Reducing red tape 
Text version Home page
> Management Advisory Committee > Reducing red tape in the APS > Decision-making > Next: Periodic review
‹ Previous page
Last updated: 1 March 2007
Reducing red tape in the APS
Chapter 6. Decision-making
| Design and analysis |
| Stakeholder consultation |
| Independent advice |
| Stage 4: Decision-making |
The final stage in designing a new regulatory or administrative requirement is to determine whether the recommended requirement should be implemented. In a review of an existing requirement, the decision will be to retain, remove or replace the requirement.
By undertaking the three previous stages, agencies will ensure that decision makers are well informed.
Level of decision-maker
In some cases, the person responsible for deciding on a requirement will be specified. For example, this might be detailed in legislation, subordinate legislation or delegations.
Where there is no designated decision maker, decisions on a proposed requirement should be made at a level appropriate to the requirement. At a minimum, significant whole-of-government requirements warrant decision-making at the Deputy Secretary level, unless there are legislative or other constraints.
Provision of sufficient information
The decision maker should be provided with the analysis of the preferred option, the outcome of consultations with stakeholders, the advice of the independent adviser and any other relevant information.
The information should detail how any concerns raised by stakeholders, independent advisers, Chief Executives or others have been dealt with. If such concerns have not been addressed, the decision maker should be told why.
Issues to be considered
In making the decision, the decision maker should consider the information provided to determine whether:
- the framework for design and review of requirements has been applied and all relevant factors and options have been considered
- the recommended requirement is the most efficient and effective, and the benefits substantially outweigh the costs, consistent with the three underlying principles of the framework
- there is an appropriate review strategy (see Chapter 7).
