Transcript The Dutch Advisory Board on Administrative Burden (Actal)

The Dutch Advisory Board on
Administrative Burden (Actal)
The Hague
March 5, 2008
Topics

Businesses
 Four
criteria for success
 The proof of the pudding

Broadening the scope
 Citizens
 Public
administrations
 Compliance costs
 Europe
Businessess



Good governance
Reducing administrative burdens
for businesses is good for
economy
25 % reduction policy results in:
 Labour
productivity + 1.7 %
 GDP growth + 1.5 %
Businesses: four criteria
for success

Review of World Bank (2007) and OECD (2007):
 Dutch
programme on reducing administrative
burdens for businesses is world leading.
 Four
criteria for success: measurement, reduction
targets for each ministry, strong coordinating
minister, incorporation in the regulatory process
First criterion:
measurement

Zero-base measurement

Standard Cost Model

Ex ante measurement (new
regulation)

Second criterion: targets

Reduction targets for each ministry

Nimby

25 percent target works well as an
incentive
Third criterion: strong
minister

Ministry of Finance

Budget cycle (carrot and sticks)

Situation since 2007 (new
cabinet): two state secretaries, still
linked to the budget cycle
Fourth criterion:
incorporation

Contain the flow of new regulation

Independent watchdog: Actal

NET target
The Actal
Organisation





Independent watchdog, assessor and
facilitator
Established in 2000: focus on AB for
businesses
From 2005: AB for citizens too
Final date: 1st of June 2011
Small organisation: 3 Board members, 13
staff
Assignment

Bring about a cultural shift among
legislators and policy officers
“Policy officers should consider the
effects for AB on their own initiative”
Method of working

The two main instruments are:
- advise ministries on proposed legislation
- advise ministries on existing legislation
Also:
Parliament (only at request)
- assess amendments

Supervisory bodies

Local government

European Union
Proposed legislation:
Test criteria





Are the administrative burdens quantified?
Is the quantification correct?
Are alternative options considered that may lead to
lower administrative burdens? Is the least burdensome
option chosen?
Are arguments provided as to why a certain option was
preferred and possible alternatives were rejected?
Is the least burdensome option chosen in
implementation (enforcement) of laws and regulations?
Proof of the pudding - I
Dutch Programme AB Businesses
Since 2002
Before 2000
Measurement
SCM, Zero-base
No zero-base
Targets
Net target, each
Gross overall
Coordinating
Ministry of Finance
“Economic Affairs”
Incorporation
Actal; Ex-ante
No check on new
regulations
Proof of the pudding - II

Delivery of results:
 Reduction
plans from ministries
 Ex ante measurement of new regulation
 Effect on AB matters for decisionmaking
 Actual reduction of AB businesses
Broadening the scope:
citizens

AB Citizens (since 2005)
 (Partial)
zero-base measurement; SCM
 Reduction targets for each ministry
 Coordination by Ministry of the Interior
 Ex ante measurement and Actal

Cumulative burdens for target groups, e.g.:
 Disabled
 Elderly
persons;
Broadening the scope:
public administrations

The example is the education sector:
 Zero-base
measurement; SCM
 Net reduction target
 Initiative of Ministry of Education
 Ex ante measurement; checked by Actal
 Presently
our cabinet aims to broaden the
scope to public administrations in general (this
is still under construction).
Broadening: compliance
costs

Why?
 Good
governance
 Economy
 Bridging the gap between what government
does and what business perceives
Broadening: compliance
costs

This is presently under construction
 It
can be measured: probably a partial zerobase measurement
 Probably gross reduction targets for some
specific domains
 Coordination by state-secretaries Finance plus
Economic Affairs
 Ex ante measurement; checked by coordinating
ministries or Actal
Broadening the scope:
Europe

About 50% of Dutch AB originate from Europe
 Thirteen
priority areas are presently measured
 Gross reduction target on priority areas [Fast
track proposals] (future ambition for net target?)
 Coordination by commissioner Verheugen (DG
Enterprise)
 Flow: ex ante measurement for all new proposals
(Impact Assessment Board)

About Europe



Joint position papers of NKR, BRC,
Actal on European efforts
First position paper: 1 March 2007
Second paper: 19 Oktober 2007
Europe: some of our
wishes




Measurement of the full Acquis
Net reduction targets for each DG
Better ex ante measurement of AB
for new proposals
Independent watchdog (High Level
Group: Stoiber)
 Truly
independent
 Good mandate
Conclusions - I

Four criteria for success of the
Dutch approach on administrative
burdens for businesses:
 Measurement;
 Targets;
 Strong
minister;
 Incorporation in regulatory
process.
Conclusions - II

Several opportunities to duplicate
(broaden) the success:
 Citizens;
 Public
administrations;
 Compliance costs;
 European union.
Useful websites

www.compliancecosts.com

www.administrative-burdens.com

www.actal.nl
Contact information
Actal
P.O. Box 16228
2500 BE The Hague
The Netherlands
tel: +31-(0)70-3108666
e-mail: [email protected]
Internet: www.actal.nl