430
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 388:
Line 388: + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
no edit summary
To view the RTF version, use the document conversion features available in most word processing software, or use a file viewer capable of reading RTF.</blockquote>
To view the RTF version, use the document conversion features available in most word processing software, or use a file viewer capable of reading RTF.</blockquote>
The expected benefits and costs are grouped into the following three categories:
# '''Section A:Quantified and monetized impacts.''' As some of the benefits generated from regulatory policies are difficult to quantify, attempts should be made to use alternative methods for quantification. Only those benefits and costs that are monetized can be aggregated to arrive at net benefits. Refer to the ''[[Canadian Cost-Benefit Analysis Guide: Regulatory Proposals|Canadian Cost Benefit-Analysis Guide: Regulatory Proposals]]'' for help.
# '''Section B:Quantified but not monetized impacts.''' For items where the benefits or costs cannot be monetized but can be quantified, list these in physical units. Include both positive and negative impacts that have been quantified, and indicate clearly the unit of measure (e.g., number of deaths or injuries avoided).
# '''Section C:Qualitative or intangible impacts that are neither monetized nor quantifiable.''' Intangible or qualitative items that are likely to have significant impacts on decision making should be listed and their importance briefly stated. These are the elements of analysis that matter but cannot be estimated. List both positive and negative impacts by stakeholder. Remember, these qualitative impacts can be very important to decision makers.
Dollar estimates in Section A should be expressed in constant dollar terms, with the units (thousands, millions, billions) and constant dollar base year clearly indicated.
Figures for the base or initial year and the final year included in the analysis of costs and benefits should be shown. The department may decide to select other important years within the period of analysis, i.e., those years for which significant or varying costs and benefits are estimated to occur.
Total present value (PV)<ref>Present value is the value on a given date of a future payment or series of future payments that has been discounted to reflect the time value of money.</ref> should be included for monetized costs and benefits, and the discount rate<ref>Discounting allows for the systematic comparison of costs and benefits that occur in different time periods by allowing one to calculate the net present value of the intervention.</ref> applied should be indicated in the table. For most analyses, a discount rate of 8 per cent should be used to calculate present value based on a minimum 10-year forecast. Average annual figures should also be shown in the table based on the annualization formula in the ''[[Canadian Cost-Benefit Analysis Guide: Regulatory Proposals|Canadian Cost‑Benefit Analysis Guide: Regulatory Proposals]]''.
== Rationale ==
The selected option should be based on a rationale that flows from the analysis provided above, including costs and benefits and consultation results. In the "Rationale" section, describe why this option results in the greatest overall benefit, how it will meet the objectives stated earlier, and how it is proportionate to the degree and type of risk presented by the issue. This section should link directly to all of the preceding sections, especially the "Issue," "Objectives," "Regulatory and non-regulatory options considered," and the "Benefits and costs" sections.
In justifying the selected option, this section should demonstrate how adverse impacts have been mitigated and positive impacts enhanced for the environment, the health and safety of Canadians, businesses, consumers, competition, competitiveness, trade, and investment. It should discuss how any administrative burden has been limited to impose the least possible cost on Canadians and businesses, and it should show that the specific needs of small businesses have been addressed.
Note any cooperation and coordination efforts undertaken, including between federal departments, with other governments in Canada, and internationally. When specific Canadian requirements are proposed, describe the rationale for the Canadian approach. For guidance, please refer to the ''[[Guidelines on International Regulatory Obligations and Cooperation]]''.
{| class="wikitable"
!Checklist
!CDSR references
|-
|
* Does the rationale flow logically from the analysis, including costs and benefits and consultation results?
* Is there a description of how the regulatory proposal results in the greatest overall benefit to Canadians and how it will meet objectives stated in the "Objectives" section?
* Is it clear that the regulatory proposal is proportionate to the degree and type of risk presented in the "Issue" section, and why it will not unduly impact other areas or sectors?
* Does the RIAS contain an explanation of how adverse impacts have been mitigated and positive impacts enhanced for the environment, the health and safety of Canadians, businesses, consumers, competition, competitiveness, trade, and investment?
* Is it clear how any administrative burden has been limited to impose the least possible cost on Canadians and businesses, and that the specific needs of small businesses have been addressed?
