430
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 134:
Line 134: − + + − ==The Small Business Lens==+ − The purpose of the [https://www.canada.ca/en/government/system/laws/developing-improving-federal-regulations/requirements-developing-managing-reviewing-regulations/small-business-lens.html small business lens] is to require sensitivity to small business impacts in the regulatory development process. Consultation and robust analysis help develop a clear understanding of business realities at the earliest stages of regulatory design. − + − <blockquote style="background-color: lightgrey; border: solid thin grey;">+ − − + + − Sensitivity to small business must not compromise the protection of health and safety or the environment. Sometimes, adopting a less burdensome, more flexible approach is not appropriate. In such situations, the regulator explains why this is the case in the published Regulatory Impact Analysis Statement. For example, in the proposed ''[http://canadagazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p2/2015/2015-06-17/html/sor-dors126-eng.php Order Amending the Schedule to the Tobacco Act]'', Health Canada considered and rejected delayed implementation of new restrictions on flavoured tobacco products targeted to youth. While a delay would have given tobacco distributors time to clear inventories of product, the department demonstrated that delayed implementation ran counter to the health protection objectives of the amendment.</blockquote>Regulators must complete a checklist that drives consultation with small business, and the publicly available Regulatory Impact Analysis Statement (RIAS) describes the regulator’s efforts to minimize the burden on small business. This includes the development and disclosure of an alternative, less burdensome design option in the RIAS. Costs for both the initial and flexible options are also disclosed. If the less burdensome option is not adopted, the onus is on the regulator to explain why in the RIAS. Transparency in the results of the lens’s application enables stakeholders to provide feedback on costing and other design assumptions when the draft regulation is published for comment in the ''Canada Gazette'', Part I. This type of feedback can help the regulator avoid unanticipated impacts on small businesses by considering risk-based alternative approaches that do not compromise health, safety, security or the environment.+ − + − + − In some instances, regulators are taking extra steps to lower burden on small businesses even if the lens does not apply; they do this simply as a matter of good regulatory practice. For example, through the ''[http://canadagazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p2/2014/2014-06-04/html/sor-dors114-eng.php Regulations Amending the Seeds Regulations]'', the Canadian Food Inspection Agency reduced administrative and compliance costs for 29 small businesses by removing certain unnecessary recordkeeping, reporting and reviewing requirements, as well as pre-registration testing. The amendment spares businesses $114,426 in new burden per year, or about $4,000 annually per stakeholder, representing a present value of $803,682 over 10 years.+ − Regulators understand the importance and value of engaging business in the regulatory development process. The Canadian Food Inspection Agency, for example, has undertaken significant steps to engage stakeholders on a potential new approach to food inspection. This has included consultation with micro and small businesses through multiple channels: in-person sessions during the day and evening to accommodate schedules of small enterprises, solicitation of input through webinars and online questionnaires, and partnering with provincial governments and industry associations to assist in promoting these consultations.</blockquote>+ − + − ===Results and observations in 2014–15===+ − + − *The small business lens was applied to seven final regulations that were published in the ''Canada Gazette'', Part II. − *Of the seven final regulations, five adopted the proposed flexible option. This enabled small business to avoid an estimated $4 million annually in administrative and compliance burden over the next 10 years (see Appendix C). − *Through the application of the lens, the impacts on stakeholders are being identified and, where possible, mitigated through the adoption of flexible regulatory design options that reduce the burden on small businesses in different ways. − *While TBS’s guidance is not prescriptive in this regard, regulators have used a number of approaches, including delayed implementation, reduced frequency of reporting or certification, and requirements adapted to the particular situation of regulated businesses. − − − ==The One-for-One Rule== − [[File:Fig02-eng.jpg|alt=The one-for-one rule aims to control the growth of administrative burden on business arising from regulations. In 2014–15, administrative burden was reduced by more than $2.7 million, equivalent to an estimated 80,000 hours each year dealing with regulatory burden. After three years, the rule has delivered almost $24 million in net administrative burden relief annually, representing 344,000 fewer hours dealing with regulatory red tape each year. There has also been a reduction of 20 net regulations under the rule.|thumb|The one-for-one rule]] − The [https://www.canada.ca/en/government/system/laws/developing-improving-federal-regulations/requirements-developing-managing-reviewing-regulations/one-for-one-rule.html one-for-one rule] seeks to control the growth of administrative burden on business arising from regulations. When a new or amended regulation increases the administrative burden on business, the rule requires regulators to offset an equal amount of administrative burden cost. As well, the rule also requires regulators to remove an existing regulation each time they introduce a new regulation that imposes new administrative burden on business. − − The rule applies to all regulatory changes that impose new administrative burden costs on business. There are, however, three circumstances where the Treasury Board may exempt<ref>Section 7(''e'') of the ''Red Tape Reduction Act'' and section 6 of the ''Red Tape Reduction Regulations'' use the term "exemption". Previous scorecards referred to "carve-outs". The terminology from the Act and the Regulations is used throughout this document.</ref> regulations from the application of the rule: − − *Regulations related to tax or tax administration; − *Regulations where Her Majesty in right of Canada has no discretion regarding the requirements that must be included in the regulation due to international or legal obligations, including the imposition of international sanctions or the implementation of Supreme Court of Canada decisions; and − * Regulations in emergency, unique or exceptional circumstances, including if compliance with the rule’s requirements would compromise public health, public safety or the Canadian economy. − − ===Results and observations in 2014–15=== − − *The [https://www.canada.ca/en/government/system/laws/developing-improving-federal-regulations/requirements-developing-managing-reviewing-regulations/one-for-one-rule.html one-for-one rule] is meeting its intended objective of controlling growth in administrative burden arising from regulations. Since its introduction in 2012–13, the one-for-one rule has resulted in nearly $24 million in administrative burden relief and an estimated 344,000 fewer hours spent annually dealing with regulatory red tape. There has also been a reduction of 20 net regulations under the rule. − *In 2014–15, 86 per cent of final Governor in Council (GIC)–approved and non-GIC regulatory changes published in the ''Canada Gazette'' either reduced (13 per cent) or did not impose any new administrative burden (73 per cent) on business.<ref>Of the 328 final regulations, these percentages are based on the 291 that fell within the scope of the rule.