A quick question for you...

Are you for or against regulation?

Recently it feels as though this has become a very ideological matter - "right wing" politicians and commentators are against it, seeing it as government interference that curbs freedoms and adds bureaucracy, motivated by a desire for control over individuals, while their "left wing" counterparts see it as a necessary requirement of a fair and functioning society that prevents abuses of power and unfair treatment.

In truth the question is based on a false premise: one that assumes that regulation is either inherently good or bad.

But regulation itself is not good or bad. It can be extremely helpful or extremely damaging, but that is a result of its design and implementation, not simply because it is regulation.

Is there anyone out there who really believes that cars should be able to be driven on whichever side of the road that the driver wants? That suppliers should be able to use seriously harmful chemicals in the production of foods? That some companies should be forced to compete in a marketplace that is rigged against them? Well designed regulations protect the environment, individuals and companies while allowing society to flourish, and can help prevent friction and confusion.

This is not to say that there are not some poorly constructed regulations in place. Any regulation that causes an excessive burden relative to the risk it is designed to prevent should be re-thought, any that requires the collection of data that is not or could not be utilised for any reasonable purpose should be streamlined, any that repeats obligations already fulfilled elsewhere should be removed, any that prevents genuine benign innovation or competition through inflexibility should be loosened.

So we should instead re-frame the question: Is a specific proposed regulation effective or not? Will it produce better outcomes or not? Are the benefits it brings worth the sacrifice of the behaviour it prevents?

In the Social Progress Party we believe in good and effective regulation, but not in regulation for regulation's sake.

Thanks for reading.