Changes

Guidelines for Effective Regulatory Consultations (view source)

Revision as of 12:55, 14 September 2021

202 bytes added , 12:55, 14 September 2021

no edit summary

Line 1: Line 1: +

[[fr:Agents_libres_du_Canada]]

+

+

+

<span class="plainlinks">[[Lignes directrices pour des consultations efficaces sur la réglementation|Français]]</span>

+

</div>

+

'''<big>We have archived this page and will not be updating it.</big>'''

Line 22: Line 28:

''[http://www.pco-bcp.gc.ca/index.asp?lang=eng&page=information&sub=publications&doc=legislation/cabdir-dircab-eng.htm Cabinet Directive on Law-Making]''</blockquote>

−

== Regulatory Consultations ==

+

==Regulatory Consultations==

The extent to which stakeholders are involved in a consultation process varies considerably, from simply providing them with information to engaging them in a true partnership with shared decision making. Regulatory consultations tend to fall somewhere in the middle of this continuum, since the final decision regarding regulation rests with a specific individual (i.e. the Minister) or body (i.e. the Governor in Council). These Guidelines focus primarily on the consultation process, which entails a two-way exchange in which stakeholders are given an opportunity to provide input and affect the outcome of a regulatory proposal. A good consultation process assists in developing quality regulations and mitigates implementation risks.

Line 43: Line 49:

Officials must ensure that regulatory consultations are consistent with all relevant statutes related to the proposed regulations. All regulatory consultations must be consistent with the ''Official Languages Act''.

−

== Components of Effective Regulatory Consultations ==

+

==Components of Effective Regulatory Consultations==

−

=== Ongoing, Constructive, and Professional Relationship with Stakeholders ===

+

===Ongoing, Constructive, and Professional Relationship with Stakeholders===

Broadly defined, stakeholders are individuals, groups, or organizations likely to be affected by proposed regulatory changes. In conducting regulatory consultations, officials should recognize and understand the multiplicity of stakeholders, with their different levels of interest, points of view, and expectations concerning the nature and content of a proposed regulatory regime.

An ongoing, constructive, professional relationship between government and stakeholders is key to achieving a quality outcome from consultations. Applying the following principles will help to achieve this type of relationship.

−

* '''Meaningfulness:''' Officials conducting the consultations should be open to stakeholders' views and opinions and should take these into account in preparing the proposed regulations. They should be impartial with respect to the views expressed and willing to allow them to influence the final version of the proposed regulations, if appropriate. If some aspects of the proposal are not subject to change, this should be clearly communicated, so that participants can focus their efforts and provide meaningful input. Clarity regarding the purpose and objectives of the consultation and the proposed regulations is an essential underpinning of a positive relationship.

+

*'''Meaningfulness:''' Officials conducting the consultations should be open to stakeholders' views and opinions and should take these into account in preparing the proposed regulations. They should be impartial with respect to the views expressed and willing to allow them to influence the final version of the proposed regulations, if appropriate. If some aspects of the proposal are not subject to change, this should be clearly communicated, so that participants can focus their efforts and provide meaningful input. Clarity regarding the purpose and objectives of the consultation and the proposed regulations is an essential underpinning of a positive relationship.

−

* '''Openness and balance:''' All stakeholders, whether directly or indirectly affected, should have an opportunity to contribute their views. Significant effort should be made to identify the "most affected stakeholders." Officials should ensure that an appropriate balance of views is represented in the consultation process.

+

*'''Openness and balance:''' All stakeholders, whether directly or indirectly affected, should have an opportunity to contribute their views. Significant effort should be made to identify the "most affected stakeholders." Officials should ensure that an appropriate balance of views is represented in the consultation process.

−

* '''Transparency:''' The relationship between the department and stakeholders should be transparent. A transparent approach is essential to building trust. Officials should ensure transparency of:

+

*'''Transparency:''' The relationship between the department and stakeholders should be transparent. A transparent approach is essential to building trust. Officials should ensure transparency of:

−

** the overall regulatory consultation process

+

**the overall regulatory consultation process

−

** pertinent non-sensitive information

+

**pertinent non-sensitive information

−

** the decision-making process

+

**the decision-making process

−

** how stakeholder input will be used

+

**how stakeholder input will be used

−

* '''Accountability:''' Departments should demonstrate accountability by documenting how the views of stakeholders were considered during the development of the regulations and informing stakeholders of how those views were used. Where stakeholder input could not be reflected in the proposed regulations, officials should be able to outline the reason(s) why. Accountability also involves ensuring that the consultations take place over a reasonable period of time, so that participants have sufficient time to submit their views.

