Generally speaking, I think Ofcom consult well on their proposed regulations and policies. Sure, there have been times — particularly on issues where politics is involved — where Ofcom have come up short. I’m thinking mainly of Ofcom’s Broadcast Code and Junk Food (HFSS) Adverts consultations. But on most matters, it’s clear Ofcom truly engage with regulated firms and the public in a genuine effort to learn more about whether their proposals will ultimately serve the public interest.

Last week, the Cabinet Office launched a policy review about consultations. The website is here. Hopefully, Ofcom can learn from this policy review and ensure that its consultation procedures are best-in-class. Over the years, OfcomWatch has periodically focused on Ofcom’s consultations. My take is that Ofcom could easily enact a few measures to improve its consultations:

* Allow comments-on-comments, sometimes called ‘reply comments’. Sure, reply comments do not work well in every situation and can even unduly delay a consultation, but in some cases reply comments allow more of a debate to occur — particularly where there exists a technical disagreement. For example, in the Digital Dividend Review Ofcom was presented with technical data from some parties about HD spectrum allocations. It would have been great had technical experts and others been able to reply to those comments with competing data. If I am not mistaken Oftel used to permit reply comments.

* Avoid ‘future of…’ or ’strategic review of…’ consultations. I suppose you could call them Super Consultations - they often exceed 100 pages in length and are accompanied by multiple annexes, including a lengthy report or two from a private consultancy. It’s not that I am against strategic thinking. I’m all for it. But consultations that contain too many sub-issues (often of a different nature, with different constituencies) end up being overly-complex. Big consultations also seem to drag-on. Take the DDR consultation again as an example. Ofcom asked a very broad big picture question, and then packed-in lots of ancillary questions about auctions and spectrum allotments that were dependent on the answer to the big picture question. Not only was it overly complex; it looked like Ofcom had already made its decision. The recent Future of Radio consultation is another example — tackling some very diverse issues.

* Put all the information out there. Put it out there in a timely manner. And put it out there for everyone. (Well, most of the information. I understand Ofcom should not share sensitive financial information.) I know, for example, that Ofcom held — or will hold — at least one invite-only pre-consultation forum on the forthcoming PSB Review consultation. The PSB system is paid-for and consumed by the public. Why not webcast that meeting?

* Maintain an ex-parte presentation log. When anyone contacts Ofcom about a regulatory matter under consideration and presents their views, that contact should be logged and the presentation made available to the public. Ofcom — understandably in my view — became defensive when during the junk food adverts debate it was alleged that the regulator met more frequently with broadcasters than health food advocates. That type of accusation would of course be muted by an ex parte presentation log — it would serve everyone’s interests.

Stay tuned …