</ref> − − *The Act and Regulations require that the President of the Treasury Board publish an annual report on the application of the rule, and the Act has a provision requiring that it be reviewed after five years. − *As per the requirement to publicly report on the application of section 5 of the ''Red Tape Reduction Act'' for 2014–15, the increases and decreases in the cost of administrative burden and the number of regulations amended or repealed are as follows: − **Annual net administrative burden to business was reduced by approximately $2.7 million: 11 regulations increased burden by over $500,000; 60 per cent of this resulted from three new regulatory titles, with the balance from other regulatory changes (e.g., amendments). This new administrative burden was offset by 13 regulations that provided burden relief of over $3,200,000. This saves businesses an estimated 80,000 hours in time spent dealing with regulatory burden each year. A detailed list of regulatory changes increasing or decreasing administrative burden on business under the one-for-one rule, as published in the Canada Gazette, Part II, in 2014–15 can be found in Appendix D, Table 1. − **Ten amended regulations, as well as one Order and two regulations that resulted in repeals (for a total of 13), relieved administrative burden on business. These regulatory changes are identified in Appendix D, Table 1. − **In total, eight regulations were repealed. These include three regulations removed from the regulatory stock and five regulations that were replaced by four new regulatory titles. This resulted in a total net reduction of one regulation under the rule in 2014–15. Further details on repealed regulations are found in Appendix D, Table 2. − − *There were 30 regulations exempted from the rule, including 27 non-discretionary obligations (e.g., international sanctions), 2 related to emergency situations, and 1 concerning tax or tax administration. A detailed list can be found in Appendix D, Table 3. − *In 2014–15, all regulatory portfolios complied with the requirement to offset administrative burden or new regulations within 24 months. Compliance with analytical and costing requirements remains strong; areas for improvement include disclosing costing assumptions to help ensure robust cost calculations, and engaging impacted stakeholders to review and challenge the accuracy of the calculations, as appropriate. − + − + − + − !2014–15+ − − + − + − | 121 − + − + − + − + − |46 − + − + − + + + + + − + + − + − |24 − |62 − + − + − + − + − |$3.0 − + − + − + − + − |$26.7 − + − + − + − + − |$23.7 − + − |344,000<ref>Figures in the table are rounded from 98,192 hours in 2012–13, 165,218 hours in 2013–14, and 80,288 hours in 2014–15. The total for three years is 343,698 hours.</ref> − |- − !Net number of regulations reduced − | 5 − |14 − |1 − |20 − + − + − + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + − <blockquote style="background-color: lightgrey; border: solid thin grey;">+ − + + + + + + + + + + + + + + − Canadian businesses that import or sell textile fibre products can expect Industry Canada to issue a CA Identification Number (required for product labelling) within 5 days when the request is submitted online, and 20 days when submitted by mail.+ − Aquaculture operators know how long it will take to obtain licences for new sites or to make modifications to existing sites. In cases where licences are sought for British Columbia, Fisheries and Oceans Canada issues the licence, but the provincial government and other federal departments play a role in the licensing process – a good example of interdepartmental and interjurisdictional service delivery.+ + − Within six months, businesses can expect Citizenship and Immigration Canada to process electronic applications under the Skilled Trades Program (for people who want to become permanent residents based on being qualified in a skilled trade).</blockquote>+ − In addition to timeliness standards and service targets, regulators are required to establish a feedback mechanism so that Canadians can raise service issues if expectations have not been met. Providing feedback on the service that businesses receive when they apply for an authorization can help regulators improve service and recalibrate their timeliness commitments over time.+ + + + + + − In 2014–15, regulators were required to post service standards for regulatory authorizations with more than 500 annual transactions. This threshold has been adjusted each year to gradually phase in more authorizations. In 2012–13, the threshold was 2,000 transactions, and in 2013–14 it was 1,000. In 2013–14, regulators were also required to transition their pre-existing service standards for HVRAs to the expectations outlined in the TBS guidance document ''[[Guide on Improving Service Performance for Regulatory Authorizations]]''.+ − + − <blockquote style="background-color: lightgrey; border: solid thin grey;">+ − '''User-centric service''' − The Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) has created a one-stop-shop web page to help businesses find information and services related to their tax situation. The CRA’s My Business Account portal now offers the ability to submit enquiries and receive responses electronically. [http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/mybusinessaccount/ My Business Account portal] have also been strategically placed in complex or high-interest web content to connect users with an agent. A Liaison Officer Initiative is helping businesses understand their tax affairs and "get it right from the start," and a smartphone app has been introduced to provide custom alerts for instalments, payments, returns and remittances.</blockquote>+ − [[File:Pie-eng.jpg|alt=Figure 4 shows a pie chart for new high-volume regulatory authorizations (HRVAs) covered by service standards. The chart shows the number of annual transactions that directly impact business. The pie chart is divided into nine segments: Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada had 1 HVRA and 439 transactions. Agriculture and Agri-food Canada had 1 HRVA and 200 transactions. The Canadian Transportation Agency had 1 HRVA and 133 transactions. Economic and Social Development Canada had 1 HRVA and 100 transactions. Fisheries and Oceans Canada had 3 HRVAs and 1,000 transactions. Industry Canada had 1 HRVA and 100 transactions. Health Canada had 2 HRVAs and 2,079 transactions. The Natural Resources portfolio had 2 HRVAs and 816 transactions. Public Works and Government Services Canada had 3 HRVAs and 5,103 transactions.|thumb|2014–15 new high-volume regulatory authorizations covered by service standards: Annual transactions directly impacting business]]+ − + + − *Service performance was reported against all of the new timeliness standards that were established in March 2013. Performance targets were met or exceeded for 14 of the 15 new authorizations assessed for performance. In the one instance where a department did not meet its target<ref>Environment Canada demonstrated a best practice by explaining the unique circumstances affecting its 2013–14 result against the service standard for the issuance of export permits under the ''Export and Import of Hazardous Waste and Hazardous Recyclable Materials Regulations''. The service standard is to complete the authorization within 60 days, 70 per cent of the time. This involves completing the review of applications and issuing a permit if appropriate. Exporters and importers provide specific information and, in the case of export permits, the department must secure approval from the receiving jurisdiction. In 2013–14, the US government shutdown affected Environment Canada's performance because 98 per cent of exports of hazardous waste and hazardous recyclable materials are sent to the United States. The department's performance result was 64 per cent, and it noted that if export permits had been removed from the assessment, the result would have been 79 per cent. Of note, in 2014–15 the department achieved a result of 76 per cent against this service standard.</ref>, it provided a thorough explanation on its website, demonstrating openness and transparency with stakeholders, and accountability for commitments made.+ − *New service standards for an additional 15 HVRAs that impact business were also posted on departmental Acts and Regulations web pages. Appendix E provides a list of these HVRAs and associated service standards posted in 2014–15. − *Most departments met TBS guidance requirements in 2014–15 by posting their service standards by the deadline of March 31, 2015, providing a clear articulation of the service standard. They also posted information processes and requirements for obtaining the regulatory authorization, and specified a feedback mechanism that stakeholders can access if service expectations are not met. − *There are now 197 regulatory authorizations, 147 of which have business impacts, covered by more than 400 publicly available service standards. These authorizations address a wide range of activities such as health products licensing and the permitting of import/export of natural resources and agricultural and manufactured goods. − *The opportunity now exists for stakeholders to provide feedback to regulators through service mechanisms identified on departmental websites. Regulators can use this feedback to address issues that affect service performance, or to adapt service standards based on stakeholders’ experience. − {| class="wikitable"+ − |+Table 2: High-volume regulatory authorizations covered by service standards, 2012–13 to 2014–15+ − !+ − !2012–13<ref>In ''The'' ''2012–13 Scorecard Report'', it was reported that there were 24 HVRAs governed by service standards, 19 of which were new. Since that time, departments and agencies (i.e., Citizenship and Immigration Canada; the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission; and Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Canada) have updated some of these authorizations and service standards on their web pages. Moreover, one HVRA reported in 2012–13 (Transport Canada’s Defect Investigations and Recalls) was determined in 2014–15 to not have been an HVRA. In order to present an updated three-year count of all HVRAs and associated service standards in this Scorecard Report, a full recount was conducted. Updated figures are presented accordingly in this report.