The potential energy savings resulting from more efficient computer monitors are relatively minor at an individual level, however due to the size of the market the aggregate savings are likely to be substantial. 

On 22 March 2013, the COAG Select Council on Climate Change announced new energy efficiency regulations under the Greenhouse and Energy Minimum Standards Act 2012. The standards will apply to computers and computer monitors, and commence on 1 October 2013.

The new standards are intended to drive consumer uptake of more efficient products through improved information – enhanced labelling – which better enables consumers to compare products. It also specifies a minimum energy performance standard.

The design of the standard takes into account the position of Australia and New Zealand in the global market. Computers are global commodities and there is little variation between markets. The standards have therefore been set having regard to global markets. 

Australian businesses are likely to experience compliance costs in terms of either registering products or having them tested for conformance with the standards. Businesses will also need to ensure they do not import non-complying products. These costs are likely to be passed on to consumers in the form of relatively modest price rises for these products. The removal of poorer energy performing computers and computer monitors from the market is expected to produce a net benefit to the community in terms of energy savings.

A Regulation Impact Statement was prepared by the Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency and assessed as adequate by the Office of Best Practice Regulation.

• Minimum Energy Performance Standards and Energy Labelling for Computer Monitors RIS [ 1.4 MB]
• Minimum Energy Performance Standards and Energy Labelling for Computer Monitors RIS [ 1.7 MB]

A Regulation Impact Statement (RIS) was required for these changes but was not prepared. As a result, a Post‑implementation Review (PIR) has been prepared in line with the Government’s best practice regulation process.

While the number of new celebrant registrations per year has fallen since the introduction of the Certificate IV in Celebrancy as the minimum qualification, there has still been an overall increase in the number of marriage celebrants available to marrying couples, from 8,546 in 2009 to 10,509 in 2012. 

The PIR notes that it is too soon to know the impact of the requirement to have a Certificate IV in Celebrancy on the overall marriage celebrant industry, as the requirement did not affect existing marriage celebrants.

The PIR also highlighted that while the units for the Certificate IV in Celebrancy provide aspiring celebrants with appropriate skills and training to conduct marriage celebrancy work, there were some inconsistencies with the quality of training being offered. 

The PIR is not related to the introduction of cost recovery for marriage celebrants from 1 July 2013. A RIS was previously prepared in 2011 for the decision to introduce cost recovery. The PIR was prepared by the Attorney-General’s Department and was assessed as adequate by the Office of Best Practice Regulation.

• Marriage Amendment Regulation 1 and 2 2009 PIR [ 589 KB]
• Marriage Amendment Regulation 1 and 2 2009 PIR [ 161 KB]
• Marriage Amendment Regulation 1 and 2 2009 PIR – Attachment A [ 31 KB]
• Marriage Amendment Regulation 1 and 2 2009 PIR – Attachment A [ 76 KB]
• Marriage Amendment Regulation 1 and 2 2009 PIR – Attachment B [ 55 KB]
• Marriage Amendment Regulation 1 and 2 2009 PIR – Attachment B [ 90 KB]

Crown use provisions allow governments to access patented inventions under specific circumstances. A recent Productivity Commission Inquiry into Compulsory Licensing of Patents found that there was significant uncertainty around the use of Crown use provisions. It was found that the scope of the types of entities that can actually make use of the Crown use provisions is unclear, particularly in the healthcare field, and there is a lack of transparency and accountability associated with the Crown use provisions.

The proposed amendments:

• clarify the scope of Crown use;
• require the Crown to attempt to negotiate use of the patented invention prior to invoking Crown use;
• require a statement of reasons to be provided before Crown use occurs;
• require ministerial approval for Crown use; and
• change remuneration arrangements for Crown use.

The proposed amendments were found to benefit patent owners in terms of the ability to negotiate a reasonable outcome in relation to their interests. Government was also found to benefit from greater clarity around which entities are able to invoke Crown use.

The main costs are associated with the requirement to negotiate with patent holders prior to Crown use which could potentially lead to unacceptable delays in the availability of the patented technology. However, it was found that this could be mitigated by legislative provisions which clarify expectations and which limit the prospect of vexatious legal action. In addition, in the case of emergencies, the requirement for negotiation is waived. 

A Regulation Impact Statement was prepared by the Department of Industry, Innovation, Climate Change, Science, Research and Tertiary Education and assessed as adequate by the Office of Best Practice Regulation.