* Is it clear that the regulatory proposal complies with Canada's international obligations?
* Has international cooperation been considered and have specific Canadian requirements been limited and justified?
|CDSR Section 4.4, Selecting the appropriate mix of government instruments
CDSR Section 4.4, Recommending an option
CDSR Section 4.4, Coordination and cooperation
''Guidelines on International Regulatory Obligations and Cooperation''
|}
=== Strategic environmental assessments ===
A separate strategic environmental assessment (SEA) may be required, as stipulated under ''The'' ''Cabinet Directive on the Environmental Assessment of Policy, Plan and Program Proposals'', if the regulatory proposal were to have the following effect:
* Result in important positive or negative environmental impacts; or
* Involve a high level of uncertainty or risk regarding the outcomes of the proposal that make it difficult to assess the potential environmental impacts.
If an SEA has been prepared, the RIAS writer may wish to summarize key findings in the "Rationale" section of the RIAS and provide a Web link to the SEA, as appropriate.
=== Consultation ===
This section should provide a summary of the consultation process, the main substantive comments received, and how they were taken into account. For guidance, please refer to the ''[[Guidelines for Effective Regulatory Consultations]]''.
In summary, this section should address the following:
* Show who was consulted;
* Indicate what consultation mechanisms were used;
* Indicate when and how long the consultations were conducted;
* Discuss results of the consultation and whether the regulation changed as a result;
* Show how the regulation was revised to reflect and respond to comments received during the pre-publication process;
* Provide a rationale as to why the regulation might not respond to stakeholders' views or concerns; and
* Name any groups still opposed to the regulation.
The CDSR requires departments and agencies to identify interested and affected parties and to provide them with opportunities to take part in open, meaningful, and balanced consultations at all stages of the regulatory process. The "Consultation" section of the RIAS should demonstrate that this requirement has been met. Also, explicit recognition should be given to the Crown's unique relationship with Aboriginal peoples with respect to any existing rights under section 35 of the ''Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms'' that may be affected by a regulatory initiative.
Providing Canadians a full opportunity to be consulted and to participate in the regulatory process is a cornerstone of the CDSR. The public is to be encouraged to criticize ineffective or inefficient regulation and to offer suggestions for better ways to solve problems and meet social and economic objectives.
As is the case with other issues addressed in the RIAS, the extent of consultations undertaken should be influenced by the significance and anticipated impact of the proposed regulation. This, in turn, will be reflected in the length of the "Consultation" section. The RIAS should not contain an outline of all comments received nor an answer to each issue or concern raised. Departments that wish to provide detailed descriptions of their consultations should do so in a separate document and provide a Web link or departmental contact for information in the RIAS.
The RIAS should demonstrate that the consultation process was balanced and not unduly influenced by the views of one particular group. Also, when consultations were undertaken to gather data, it should be clear that data-collection methods were appropriate and that the robustness of results was validated. It is important to remember when writing the RIAS that consultations are never a legitimate substitute for analysis of an issue.
Pre-publication is also not a substitute for consultation. The groups that are most affected by the regulation should have been consulted before pre-publication. Pre-publication is intended only as a final check to give all interested parties a last opportunity to become informed about the government's planned course of action.
If, after consultation, there is still a group opposed to the regulation, the reason for opposition and the identity of the group should be noted. Comments received between pre-publication of the RIAS in the ''Canada Gazette'', Part I, and final publication in the ''Canada Gazette'', Part II, can involve situations where affected stakeholders submit concerns or challenges to the methodology or reasoning of the impact and cost-benefit analyses. Stakeholders may also submit letters of concern due to distributional issues, such as undue burden placed on one region or industry. While, for the most part, these concerns are responded to through independent letters by the department or agency, they can also necessitate changes to the regulation and/or clarifications to the RIAS prior to publication in the ''Canada Gazette'', Part II. Such changes should be summarized in the "Consultation" section of the RIAS. In exceptional cases, consultation outcomes will alert regulators to unforeseen potential regulatory impacts, which may necessitate changes to the "Benefits and costs" section of the RIAS.
