issue : 01/2019 1. june 24, 2019, launching of...

ISSUE : 01/2019

HIGHLIGHTS In this issue :

UNIFIED PUBLIC CONSULTATION (UPC)

Centralised online portal to enhance public engagement

UNIFIED PUBLIC CONSULTATION (UPC) Centralised online portal to enhance public engagement

DRIVING PRODUCTIVITY OF THE NATION 1

BOLSTERING CULTURE OF INDEPENDENCE Safeguard against Undue Influence

DEREGULATION— LESSON LEARNED FROM UK Enhancing Quality Regulators & Regulations

1. June 24, 2019, Launching of

Productivity Report

2018/2019 (26th Edition)

PUBLISHER:

Smart Regulation, Productivity and Competitiveness

Development Division

Malaysia Productivity Corporation (MPC) , Lorong Produktiviti, Off Jalan Sultan, 46200 Petaling Jaya , Selangor Darul Ehsan

Tel : 603- 79557266 Fax : 603- 79540795

GRP Portal : grp.mpc.gov.my

Email: regulatoryreview.mpc.gov.my

Advisor : Dato' Mohd Razali Hussain

Chairman : Dato' Abd. Latif Hj. Abu Seman

Editorial Team : Mr Mohamad Muzaffar Abdul Hamid, Ms. Nik Nur Atiqah Saidi, Ms. Rubiatul Adawiyah Che Sari, Ms. Noor Iddeanna Idris

MPC Associate : Mdm Lok Lee Lee

As per the targets set in the Eleventh Malaysia

Plan (2016-2020), and under Thrust 4 of the Malaysia

Productivity Blueprint (MPB) (Forging a Robust

Eco-system), MPC has been tasked to accelerate the

efforts to enhance whole-of-government approach

towards addressing regulatory constraints. One of the

strategies is to establish and institutionalise an

innovative policy development engagement mechanism.

With the advances in ICT tools - Internet and the

ubiquitous social media, the use of ICT for online

dissemination, communication and solicitation of

Information has become an unavoidable feature in

public consultation.

Towards this end, MPC has collaborated with

the World Bank (WB) to design a unified (centralised)

website for online consultation in rulemaking.

The proposed centralised on-line portal will provide an

alternative mechanism for regulators to reach out to their

stakeholders as well as being a more cost-effective

approach for the provision of information on the

proposed regulatory changes.

Benefits of Public Consultation :

Identify the full range of affected parties

Allow stakeholders’ views and concerns to be heard

and considered

Promotes transparency and accountability

Enhances predictability

Reduces risk of policy failures due to unexpected

consequences

A Single Platform for online consultation in rulemaking




Ways of Conducting Public Consultation :

Informal consultation

Forums

Public surveys

Focus group discussions

Round table discussions

Stakeholder meetings

Town-hall meetings

Public hearings

Notice & Comment

Online /Web-based

Unified Public Consultation (UPC) Portal

The UPC portal is to facilitate stakeholder

engagements in its rule-making process. UPC provides

members of the public easy access to regulatory consultations

through a single website. UPC will also contribute to achieving

the Government’s commitment to accountability, transparency

and inclusiveness.

With the establishment of a centralised on-line public

consultation mechanism, it is envisaged that a set of guidelines

will be drawn up to put in place a more systematic and

effective public consultation leading to a more robust rule-

making process and enhancing legitimacy and trust in public

institutions. It provides a tracking tool for better monitoring

and evaluation of evidence-based and quality rule-making. The

publication of notice of regulatory consultations from various

regulators on a centralised portal will serve to enhance

accessibility, transparency, inclusiveness and accountability.

Regulators Undertaking Pilot Projects

MPC and the WB teams are undertaking pilot projects

on UPC in collaboration with several regulators. It is expected

that the pilot projects will provide useful insights to the project

team before expanding the UPC nationwide. Regulatory

agencies have actively embarked on stakeholder engagements

through the internet, especially through the regulator’s

website.

Members of the public and stakeholders seeking to

contribute to the Government’s rule making process

navigate through the respective regulator’s website with its

own design, some of which may be cumbersome. With UPC,

regulators will undertake stakeholder engagements through a

single portal. UPC will make stakeholder engagement in the

rule making process more uniform, effective and efficient.

Among the regulators that have established the

web-based consultation mechanism are MITI, MOH, and MOA

(Department of Agriculture and Department of Veterinary

Services).

Ministry of International Trade & Industry (MITI)

Ministry of Health (MOH)

Department of Agriculture

Department of Veterinary Services



3 Phases of Engagement

In implementing UPC, it is envisaged that engagement with stakeholders, and the public in general, on regulatory issues is generally undertaken through three phases –Forum discussion, Preliminary consultation and Final consultation.

