Difference between revisions of "EACRC 2019-2021: Meeting Summaries"
| Line 56: | Line 56: | ||
Members noted that as the sectors and themes are broad, they will each need to be scoped appropriately in order to address stakeholder issues and identify tangible solutions. | Members noted that as the sectors and themes are broad, they will each need to be scoped appropriately in order to address stakeholder issues and identify tangible solutions. | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Follow-Up Meeting Summary for May 22, 2019 == | ||
| + | |||
| + | === '''Meeting objectives''' === | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Committee agrees to a proposed list of recommendations on sectors or themes for the second round of Regulatory Reviews | ||
| + | * Committee provides feedback on a draft of the letter to the President of the Treasury Board | ||
| + | * Committee provides feedback on the agenda for the next in-person meeting | ||
| + | |||
| + | '''Participants:''' Laura Jones (Chair), Catherine Beaudry, Stewart Elgie, Ginny Flood, Anne Fowlie, Don Mercer, Keith Mussar | ||
| + | |||
| + | '''Regrets:''' Nancy Olewiler | ||
| + | |||
| + | '''Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat:''' Jeannine Ritchot, Kyle Burns, Lindsay Wild, Claire Penny, Ian Allan, Allison Krogh, Hélène Lowell, Christopher Lee | ||
| + | |||
| + | === '''Introduction and roundtable''' === | ||
| + | Members were pleased with the diversity of perspectives expressed at their first meeting on May 10, 2019, and confirmed their commitment to considering the interests and expectations of all members in their deliberations. | ||
| + | |||
| + | === '''Draft letter to the President''' === | ||
| + | Members came to consensus on recommending three sectors and themes for the next round of Regulatory Reviews, which are digitalization and technology-neutral regulations, clean technology, and international standards. In coming to consensus on the sectors and themes, members noted: | ||
| + | |||
| + | * digitalization could provide opportunities to modernize and simplify regulatory interactions to the benefit of all Canadians | ||
| + | * clean technology should include clean innovation, competitiveness and demand for new regulatory technologies | ||
| + | * an international standards review is an opportunity for Canada to advance its strategic leadership in the development of such standards | ||
| + | * the following themes would be included in the letter: culture change, regulatory excellence, transparency and trust, inclusiveness, a systems approach, and overlapping regulations | ||
| + | |||
| + | === '''Next steps''' === | ||
| + | |||
| + | * The Chair will update the letter and seek members’ final review and approval. | ||
| + | * The next scheduled meeting will be June 25 and 26, 2019, and will focus on competitiveness. | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Meeting Summary for June 25 and 26, 2019 == | ||
| + | |||
| + | === '''Meeting objectives''' === | ||
| + | |||
| + | * to identify key recommendations for advancing competitiveness in Canada’s regulatory framework | ||
| + | * to provide advice on methods to examine how competitiveness analysis could be defined, integrated, and measured in the regulatory development process | ||
| + | * to provide targeted advice to Health Canada on competitiveness issues identified in the Agri-food and Aquaculture Regulatory Review, including any observations on effective consultation and engagement mechanisms | ||
| + | |||
| + | '''Participants''' | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Laura Jones (Chair) | ||
| + | * Catherine Beaudry (June 25 only) | ||
| + | * Stewart Elgie | ||
| + | * Ginny Flood | ||
| + | * Anne Fowlie | ||
| + | * Don Mercer | ||
| + | * Keith Mussar | ||
| + | * Nancy Olewiler | ||
| + | |||
| + | '''Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat''' | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Tina Green | ||
| + | * Kyle Burns | ||
| + | * Lindsay Wild | ||
| + | * Brennen Young | ||
| + | * Rob Turk | ||
| + | * Claire Penny | ||
| + | * Hélène Lowell | ||
| + | * Allison Krogh | ||
| + | |||
| + | === '''Chair’s opening remarks''' === | ||
| + | The Chair welcomed Committee members and reviewed the agenda for the meeting. | ||
| + | |||
| + | === '''Briefing on competitiveness in the regulatory framework''' === | ||
| + | '''Tina Green''', Assistant Secretary, Regulatory Affairs Sector, Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat, described the government’s efforts to integrate economic considerations and competitiveness into its regulatory framework while ensuring that regulations continue to protect the health, safety, security, and social and economic well‑being of Canadians. Members were briefed on the government’s efforts to improve competitiveness and measure the impact of regulations on competitiveness, including cumulative burden. Members discussed possible competitiveness gaps, which prevent the government from better assessing, considering, and achieving regulatory competitiveness. | ||
| + | |||
| + | === '''Perspectives on regulatory competitiveness''' === | ||