</ref>+ − !2013–14+ − !2014–15+ − !Total+ − − !Number of high-volume regulatory authorizations − − |163 − |19 − |197 − |- − !Number of high-volume regulatory authorizations with business impacts − |14 − |118 − |15 − |147 − |- − !Number of timeliness service standards − |24 − |419<ref>The figures for 2013–14 are significantly higher than for the first and third years of implementation because departments were to bring all existing high-volume authorization service standards into line with posting requirements based on TBS expectations for this reform area.</ref> − − |471 − |} − ==Forward Regulatory Plans==+ − [[File:Fig04-eng.jpg|alt=Forward regulatory plans provide information on changes or new federal regulations expected in the next two years, and give businesses an opportunity to engage in their development and prepare for implementation. The plans of nearly 40 major regulators provide stakeholders with information on more than 400 regulatory initiatives, including whether there are anticipated business impacts and how they can engage in consultations and provide feedback to regulators.|thumb|Forward regulatory plans]]+ − [https://www.canada.ca/en/government/system/laws/developing-improving-federal-regulations/regulatory-planning/forward-planning.html Forward regulatory] plans describe anticipated regulatory changes or proposals that a department or agency intends to bring forward over a 24-month period. Federal departments and agencies make their forward regulatory plans publicly available on their Acts and Regulations web pages, giving businesses and other stakeholders a heads-up on upcoming regulations that impact them and an opportunity to engage regulators on regulatory design and plan for implementation.+ + + + + − The ''[[Guide on Forward Planning and Related Measures to Improve the Transparency and Predictability of the Federal Regulatory System]]'' requires that departments and agencies post the following for every regulatory initiative: a concise, plain-language description of the initiative’s objective; an indication of anticipated impacts on business; information on the intended approach to upcoming public consultations, including estimated timing; and a departmental contact in the event that a stakeholder requires additional information.+ + − Departments have been posting annual plans for three years and have been adding mid-year updates as of 2013–14. As such, Canada now has a regularized and highly transparent forward-planning infrastructure. This disclosure of anticipated regulatory changes is of benefit to businesses, trading partners and citizens alike, and has become incorporated into how regulators do business.+ + − However, informal feedback from some stakeholders, though positive, suggests awareness of forward regulatory plans among individual business owners is likely to be low. There may be opportunities to use targeted outreach and new technology tools to raise awareness among stakeholders of forward regulatory plans.+ + − + − + − + − + − + − *The utility of forward regulatory plans for stakeholders can be improved if departments and agencies place greater attention on using plain language to describe the objectives of regulatory initiatives. Addressing deficiencies in this area, combined with timely posting of forward plans and mid-year updates, would help make information on forward regulatory plans more accessible to stakeholders.+ + + − {| class="wikitable"+ − |+Table 3: Forward regulatory plans+ − !+ − !2013–15+ − !2014–16 − !2015–17 − |- − !Number of forward regulatory plans − |32 − |40 − |39 − |- − !Number of posted initiatives − |460 − |455 − |451 − |- − !Number of initiatives with anticipated business impacts − |111 − |148 − |118 − |} − + − + − Compliance with regulations is the goal of both regulators and stakeholders; while regulators are working to design processes with business needs in mind, they also recognize the importance of providing businesses with timely clarification of what they expect, and tools to help stakeholders comply with regulatory requirements.+ − [https://www.canada.ca/en/government/system/laws/developing-improving-federal-regulations/requirements-developing-managing-reviewing-regulations/interpretation-policies.html Interpretation policies] help make regulations and compliance requirements easier to understand by outlining the commitments, practices and tools to be applied by regulators when providing Canadians and businesses with information and guidance on regulatory obligations to be met. This helps reduce administrative burden on Canadians and businesses in particular, who might otherwise expend additional time and resources to interpret regulatory requirements.+ + − The TBS ''[[Guide for Developing and Implementing Interpretation Policies]]'' sets out the requirements and principles upon which federal departments are to design interpretation policies: predictability, service, stakeholder engagement and improvement.+ − Departments and agencies are required to outline their practices for responding to regulatory questions, including specifying the conditions under which federal regulators will provide written responses to questions. The policy is also to establish a service timeliness commitment for responding to stakeholders’ questions.+ + − Federal regulators are also called upon to identify the practices and tools they use to engage stakeholders. This could include, for example, consulting Canadians and businesses on the development and review of guidance documents, new information materials, or seeking feedback on their experience using other online resources. Stakeholder feedback is also key to driving further improvements in delivering interpretation services.+ − For 2014–15, departments and agencies were required to post their interpretation policies on their Acts and Regulations websites, as well as FAQs for their most-accessed regulations. They were to engage stakeholders on their current interpretation practices in order to identify areas for improvement. Metrics that describe how the department or agency will monitor implementation of improvement priorities over time were also to be posted online. − <blockquote style="background-color: lightgrey; border: solid thin grey;"> − '''Making it easier to do business with regulators''' − Businesses can access policies, operational instructions and agreements on [http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/department/acts-regulations/reginterpretation.asp Citizenship and Immigration Canada’s interpretation policy web page], including the operational manuals and bulletins that Citizenship and Immigration and Canada Border Services Agency employees consult when carrying out their duties. They can also refer to frequently asked questions (FAQs) on key regulations, including the ''Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations'', the ''Citizenship Regulations'', and the ''Passport and Other Travel Document Services Fees Regulations''. The page also provides an email address, [mailto:regs@cic.gc.ca regs@cic.gc.ca], where businesses can provide feedback on the available information resources and any relevant consultation opportunities. − Fisheries and Oceans Canada recently surveyed businesses and other stakeholders to solicit feedback, ideas and recommendations on its current suite of policy instruments. This information was then used to inform the development of several improvement priorities. On [http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/acts-lois/improvement-amelioration-eng.htm Fisheries and Oceans Canada’s interpretation policy web page], stakeholders can review the consultation methodology, the themes that emerged, and the improvements proposed by the department. These included a flexible client service model, greater use of electronic feedback, plain language, and use of more interactive tools such as social media and videos. Metrics for monitoring the implementation of improvement priorities are also included. For example, under its proposed flexible client service model, the department has committed to develop stakeholder outreach plans for 100 per cent of new regulatory initiatives, regulatory amendments and policy instruments.</blockquote> Line 379:
Line 356: − [[File:Fig06-eng.jpg|alt=The Administrative Burden Baseline provides an annual count of requirements in federal regulations and related forms that impose administrative burden on businesses. In 2014–15, 38 federal entities counted and reported their administrative burden requirements, which totaled 129,860. Departments and agencies post annual updates to their counts on their Acts and Regulations web pages, contributing to the openness and transparency of the federal regulatory system.|thumb|Administrative Burden Baseline]]
The 2013–2014 Scorecard Report: Implementing the Red Tape Reduction Action Plan (view source)
Revision as of 12:41, 17 November 2021
, 12:41, 17 November 2021no edit summary
Results for 2013‒14 support the government’s commitment to strengthen transparency and accountability, and demonstrate that the reforms have traction and that momentum continues to build.