The date of pre-publication should also be indicated in the "Consultation" section. Before the RIAS is published in Part II of the ''Canada Gazette'', the "Consultation" section should be revised to reflect and respond, at least in a general way, to comments that were received during the pre‑publication process. If no comments were received or no changes made to the regulation, this needs to be stated.
Note that, in some cases, comments received as a result of pre-publication may alert regulators to considerations that did not initially factor into the cost-benefit analysis for the proposed regulatory measure. This may result in a substantial change to the regulatory proposal. In these circumstances, it may be necessary to pre-publish for a second time before proceeding to the ''Canada Gazette'', Part II.
{| class="wikitable"
!Checklist
!CDSR references
|-
|
* Does this section explain how affected parties were consulted?
* Does the section clarify which groups of stakeholders were consulted? Have their views been summarized?
* If required, does the RIAS ensure that the confidentiality of specific stakeholder comments has been protected?
* Have outstanding issues been addressed? If not, why?
* If comments were received, does this section detail what measures were taken to address them?
|CDSR Section 4.1, Regulatory consultation
''Guidelines for Effective Regulatory Consultations''
|}
=== Implementation, enforcement, and service standards ===
This section describes the implementation plan for a regulatory action, including any communications or outreach activities, dates for coming into force, partner institutions, or cooperation and coordination activities that will be necessary to ensure effective and efficient implementation.
Regulations are usually intended to modify the behaviour of individuals to protect or enhance the public interest. It cannot, however, be assumed that all individuals will voluntarily comply, and sanctions may be necessary to encourage compliance. The CDSR requires that departments and agencies establish compliance and enforcement policies as part of the regulatory development. The RIAS should describe these policies and demonstrate that they are warranted by the rationale and objectives set out for the regulatory activity.
This section of the RIAS should address the following:
* Explain the mechanism adopted to ensure compliance (including criminal law sanctions, ticketing, prohibition and corrective action orders, inspection, licensing, registration, or other government approval requirements);
* Describe means that will be used to detect non-compliance (e.g., inspection or testing); and
* Describe the penalties for non-compliance (e.g., fines, imprisonment, and taxes).
It is vital that rules, processes, sanctions, and actions of regulatory authorities be securely founded in law. The RIAS should indicate how regulations will be administered to ensure consistency across regions, how sanctions and penalties will be determined, and that they will be proportionate to the seriousness of the violation.
If the regulation pertains to a treaty with a foreign government, the RIAS should demonstrate that the regulation does not arbitrarily or unjustifiably discriminate against other jurisdictions. It should demonstrate that it is in line with Canada's international trade obligations. To obtain further clarification, departments and agencies should consult with the Legal Affairs Bureau of Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada, as appropriate, and with the department's Technical Barriers and Regulations Division.
If necessary, this section should also identify the service standard (e.g., timelines for approval processes, such as licensing, permitting, and certification) that is associated with the regulatory activity. It should describe how the department will monitor its performance against the standard. If new or increased fees are being proposed, ensure that the process has been followed for setting service standards in accordance with the ''Policy on Service Standards for External Fees'' and the ''User Fees Act''.
{| class="wikitable"
!Checklist
!CDSR references
|-
|
* Have service standards been established in accordance with the principles or requirements of TBS policy and guidance?
* Has a compliance and enforcement strategy been developed and summarized for readers?
* Have any issues and possible barriers to compliance been clearly assessed?
* If issues with compliance exist, are mechanisms to overcome them described?
|CDSR Section 4.5, Planning for implementation, compliance, and enforcement
|}
=== Performance measurement and evaluation ===
Information for this section of the RIAS is drawn from the ''Handbook for Regulatory Proposals: Performance Measurement and Evaluation Plan'' (PMEP).
A summary of the PMEP is to be included in the RIAS for only high-impact regulatory proposals, as determined by the triage process and in consultation with the appropriate TBS‑RAS analyst. The PMEP section of the RIAS should clearly demonstrate how performance is being measured and how and when the department will evaluate implementation and results of the regulatory activity.