| + | Members heard a variety of perspectives on regulatory competitiveness. | ||
| + | |||
| + | * '''Mike Beale''', retired Assistant Deputy Minister, Environmental Protection Branch, Environment and Climate Change Canada, conveyed his broad experience with the Canadian regulatory system and in working constructively with stakeholders while advancing public policy objectives. | ||
| + | * '''Christine Little''', Assistant Deputy Minister, Ministry of Jobs, Trade and Technology, Government of British Columbia, discussed the B.C. government’s efforts to reduce red tape, which have led to a 50% reduction in the number of B.C. regulatory requirements since 1998. | ||
| + | * '''Dr. Patrick McLaughlin''', Director of Policy Analytics and a Senior Research Fellow at the Mercatus Center, George Mason University, shared his views on regulatory measurement in the context of improving competitiveness. | ||
| + | * '''Kathleen Sullivan''', Chief Executive Officer, Food and Beverage Canada, shared a private sector perspective on how industry and government can work together to advance both food safety protections and competitiveness. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Following the panel discussion, members discussed key take‑aways, including: | ||
| + | |||
| + | * identifying opportunities to engage relevant parties early and often to facilitate dialogue throughout the development of regulations | ||
| + | * investigating and considering experimentation with new available technologies to improve consultation | ||
| + | * investigating the use of innovative approaches that allow for more intensive, interactive, multi‑party consultation for complex issues | ||
| + | * examining best practices from other countries, as well as from provinces such as British Columbia, to develop broad-based metrics for a regulatory measurement program | ||
| + | * exploring the use of machine-based text analysis and its potential for regulatory measurement | ||
| + | * undertaking a mapping exercise to measure cumulative burden in one or more illustrative sectors in order to understand the aggregate net impact of federal, provincial, and international regulations and regulatory practices (for example, policy and guidance requirements) on that sector, including understanding the differences in burden on large, medium, and small businesses, as well as on consumers, where possible | ||
| + | * developing a methodology for the ex-post analysis of regulations that are expected to impose $10 million or more in annual costs on business in order to assess both their effectiveness and their impact on competitiveness | ||
| + | |||
| + | === '''Case study: Regulatory competitiveness and the ''Pest Control Products Act''''' === | ||
| + | '''Tyler Bjornson''', President of the Canada Grains Council (CGC), and '''Jason Flint''', Director General, Policy, Communications and Regulatory Affairs Directorate, Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA), Health Canada, provided members with a stakeholder’s and a regulator’s perspective on regulatory competitiveness, respectively. Members discussed the key challenges for PMRA posed by its pesticides’ re-evaluation process. | ||
| + | |||
| + | === '''How competitiveness analysis can be defined, integrated, and measured''' === | ||
| + | '''Cary Coglianese''', Edward B. Shils Professor of Law, and professor of political science at the University of Pennsylvania, and '''Craig Alexander''', Partner and Chief Economist at Deloitte Canada, discussed challenges of measuring regulatory competitiveness. Key points raised included: | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Limited data is available to measure competitiveness and cumulative burden | ||
| + | * Limited data leads to perceptions that Canada is not doing well on regulatory competitiveness | ||
| + | * Both benefits and costs should be taken into account when assessing regulations | ||
| + | * Need to work with organizations such as Statistics Canada and the Organisation for Economic Co‑operation and Development to determine what data sets could be generated to enhance the understanding of regulatory competitiveness in Canada | ||
| + | * Managing risk can be done in different ways. For example, sandboxes can be used to generate data on the effectiveness of new technologies within a safe environment. Both businesses and governments could benefit from this data | ||
| + | |||
| + | === '''Next steps''' === | ||
| + | In preparation for a follow-up meeting on July 22, 2019, members reflected on their interactions with guest speakers and discussed possible advice and observations. The following broad themes emerged: | ||
| + | |||
| + | * the importance of measuring cumulative burden when assessing regulatory competitiveness | ||
| + | * best practices for consultation, engagement and communication | ||
| + | * competitiveness issues in pesticides regulations that may be relevant in other regulated areas | ||
Revision as of 12:14, 27 September 2022
For a brief record of what was discussed at the EACRC meetings from 2019 to 2021, review the meeting summaries below.