Results for 2013‒14 support the government’s commitment to strengthen transparency and accountability, and demonstrate that the reforms have traction and that momentum continues to build.
Reducing Burden on Canadian Business
== Reducing Burden on Canadian Business ==
<blockquote>"Government regulation must and will continue to protect the health, safety, and environment of all Canadians. But we must meet this imperative in ways that free business from unnecessary and frustrating red tape."
- Tony Clement, President of the Treasury Board, ''Red Tape Reduction Action Plan'', 2012</blockquote>In response to the business community’s frustration that regulatory red tape was creeping uncontrolled and unnecessarily into the federal regulatory system, in 2012, the government introduced the [https://www.canada.ca/en/government/system/laws/developing-improving-federal-regulations/requirements-developing-managing-reviewing-regulations/one-for-one-rule.html one-for-one rule]. The rule systematically targets and controls the growth of administrative burden that regulations impose on business.
The lens applies to regulatory proposals that impact small business and have nationwide cost impacts of over $1 million annually. Further to the expectations outlined in the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat (TBS) guidance document ''[[Hardwiring Sensitivity to Small Business Impacts of Regulation: Guide for the Small Business Lens]]'', there are a number of requirements that regulators must consider when designing regulations.
In addition, recognizing that regulations can sometimes have unintended negative impacts on small business, the government raised the bar for regulatory design by introducing the [https://www.canada.ca/en/government/system/laws/developing-improving-federal-regulations/requirements-developing-managing-reviewing-regulations/small-business-lens.html small business lens]. The lens targets regulatory proposals that impact small businesses and that introduce $1 million or more in annual compliance and/or administrative costs. It requires regulators to understand the unique small business impacts of a proposed regulation and to account for regulators’ efforts to minimize the burden on small business in the publicly available Regulatory Impact Analysis Statement (RIAS).<blockquote>Administrative burden includes planning, collecting, processing and reporting of information, and completing forms and retaining data required by the federal government to '''comply with a regulation'''. This includes filling out licence applications and forms, as well as finding and compiling data for audits and becoming familiar with information requirements.
- ''Controlling Administrative Burden That Regulations Impose on Business: Guide for the 'One-for-One' Rule''</blockquote>
'''The small business lens at work'''
The ''[http://canadagazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p2/2014/2014-12-31/html/sor-dors297-eng.php Regulations Amending the Maple Products Regulations]'' give small federally registered maple syrup establishments two years to gradually implement new regulatory requirements. They can either follow the current grading system or the new grading system, and they have time to buy and install new equipment and change labels to comply with the new requirements. As a result, 204 small businesses are expected to avoid $227,000 in potential administrative and compliance burden over the next 10 years.
=== Red Tape Reduction Action Plan Reform: The One-for-One Rule ===
The cornerstone of the Red Tape Reduction Action Plan, the one-for-one rule, imposes a new discipline across the regulatory system. The rule maintains current protection of health and safety, as it controls both the number of regulations and the growth of administrative burden on businesses. The rule requires regulators to reduce existing regulatory administrative burden on business equal to any new burden imposed<ref>Regulators have 24 months to offset new administrative burden introduced from the date it comes into effect. The cost of administrative burden increases or decreases, and the underlying cost assumptions are made public in the RIAS when published in the ''Canada Gazette''. Burden may be offset portfolio-wide.</ref>. Also, each time a brand new regulation that imposes administrative burden is introduced, an existing regulation must be removed.
The rule applies to all regulatory changes that impose new administrative burden costs on business.
<blockquote style="background-color: lightgrey; border: solid thin grey;">
The value of the administrative burden cost of the changes and the underlying assumptions are made public in the RIAS when the regulation is published in the ''Canada Gazette''. Although the one-for-one rule requires regulators to offset any new administrative burden associated with a regulatory proposal with an equal reduction within 24 months, there is flexibility to “carve out”<ref>Detailed information on carve-out requirements is available in [[Controlling Administrative Burden That Regulations Impose on Business: Guide for the 'One-for-One' Rule#Carve-Outs|section 9, "Carve-Outs," of ''Controlling Administrative Burden That Regulations Impose on Business: Guide for the 'One-for-One' Rule'']].</ref> certain proposals from the rule.
'''Considering small business impacts when regulating'''
[[File:Fig2-eng.jpg|alt=Under the Action Plan theme of reducing burden on business, the following has been achieved to establish a less burdensome regulatory system: Over two years of implementation, 2012‒13 to March 31, 2014, the one-for-one rule saved Canadian businesses almost $21 million per year in net administrative burden and 263,000 hours per year in dealing with regulatory red tape. There are also 19 fewer regulations on the books.|thumb|Reform Snapshot: The One-for-One Rule]]
==== Key Results From 2013‒14 ====
* The one-for-one rule imposes a new discipline across the federal regulatory system. Administrative burden is now measured and controlled. This ensures that administrative costs to business can no longer grow unchecked.
* In 2013‒14, 93 percent<ref>This figure refers to all GIC and non-GIC regulations, excluding 35 that were outside of the scope of the one-for-one rule. Therefore, of the 270 final regulations, these figures are determined using 235 regulations.</ref> of final Governor in Council (GIC)-approved and non-GIC regulatory changes published in the ''Canada Gazette'' either reduced (13 per cent) or did not impose any new (80 per cent) administrative burden on business.
* The application of the rule in 2013‒14 reduced annual net administrative burden to business by almost $18 million. This saves business over 165,000 hours in time spent dealing with regulatory red tape. In addition, there was a net reduction of 14 regulations from the stock of federal regulations.
* For 2013‒14, the highest dollar value “out” was $15 million (''Regulations Amending Certain Regulations Concerning Prescription Drugs''). This regulatory change reduces the administrative burden on small business by enabling the transfer of prescriptions by pharmacy technicians rather than solely by pharmacists. This represents the largest “out” in the first two fiscal years of the application of the rule.
*For example, risk-based approaches have been used to safely reduce the licensing frequency and retraining requirements for small laboratories that handle low-risk human pathogens. As well, a risk-based approach to security requirements in small airports reflected the risk factors specific to these small facilities while maintaining a coordinated, national approach to airport security.
* The ''[https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/R-4.5/ Red Tape Reduction Act]'', which gives the force of law to the rule, received Royal Assent on April 23, 2015. The ''[https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SOR-2015-202/FullText.html Red Tape Reduction Regulations]'' were finalized in July 2015 and set out the operational elements for how the rule is to be applied.
* For 2014–15, the regulation removing the most administrative burden ($955,000) was ''Regulations Amending the Canada Labour Standards Regulations''. This regulatory change reduces the administrative burden on small business by simplifying the holiday pay calculation for employees whose hours of work differ from day to day, or who are paid on a basis other than time (e.g., commissioned sales).
