News - full story

A LIVELY DEBATE at ChemEng08 has concluded that ‘chemical engineers believe that the world needs more innovation and less regulation.’ The audience voted by a factor of 2:1 against the motion for more regulation, but everyone agreed that the motion title needed redrafting – much like UK regulation, as argued by Nigel Hirst, managing director of Haden Freeman.

IChemE’s deputy-president Ian Shott began by arguing for less regulation, saying that excessive legislation hampers innovation. Health and Safety Executive chair Judith Hackitt took to the podium to argue the opposite view but conceded that she agreed with Shott. Both teams argued from their own positions but the overall conclusion was that the world needs more ‘smart’ regulation.

“Innovation must not threaten what we already have,” said Hackitt. “Rampant innovation can result in bad outcomes such as loss of quality of life but good regulation stimulates innovation.”

Hirst took to the podium and laid out his three rules of regulation. One: if there are no rational grounds for regulations – don’t have regulations. Two: review and repeal regulations every five years. Three: promote innovation, don’t kill it. “Otherwise,” Hirst said, “we have so much work for so little gain.” Hirst said that regulation doesn’t eliminate negative consequences, noting that the banking sector is the most regulated in the world but its regulations haven’t prevented products coming to market and seeding the current financial crisis.

IChemE policy and communication director Andrew Furlong outlined his personal experience of working in the paint sector ensuring that toy coatings were safe for children. “Regulation is not a threat – it’s an opportunity to protect people from exploitable, imperfect markets.

“Dare I say that we need more regulation? Yes. Smart regulation enables and encourages innovation.”

And the key word is: smart. The audience voted with Shott and Hirst for less regulation but conceded that the motion should be worded: ‘chemical engineers believe that the world needs more innovation and smart regulation.’ The key to the whole problem is how to correctly frame regulation.