‘Forum’ is an early stage of issues identification where regulators may pose topics to obtain feedback and seek clarity on issues that have raised public interests and may require policy intervention by the Government.

Preliminary consultation takes place when the regulator has assessed the issue(s) and decides that there may be a need for intervention on the part of the Government. This stage is usually arrived at from information received during forum discussions. A draft paper is prepared providing background information, issues of concern, contributing factors, magnitude, risk of non-intervention, tentative solutions and possible impact. The draft paper should be published or made available to stakeholders as part of consultation process to ascertain the validity of the assessment undertaken and the feasibility of possible solutions.

Final consultation with stakeholders is undertaken when the draft final policy paper and draft regulations are available. This part of the consultation will enable the regulator to make known its proposed solution with greater specificity, including specific measures, if available. At this stage, feedback from preliminary consultations would have been considered.

Stakeholder Participation Stakeholders are required to register with UPC to participate in preliminary and final consultations. Parties participating in forums or consultation must observe certain conditions to ensure fruitful discussions or feedbacks to regulators. As such: Statement which offends racial, religious or cultural

sensitivities should be avoided; Statement attacking or insulting person(s) or

organisation) is not allowed; Comments/feedback must be related and relevant

to the issue(s) under consideration; Not to attach any link to offensive or unsolicited

websites; Ensure compliance with copyright, trademark and

patent requirements, if relevant. Not to use the UPC to conduct competition or

commercial activities; and Not to upload file that contains virus.

Getting Started

For more info on UPC, kindly visit Upc.mpc.gov.my




On-going Consultations in UPC


UPC - EASY ACCESS TO REGULATORY CONSULTATIONS THROUGH A SINGLE WEBSITE

(MOH)

This consultation document has been uploaded in UPC

website. The public consultation will be online until 30 April

2019.

PROPOSAL TO STREAMLINE THE PROCESS OF

ESTABLISHMENT AND LICENSING OF PRIVATE

HEALTHCARE FACILITIES (PRIVATE HOSPITAL) TO

ENHANCE THE EFFICIENCY OF REGULATORY PRACTICES

AND REDUCE UNNECESSARY REGULATORY BURDEN.

We are seeking your kind support to participate and to

contribute your ideas via Unified Public Consultation

(UPC) Website by following the steps below:

1. Click on http://upc.mpc.gov.my/csp/sys/bi/work/upc/shareThumbnail/MOH21.csp?$NAMESPACE=UPC&redirPage=regulation&regId=21.

2. Click on the Survey for Improving Dealing with

Construction Permits for Private Hospitals and share your

ideas with us.

We encourage you to share this survey with your peers

and everyone who is involved in the development of

private hospitals. Your ideas will help the focus group in

improving the initiatives.

We believe in having sufficient consultations and your

ideas and suggestions will surely bring benefits back to

all stakeholders. Your idea and suggestion matters!.

Public Consultation on Improving Efficiency in

Dealing with Construction Permits for Private

Hospitals | 22 January 2019 | Hilton Petaling Jaya

The public consultation was held to seek the private

healthcare industry’s input on the proposed changes

to improve the process of setting up private hospitals.

Issues discussed in the public consultation are divided

into three categories:

1. Improving efficiency of process of setting up

private hospitals.

2. Harmonising variations of technical specification

requirements of Act 586 (Private Healthcare

Facilities and Services Act 1998) and Uniform

Building By-Law (UBBL).

3. Special topics

i. Mitigating Patient Safety Risk due to Fire for

Private Hospital Building height of >48m.

ii. Extending renewal licence to operate duration for

private hospital.

iii. Disallowing the usage of shop lots as a private

hospital.

iv. Consideration to introduce ‘Processing Fee’ to

speed up processing applications to CKAPS by getting

assistance from qualified professionals.

This public consultation is part of initiatives by the

Private Healthcare Productivity Nexus and

PEMUDAH’s Focus Group on Dealing with

Construction Permits (FGDCP). Intensive discussions

were held in 2018 between FGDCP and CKAPS, and

together with the issues raised during a series of

Training Workshops on DCP Private Hospitals

throughout 2018 has come out with various proposed

recommendations.


http://upc.mpc.gov.my/csp/sys/bi/work/upc/shareThumbnail/MOH21.csp?$NAMESPACE=UPC&redirPage=regulation&regId=21



UPC - EASY ACCESS TO REGULATORY CONSULTATIONS THROUGH A SINGLE WEBSITE

(MOH)

Public Consultation on Improving Efficiency in DCP for Private Hospitals, 22 January 2019, Petaling Jaya

From left: Mr. Zahid Ismail, Director of MPC; Dato' Dr. Haji Azman Bin

Abu Bakar, Deputy Director General of Health; Dr. Mary Wong Lai Ling,

Deputy Secretary General of KPKT; Dato’ Dr. Jacob Thomas, Private

Healthcare Productivity Nexus Chairman and Dato' Mohammad Radhi

Bin Abdul Razak, Deputy Director of EPU.