{| class="wikitable"
{| class="wikitable"
|+Table 1: One-for-one rule: 2012–13 to 2014–1
|+Table 1. Key Statistics on the One-for-One Rule, 2012‒13 to 2013‒14
!
!
!2012–13
!2012‒13
!2013–14
!2013‒14
!Two-Year Total
!Total
|-
|-
!How many regulations had one-for-one implications?
!Total regulations that triggered the rule
|27
|27
|36
|36
|58
|63
|-
|-
!How many regulations were exempted from the rule?
!How many regulations were carved out from the rule?
|9<ref>In the previous two scorecards, it was indicated that the number of carve-outs (exemptions) for 2012–13 was eight regulations. Subsequent analysis has revealed that one regulation, the ''Regulations Amending the Income Tax Regulations (Part XLIX – Qualified Investments)'' (SOR 2012-270), had not been reflected. The updated figure of nine is used in this scorecard.</ref>
|8
| 7
|7
|30
|15
|-
|-
!How many regulations were only repealing other regulations?<ref>These are regulatory titles repealing other regulations, and therefore had no incremental administrative burden impact regarding the one-for-one rule.</ref>
!How many regulations were only repealing other regulations?
|4
|4
|5
|5
|4
|9
|13
|-
!How many regulations had administrative impacts?<ref>See Appendix B for full list of regulations that had administrative impacts in 2013‒14. Note that one regulatory package contained two regulations combined in one package (Canadian Food Inspection Agency), thus accounting for 24 total regulations.</ref>
|14
|23
|37
|-
|-
!How many regulations had administrative impacts on business?
!Net number of regulations reduced<ref>Under Element B of the one-for-one rule in 2013‒14, 17 regulations were repealed and 3 added, leaving a net reduction of 14.</ref>
|5
|14
|14
|24<ref>The 2013–14 scorecard indicated a total of 23 regulations with administrative impacts on business in 2013–14. A footnote to the table in that scorecard clarified that one regulatory package contained two regulations, thus accounting for 24 total regulations with business impacts. The 2013–14 figures in this scorecard have been adjusted to reflect this.</ref>
|19
|-
|-
!Administrative burden increased ($ millions, rounded)
!Administrative burden increased (“in”)(rounded)
|$0.5
|$500,000
|$2.0
|$2,000,000
| $0.5
|$2,500,000
|-
|-
!Administrative burden decreased ($ millions, rounded)
!Administrative burden decreased (“out”)(rounded)
|$3.5
|$3,500,000
|$20.0
|$20,000,000
|$3.2
|$23,500,000
|-
|-
!Total administrative burden saved annually ($ millions, rounded)
!Total administrative burden saved annually (rounded)
|$3.0
|$3,000,000
|$18.0
|$18,000,000
|$2.7
|$21,000,000
|-
|-
!Total number of hours saved to business annually (rounded)
!Total number of hours saved to business annually (rounded)
|98,000
|98,000
|165,000
|165,000
|80,000
|263,000
|}
|}
==Service Standards for High-Volume Regulatory Authorizations==
* The rule also leaves room for increased administrative cost to business (“ins”) in some cases, such as the introduction of a regulatory change for important public policy purposes (e.g., health and safety) that may result in new requirements. For example, in 2013‒14, regulations were introduced to regulate active ingredients in pharmaceutical drugs, transfer duties of inspection and weighing in the grain sector, and implement new standards to reduce air pollution and emissions from vessels. Each of these carried some administrative cost requirements.
[[File:Fig03-eng.jpg|alt=Service standards provide businesses with a clear indication of how long it will normally take to obtain a decision on regulatory authorizations. More than 400 timeliness service standards for 147 high-volume regulatory authorizations impacting business are now posted publicly, and regulators are beginning to post performance results against these standards. Results posted in 2014 show that regulators met their performance targets 93% of the time.|thumb|Service standards for high-volume regulatory authorizations]]
* The design of the rule provides the government with flexibility to carve out regulations from its application. This year, seven regulations were carved out<ref>More detailed information on carve-out requirements is available in [[Controlling Administrative Burden That Regulations Impose on Business: Guide for the 'One-for-One' Rule#Carve-Outs|section 9, "Carve-Outs," of ''Controlling Administrative Burden That Regulations Impose on Business: Guide for the 'One-for-One' Rule'']]. See Appendix B for a full list of regulations that received a carve-out exemption.</ref> from the rule. Of those carve-outs, one was due to a unique or exceptional situation, four were non-discretionary obligations (e.g., sanctions), and two were related to tax or tax administration.
[https://www.canada.ca/en/government/system/laws/developing-improving-federal-regulations/requirements-developing-managing-reviewing-regulations/service-standards.html Service standards] provide businesses with a clear indication of how long it will normally take to obtain a decision from a regulator, allowing stakeholders to factor these timelines into their planning. Departments and agencies are required to post service standards and service performance for high-volume regulatory authorizations (HVRAs) on their Acts and Regulations web pages. A high-volume authorization is a licensing, permit or certification process with 100 or more transactions per year. Service standards cover a range of sectors and business activities, from licensing off-track betting to issuing registration certificates under the Controlled Goods Program of Public Works and Government Services Canada.
* Regulators demonstrated a high level of compliance with TBS guidance for the one-for-one rule,<ref>See [[Controlling Administrative Burden That Regulations Impose on Business: Guide for the 'One-for-One' Rule#Element B: Removing a Regulation When a New Regulation Imposes Administrative Burden on Business|section 7.2 of ''Controlling Administrative Burden That Regulations Impose on Business: Guide for the 'One-for-One' Rule'']].</ref> and all have remained in compliance with the requirement to offset new administrative burden or brand new regulations within 24 months (see Appendix B).
* However, as was noted in last year’s scorecard, regulators need to describe more consistently the assumptions underlying their calculation of administrative costs in the RIAS so that stakeholders can challenge the accuracy of the calculations. Similarly, consideration should be given to the merits of providing more robust descriptions in the RIAS of the rationale for applying or not applying the rule.<blockquote style="background-color: lightgrey; border: solid thin grey;">
'''Looking Ahead to 2014‒15'''
In January 2014, the government introduced Bill C-21, the ''Red Tape Reduction Act'', which is currently before Parliament. If the bill receives Royal Assent, Canada will be the first country to give the one-for-one rule the weight of law.</blockquote>
=== Red Tape Reduction Action Plan Reform: The Small Business Lens ===
Small businesses account for nearly 98 per cent of all Canadian businesses. The [https://www.canada.ca/en/government/system/laws/developing-improving-federal-regulations/requirements-developing-managing-reviewing-regulations/small-business-lens.html small business lens], introduced on February 1, 2012, is designed to “hard-wire” sensitivity to small business realities as regulations are being developed.