+

*'''Accountability:''' Departments should demonstrate accountability by documenting how the views of stakeholders were considered during the development of the regulations and informing stakeholders of how those views were used. Where stakeholder input could not be reflected in the proposed regulations, officials should be able to outline the reason(s) why. Accountability also involves ensuring that the consultations take place over a reasonable period of time, so that participants have sufficient time to submit their views.

Introducing successful regulatory proposals requires the development and nurturing of ongoing relationships between the government and stakeholders. A climate of mutual trust and respect will often carry forward to future consultations. Developing a network of stakeholders allows officials to tap into a wider array of knowledge and information that can greatly assist in the effective and efficient development of regulations.

Line 63: Line 69:

|+Examples of Stakeholders

|

−

* Citizens and community groups

+

*Citizens and community groups

−

* Industry groups

+

*Industry groups

−

* Non-governmental organizations

+

*Non-governmental organizations

−

* Provinces, territories, municipalities

+

*Provinces, territories, municipalities

−

* Foreign governments

+

*Foreign governments

−

* Unions

+

*Unions

−

* Individual companies

+

*Individual companies

−

* International organizations

+

*International organizations

−

* Professional associations

+

*Professional associations

−

* Consumer groups

+

*Consumer groups

|}

−

=== Consultation Plan ===

+

===Consultation Plan===

Good regulatory proposals begin with good planning. A clear and comprehensive consultation plan is key to achieving the goals and objectives of the proposed regulations and facilitating a smooth consultative process. The development of the consultation plan requires an upfront investment of time, budget, and effort.

Line 84: Line 90:

The consultation plan should be commensurate with the expected impact and scope of the proposed regulations. A well-designed regulatory consultation allows stakeholders to provide input through a variety of mechanisms (e.g. public forums or advisory groups) that are both convenient and adapted to their abilities and resources. However, in some circumstances, a detailed consultation plan may not be necessary. For example, in many cases, departments use established ongoing committees or councils made up of all stakeholders affected by a particular regulated area (e.g. civil aviation). In such cases, "terms of reference," a charter, or other similar document should be developed to support the work of the consultation mechanism. As well, for routine or low-impact proposals (e.g. administrative amendments), a detailed plan may not be necessary.

−

==== Statement of purpose and objectives ====

+

====Statement of purpose and objectives====

The consultation plan should begin with a clear statement of the purpose and objectives of the consultations. A well-defined statement of purpose will help to keep the consultations focussed and on track and will clarify the scope and boundaries of the consultative effort.

Line 110: Line 116:

|

−

|Describe how the regulations will be developed (i.e. process to be followed)

+

| Describe how the regulations will be developed (i.e. process to be followed)

|-

|

−

|Outline the scope of the regulatory consultation process (i.e. what can and cannot be considered as part of the consultations)

+

| Outline the scope of the regulatory consultation process (i.e. what can and cannot be considered as part of the consultations)

|-

|

Line 125: Line 131:

|}

−

==== Public environment analysis ====

+

====Public environment analysis====

The consultation plan should include an analysis of both the internal and external environments.

Line 137: Line 143:

!Yes

!N/A

−

!A clear statement of purpose at the beginning of the consultation plan should:

+

! A clear statement of purpose at the beginning of the consultation plan should:

|-

|

Line 161: Line 167:

{| class="wikitable"

|+Checklist 3

−

!Yes

+

! Yes

!N/A

!A clear statement of purpose at the beginning of the consultation plan should:

Line 167: Line 173:

|

−

|Determine the level of public interest (e.g. public opinion research, degree of impact on citizens)

+

| Determine the level of public interest (e.g. public opinion research, degree of impact on citizens)

|-

|

Line 187: Line 193:

|

−

|Assess the social, economic, health, and/or environmental impacts of the proposal

+

| Assess the social, economic, health, and/or environmental impacts of the proposal

|-

|

Line 218: Line 224:

|}

−

==== Developing realistic timelines ====

+

====Developing realistic timelines====

The consultation plan should include realistic timelines that identify activities and set milestones for all aspects of the consultative process. It should also be flexible enough to allow for unforeseen circumstances.