• Invoking the Crown use provisions for a patented invention RIS[ 131 KB]
• Invoking the Crown use provisions for a patented invention RIS[ 291 KB]

Data breaches can result in financial loss and impose psychological damage on individuals. There is also general evidence that data breaches internationally are increasing. Depending on the current level of under reporting of data breaches, mandatory disclosure may help more individuals take steps to mitigate against the possibility of financial loss from identity theft. It is also intended that mandatory disclosure of data breaches will promote better behaviour in relation to security of personal information and compliance with other privacy obligations.

The organisations covered by mandatory data breach notification are those with greater than $3 million revenue and those smaller organisations dealing with personal information. The actual costs of data breach notifications will largely depend on an organisation’s existing investment in information security.

A Regulation Impact Statement was prepared by the Attorney‑General’s Department and assessed as adequate by the Office of Best Practice Regulation.

• Mandatory Data Breach Notification RIS[ 270 KB]
• Mandatory Data Breach Notification RIS[ 526 KB]

A Regulation Impact Statement was required for the decision to introduce restrictions on the use of lead compounds in industrial surface coatings and inks, but was not prepared. As a result, a Post-implementation Review (PIR) was required to be undertaken in line with the Government’s best practice regulation process.

The restrictions on the use of lead compounds were introduced to supplement a voluntary phase out by industry of lead-based pigments used in industrial surface coatings and inks to reduce lead exposure. 

Due to the existing voluntary phase out by industry, the changes were found to have little direct impact on business. There were some costs for businesses associated with reformulation, including development of non-lead alternatives. It was also found that the number of paint suppliers had reduced, primarily as a result of there being fewer suppliers of non-lead based pigments than there were of lead-based pigments.

The PIR found that the extent to which the benefits were realised may have been improved by the establishment of a targeted monitoring and compliance program to supplement the educational measures that NICNAS had put in place.

The PIR was prepared by NICNAS and was assessed as adequate by the Office of Best Practice Regulation.

• Restrictions on the Use of Lead Compounds PIR [ 275 KB]
• Restrictions on the Use of Lead Compounds PIR [ 789 KB]

The Government had previously prepared a Regulation Impact Statement (RIS) to support an in-principle decision to develop clinical registers for high risk implantable medical devices, and committed to examine options to track the use and performance of such devices and funding models. The purpose of this implementation RIS was to assist the Australian Government in deciding how to best implement the decision to support the registers.

The development of clinical quality registers for specific implantable devices, over time, will allow better information to be developed about the performance of implantable devices. This can flow through to more proactive monitoring by regulatory agencies, and better clinical practice by medical practitioners. The benefits are difficult to quantify but a similar initiative, the National Joint Replacement Register, is estimated to have avoided around 4400 recalls for surgery revisions over a seven year period, at a cost saving of $110 million.

The main benefits of a patient contact register accrue to the patients themselves, who will have more timely access to medical advice in the event of a recall or other warnings relating to their implanted medical devices; and hospitals which will be able to better fulfil their duties of care to patients.

The expected cost of two clinical quality registers and building enhanced national capability to identify and contact patients with particular implanted high risk medical devices is about $4 million, which is expected to be cost-recovered from industry. Ongoing administrative costs for the medical device industry, clinicians and hospitals are likely to be relatively small, as this is largely information that is already collected.

A RIS was prepared by the Department of Health and Ageing. The RIS was assessed as adequate by the Office of Best Practice Regulation.

• Clinical Registers for High Risk Implantable Medical Devices – Implementation Regulation Impact Statement[ 259 KB]
• Clinical Registers for High Risk Implantable Medical Devices – Implementation Regulation Impact Statement[ 955 KB]

The olives industry’s perception is that greater expenditure on research and development (R&D) is required in order to:

• provide information that establishes the benefits of Australian fresh olive products; and
• maintain the current high quality product while improving productivity; profitability and environmental management through all stages of the supply chain.

In addition, there are concerns with existing arrangements regarding biosecurity risk mitigation.

The preferred option in the RIS sought new levies in order to deliver improved outcomes for the Australian olive industry and consumers.

The levies apply to olives for processing set at $3.10 per tonne, comprising $3.00 for R&D and $0.10 for Plant Health Australia subscription. In addition, an Emergency Plant Pest Response levy (initially set at $0/tonne) is established to meet the industry’s obligations to manage biosecurity risk mitigation should an emergency plant pest incident occur.

A Regulation Impact Statement was prepared by the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry and has been assessed as adequate by the Office of Best Practice Regulation.