The lens applies to regulations that impact small business and that have nationwide cost impacts of over $1 million annually. It requires regulators to consult with small business and to demonstrate through the RIAS that they have done what they can to minimize administrative and compliance costs on small business, without compromising the environment, the economy, or the health, safety and security of Canadians. Regulators must summarize the results of the lens’s application in the RIAS for each regulatory proposal.<blockquote>A small business is defined as "any business, including its affiliates, that has fewer than 100 employees '''or''' between $30,000 and $5 million in annual gross revenues."
- ''Hardwiring Sensitivity to Small Business Impacts of Regulation: Guide for the Small Business Lens''</blockquote>
[[File:Fig3-eng.jpg|alt=Under the Action Plan theme of reducing burden on business, the following has been achieved to hard-wire sensitivity for small business: Over two years of implementation, 2012‒13 to March 31, 2014, estimated regulatory cost savings were $75 million annually in administrative and compliance costs for over 5,000 small businesses as a result of the small business lens.|thumb|Reform Snapshot: The Small Business Lens]]
==== Key Results From 2013‒14 ====
* Regulatory proposals can take many months or even years from early development through to approval and implementation, including time for thorough analysis and stakeholder consultations. Last year, proposals were in development, and none that triggered the [https://www.canada.ca/en/government/system/laws/developing-improving-federal-regulations/requirements-developing-managing-reviewing-regulations/small-business-lens.html small business lens] had yet come forward for final approval in the ''Canada Gazette'', Part II. As a consequence, it was too early to assess whether the lens had delivered greater sensitivity to small business. However, with more regulatory proposals applying the small business lens now coming forward for approval, early indications are that the lens is having its intended effect on regulatory design.
* In 2013‒14, the lens began to show its intended effect, with '''five regulations triggering the lens'''. Four were pre-published in the ''Canada Gazette'', Part I, and one advanced to final approval in the ''Canada Gazette'', Part II.<ref>Appendix D details published regulations that applied the small business lens in 2013‒14.</ref>
* The Canadian Food Inspection Agency’s ''[http://www.gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p2/2014/2014-02-26/html/sor-dors23-eng.php Regulations Amending the Health of Animals Regulations]'' represents the first regulation that applied the lens to receive final approval in the
* ''Canada Gazette'', Part II. The application of the lens to this proposal resulted in '''$75 million and over 15,000 hours'''<ref>These hours reflect the reduction in administrative costs only.</ref> (annually) saved for over 5,000 small businesses in Canada.<blockquote style="background-color: lightgrey; border: solid thin grey;">
Livestock traceability is important for consumer safety and industry competitiveness. The Canadian Food Inspection Agency's (CFIA's) ''[http://www.gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p2/2014/2014-02-26/html/sor-dors23-eng.php Regulations Amending the Health of Animals Regulations]'' require pig farmers to keep records and report movements of pigs, from birth or import to slaughter or export. The application of the lens resulted in a regulatory change that helps protect the safety of Canada's food system, while considering the needs of small businesses. Following analysis and consultation, a flexible option was chosen. Instead of a traceability system based on individual pig identification and tagging (with an estimated total annualized cost to business of nearly $77 million, or $13,079 per business), CFIA adopted a system based on group/drove identification and movement reporting, which substantially reduced projected costs to business. This system is estimated to have an annualized cost of $1.6 million, or $295 per business for over 5,000 small businesses nationwide, a $75-million annual saving.</blockquote>For the five proposals that applied the lens in 2013‒14, four recommended a flexible option that reduces costs to small business. These options would save burden in terms of, for example, the frequency of inspections, filling out of repetitive forms, and reporting requirements. A list of these proposals is found in Appendix C.<blockquote style="background-color: lightgrey; border: solid thin grey;">
'''Looking Ahead to 2014‒15'''
At the time of this publication, eight additional proposals triggering the lens had been published in the ''Canada Gazette'' since April 1, 2014, and there are '''more proposals in development'''.</blockquote>
==== In Their Own Words: Canada Revenue Agency Game Plan to Reduce Red Tape ====
In response to the Government of Canada’s Red Tape Reduction Action Plan, the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) implemented a bold, new, organization-wide strategy, above and beyond the mandated systemic reforms. This strategy was developed as a “whole-of-agency” framework to maximize burden reduction for small and medium-sized businesses, improve service delivery, and meet small and medium-sized businesses’ needs.
The CRA recognizes that red tape reduction will be successful only if all employees contribute to identifying and implementing better ways to provide service to small and medium-sized businesses. This required an organizational culture shift, encouraged by making an Assistant Commissioner responsible for each of the CRA’s Red Tape Reduction Action Plan items, and by regularly recognizing staff contributions to reducing red tape.
The CRA’s goal is to continuously solicit internal and external feedback on its processes, and make the changes that small and medium-sized businesses want and most need. The CRA held consultations across Canada in November 2012 with small and medium-sized businesses and their service providers, with the aim of refining and focusing its red tape reduction efforts. The CRA has implemented significant red tape reduction measures, outlined in the following.
==== Administrative Burden and Small and Medium-Sized Business Realities ====
* '''To clarify and simplify information, make it easier to access information on the CRA website, and simplify some key guides and forms, the CRA:'''
'''Predictable service for high-volume regulatory authorizations'''
** Developed a one-stop-shop web page so businesses can easily find information and service options relevant to their tax situation;
** Developed new website information tools (Twitter, videos and webinars); and
** Simplified form RC366 (Direct Deposit Request for Businesses) and form RC59 (Business Consent).
* '''To increase business options for electronically filing and amending information returns and making e-payments, the CRA enhanced:'''
** The CRA My Business Account web page to highlight electronic services available for businesses, including registering for an account, filing a return, making a payment, reviewing or changing information, calculating an amount, and providing the CRA with documentation such as receipts or contracts to support expenses or credits claimed.
* '''To identify ways to simplify interactions with the CRA, it developed new tools:'''
** Electronic written responses to small and medium-sized businesses’ enquiries about tax matters can be obtained through the CRA My Business Account portal. Businesses or their representatives can ask the CRA tax-related questions about their accounts online and receive answers online and in writing;
** “You’ve got online mail…from the Canada Revenue Agency” allows businesses to receive some of their correspondence from the CRA online; and
** “Smartlinks” allows web users to access a CRA agent directly from its website so the agent can help users navigate through the site or provide them with additional information.
* '''To commence coordination of information sharing among levels of government and departments, in partnership with Industry Canada, the CRA:'''
** Is working with other government entities to expand the use of the CRA’s Business Number (BN). The BN makes it easier for small and medium-sized businesses to register, eliminates duplicate accounts and other errors, and enables integrated online services, such as changing an address.
* '''To provide support to small and medium-sized businesses when they need it most, in order to get their tax obligations “right from the start,” the CRA:'''
** Developed the Liaison Officer Initiative to help small and medium-sized businesses meet their tax obligations by providing in-person support at key points in their business cycle; and
** Launched its first-ever mobile app, the Business Tax Reminders app, which allows businesses to create custom reminders and alerts for dates related to instalment payments, returns and remittances.
==== Accountability ====
* '''To enhance communication of the CRA’s information provision policy, the CRA:'''
** Developed an interpretation policy that clearly explains the CRA’s commitments, practices and tools used in providing Canadians and businesses with the information they need to meet their obligations.
