Deregulatory irresponsibility: takings, transfers and transcendental institutionalism
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26686/pq.v6i2.4336Keywords:
Regulatory Responsibility Bill, cost-benefit, Takings, impairment and compensation, Pareto gains, Redistribution, effective regulationAbstract
The taskforce on the Regulatory Responsibility Bill has put forward what it considers to be six ‘broadly accepted principles of good legislation’. I shall argue, from the standpoint of an economist, against this description. In their present form, several of the principles have extreme implications for policy; and some fundamental requirements of good legislation are missing entirely from the taskforce’s list, and apparently will have to be defended before the courts every time they are implemented.
Downloads
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Permission: In the interest of promoting debate and wider dissemination, the IGPS encourages use of all or part of the articles appearing in PQ, where there is no element of commercial gain. Appropriate acknowledgement of both author and source should be made in all cases. The IGPS retains copyright. Please direct requests for permission to reprint articles from this publication to igps@vuw.ac.nz.