The event managed to attract almost 200 participants from the Ministry of Health, EPU, DBKL, JBPM, State Local

Authorities, Medical Planners, Architects, Engineers and others.


Engagement Session with Regulatory Coordinators (RCs)

The session held on 27 March 2019 at Zenith Hotel, Putrajaya was attended by 160 participants comprising 22 Ministries and Agencies’ officials, and representatives from MPC and Vendors. List of Ministries who participated: Ministry of International Trade & Industry (MITI) Ministry of Housing and Local Government (KPKT) Ministry of Finance (MOF) Ministry of Tourism, Arts and Culture (MOTAC) Ministry of Communications and Multimedia

(KKMM) Ministry of Water, Land and Natural Resources

(KATS) Ministry of Economic Affairs (MEA) Ministry of Energy, Science, Technology,

Environment and Climate Change (MESTECC) Ministry of Rural Development (KPLB) Ministry of Works (KKR) Ministry of Agriculture and Agro-based Industry

(MOA) Ministry of Human Resources (MOHR) Prime Minister’s Department (JPM) Ministry of Primary Industries (MPI) Ministry of Women, Family and Community

Development (KPWKM) Ministry of Home Affairs (KDN) Ministry of Education (MOE) Ministry of Defense (MINDEF) Ministry of Transport (MOT) Ministry of Domestic Trade and Consumer Affairs

(KPDNHEP) Ministry of Health (MOH) Ministry of Youth and Sports (KBS)

Objectives of the session

To enhance Regulatory Coordinators’ understanding

of GRP;

To update on GRP implementation status at ministry

and agency levels; and

To introduce the Unified Public Consultation Portal

(UPC) as a new mechanism for the government to

get feedback and involvement of the people in the

process of policymaking and government policy.

Expected outcomes from this engagement session:

Strengthening the understanding of GRP among

ministries and agencies.

Promoting UPC to potential stakeholders in both

private and government sectors to participate as

good citizen to this promising initiative supported by

the current government.

The sharing of GRP best practices will be used to

conceive ways for improvements and to set a

standard for improved rule-making and participation

in regulatory process.


“Undue influence, whether real or perceived, can undermine a regulator's ability to behave in this way, impinge on its

independence, and ultimately, on its performance.” (ECD (2017), Creating a Culture of Independence: Practical Guidance against

Undue Influence, The Governance of Regulators, OECD Publishing, April 25, 2017, Paris, https://

doi.org/10.1787/9789264274198-en

The guidance covers issues linked to both external and internal governance of regulatory agencies, structured according to the following five dimensions of Role clarity and responsibility, Transparency and accountability, Financial independence, Independence of leadership and Staff behavior. Guidance on creating a culture of independence presents practical guidance for governments and regulators on how to protect economic regulatory agencies from undue influence and creating a culture of independence. The governance of regulators helps ensure that regulatory decisions are credible and inspire confidence. Regulators are the “referees” of markets that provide essential services to citizens; they guarantee that all actors respect the rules and work to achieve the best outcomes. This means that their behaviour must be objective, impartial, consistent and free from conflict of interest- in other words, independent. Yet, regulators need to engage with a number of stakeholders, who may also seek to apply pressure and exert undue influence on regulatory outcomes. The independence of regulators is thus constantly under stress. Hence this report serves as a very useful reference as it provides practical advice on how to address stress points and protect economic regulators from undue influence, drawing on the experience of over 80 regulators that participate in the OECD Network of Economic Regulators (NER). It presents a practical checklist to support behavioural and organisational change, and helps other stakeholders better understand and appreciate the role of regulators and how to interact with them. www.oecd.org/gov/regulatory-policy/ner.htm

Survey Findings –Gauging Level of Independence

Below are extracts from a publication as a result of a survey by OECD on 48 public regulators in 26 countries to gauge

their level of independence in practice and identify areas where undue influence may hinder performance. It looks at

potential entry points for undue influence in financing arrangements, staff behaviour and the political cycle.

The key findings are:

88% of the regulators surveyed receive annual rather than multi-annual budget allocations, which can increase the

risk of undue influence.

Most of the regulators have their head appointed by the government’s executive branch. In 15% of cases, the

appointment is made by parliament. Only eight regulators use a search committee for hiring a new Chair.

Over half the regulators place no restrictions on pre-or post-employment of professional staff, opening the risk of

"revolving doors" and conflicts of interest with industry.