Key elements of the PMEP to be included in the RIAS are as follows:
* A summary of how the regulatory activities connect the inputs and activities to the outputs, to the target groups and the expected outcomes from the initiative (i.e., summary of the logic model);
* A description of the indicators that have been defined to measure changes in outputs and outcomes for the regulatory proposal;
* A description of how and when the information will be summarized, reported, and used to improve the performance of the regulatory activities;
* An outline of how (i.e., methodology) and when the regulatory activities will be evaluated; and
* An indication that the PMEP is available upon request.
Note: if the regulation involves a Treasury Board submission, the RIAS summary should be based on evaluation plan reports in section 9.6 of the submission. Please refer to A Guide to Preparing Treasury Board Submissions.
{| class="wikitable"
!Checklist
!CDSR references
|-
|
* Does this section summarize how regulatory activities connect inputsand activities to outputs and target groups and expected outcomes from the initiative (i.e., summary of the logic model)?
* Does it make reference to indicators that will be used to measure changes in outputs and outcomes?
* Does it include information on how and when the information will be summarized, reported, and used to improve the performance of the regulatory activities?
* Does it outline the methodology that will be used to evaluate the regulatory activity?
* Does it indicate that the PMEP is available upon request?
|CDSR Section 4.5, Planning for implementation, compliance, and enforcement
|}
=== Contact ===
At the end of each RIAS, list the name, address, and telephone number of the person (including area codes and fax numbers, if applicable) in the department who is knowledgeable about the proposed regulation and can answer requests for information from the public.
== Low-impact RIAS ==
In a low-impact RIAS, CDSR requirements must be addressed similarly to the medium/high‑impact RIAS. The triage is a good place to start to know which CDSR elements need sufficient treatment in the low-impact RIAS. Also, it may be helpful to refer to the checklists for each relevant section of the RIAS, as shown in the previous section of this guide.
=== Issue and objectives ===
This section should provide a brief statement describing the issue that the regulation will address and why government intervention is needed. Objectives of the proposed regulatory action should also be included in brief bullet form.
=== Description and rationale ===
A brief description of the proposed regulatory action, along with a justification demonstrating how the proposal will address the objectives, is proportionate to the degree and type of risk presented by the issue. This will not unduly impact other areas or sectors. A brief, qualitative assessment of expected benefits and costs must be included. While quantitative benefits and costs are not a requirement in the low-impact RIAS, they may also be included.
=== Consultation ===
Describe the consultation process, the main views of consulted parties, and how they were taken into account.
If the regulation is being considered for an exemption from pre-publication, this section needs to include information about consultations similar to that of a medium/high-impact RIAS for the ''Canada Gazette'', Part II, as discussed in the previous section of this guide.
=== Implementation, enforcement, and service standards ===
Describe the implementation plan and compliance and enforcement strategies, as appropriate. Identify the service standard associated with the regulatory activity and describe how the department will monitor its performance against the standard.
=== Contact ===
Identify the contact person(s) for public enquiries.
== RIAS for miscellaneous amendments regulations ==
Miscellaneous amendments regulations (MARs) can be used to implement amendments that are non-substantive and that have been classified through the triage process as "No" or "N/A" (not applicable). The RIAS for MARs is expected to contain the following sections: "Issue and objectives," "Description and rationale," "Consultation," and "Contact."
== RIAS checklist ==
{| class="wikitable"
!RIAS Section
!Checklist
!CDSR References
!
|-
|Executive summary
|
* Is the section within the 60-line (1,000-word) limit?
* Does it provide a summary of only essential information?
|
|
|-
|Issue
|
* Has the nature of the issue or risk been properly identified and assessed (how it may change over time)?
* Has the need for government intervention been demonstrated?
* Has a quantitative risk assessment been performed?
* Have scientific and empirical evidence, uncertainties, ethical considerations, and public views of the public policy issue been summarized?
* Has a Web link or departmental contact to the full risk‑analysis been provided?
|CDSR Section 4.2, Identifying and assessing public policy issues
''Assessing, Selecting, and Implementing Instruments for Government Action''
|
|-
|Objectives
|
* Have public policy objectives been clearly stated in terms of tangible outcomes for Canadians?
|CDSR Section 4.3, Setting public policy objectives
''Assessing, Selecting, and Implementing Instruments for Government Action''
|
|-
|Description
|
* Has a summary description been provided with only essential details of the regulation?