Line 256: Line 262:

|

−

|Factor in the timing of other aspects of the regulatory process (e.g. drafting by the Department of Justice Canada, senior management approval, ministerial sign-off, Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat review, parliamentary schedule, pre-publication timelines, final approval)

+

| Factor in the timing of other aspects of the regulatory process (e.g. drafting by the Department of Justice Canada, senior management approval, ministerial sign-off, Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat review, parliamentary schedule, pre-publication timelines, final approval)

|-

|

Line 276: Line 282:

|

−

|Determine the time required for contracting outside help (i.e. bidding times, internal process, approval)

+

| Determine the time required for contracting outside help (i.e. bidding times, internal process, approval)

|-

|

Line 291: Line 297:

|}

−

==== Internal and interdepartmental coordination ====

+

====Internal and interdepartmental coordination====

Internal: In developing a consultation plan, officials should first communicate internally within their department so that interested colleagues are aware of the proposed consultative process and proposed regulations. This internal process may include discussions with other policy centres, corporate services (e.g. contracting, financial services, and translation), communication experts, consultation experts, and those involved in the implementation of regulations, such as inspectors and evaluators.

Line 327: Line 333:

|

−

|Conduct a file search for similar consultations

+

| Conduct a file search for similar consultations

|-

|

Line 372: Line 378:

{| class="wikitable"

|+Consultation Tools

−

|

+

|

−

* Interviews

+

*Interviews

−

* Toll-free hotlines

+

*Toll-free hotlines

−

* Questionnaires/surveys

+

*Questionnaires/surveys

−

* Open house / public meetings

+

*Open house / public meetings

−

* Conferences/workshops

+

*Conferences/workshops

−

* Bilateral meetings

+

*Bilateral meetings

−

* Focus groups

+

*Focus groups

−

* Advisory boards/committees

+

*Advisory boards/committees

* Comment forms

−

* Requests for written submissions

+

*Requests for written submissions

−

* Websites/forums

+

*Websites/forums

−

* Task forces

+

*Task forces

−

* Video conferencing

+

*Video conferencing

|}

{| class="wikitable"

Line 396: Line 402:

|-

|

−

* Open houses

+

*Open houses

−

* Direct mail

+

*Direct mail

−

* Exhibits

+

*Exhibits

* Conferences

−

* Newspaper inserts

+

*Newspaper inserts

−

* Reference centre

+

*Reference centre

|

−

* Telephone

+

*Telephone

−

* Hotlines

+

*Hotlines

−

* Focus groups

+

*Focus groups

* Surveys

* Website

|

−

* Public meetings

+

*Public meetings

−

* Public forums

+

*Public forums

−

* Advisory groups

+

*Advisory groups

−

* Workshops

+

*Workshops

−

* Dialogue sessions

+

*Dialogue sessions

|

−

* Planning workshops

+

*Planning workshops

* Negotiation and mediation

−

* Partnering

+

*Partnering

|}

{| class="wikitable"

Line 423: Line 429:

!Yes

!N/A

−

!In selecting consultation tools, officials should:

+

! In selecting consultation tools, officials should:

|-

|

Line 450: Line 456:

|}

−

==== Selecting participants ====

+

====Selecting participants====

The consultation plan should include criteria for selecting participants. Again, given the variety of regulatory proposals, there is no single approach to selecting stakeholders. Some consultations may be geared toward specific clients and stakeholders. In other situations, participants might be selected on the basis of technical or local knowledge, subject-matter expertise, or the level of impact on their activities. Depending on the size and scope of the proposal, consideration should be given to how the general public would be consulted.

Line 509: Line 515:

|}

−

==== Effective budgeting ====

+

====Effective budgeting====

Good planning requires good budgeting. It also requires an appropriate investment of personnel and time. The degree of financial, personnel, and time investment should be commensurate with the size and scope of the regulatory proposal.

