Institute of Regulation's Podcast – Details, episodes & analysis

Are regulators lightning rods for blame? This month's podcast talks to Matthew Flinders, a professor of politics at the University of Sheffield, and former regulator CEO Martin Stanley about the way politicians sometimes deflect criticism by blaming regulators. They discuss how easy it is for regulators to be blamed, whether by politicians, the media, or those they regulate, and how difficult it can be for regulatory leaders to deal with blame, perhaps especially if the regulatory leader has come from outside the political world. The threat of blame can be pernicious and, at worst, influence regulatory decisions and compromise independence, as well as put off good people from working in regulation or taking up senior roles. The speakers on the podcast discuss solutions - including having good, trusting relationships with ministers and civil servants, as well as being able to tell a clear, persuasive narrative to the media, the public, and opposition politicians about the regulator's work. Support networks are important too, including those set up by the Institute of Regulation to help Chairs, CEOs and regulatory staff to navigate these tricky areas and share advice and good practice. Finally, the speakers advise that regulators sometimes need to stand their ground when others blame them wrongly. And that's why good relationships with Whitehall are necessary. Regulators may be able to stand their ground with Ministers in private. But it's never good for a regulator, if blamed by a politician, simply to blame them back in public. You can listen to the podcast here.

Keywords: Regulators, blame, accountability, regulatory leadership, public trust, support networks, Institute of Regulation, regulation challenges

In this month's podcast, New Zealand Deputy Prime Minister David Seymour MP talks to Institute of Regulation Chair Marcial Boo about regulatory reform in New Zealand, including their Regulatory Standards Act, just passed. David, who is also Minister for Regulation, says that regulation must maximise benefit and minimise cost. This includes the option not to regulate. He argues that regulation has often increased costs in response to infrequent risks: the fear of earthquakes increases burdens on property developers, for example. His new law sets a more consistent framework, so that new burdens are not imposed on the basis of emotion, but through a transparent methodology, so that the impact of new regulations is known. He recognises that some politicians find it hard to apply regulatory discipline in practice when under pressure to 'do something'. So, he will incentivise good behaviour through a regulatory standards board to assess new regulations and make sure that additional checks and balances are put in place through regulation, actually bringing benefits. He says that the regulatory profession needs to look at itself in the mirror too, to assess whether the benefit of their work outweighs the cost imposed. David also discusses international collaboration and how countries can benefit by trusting the regulatory scrutiny and assurance of other jurisdictions to save time and money, although he accepts that taking rules from others can reduce the scope for domestic innovation. David ends by advising UK policymakers to look carefully at the costs and benefits of each additional rule to assess whether regulatory accretion is really worthwhile.

Keywords: regulatory reform, cost-benefit analysis, risk management, transparency, international collaboration, improving regulatory discipline

This month's podcast focuses on an issue that every regulator grapples with. How do you know whether there is too much regulation or too little? And how do regulators get the balance right? Martin Stanley, former CEO of the Postal Regulator (now part of Ofcom), the Competition Commission and author of ‘How to Be a Civil Servant’, discusses how to spot too much regulation and what to do about it and the risks of too little regulation. Unfortunately, there are no easy answers, but in this latest edition of the Regulation Podcast we explore the core issues of this highly relevant debate. 

Many regulators work to an annual cycle, for the Advertising Standards Authority and the Food Standards Agency, December can be a busy month, with an increase in Christmas advertising and food consumption. This month's Regulation Podcast hears from Claire Forbes from the FSA and Matt Wilson from the ASA on how their regulators keep advertising honest and food safe. 

This month's podcast focuses on how regulators can use communications to tell people how to comply with the rules you're enforcing. We hear from two engagement experts who've worked in regulators, to understand how to get messages across to diverse audiences through varied external and internal channels. A must-listen for everyone working in communications in a regulatory context.  Episode 22 of the Regulation Podcast is hosted by Marcial Boo, chair Institute of Regulation, with contributions from experts Anne Shevas and Stephen Hardwick. 

Regulation is evolving. No longer is it about command-and-control, tick-box inspections. And the risk-based, principled approach is changing too. Leading academics and practitioners now consider that regulators must think of their regulatory domain as a complex system with many actors. This has implications for how regulators approach their work, with a need for agility in their rules and their processes. Episode 21 of the Regulation Podcast in discussion with academic Martin de Bree from the Netherlands and practitioner Alan Clamp from the Professional Standards Authority. 

This month's podcast focuses on the regulation of behaviour in the film, music and other creative industries, where a new regulator has been created. It aims to protect everyone in those industries from bullying and abuse from powerful executives or famous stars. The regulator is the Creative Industries Independent Standards Authority (CIISA). 

The latest edition of The Regulation Podcast focuses on the concept of regulatory capture - what it is and how regulators can avoid getting caught - hearing the expert views of Dr Eva Heims of York University and Dr Justin Rex of Bowling Green University USA, drawing on case studies in their academic publications.

A short guide to regulatory capture from Dr Heims is here: ‘Regulatory-capture-A-short-guide-for-practitioners.pdf’ She will also be contributing to our online workshop on regulatory capture, Thursday 05 December 2024.

The latest Regulation Podcast focuses on AI and how regulators should respond to it. Two global experts, Prof. Julia Black of the LSE and Joey Conway of Deloitte, discuss what AI is, the problems and opportunities it brings, and how regulators should meet its challenges. The main recommendation to regulators is to learn more; and then to work with others. AI crosses sectors and national boundaries. Regulators must too. The Institute of Regulation is in contact with the UK's Digital Regulation Cooperation Forum and others to explore these issues, and hosting events in the autumn for all our members to foster wider collaboration within the UK regulatory community on AI issues. In the meantime, you can listen to the podcast here.

The latest half-hour episode of the Regulation Podcast explores how to regulate vets, with speakers from our member the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons. It presents a case study of one sector, where the regulator is working within outdated legislation and with the consequences of Covid, where more people bought pets but more vets left the profession. Like other regulators, the RCVS has conflicting stakeholders with different demands, ranging from pet owners and farmers through to scientists and government. To listen to the challenges facing the UK's vets regulator, with Lizzie Lockett CEO RCVS and Ben Myring, Policy and Public Affairs Manager, RCVS you can listen here.