Only a quarter of the regulators are given a government statement of expectations on their conduct. Such formal

statements can be useful to clarify roles, goals and activities.

Regulatory independence is not an end in itself but a means toward ensuring effective and efficient public service

delivery by market players.


Bolstering Culture of Independence Safeguard against Undue Influence

https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264274198-en

https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264274198-en

http://www.oecd.org/gov/regulatory-policy/ner.htm

Bolstering Culture of Independence Safeguard against Undue Influence

An Insight of what others are doing: Case Example

May 16, 2017 – The federal government should restore

the independence of the National Energy Board’s (NEB)

decision-making authority for pipeline applications,

according to a new report from the C.D. Howe Institute*.

In How to Restore Public Trust and Credibility at the

National Energy Board, author Lesley Matthews urges

Ottawa to establish the NEB as a credible, effective and

efficient energy regulator.

The author assesses whether the NEB is “broken” by

evaluating its performance against six recognised

attributes of an effective and efficient regulator,

including: independence, conflict-of-interest protection,

transparent and inclusive processes, performance

management and adaptability, capacity, and enabling

factors.

From this analysis the author makes 23

recommendations intended to assist the NEB, as well as

the federal government, in improving the effectiveness

and efficiency of federal energy regulation in Canada.

Independence is not static, but is an active objective which regulators must be prepared to approach continuously, requiring a mix of formal and informal, de jure and de facto elements.

The life of a regulatory agency is fraught with potential entry points for undue influence, from issues linked to finance, leadership, staff behaviour to links to the political cycle. A real culture of independence will help navigate these “pinch points”.

Independence cannot come at the price of accountability or engagement. Regulators need to be part of a well-functioning and transparent governance-ecosystem. Keeping their fingers on the pulse of the market through interaction with industry and consumers and having effective interactions with government institutions. (Source: OECD (2016), Being an Independent Regulator, The Governance of Regulators, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264255401-en)

Among the key recommendations:

1. The federal government should restore the

independence of the NEB’s decision-making authority for

pipeline applications, eliminating political overrides of NEB

decisions except via courts.

2. To keep the review process timely, review participants

should be limited to those directly affected or have relevant

expertise related to the project under review.

3. However, the federal government should rescind the one

-size-fits-all time-limit requirements on NEB reviews and

instead require each panel to determine the timeline for each

review.

4. Outside of the formal hearing process, the NEB should

implement a mechanism for ongoing public engagement,

with an initial focus on local and Aboriginal communities

affected by NEB-regulated facilities, on the range of issues

under its mandate.

5. To reduce the perception of a conflict of interest, the

NEB should review its staff Code of Conduct to ensure it

covers all situations potentially creating a conflict of interest.

6. Ottawa should also make sure that the NEB has the

capacity to attract the best candidates for its needs and that

it transparently evaluates its overarching regulatory goals.

7. In partnership with the provinces and territories, the

federal government should develop an integrated energy

strategy reflecting the public interest of Canada, within which

the NEB’s work would be framed.

* The C.D. Howe Institute is an independent not-for-profit

research institute whose mission is to raise living standards

by fostering economically sound public policies. Widely

considered to be Canada's most influential think tank, the

Institute is a trusted source of essential policy intelligence,

distinguished by research that is nonpartisan, evidence-

based and subject to definitive expert review.


https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264255401-en

NEWS: NTM

14-15 January 2019: NTM Strategic Session 2019 with NTM Experts and Facilitators, Hotel Hatten Melaka

Presentation on NTMs status for 2018 for 6 Ministries

Ministry of Works (KKR)

Ministry of Agriculture and Agro-based Industry (MOA)

Ministry of Water, Land and Natural Resources (KATS)

Ministry of Human Resources (MOHR)

Ministry of Primary Industries (MPI)

Ministry of Health (MOH)

Group discussion on NTMs Way Forward , 2019

(8 ministries)

Ministry of Home Affairs (KDN)

Malaysian Communications & Multimedia Commission (MCMC)

Ministry of International Trade & Industry (MITI)

Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA)

Ministry of Finance (MOF)

Energy Commission (EC)

Ministry of Domestic Trade and Consumer Affairs (KPDNHEP)


19-21 February 2019, Cititel Hotel Kuala Lumpur

Workshop on NTMs Profiling and Compliance Cost for Ministry of

Domestic Trade and Consumer Affairs (KPDNHEP); Ministry of

Energy, Science, Technology, Environment and Climate Change

(MESTECC) and Ministry of Home Affairs (MOHA)

30-31 January 2019, Sunway Putra Hotel, Kuala Lumpur

Workshop to Streamline and Monitor NTMs Among Ministries and Implementing Agencies with Royal Malaysian Customs (JKDM) and

Department of Standards Malaysia (JSM)