• Regulations for Olive Industry Research and Development and Biosecurity Levies RIS [ 185 KB]
• Regulations for Olive Industry Research and Development and Biosecurity Levies RIS[ 711 KB]

The proposed update seeks to improve the safety and quality of HCT products supplied in Australia. The update intends to align manufacturing requirements with industry practice and international regulation. The update will also remove technical requirements from the Code which will be transferred to a new Therapeutic Goods Order: Standards for minimising infectious disease transmission via therapeutic goods that are human blood and blood components, human tissues and human cellular therapy products. This instrument will clarify the requirements for minimisation of infectious disease transmission through the selection and testing of donors of HCT products, and will align regulation of HCTs with the regulation of other therapeutic goods in Australia and internationally.

The costs and benefits of the revision are difficult to quantify. The majority of manufacturers affected by this update must already comply with the existing Code, and as the revised Code is principles-based it allows flexibility in practice so the costs are expected to be limited. The introduction of internationally harmonised infectious disease minimisation criteria results in a small reduction in eligible donors and a minor increase in resource costs for some facilities.

The revised Code and Therapeutic Goods Order will be effective from 31 May 2013, and allow a 12 month transition period.

A Regulation Impact Statement was prepared by the Department of Health and Ageing and assessed as adequate by the Office of Best Practice Regulation.

• HCT Code of Practice – Regulation Impact Statement [ 387 KB]
• HCT Code of Practice – Regulation Impact Statement [ 794 KB]

Community housing is housing assistance delivered by community organisations to people on low to moderate incomes with a housing need. Public housing (provided by governments) has traditionally provided the safety net for those unable to find affordable accommodation in the private sector.  However, the number of new allocations to public housing has been declining over the past few years and the demand for rental accommodation is forecast to increase with the lower end of the market experiencing the highest demand. The shortfall is likely to be met by community housing, which is expected to continue to grow in the future.

Regulation of community housing is currently undertaken at the state and territory government level with a range of legislative and administrative controls which add regulatory complexity and cost for housing providers operating in more than one jurisdiction. The current regulatory framework is also considered to undermine confidence in the sector by lenders and property developers operating nationally. 

The COAG Decision Regulation Impact Statement (RIS) notes that community housing providers and governments agree that effective regulation is required in order to manage risk, protect against organisational failure, bring down the cost of finance and help create an expanded community housing market.  The NRS is expected to yield net benefits exceeding $33.6 million over ten years.

Stakeholders generally agreed that the proposed model for the NRS is expected to reduce cost and complexity for housing providers operating across state and territory boundaries, not discriminate against housing providers seeking to enter new jurisdictions, and give greater flexibility for providers to pursue growth opportunities.  Tenants are expected to benefit from greater consistency leading to better tenant outcomes driven by national standards.

The Decision RIS was prepared by the COAG Select Council on Housing and Homelessness and assessed as adequate by the Office of Best Practice Regulation.

• National Regulatory System for Community Housing Providers Decision RIS [ 434 KB]
• National Regulatory System for Community Housing Providers Decision RIS [ 581]
• Appendix 1 – Cost Benefit Analysis [ 420 KB]
• Appendix 1 – Cost Benefit Analysis [ 577 KB]
• Appendix 2 – National Regulatory System for Consultation Report [ 348 KB]
• Appendix 2 – National Regulatory System for Consultation Report [ 672 KB]
• Appendix 3 – Community Housing Providers National Law [ 1 MB]
• Appendix 4 – National Regulatory System Inter-government agreement [ 67 KB]
• Appendix 4 – National Regulatory System Inter-government agreement [ 156 KB]

A Regulation Impact Statement was not prepared by the Department of the Treasury for the joint proposal. Consequently, a Post-implementation Review (PIR) was required to be undertaken in line with the Government’s best practice regulation process.

The PIR found that the one off increase in tobacco excise and excise equivalent customs duty met three of four identified policy objectives. In particular, the increase in excise:

• decreased consumption of tobacco with clearances (tobacco importation) of tobacco declining 11 per cent;
• reduced the number of tobacco smokers demonstrated by a temporary increase in attempts to quit; and
• made available additional funding for related health care through the Health and Hospitals Network Fund.

The measure did not result in a closer alignment of Australia’s tax treatment of tobacco (in terms of the ratio of taxes to the retail price of tobacco) with comparable countries over the analysis period. Although there was short-term increase in the tax proportion of the sale price, this was more than offset over the analysis period by non-tax related price increases of tobacco.

The PIR identified that the immediacy of the price increase resulted in substantial compliance costs for industry. These costs could have been avoided with a 2-3 day implementation period.  

The PIR was prepared by The Treasury and assessed as adequate by the Office of Best Practice Regulation.

• Post-Implementation Review: 25 Per cent Tobacco Excise Increase [ 313 KB]
• Post-Implementation Review: 25 Per cent Tobacco Excise Increase [ 725 KB]