Tammy Tyrrell (Tasmania, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

I seek leave to table an explanatory memorandum relating to the bill.

Leave granted.

I seek leave to have the second reading speech incorporated in Hansard.

Leave granted.

The speech read as follows—

As I rise today to speak on the Mandatory Regulation Impact Statement Bill, I am standing for honesty, transparency, and, frankly, good policy.

Now, I'll be honest. This is not a flashy bill. There are no headlines in it. No one's going to be chanting about regulation impact statements at rallies.

But it's the kind of change that makes a big difference in how we legislate, and how the legislation affects real people in the real world.

This bill is about making sure we do the thinking before we do the legislating. It's about getting serious not just about the why and the who when it comes to making new rules and regulations.

As all of you here in the chamber are aware, there is a recommendation located in the Legislation Handbook that says we should provide a Regulatory Impact Statement for any bill that will have an impact—on anyone.

As is sometimes the case, though, Impact Statements are too often only provided when they make the policy look good. When it has a positive impact.

Right now, across many levels of government, new regulations are brought in without fully considering the consequences. Most of the time, the intention is good, but the flow-on effects just haven't been thought through properly.

And who ends up dealing with those unintended consequences?

It's the small business owner trying to open a local cafe in a small town, who suddenly has to comply with a mountain of forms.

It's the farmer who wants to build a new dam for water security, but finds the rules made in the city don't match the reality on the ground.

It's the young family who can't move into their new build because it's tangled in a regulation spaghetti.

A decade ago, nearly half of Red Tape Survey respondents reported that impacts of regulation had prevented them from making changes to grow their business.

Years later, interim inquiries found that these concerns had not abated.

If a lack of a meaningful Regulation Impact Statement is preventing businesses from growing, then it is stalling productivity, which is one of the biggest concerns of this parliament.

When people get frustrated with the government, when they say it's out of touch, this is what they're talking about. Rules made, often with the best of intentions, but no clue the impact they're gonna have on everyday people.

This isn't right. Us representatives should know what we're voting on. Our voters should know how their elected representatives' policies are going to affect them. It's a no brainer, really.

That's where this bill comes in.

What this bill does is straightforward:

It makes it mandatory for new legislation that will have an impact to be presented with a Regulation Impact Statement. It's what we should be doing anyway.

If you're going to impose new rules that affect people's lives, their livelihoods, their businesses, or their communities, then you owe them a pretty honest estimate of how it's going to play out.

This Bill helps us to do our jobs better. It forces decision-makers to ask the right questions.

What is the actual intention of the legislation?

What are all our options, and the costs and benefits of each?

Who's affected, and how can we valuably include their input?

And finally, is this piece of legislation actually beneficial? Or is it just another layer of regulation to make people's lives harder?

If we want our voters, our citizens, the people we are put here to represent to trust us, we need to make sure our policies are well designed, thoroughly justified, and properly communicated.

This bill is about lifting and upholding the standard. It's about transparency. Accountability. All the things that are essential to our democracy.

We owe that level of transparency to the people who elected us.

Too often in this place, the outcome doesn't match the intent. We talk about removing red tape, and just add more. We say we want to improve the small business sector, and just make it harder for small business owners.

This bill aims to change that.

It's not a silver bullet. It won't stop every bad regulation or unintended consequence. But it will force us to have a good hard think before we go messing with people's everyday lives.

That's what good governance looks like.

This is for everyone who's ever felt like their elected representatives just aren't representing them.

So while this bill might not be a biting criticism, or a front page headline, it's a practical change that can make a world of difference.

Right now, we have a chance to improve governance for good. Why wouldn't we take it?

Debate adjourned.