From left: Mr Kabir Ahmad Mohamad Jamil, Director Smart Regulation MPC, Dato’ Abdul Latif Hj Abu Seman, Deputy Director General of MPC, Dato’ Sri Subromaniam Tholasy, Director General

of Royal Malaysian Customs, Datuk Fadillah Baharin ,Director General Department of Standards Malaysia and Tan Sr Dr.Vijay,

Deputy President MFFA

NEWS: NTM


25 - 26 February 2019, Hotel PJ Hilton NTM Workshop on Verification of Recommendations and Final Report for Ministry of Health (MOH) and Ministry of Primary

Industries (MPI)

6 March 2019: Briefing Secretary General of Ministry of International Trade & Industry (MITI) Dato’ Lokman Hakim on NTMs project

7-8 March 2019: Workshop Verification & Finalising on

NTR/ATR, MOH & MOA (SPS) data by EU/Arise Plus at

Awana Genting Highlands

6 March 2019: Discussion on regulatory notifications on

Fisheries Act and MAQIS with Secretary General Ministry

of Agriculture and Agro-based Industry, Datuk

Sallehuddin Hassan and his officers at MAEPS Serdang

Deregulation: Lesson Learned from UK Enhancing Quality of Regulators & Regulations

On 18-21 February 2019, MPC sent a team of 10

participants to attend an executive course on Better Regulation

at the London School of Economics and Political Sciences (LSE).

The course was conducted by Professor Robert Baldwin and

Prof. Veerle Heyvaert. One of the topics covered in the course

is Deregulation in the UK.

THE DEVELOPMENT

The initiatives on deregulation in the UK can be traced

back to 1948 when the Manchester Guardian reported on 1

November 1948 that President of the Board of Trade, Harold

Wilson was soon to announce a "further bonfire of

controls". In March 2005, the Treasury of UK published the

Hampton Report entitled "Reducing Administrative Burdens:

Effective Inspection and Enforcement". The report was

principally aimed at increasing the efficiency of, and reducing

the burden on "honest businesses" of, inspection and

enforcement. The report recommended that:

comprehensive risk assessment should be the foundation

of all regulators' enforcement programmes;

there should be no inspections without a reason, and data

requirements for less risky businesses should be lower

than for riskier businesses;

resources released from unnecessary inspections should

be redirected towards advice to improve compliance;

there should be fewer, simpler forms;

data requirements, including the design of forms, should

be coordinated across regulators;

when new regulations are being devised, Departments

should plan to ensure enforcement can be as efficient as

possible, and follow the principles of this report;

thirty-one national regulators should be reduced to seven

more thematic bodies.

a Better Regulation Executive should be created to take

over the responsibilities of the Better Regulation Task

Force and the Cabinet Office's Regulatory Impact Unit,

Penalty regimes should be reviewed - and generally made

tougher (He noted that it often takes regulators ages to

impose penalties which are then often less than what it

would have cost the business to comply with the

legislation if the first place.), and that

The Hampton Report also highlighted principles of inspection

and enforcement which the Government should adopt:

regulators, and the regulatory system as a whole, should

use comprehensive risk assessment to concentrate

resources on the areas that need them most;

regulators should be accountable for the efficiency and

effectiveness of their activities, while remaining

independent in the decisions they take;

all regulations should be written so that they are easily

understood, easily implemented, and easily enforced, and

all interested parties should be consulted when they are

being drafted; no inspection should take place without a

reason;

businesses should not have to give unnecessary

information, nor give the same piece of information

twice;

the few businesses that persistently break regulations

should be identified quickly, and face proportionate and

meaningful sanctions;

regulators should provide authoritative, accessible advice

easily and cheaply; when new policies are being

developed, explicit consideration should be given to how

they can be enforced using existing systems and data to

minimise the administrative burden imposed;

regulators should be of the right size and scope, and no

new regulator should be created where an existing one

can do the work; and

regulators should recognise that a key element of their

activity will be to allow, or even encourage, economic

progress and only to intervene when there is a clear case

for protection.

The above principles are known as The Hampton Princi-

ples and were summarised as Proportionality, Accountability,

Consistency, Transparency, Targeting principles.

Hampton's proposed review of penalty regimes which would

give regulators the power to impose quicker, stronger

penalties was carried out by a team led by Professor Richard

Macrory. The Macrory report which was published in

November 2006, argued that the current system was too

heavily reliant on criminal prosecution, and that a more

flexible set of regulatory sanctions, including an element of

redress for the harm caused by culprits, would resolve many

cases more quickly and effectively.


https://www.regulation.org.uk/library/2005_hampton_report.pdf



The Macrory review laid out a set of ‘penalty principles’ that

should underlie any good sanctioning regime:

should be able to change behaviour;

should ensure that there is no financial benefit from

non-compliance;

should be responsive and consider what is appropriate to a

particular offender and particular regulatory issue;

be proportionate to nature of offence and harm caused;

restore the harm caused;

aim to deter future non-compliance.

The Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Act (RESA)

2008 was later introduced to enable the fixed and variable

monetary penalties, undertakings and new forms of notice

powers that form part of Macrory’s Vision for the Future to be

available for different regulators, in addition to their existing

powers. The Government accepted all Macrory

recommendations but it was only in February 2010, that the

Environment Agency and Natural England became the first

regulators to be given new civil powers including the power to

impose fixed and variable monetary penalties and issue

compliance notices. Another outcome of the Hampton Review,

is the Regulators Code which came into force in 2007. The Code

went through amendments in 2009, 2010, 2012 and the latest

version of the code is now the Regulators Code 2014. Main

principles highlighted under the code are :

I. Regulators should carry out their activities in a way that

supports those they regulate to comply and grow;

II. Regulators should provide simple and straightforward ways

to communication with those they regulate;

III. Regulators should base their regulatory activities on risk;

IV. Regulators should share information about compliance and

risk;

V. Regulators should ensure clear information, guidance and

advice are available to help those they regulate meet their

responsibilities to comply; and

VI. Regulators should ensure that their approach to their

regulatory activities is transparent.

In 2015, the UK Deregulation Act was passed. It is an

Act introduced to make provision for the reduction of burdens

resulting from legislation for businesses or other organisations

or for individuals; make provision for the repeal of legislation

which no longer has practical use; make provision about the

exercise of regulatory functions;

and for connected purposes. Between 2015 and 2017, the

Government introduced the ‘Cutting Red Tape Programme’.

The Programme consisted of sectoral reviews, initially

focusing on adult social care, agriculture, energy, mineral

extraction and waste. By the end of the 2015, 16

parliamentary session, the sectors of financial services,

housebuilding and local government were included in the

review.

WHAT MALAYSIA CAN LEARN FROM UK EXPERIENCES

It is observed that development of deregulation in

the UK are focused on enhancing quality of regulators and

regulations. This can be seen in the Hampton Principles of

Proportionality, Accountability, Consistency, Transparency

and Targeting. The Macrory Review highlighted the

importance of good sanctioning regulations which should

move away from regulations which heavily reliant on criminal

prosecution to more flexible and effective measures. The

Regulators Code further strengthen the emphasis on quality

of regulators who would be the main actors in proposing,

monitoring and enforcing regulations

Other than flexible and effective sanctions, one of

the measures for deregulation is for regulators to take no

action but to keep close monitoring the situation. This is

where it is vital to have good regulators. The application of

risks based regulations and precautionary principles are also

among mechanisms towards deregulation

The understanding that deregulation must involve

repeal and reviews of regulations are not accurate as there

are many other measures that can be adopted in the process

of deregulations such as putting of notices which would

increase compliances or reduce non-compliances, applying

nudges to lessen or adjourn the non-compliance activities

and allowing a healthy competition in the market to naturally

throw out the bad players or foul practices.

Where we are now?

According to the APEC Deregulation Report 2000,

the Malaysian economy has undergone substantial

deregulation since the mid-1980s. The focus on deregulations

focused on policies that favour liberalisation to nurture a

competitive environment. Deregulation in the sectors such as

telecommunications, transport, education and financial

services have taken place in the form of privatisation. With

privatisation, the private sector’s role in development has

been enhanced and market forces allowed to operate in a

competitive environment rather than being regulated by the

Government.



Deregulation was also implemented through the

concept of Malaysian Incorporated and smart partnerships to

foster greater collaboration between the government and the

private sector. This allows Government to undertake further

deregulation by simplifying administrative procedures and

increasing the transparency of its processes.

The new government of Malaysia also emphasizes on

reducing bureaucracies and cutting red tape to ensure

effective and transparent management. One of the proposed

mechanisms of the Government to cut down red tape is to

reduce the public sector. It is contended that by reducing the

size of the public services, there will be less bureaucracy as

there will be fewer civil servants to tie up the red tape and the

economy. This will also speed up business approvals that can

be seriously delayed because of the several levels of approval.

Malaysia Productivity Corporation (MPC) as the

agency mandated to strengthen the implementation of Good

Regulatory Practice (GRP), continues to conduct research and

implement efforts to improve business regulations to enhance

Malaysia’s competitiveness. In 2017, as an outcome of MPC

inititives, the cost savings from compliance reached RM1.2

billion through the Reducing Unnecessary Regulatory Burdens

(RURB), Modernising Business Licences (MBL) and Cutting Red

Tape (MyCURE) projects. These measures are comparatively

similar to the UK deregulation approaches.