* Is it presented in clear and simple language, providing context to help the reader understand the regulation, but avoiding excess detail on the history of the legislation or regulation?
* Does it describe who will be affected by the regulation and how?
* Have linkages to enabling legislation and government priorities been established to ensure relevance and consistency?
|CDSR Section 4.1, Regulatory consultation
|
|-
|Regulatory and non-regulatory options
|
* Have both regulatory and non-regulatory options considered been summarized, including the proposed regulatory action?
* Have the key differences between the options been summarized and assessed?
|CDSR Section 4.4, Selecting the appropriate mix of government instruments
''Assessing, Selecting, and Implementing Instruments for Government Action''
|
|-
|Benefits and costs
|
* Is the depth of the analysis commensurate with the level of significance determined by the triage?
* Have both costs and benefits of regulatory and non‑regulatory measures been described?
* Have both quantitative and qualitative measures been included?
* Does the RIAS adequately summarize potential positive and negative economic, environmental, and social impacts on Canadians, businesses, and government of the proposed regulation and its feasible alternatives?
* Is it clear how the positive and negative impacts may be distributed across various affected parties, sectors of the economy, and regions of Canada?
* Has a Web link or departmental contact to the full cost‑benefit analysis been provided?
* Has a cost‑benefit analysis summary statement of the quantifiable and non-quantifiable costs and benefits been presented?
|CDSR Section 4.4, Analyzing the benefits and costs of regulation
''Canadian Cost-Benefit Analysis Guide: Regulatory Proposals''
''Guide to Market Assessment''
|
|-
|Rationale
|Does the rationale flow logically from the analysis, including costs and benefits and consultation results?
* Is there a description of how the regulatory proposal results in the greatest overall benefit to Canadians and how it will meet objectives stated in the "Objectives" section?
* Is it clear that the regulatory proposal is proportionate to the degree and type of risk presented in the "Issue" section and why it will not unduly impact other areas or sectors?
* Does the RIAS show how adverse impacts have been mitigated and positive impacts enhanced for the environment, the health and safety of Canadians, businesses, consumers, competition, competitiveness, trade, and investment?
* Is it clear how any administrative burden has been limited to impose the least possible cost on Canadians and businesses? Have specific needs of small businesses been addressed?
* Is it clear that the regulatory proposal complies with Canada's international obligations?
* Has international cooperation been considered and have specific Canadian requirements been limited and justified?
|CDSR Section 4.4, Selecting the appropriate mix of government instruments
CDSR Section 4.4, Recommending an option
CDSR Section 4.4, Coordination and cooperation
''Guidelines on International Regulatory Obligations and Cooperation''
''Guide to Market Assessment''
|
|-
|Consultation
|
* Does this section explain how affected parties were consulted?
* Does the section clarify which groups of stakeholders were consulted, and have their views been summarized?
* If required, does the RIAS ensure that the confidentiality of specific stakeholder comments has been protected?
* Have outstanding issues been addressed? If not, why?
* If comments were received, does this section detail what measures were taken to address them?
|CDSR Section 4.1, Regulatory consultation
''Guidelines for Effective Regulatory Consultations''
|
|-
|Implementation, enforcement and service standards
|
* Have proper service standards been established?
* Has a proper compliance and enforcement strategy been developed and summarized for readers?
* Have any issues and possible barriers to compliance been clearly assessed?
* If issues with compliance exist, are mechanisms to overcome them described?
|CDSR Section 4.5, Planning for implementation, compliance, and enforcement
|
|-
|Performance measurement and evaluation
|
* Does this section summarize how the regulatory activities connect inputsand activities to ''outputs'' to target groups and expected outcomes from the initiative (i.e., summary of the logic model)?
* Does it make reference to the indicators that will be used to measure changes in outputs and outcomes?
* Does it include information on how and when the information will be summarized, reported, and used to improve the performance of the regulatory activities?
* Does it outline the methodology that will be used to evaluate the regulatory activity?
* Does it indicate that the PMEP is available upon request?
|CDSR Section 4.6, Measuring, evaluating, and reviewing regulation
''Handbook for Regulatory Proposals: Performance Measurement and Evaluation Plan''
|
|}
==Notes==
==Notes==
<references />
<references />