Line 515: Line 521:

{| class="wikitable"

|+Checklist 8

−

!Yes

+

! Yes

!N/A

!In developing a budget for a regulatory consultation, officials should:

Line 557: Line 563:

|

−

|Determine the kind of facilities required (e.g. hotels, conference centres, government facilities)

+

| Determine the kind of facilities required (e.g. hotels, conference centres, government facilities)

|-

|

Line 565: Line 571:

|

−

|Determine whether arrangements might be required for participants with special needs

+

| Determine whether arrangements might be required for participants with special needs

|-

|

−

|Assess whether intervener funding is available

+

| Assess whether intervener funding is available

|}

−

==== Ongoing evaluation, end-of-process evaluation, and documentation ====

+

====Ongoing evaluation, end-of-process evaluation, and documentation====

Evaluations should be conducted both as the consultations are taking place, so that changes can be made if necessary, and at the end of the consultations, to assess the results. The consultation plan should detail how these evaluations will be conducted.

Line 583: Line 589:

Two factors should be considered when conducting both ongoing and final evaluations: (i) whether the process is working (has worked), and (ii) what results are being (have been) achieved. Both consultation officials and stakeholders should participate in the evaluation process.

−

===== Ongoing evaluation =====

+

=====Ongoing evaluation=====

Ongoing evaluation throughout the process enables officials to determine how well the consultation plan is being implemented (i.e. whether the process is effective), measure success (i.e. whether the information gathered is valid and reliable), and determine whether adjustments should be made to advance the consultation objectives. Ongoing evaluation also allows participants to suggest next steps and helps to identify the elements of a troubled process (e.g. lack of interest or power struggles).

Line 589: Line 595:

{| class="wikitable"

|+Checklist 9

−

!Yes

+

! Yes

!N/A

−

!In conducting an ongoing evaluation, officials should:

+

! In conducting an ongoing evaluation, officials should:

|-

|

Line 611: Line 617:

|

−

|Evaluate whether the timetable allows enough time for input

+

| Evaluate whether the timetable allows enough time for input

|-

|

Line 630: Line 636:

|}

−

===== Evaluation at end of process =====

+

=====Evaluation at end of process=====

An evaluation at the end of the process enables officials to gauge the success, impact, and results of the regulatory consultation, allowing them to identify what worked best and whether there were any unanticipated outcomes. The evaluation should determine (i) the quality of the information and advice collected; (ii) the extent to which the results have been integrated into the regulatory initiative; and (iii) the degree to which the consultation process itself was successful.

Line 650: Line 656:

|

−

|Did those consulted feel the process was worthwhile?

+

| Did those consulted feel the process was worthwhile?

|-

|

Line 697: Line 703:

|}

−

==== Feedback/follow-up ====

+

====Feedback/follow-up====

The consultation plan should include options for providing feedback. Feedback is an important part of accountability. A department should demonstrate accountability by taking into consideration the views of stakeholders in developing the regulations and by informing stakeholders of how those views were used. Where the input of stakeholders could not be reflected in the proposed regulations, officials should clearly explain why.

Line 706: Line 712:

Officials should follow up with stakeholders with timely thank-you letters and the final consultation report, as a sign of respect and accountability. Stakeholders should also be informed of the next steps.

−

=== Conducting the Consultations ===

+

===Conducting the Consultations===

In conducting regulatory consultations, officials should keep in mind the key principles for maintaining an ongoing positive relationship with stakeholders: meaningfulness, openness and balance, transparency, and accountability. In keeping with these principles, officials should conduct consultations with the following in mind:

−

* communicating neutral, relevant, and timely information related to the regulatory proposals; and

+

*communicating neutral, relevant, and timely information related to the regulatory proposals; and

−

* ensuring that officials have the necessary skills to conduct regulatory consultations.

+

*ensuring that officials have the necessary skills to conduct regulatory consultations.

−

==== Communicating neutral, relevant, and timely information ====

+

==== Communicating neutral, relevant, and timely information====

Ongoing communication and information exchange are critical to successful regulatory consultations.

