One of the key challenges faced by legal regulators is how to apply limited resources to achieve the best outcomes in the public interest. Recently two controversies have brought the question of how regulatory risks are prioritised into sharp focus.
Any risk management professional will tell you that the threat posed by a risk is a combination of how likely it is to occur and the impact of the consequences. A nuclear meltdown is less likely to occur than a late running train, but the impact is much greater. Setting priorities must take both into account.
Inevitably different regulatory stakeholders have different priorities but, conventionally, the key interests are those of the regulated profession and the consumers of their services. Each group’s collective interests should largely overlap because both have an interest in ensuring that regulation is cost-effective and maintains high levels of confidence in the regulated profession. But there are other
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=77dbbdb7_1)
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=b3bea7f_1)
