issues of major concern should be the priority of all reform-oriented actions to this effect.