Meeting Summary for May 10, 2019
Meeting objectives
- To discuss how the Committee will implement its mandate to improve regulatory competitiveness in Canada and support the modernization of Canada’s regulatory system
- To consider the second round of Regulatory Reviews
Participants: Laura Jones (Chair), Catherine Beaudry, Stewart Elgie, Ginny Flood, Anne Fowlie, Don Mercer, Keith Mussar
Regrets: Nancy Olewiler
Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat: Erin O’Gorman, Tina Green, Jeannine Ritchot, Kyle Burns, Lindsay Wild, Claire Penny, Ian Allan, Allison Krogh
Introductory remarks
The Chair welcomed Committee members to their first meeting and highlighted the important role of this new body.
Visioning session
Members participated in a visioning session to identify themes that will guide the work of the Committee, including:
- further improving the culture between government and stakeholders
- building trust by having all relevant perspectives in the room, focusing on evidence, and drawing from the best regulatory practices both domestically and internationally
- simplifying processes while pursuing regulatory excellence
- recognizing the interconnections between regulatory issues and promoting collaborative solutions
- examining the issue of the cumulative impact of regulations across jurisdictions
Proposed sectors and themes for the second round of Regulatory Reviews
The Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat presented an overview of the targeted Regulatory Reviews, including:
- objectives, outcomes and lessons learned from the first round of reviews
- criteria used for identifying potential sectors and themes
- summaries of the potential sectors and themes for the next round of reviews based on stakeholder feedback, recommendations from the Economic Strategy Tables, and departmental input
Working lunch
John Knubley, Deputy Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada (ISED), and Lorraine Mitchelmore, former CEO of Enlighten Innovations, and Chair of the Resource of the Future Economic Strategy Table, situated the Committee’s work within broader Government of Canada initiatives to advance economic growth and innovation. The Committee was encouraged to focus on:
- regulations as an enabler of innovation and economic growth
- improving efficiency and effectiveness with better risk management
- aligning with global best practices
- embedding a collaborative approach between industry, academics and regulators
- making regulatory excellence a competitive advantage for Canada
Overview and lessons learned from the first round of sectoral reviews
The Deputy Ministers of Health Canada and Transport Canada, as well as the President of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, shared their perspectives on the first round of Regulatory Reviews with the Committee. Key points raised included:
- Regulatory Reviews require clear scoping, considerable effort and coordination to ensure positive outcomes
- focused efforts can identify greater use of risk-based approaches, identify tools to drive innovation, and design agile regulatory frameworks that can keep pace with changing technology and the economy
Second round of Regulatory Reviews
Members identified three areas that they would recommend for the next round of Regulatory Reviews:
- digitalization and technology-neutral regulations
- clean technology
- international standards
Members noted that as the sectors and themes are broad, they will each need to be scoped appropriately in order to address stakeholder issues and identify tangible solutions.
Follow-Up Meeting Summary for May 22, 2019
Meeting objectives
- Committee agrees to a proposed list of recommendations on sectors or themes for the second round of Regulatory Reviews
- Committee provides feedback on a draft of the letter to the President of the Treasury Board
- Committee provides feedback on the agenda for the next in-person meeting
Participants: Laura Jones (Chair), Catherine Beaudry, Stewart Elgie, Ginny Flood, Anne Fowlie, Don Mercer, Keith Mussar
Regrets: Nancy Olewiler
Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat: Jeannine Ritchot, Kyle Burns, Lindsay Wild, Claire Penny, Ian Allan, Allison Krogh, Hélène Lowell, Christopher Lee
Introduction and roundtable
Members were pleased with the diversity of perspectives expressed at their first meeting on May 10, 2019, and confirmed their commitment to considering the interests and expectations of all members in their deliberations.
Draft letter to the President
Members came to consensus on recommending three sectors and themes for the next round of Regulatory Reviews, which are digitalization and technology-neutral regulations, clean technology, and international standards. In coming to consensus on the sectors and themes, members noted:
- digitalization could provide opportunities to modernize and simplify regulatory interactions to the benefit of all Canadians
- clean technology should include clean innovation, competitiveness and demand for new regulatory technologies
- an international standards review is an opportunity for Canada to advance its strategic leadership in the development of such standards
- the following themes would be included in the letter: culture change, regulatory excellence, transparency and trust, inclusiveness, a systems approach, and overlapping regulations
Next steps
- The Chair will update the letter and seek members’ final review and approval.
- The next scheduled meeting will be June 25 and 26, 2019, and will focus on competitiveness.
