Consultation Information
| Ministry/Agency | Ministry of Investment, Trade and Industry - Malaysia Productivity Corporation |
|---|---|
| Consultation Period | 21/11/2025 - 31/03/2026 Closed |
| Consultation Stage | Public Feedback |
| Classification | Other service activities |
Purpose
i. To assess the level of understanding and implementation of GRP in current policy and regulatory development process.
ii. To gather issues and challenges encountered in using and applying the NPGRP and Handbook.
iii. To obtain recommendations and suggestions to improve the clarity and usability of the NPGRP and Handbook, as well as the overall support provided for GRP implementation.
i. To assess the level of understanding and implementation of GRP in current policy and regulatory development process.
ii. To gather issues and challenges encountered in using and applying the NPGRP and Handbook.
iii. To obtain recommendations and suggestions to improve the clarity and usability of the NPGRP and Handbook, as well as the overall support provided for GRP implementation.
Affected Stakeholder
- Regulators
- Industry
- NGOs
- Academia
- General Public
- Regulators
- Industry
- NGOs
- Academia
- General Public
Documents
Officer to Contact
Contact 1
Ilyana Norsaidah Ab Rahman
Contact Person
ilyana@mpc.gov.my
Email
0 13-4248 298
Phone
Contact 2
Vimala Muniandy
Contact Person
vimala@mpc.gov.my
Email
012-2435208
Phone
Contact 1
Ilyana Norsaidah Ab Rahman
Contact Person
Contact Person
ilyana@mpc.gov.my
Email
0 13-4248 298
Phone
Phone
Contact 2
Vimala Muniandy
Contact Person
Contact Person
vimala@mpc.gov.my
Email
012-2435208
Phone
Phone
UPC Technical Assistant
Have Your Say
AN
Anonymous
AN
Anonymous
Estimated time: : 15
minutes
Estimated time: : 15
minutes
Share your thoughts and feedback
Engage with stakeholders and provide administrative oversight on feedback.
Top 5 Comments
Most liked comments from this consultation
March 30, 2026
Further explanation is needed on how the Policy Implementation Review (PIR) should be applied. Under the National Policy on Good Regulatory Practice (NPGRP), it is stated that a PIR should be completed within two (2) years after a policy has been implemented. This gives the understanding that the entire review process, from start to finish, should take place within that twoâyear period.
However, the Guidebook for GRP 2.0 explains the PIR differently. The Guidebook only states that the PIR should be started within two (2) years after a policy is implemented, but it does not clearly mention when the PIR should be completed. This may lead to different interpretations among agencies on whether the twoâyear timeline applies only to the start of the PIR or also includes its completion.
In addition, further clarity would be useful for situations where a policy has been amended within less than two (2) years after its implementation. At present, it is not clear whether such amendments require a new PIR timeline, or whether the amended policy should still be reviewed under the original PIR period. Clear guidance on this matter would help agencies apply the PIR more consistently.
December 26, 2025
Areas for Improvement / Suggestions
More practical examples or case studies
Including short real-world examples of Full RIA vs Light RIA, or successful post-implementation reviews, would improve usabilityÃĸâŦâespecially for smaller agencies.
Stronger digital governance integration
While DRN and online consultation are mentioned, the policy could further emphasise:
Data-driven regulation
Use of digital dashboards for monitoring regulatory performance
Integration with whole-of-government digital platforms
Capacity disparities among regulators
Smaller agencies may face challenges in conducting full RIA and SCM analysis. Consider:
Tiered requirements
Centralised analytical support from MPC
Simplified RIA templates
Stakeholder feedback loop clarity
Consultation is well covered, but the document could be strengthened by explicitly requiring regulators to publish responses to stakeholder inputs, not just summaries.
Measurable performance indicators
Introducing KPIs (e.g. reduction in compliance costs, time saved, regulatory burden index) would help quantify NPGRPÃĸâŦâĸs impact.
Survey
The survey aims to evaluate respondentsÃĸâŦâĸ familiarity and experience with GRP, the challenges faced in its implementation, and the clarity, relevance and usefulness of the NPGRP and Handbook, while also gathering feedback and suggestions to improve both documents and the overall GRP support ecosystem.
The cooperation of Dato'/Datin/Dr./Sir/Madam is requested to complete ALL the details in the survey. All information is confidential and will be used for the purpose of this public consultation session only. We would like to thank you for your time and effort in providing feedback.
Please click on the button below to contribute your comment to this consultation.
The survey aims to evaluate respondentsÃĸâŦâĸ familiarity and experience with Good Regulatory Practice (GRP) and gathering feedback and suggestions to improve the overall GRP support ecosystem.
The cooperation of Dato'/Datin/Dr./Sir/Madam is requested to complete ALL the details in the survey. All information is confidential and will be used for the purpose of this public consultation session only. We would like to thank you for your time and effort in providing feedback.
Please click on the button below to contribute your comment to this consultation.