Main Menu
- Other links
- Sections
- About
RRAC - Frequently Asked Questions
Frequently asked questions
- What would success look like?
- How does this fit with Better Regulation?
- How does this fit with the Public Service Reform agenda?
- Where will it be based? How will it work?
What would success look like?
Success means a more mature public approach to Public Risk, where it is possible to engage the public in the risk issues rather than having a public storm that forces premature decisions. That involves building trust on both sides. The government has to deserve that trust through holding fast to an evidence-based assessment of the risk issues and it has to educate the public in these issues, sharing the evidence and the assessment.
Success would look like a world where Ministers and civil servants have a better understanding of risk so that a proportionate intervention only occurs when the nature and scale of the particular risk has been properly analysed and understood.
Success would look like what we have seen in recent times in relation to animal disease outbreaks. The public’s journey in understanding and accepting the risks of bird ‘flu over the last two years and the government’s efforts in controlling outbreaks has shown that both are worthy of more trust and each have gained it. Even the Foot and Mouth outbreaks became minor news quite quickly and there are no scare stories about Bluetongue.
Success should also mean a gradual return to a stronger ethos of personal responsibility.
How does this fit with Better Regulation?
This marks yet another strategic step in getting to grips with the use of regulation in our society and again offers a lead to other Member States in moving the agenda both forward and upstream. It reflects a determination by government to tackle the causes as well as the effects of bad regulation, by examining its own policy and decision-making processes. Reducing the burden of regulation remains a key objective of the government but it is not enough. It is also essential to reform the process that allows bad regulation to arise in the first place. Nobody sets out to adopt bad regulation and some bad regulation has even started life as a sensible idea. It is not a simple matter to tackle these issues as it involves some very deep rooted practices and ways of thinking.
How does this fit with the Public Service Reform agenda?
This is not just about making changes in how government operates and thinks but will involve a different relationship with the public and people working in organisations in the public, private and third sectors. If there is to be a new approach to public risk, people have to be engaged in the issues rather than being told what is good for them. Where the government does act in the public good, it has to be on the basis of an evidence-based assessment of risk, developed and shared with the public and relevant organisations. This will mean fostering greater understanding of the inevitable uncertainties that surround many issues and having the resilience to resist calls for simplistic and immediate solutions. If the government is to move away from the traditional command approach, it has to encourage greater acceptance of responsibility by citizens and organisations and even be prepared to refuse calls to manage a particular risk through regulation .
Where will it be based? How will it work?
The RRAC will be funded by the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform and supported by a dedicated team of officials in its Strategic Policy Analysis Directorate in 1 Victoria Street.
The team will draw on expertise from policy and analytical colleagues across the department, Whitehall, industry, academia, media and third sector to ensure that insights gained through study of the 3-4 topics considered are evidence based and take a balanced account of the views of the key stakeholders in the risk and regulation debate.
The RRAC will report to the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State for BERR.