==== Service Orientation and Professionalism ====
* '''To improve telephone communications services to better answer small and medium-sized businesses’ questions, the CRA:'''
** Developed Agent ID, which provides business owners with the name and identification number of the CRA agent who answers their calls to increase CRA’s accountability for business calls, ensure a consistent experience for callers, and make it easier for business owners to give feedback on CRA services; and
** Streamlined its existing interactive voice response system to make it easier for business callers to connect with an agent.
* '''To enhance auditor knowledge, training and professionalism, the CRA:'''
** Developed training products to help auditors become more sensitive to the needs and realities of small and medium-sized businesses; and
** Created an audit quality assurance review program to ensure that audits are carried out in a professional manner and that proposed assessments are correct in law.
The CRA was recognized for its significant contribution to small and medium-sized businesses in Canada. As a result of these and other CRA red tape reduction initiatives, the Minister of National Revenue was awarded the Canadian Federation of Independent Business Golden Scissors Award for 2012.
In 2014–15, for the first time, departments and agencies were also required to report service performance against the standards that were posted in spring 2013, the first year of this initiative.
In the fall of 2014, the CRA again conducted red tape reduction consultations in over 20 cities to seek views on its progress to date and gather input into CRA’s forward-looking red tape burden reduction agenda. These in-person sessions and online consultations were available to anyone in the business community interested in sharing their views. These consultations will ensure that CRA’s future action plan continues to address business red tape reduction priorities.
== Improving Service and Predictability ==
=== A predictable regulatory environment is one where service promises are kept and early warning of upcoming regulatory changes is the norm. ===
Businesses, and all Canadians, expect a transparent and predictable regulatory system. Service levels may vary across regulatory programs and departments, but for business, knowing the outcome of a regulatory authorization process within a specified time frame is key to informed decision making and ongoing management of their operations. '''Service standards''' can provide this predictability. Similarly, '''forward regulatory plans''' that identify expected regulatory changes can give businesses the heads-up to engage on regulations that impact them, and help them plan for implementation.
===Results and observations in 2014–15===
=== Red Tape Reduction Action Plan Reform: Service Standards for High-Volume Authorizations ===
Under the Action Plan, regulators are responsible for developing and publishing service standards that identify how long a business should expect to wait for a decision on a regulatory authorization (e.g., a licence, permit, certification process) that involves 100 or more transactions with businesses each year. Regulators must set targets for achieving the standard and report publicly on performance against those standards. Finally, regulators must highlight the application processes to be followed and identify how service feedback can be provided.
Service standards are a public commitment to measuring and reporting how long a client should expect to wait to receive a service under normal circumstances. Beginning with those authorizations that represent each regulator’s highest number of transactions per year, a phased approach to implementation of this Action Plan commitment is focusing service improvement in areas with the greatest number of touch points with business (see the TBS ''[[Guide on Improving Service Performance for Regulatory Authorizations]]'').
In 2012‒13, regulators were required to establish and publish (on their existing Acts and Regulations web pages) new service standards for all high-volume regulatory authorizations (HVAs) (e.g., licences, permits, certifications) with more than 2,000 transactions per year.
In 2013‒14, regulators were required to publish '''new''' service standards for authorization processes with 1,000 or more transactions per year or their next highest volume authorization. Furthermore, regulators were required to modify and/or publish any '''pre-existing''' service standards for HVAs by fall 2013, in accordance with the new TBS guidance requirements.
[[File:Fig4-eng.jpg|alt=Under the Action Plan theme of improving service and predictability, the following has been achieved to deliver measurable and predictable standards for Canadians: Over two years of implementation, 2012‒13 to March 31, 2014, 34 new service standards (32 directly impacting business) and over 100 pre-existing service standards were posted. Regulators began posting performance results as of June 1, 2014.|thumb|Reform Snapshot: Service Standards for High-Volume Authorizations]]
[[File:Fig5-eng.jpg|alt=Figure 2 shows the number of estimated annual transactions that directly impacted business and that were subject to new service standards in 2013‒14: Environment Canada: 2,167 Parks Canada: 100 Fisheries and Oceans: 400 Health Canada: 2,250 Natural Resources Canada: 1,210 Canadian Transportation Agency: 100 Public Works: 951|thumb|Figure 2: New Service Standards 2013‒14: Annual Transactions That Directly Impact Business]]
==== Key Results From 2013‒14 ====
|-
|15
|28
* Thirteen new service standards for HVAs that had direct business impacts were posted in 2013‒14. An additional two new service standards for HVAs that indirectly impact business were also posted this year. All are required to have performance targets, which will be reported on next year. A list of these standards can be found in Appendix D.
* For example, a business that wishes to conduct commercial activities in a national park (e.g., film crews, festivals, resorts) must obtain a licence from Parks Canada. The introduction of the service standard for issuing business licences in national parks ensures that applicants now know to expect to receive a licence, or a reason for its refusal, within 15 days of receipt of the application and supporting documents.
* The 13 new service standards represent '''over 7,000 annual transactions that directly impact business''' (see Figure 2). This builds on the nearly 60,000 transactions captured last year by new service standards.<ref>Appendix D details the complete list of new service standards.</ref> Two additional new service standards for authorizations that indirectly impact business were also provided this year. This represents an additional 309,250 annual transactions now covered by service standards.
* In addition to the requirement to create new service standards for HVAs, regulators were also required to adapt any '''pre-existing''' service standards for HVAs by fall 2013. In response, over '''100 pre-existing service standards were published on Acts and Regulations web pages in 2013‒14'''. This contributes to the transparency of the system, ensuring public awareness of the service standards that Canadians should expect.
* The majority of portfolios met TBS guidance requirements in 2013‒14. Some regulators will need to invest more effort in describing processes and information requirements using plain language, supported with documentation (e.g., links to application forms).
* There may be an opportunity to make current performance targets even more ambitious as service performance is tracked and as experience builds, demonstrating that regulators are continually working to meet and improve their service delivery in a consistent and timely manner.<blockquote style="background-color: lightgrey; border: solid thin grey;">
'''Looking Ahead to 2014‒15'''
* Regulators will continue to publish new service standards below 1,000 transactions per year in March 2015 and March 2016.
* Service standard performance will be assessed and reported on in the ''2014‒15 Scorecard Report''.</blockquote>
=== Red Tape Reduction Action Plan Reform: Forward Regulatory Plans ===
By introducing [https://www.canada.ca/en/treasury-board-secretariat/services/federal-regulatory-management/government-wide-forward-regulatory-plans.html forward regulatory plans], the government increased regulatory transparency and predictability for business and Canadians. Regulators post these plans each spring, with updates posted in the fall.
Forward regulatory plans provide early notice of potential regulatory changes within a 24-month period to stakeholders so they can inform regulatory design and prepare for implementation. Posted on departmental Acts and Regulations web pages, these plans also identify when public consultations are expected to occur and provide a departmental contact for more information.