Line 762: Line 768:

|}

−

==== Ensuring that officials have the necessary skills ====

+

====Ensuring that officials have the necessary skills====

A successful regulatory consultation process needs to be effectively managed, facilitated, mediated, and communicated. Officials conducting the consultations should have the skills required to support effective consultations and maintain ongoing, constructive, and professional relationships with stakeholders.

Line 771: Line 777:

|+Consultation Skills/Knowledge

|

−

* Consensus building

+

*Consensus building

−

* Facilitation

+

*Facilitation

−

* Meeting management

+

*Meeting management

−

* Negotiation

+

*Negotiation

−

* Conflict resolution

+

*Conflict resolution

−

* Problem solving

+

*Problem solving

−

* Risk management

+

*Risk management

−

* Information management

+

*Information management

−

* Communication

+

*Communication

|}

The officials need to understand the objectives of the regulatory proposal, the issues that might be raised, and the parameters of the decision-making process.

Line 825: Line 831:

|}

−

== Full Checklist ==

+

==Full Checklist==

<big>'''Defining the purpose and objectives of the regulatory consultation'''</big>

{| class="wikitable"

Line 847: Line 853:

|

−

|Describe how the regulations will be developed (i.e. process to be followed)

+

| Describe how the regulations will be developed (i.e. process to be followed)

|-

|

Line 866: Line 872:

!Yes

!N/A

−

!In conducting an internal scan, officials should:

+

! In conducting an internal scan, officials should:

|-

|

Line 892: Line 898:

!Yes

!N/A

−

!In conducting an external scan, officials should:

+

! In conducting an external scan, officials should:

|-

|

−

|Determine the level of public interest (e.g. public opinion research, degree of impact on citizens)

+

| Determine the level of public interest (e.g. public opinion research, degree of impact on citizens)

|-

|

Line 916: Line 922:

|

−

|Assess the social, economic, health, and/or environmental impacts of the proposal

+

| Assess the social, economic, health, and/or environmental impacts of the proposal

|-

|

Line 971: Line 977:

|

−

|Factor in the timing of other aspects of the regulatory process (e.g. drafting by the Department of Justice Canada, senior management approval, ministerial sign-off, Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat review, parliamentary schedule, pre-publication timelines, final approval)

+

| Factor in the timing of other aspects of the regulatory process (e.g. drafting by the Department of Justice Canada, senior management approval, ministerial sign-off, Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat review, parliamentary schedule, pre-publication timelines, final approval)

|-

|

Line 991: Line 997:

|

−

|Determine the time required for contracting outside help (i.e. bidding times, internal process, approval)

+

| Determine the time required for contracting outside help (i.e. bidding times, internal process, approval)

|-

|

Line 1,026: Line 1,032:

|

−

|Conduct a file search for similar consultations

+

| Conduct a file search for similar consultations

|-

|

Line 1,065: Line 1,071:

!Yes

!N/A

−

!In selecting consultation tools, officials should:

+

! In selecting consultation tools, officials should:

|-

|

Line 1,145: Line 1,151:

{| class="wikitable"

|+Checklist 8

−

!Yes

+

! Yes

!N/A

!In developing a budget for a regulatory consultation, officials should:

Line 1,187: Line 1,193:

|

−

|Determine the kind of facilities required (e.g. hotels, conference centres, government facilities)

+

| Determine the kind of facilities required (e.g. hotels, conference centres, government facilities)

|-

|

Line 1,204: Line 1,210:

{| class="wikitable"

|+Checklist 9

−

!Yes

+

! Yes

!N/A

−

!In conducting an ongoing evaluation, officials should:

+

! In conducting an ongoing evaluation, officials should:

|-

|

Line 1,226: Line 1,232:

|

−

|Evaluate whether the timetable allows enough time for input

+

| Evaluate whether the timetable allows enough time for input

|-

|

Line 1,260: Line 1,266:

|

−

|Did those consulted feel the process was worthwhile?

+

| Did those consulted feel the process was worthwhile?

|-

|

Line 1,335: Line 1,341:

|

−

|Include contact names and related contact information

+

| Include contact names and related contact information

|-

|

Nancy.luo

430

edits