Another undertaking made by MPC towards

deregulation is the “gullotine approach " which is a technique

of rapidly reviewing a large number of old regulations and

eliminating those that are no longer needed without the need

for lengthy and costly legal action on each regulation.

Regulatory guillotine can be used to create a comprehensive

and central regulatory registry with positive security, i.e.,

going beyond the formalities the registry have recommended

to include all regulations affecting businesses. The core

principle of Regulatory Guillotine is that any regulation

required for future policy must be market-led development.

Failure to warrant this need justified the policy or regulation

to be eliminated. The guillotine approach also specifies that

any regulation that is needed but not business-friendly will be

simplified as far as possible. This approach was pioneered by

Sweden in the 1980s and has been reviewed and favourably

assessed by the OECD.

It is important for Malaysia to focus on measures which

allows deregulation to take place without having to go through

the long and tedious legal processes. The repeal and review

practices could still be adopted but only as a final measure and

they must go through the process of Regulatory Impact

Assessment (RIA) to ensure good regulatory practices.

Malaysia should firstly focus on training the regulators

so that they are able to identify the correct and most effective

measures in regulating the respective industry/sector. The

Regulators should know when to intervene and to take

preventive measures to allow less regulatory exercises. The

training of regulators must be towards producing regulators who

are aware, intelligent and dynamic in setting objectives,

delivering outcomes and serving representative values.

In executing deregulation, it is also important for us to

identify the industry which has low risk, high intention and high

capacity to compliance and reduce regulatory measures to them

such as exemptions from registration, self-monitoring or

self-regulation. These industries could also be freed from

regulations and let to roam free in a healthy competition which

would naturally rule out those who are non-compliance.

Regulations should only be focused on industries which have

high risk and low intention to compliance as they are deemed

not responsive to non-regulatory measures.

Being able to identify what, who and when to regulate are vital in

the process of deregulation as the success of identifying the

above will allow the regulators to focus on appropriate measures

other than regulations and even if regulations are required, it

could be minimised to ensure cost and output effectiveness.

MOVING FORWARD

It is observed that the deregulation practice in Malaysia lies

heavily on the government policy and interference such as

introducing the policy of privatisation and reducing public

services.


Reduce outdated and unnecessary rules Make the rules easier and transparent Focus on legitimate regulation


NEWS: DCP


12 January 2019, Hotel The Light, Seberang Jaya, Pulau Pinang Launching of Seberang Perai Municipal Council (MPSP) DCP Manual by YB Tuan Jagdeep Singh Deo,

Executive Councillor, Local Government, Housing and Urban & Rural Planning

Preparatory Workshop for Public Consultation on DCP Private Hospitals, Dorsett Grand Subang, 12 – 13 January 2019 : Preparation and discussion on the proposed new process flow and process for getting permits for Private Hospitals and also the proposed technical specifications required for the development private hospitals.

14 January 2019, Fellowship Room, MPC : Discussion on Updates of Petron and Government Collaboration (Johor) chaired by Deputy Director General of MPC, Dato' Abdul Latif Hj. Abu Seman. It was proposed that a meeting be held with Jabatan Ketua Pengarah Tanah dan Galian (JKPTG) to share the information on the PETRON projects in Penisular Malaysia.

26 January 2019, Mayor Office DBKL : Courtesy visit to Mayor City Hall of Kuala Lumpur to discuss issues on Good Regulatory Practice, World Bank Report on Ease of Doing Business in particular Dealing with Construction Permits, PEMUDAH and initiatives of Productivity Nexus on Tourism under the Malaysia Productivity Blueprint

30 January 2019, Perbadanan Putrajaya : Briefing on the proposed

DCP Program for Perbadanan Putrajaya which was chaired by

YBhg. Datuk Dr. Aminuddin bin Hassim, President of Perbadanan

Putrajaya was presented by FGDCP. Briefing on DCP Program was

presented by FGDCP secretariat (Mohamad Azrol Mohamad Dali).

Consultant Ir. Bashir Ahamed Maideen shared on the

implementation of the DCP program which adopts the World Bank

methodology. The DCP implementation at DBKL was presented by

Puan Hajah Nor Fajariah Sulaiman, Deputy Director of City

Planning Department.

NEWS: DCP

22 January 2019, Hotel Hilton Petaling Jaya : Public Consultation on Improving Efficiency in Dealing with Construction Permits for Private Hospitals. This initiative is the result of cooperation from PEMUDAH's Focus Group Dealing with Construction Permits and Private Healthcare Productivity Nexus with related agencies namely the Medical Practice Division (KKM), Engineering Services Division (MOH), Fire and Rescue Department of Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur City Hall, Malaysian architects and industrial representatives aimed at gaining views and feedback from stakeholders in improving the technical process and guidelines for obtaining the permit for the construction of a private hospital in Malaysia.