Meeting Summary for June 25 and 26, 2019
Meeting objectives
- to identify key recommendations for advancing competitiveness in Canada’s regulatory framework
- to provide advice on methods to examine how competitiveness analysis could be defined, integrated, and measured in the regulatory development process
- to provide targeted advice to Health Canada on competitiveness issues identified in the Agri-food and Aquaculture Regulatory Review, including any observations on effective consultation and engagement mechanisms
Participants
- Laura Jones (Chair)
- Catherine Beaudry (June 25 only)
- Stewart Elgie
- Ginny Flood
- Anne Fowlie
- Don Mercer
- Keith Mussar
- Nancy Olewiler
Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat
- Tina Green
- Kyle Burns
- Lindsay Wild
- Brennen Young
- Rob Turk
- Claire Penny
- Hélène Lowell
- Allison Krogh
Chair’s opening remarks
The Chair welcomed Committee members and reviewed the agenda for the meeting.
Briefing on competitiveness in the regulatory framework
Tina Green, Assistant Secretary, Regulatory Affairs Sector, Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat, described the government’s efforts to integrate economic considerations and competitiveness into its regulatory framework while ensuring that regulations continue to protect the health, safety, security, and social and economic well‑being of Canadians. Members were briefed on the government’s efforts to improve competitiveness and measure the impact of regulations on competitiveness, including cumulative burden. Members discussed possible competitiveness gaps, which prevent the government from better assessing, considering, and achieving regulatory competitiveness.
Perspectives on regulatory competitiveness
Members heard a variety of perspectives on regulatory competitiveness.
- Mike Beale, retired Assistant Deputy Minister, Environmental Protection Branch, Environment and Climate Change Canada, conveyed his broad experience with the Canadian regulatory system and in working constructively with stakeholders while advancing public policy objectives.
- Christine Little, Assistant Deputy Minister, Ministry of Jobs, Trade and Technology, Government of British Columbia, discussed the B.C. government’s efforts to reduce red tape, which have led to a 50% reduction in the number of B.C. regulatory requirements since 1998.
- Dr. Patrick McLaughlin, Director of Policy Analytics and a Senior Research Fellow at the Mercatus Center, George Mason University, shared his views on regulatory measurement in the context of improving competitiveness.
- Kathleen Sullivan, Chief Executive Officer, Food and Beverage Canada, shared a private sector perspective on how industry and government can work together to advance both food safety protections and competitiveness.
Following the panel discussion, members discussed key take‑aways, including:
- identifying opportunities to engage relevant parties early and often to facilitate dialogue throughout the development of regulations
- investigating and considering experimentation with new available technologies to improve consultation
- investigating the use of innovative approaches that allow for more intensive, interactive, multi‑party consultation for complex issues
- examining best practices from other countries, as well as from provinces such as British Columbia, to develop broad-based metrics for a regulatory measurement program
- exploring the use of machine-based text analysis and its potential for regulatory measurement
- undertaking a mapping exercise to measure cumulative burden in one or more illustrative sectors in order to understand the aggregate net impact of federal, provincial, and international regulations and regulatory practices (for example, policy and guidance requirements) on that sector, including understanding the differences in burden on large, medium, and small businesses, as well as on consumers, where possible
- developing a methodology for the ex-post analysis of regulations that are expected to impose $10 million or more in annual costs on business in order to assess both their effectiveness and their impact on competitiveness
Case study: Regulatory competitiveness and the Pest Control Products Act
Tyler Bjornson, President of the Canada Grains Council (CGC), and Jason Flint, Director General, Policy, Communications and Regulatory Affairs Directorate, Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA), Health Canada, provided members with a stakeholder’s and a regulator’s perspective on regulatory competitiveness, respectively. Members discussed the key challenges for PMRA posed by its pesticides’ re-evaluation process.
How competitiveness analysis can be defined, integrated, and measured
Cary Coglianese, Edward B. Shils Professor of Law, and professor of political science at the University of Pennsylvania, and Craig Alexander, Partner and Chief Economist at Deloitte Canada, discussed challenges of measuring regulatory competitiveness. Key points raised included:
- Limited data is available to measure competitiveness and cumulative burden
- Limited data leads to perceptions that Canada is not doing well on regulatory competitiveness
- Both benefits and costs should be taken into account when assessing regulations
- Need to work with organizations such as Statistics Canada and the Organisation for Economic Co‑operation and Development to determine what data sets could be generated to enhance the understanding of regulatory competitiveness in Canada
- Managing risk can be done in different ways. For example, sandboxes can be used to generate data on the effectiveness of new technologies within a safe environment. Both businesses and governments could benefit from this data
Next steps
In preparation for a follow-up meeting on July 22, 2019, members reflected on their interactions with guest speakers and discussed possible advice and observations. The following broad themes emerged:
- the importance of measuring cumulative burden when assessing regulatory competitiveness
- best practices for consultation, engagement and communication
- competitiveness issues in pesticides regulations that may be relevant in other regulated areas