[[File:Fig6-eng.jpg|alt=Under the Action Plan theme of improving service and predictability, the following has been achieved to create a more predictable and transparent regulatory environment: As of March 31, 2014, 40 forward regulatory plans have been posted on departmental Acts and Regulations web pages, containing over 400 anticipated regulatory initiatives for all major regulators. Forward regulatory plans are being updated twice a year.|thumb|Reform Snapshot: Forward Regulatory Plans]]
===Results and observations in 2014–15===
==== Key Results From 2013‒14 ====
*In 2014–15, 39 forward regulatory plans, with a total of 451 planned or potential initiatives for the 2015–17 time frame, were posted on departmental Acts and Regulations web pages.
* '''Forty forward regulatory plans, with a total of 455 individual planned or potential initiatives''', were published on regulators’ existing Acts and Regulations web pages.
*This was the second year that departments were required to post a mid-year update to their forward plan, and nearly three-quarters did so in accordance with the fall 2014 deadline; these are similar to results in 2013–14.
* The majority of initiatives identified (67.5 per cent) were not expected to have anticipated business impacts. The remaining '''32.5 per cent were flagged as having the potential to impact business and could trigger the one-for-one rule or the small business lens'''.
*118 initiatives (26 per cent) of the 451 initiatives posted in 2015–17 forward plans were identified as having potential business impacts; the vast majority of these initiatives were at early stages of development and identified planned consultations.
* Of those initiatives that may have potential business impacts, '''87 per cent clearly noted upcoming consultation opportunities with stakeholders'''.
*Nearly three-quarters of all initiatives listed in forward plans (72 per cent) were proposed amendments to existing regulations. Repealed regulations and new regulations each accounted for 13 per cent of the posted initiatives. Since 2012–13, amendments to existing regulations have consistently made up the majority of the initiatives listed in forward plans.
* Regulators met the annual forward planning requirement. In some cases, posting deadlines were not consistently met, and the use of plain language needs improvement. Regulators should also provide more robust information on planned or potential consultation opportunities for maximum utility to business.
* This was also the first year that regulators were required to post a mid-year update. Although the vast majority posted a '''mid-year update''', seven did not post an update by October 1, 2013, and two posted updates that contained some outdated information.
* Although the introduction of the forward regulatory planning infrastructure is a significant achievement, it is too early to gauge the grassroots positive impact that these plans are having for business. The Regulatory Advisory Committee’s consultations this year confirm that there is an opportunity for the government to raise industry’s awareness of the purpose and availability of forward plans. This would help ensure that their utility is maximized by both industry and government in the future.<blockquote style="background-color: lightgrey; border: solid thin grey;">
'''Forward Regulatory Plans Highlights'''
* Number of forward regulatory plans: 40
* Number of posted initiatives: 455
* Number of initiatives with expected business impacts: 148
* Percentage of those initiatives that have upcoming consultation opportunities: 87</blockquote>
==Interpretation Policies==
== Making It Easier to Do Business With Regulators ==
[[File:Fig05-eng.jpg|alt=Interpretation policies help make regulations and compliance requirements easier to understand by outlining the commitments, practices and tools to be applied when providing information and guidance on regulatory requirements. Businesses now have access to more than 30 interpretation policies that provide links to guidance, FAQs, online training and other tools. Stakeholder engagement is being used to identify areas that would benefit from improved interpretation tools and practices.|thumb|Interpretation Policies]]
[[File:Fig7-eng.jpg|alt=Under the Action Plan theme of making it easier to do business with regulators, the following has been achieved to ensure more transparency, clarity and accountability from regulators: Regulators will develop and publish interpretation policies on their departmental Acts and Regulations web pages. The Administrative Burden Baseline was published in fall 2014 and will be updated annually.|thumb|Making It Easier to Do Business With Regulators]]
Two remaining reforms have been launched since the end of the reporting period (March 31, 2014): posting of '''interpretation policies''' and the creation of a new '''Administrative Burden Baseline'''. Once fully implemented, these reforms will make it easier to do business with regulators and provide further assurance of the government’s commitment to monitor and report on regulatory red tape.
=== Red Tape Reduction Action Plan Reform: Interpretation Policies ===
The Action Plan requires regulators to publish interpretation<ref>In TBS guidance, "interpretation" is defined as written or verbal guidance or information given to facilitate stakeholder understanding and compliance with regulatory obligations.</ref> policies on their web pages. Interpretation policies clarify how regulators interpret their regulations, including when the regulator can and will provide answers to stakeholder questions or concerns in writing.
Regulators undertake a range of activities in order to help industry and Canadians better understand their obligations and what they must do to comply with regulatory requirements. Interpretation policies are clarifying these efforts and articulating regulators’ commitments in four areas: predictability, service, stakeholder engagement and accountability. This also includes the requirement for departments to post an FAQ section for their 10 most accessed regulations and for any new regulations that will impact business. This will allow Canadians to visit departmental websites and easily access basic information, in plain language, on those regulations. The policies are being posted on departmental Acts and Regulations web pages. By March 31, 2015, regulators will have engaged stakeholders to identify opportunities to improve interpretation and will set performance metrics to measure success.
=== Red Tape Reduction Action Plan Reform: Administrative Burden Baseline ===
The Action Plan commits the government to establishing a government-wide baseline count of regulatory requirements that impose administrative burden on business. The count will be updated and reported each year.<blockquote>"By publishing the number of administrative requirements in federal regulations and related forms every year, the [Administrative Burden Baseline] count contributes to the further openness and transparency of the federal regulatory system. Our Government will continue to look for ways to enhance this transparency and further tackle other red tape irritants."
- Tony Clement, President of the Treasury Board</blockquote>The recent publication of the Administrative Burden Baseline provides Canadians with a clear metric on the total number of requirements in federal regulations and associated forms that impose administrative burden on business. The government-wide count of 129,860 is published on the TBS website. Departments and agencies publish their respective counts, regulation by regulation, on their Acts and Regulations web pages. The ongoing maintenance of the Administrative Burden Baseline provides further assurance of the government’s commitment to monitoring and reporting on regulatory red tape. In addition, the Administrative Burden Baseline will also support regulators’ compliance with the one-for-one rule as it establishes department-specific inventories of administrative burden requirements in regulation.
=== Results and observations in 2014–15 ===
=== Results and observations in 2014–15 ===
== Administrative Burden Baseline ==
== Administrative Burden Baseline ==
The [https://www.canada.ca/en/government/system/laws/developing-improving-federal-regulations/requirements-developing-managing-reviewing-regulations/administrative-burden-baseline.html Administrative Burden Baseline] provides Canadians with a clear metric on the total number of requirements in federal regulations and associated forms that impose administrative burden on business. The baseline is to be updated annually, contributing to the openness and transparency of the federal regulatory system.
The [https://www.canada.ca/en/government/system/laws/developing-improving-federal-regulations/requirements-developing-managing-reviewing-regulations/administrative-burden-baseline.html Administrative Burden Baseline] provides Canadians with a clear metric on the total number of requirements in federal regulations and associated forms that impose administrative burden on business. The baseline is to be updated annually, contributing to the openness and transparency of the federal regulatory system.