31 January 2019, Holiday Villa Johor Bahru : Launching of Manual DCP Johor by YB Tan Hong Pin, Executive Councillor, Local Government Johor. The manual is the output from the DCP State Programme which involved the engagement between Jabatan Kerajaan Tempatan (JKT), Pertubuhan Arkitek Malaysia (PAM), Focus Group on Dealing with Construction Permits (FGDCP) and Johor Bahru City Council (MBJB). FGDCP and MBJB.

1-3 March 2019, Grand Lexis Port Dickson Workshop on Dealing with Construction Permits : Strengthening Way Forward Initiatives for Ease of Doing Business. The workshop attended by 30 participants aimed to develop the framework and action plans on Way Forward Initiatives for EODB 2020 and to set targetted KPIs for DCP improvement initiatives.


NEWS: DCP

23-24 February 2019 , Sunway Resort Hotel & Spa

The 2-day workshop organised by MPC in collaboration with Medical Practice Division (CKAPS), Engineering Services Division and

Medical Radiation Surveillance Division was attended by 129 participants from 49 organisations. The workshop aimed to develop

competency among professionals involved in private hospitals development and to enhance understanding on general and

regulatory requirements in preparing the plan for development of private hospitals in Malaysia.

28 February 2019, Ministry of Housing & Local Government (KPKT)

Putrajaya : Meeting on DCP State Champion Program. The meeting

attended by representatives of State DCP Secretariat (MBI, DBKK,

MBJB, MBPP, MPSP MBSA) was to update and discuss on the

implementation of the program.

5 March 2019, MIDA KL Sentral : Updating and discussion with CEO MIDA Dato’Azman Mahmud and his officers on efficiency issues and construction procedures in healthcare sector.


26 March 2019, Dewan President, Level 2 Pertubuhan Arkitek Malaysia (PAM)- The workshop on Transformasi Urusan Permit

Pembinaan – DCP Champion bagi Majlis Bandaraya Shah Alam (MBSA)

This is the first workshop for MBSA involving in DCP State Champion. The workshop was attended by representatives from JKT, MPC,

DBKL, Planners, Air Selangor, PSP/SP and local authorities. The main objective of the program was to brainstorm on the DCP. The next

workshop will be held for the data collection based on the completed project.

NEWS : World Bank Doing Business

25 January 2019, Hotel PJ Hilton Petaling Jaya : With YBhg.Tan Sri Saw Choo Boon in discussion with team from World Bank led by Richard Record on investment and initiatives undertaken by MPC and PEMUDAH.

15 February 2019: Ministry of Finance (MOF) Putrajaya : Networking chat with officials from the US Embassy during the Roundtable Discussion on Doing business with foreign embassies and international chambers.

Group photo with participants and government officials of Roundtable

Discussion on Doing Business held at Ministry of Finance , Putrajaya.

Officials from foreign embassies and business representatives

from international chambers.

12-14 February 2019 Wisma Bapa Malaysia, Kuching

Briefing on Doing Business Sub-National Study with World

Bank

Briefing the Sarawak State Secretary Tan Sri Morshidi and

State Services Modernisation Unit, Dr. Anthony Valentine

Laiseh on Doing Business Sub-national Study with World Bank.


NEWS : Good Regulatory Practices (GRP)

4 March 2019, Pahang State Secretary Office Kuantan : Courtesy visit and briefing on updates of GRP initiatives to Dato’Sri Sallehuddin Ishak , the State Secretary of Pahang.

24 - 26 Mac 2019 , Tanjung Bungah, Pulau Pinang : Bengkel Projek Perintis Amalan Baik Peraturan (GRP) Peringkat Negeri Perak

22 - 24 March 2019 at Weil Hotel, Ipoh : Training for Trainers on Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA). Participants comprise State Officers (Perak, Negeri Sembilan and Kelantan), INTAN, ZICO & MPC Officers.

5 - 6 Mac 2019, The Zenith Hotel, Kuantan, Pahang : Bengkel Pemurniaan Deraf Dasar Pelaksanaan Amalan Baik Peraturan (GRP) Kerajaan Negeri Pahang

Workshop to Validate GRP in Malaysia as a Commitment to ASEAN Economic Community Blueprint 2025, 14 February 2019, PJ Hilton : Objectives of the workshop was to review ongoing work in GRP as well as ASEAN-Wide initiatives, assess these developments against the ASEAN GRP Core Principles; and to identify areas or case studies where good RMS are observed, and challenges facing Malaysia AMS that may limit implementation of the ASEAN GRP Core Principles.


issue : 01/2019 1. june 24, 2019, launching of...

Documents