We have archived this page and will not be updating it. You can use it for research or reference. Consult our Cabinet Directive on Regulations: Policies, guidance and tools web page for the policy instruments and guidance in effect.
Instructions
Overview
Because regulatory impact analysis can be resource-intensive, an early assessment of the expected impacts of regulatory proposals helps determine where approval processes can be streamlined and where analytical resources should be focused. The Triage Statement facilitates this early assessment and should be completed by departments and agencies at the earliest stages of regulatory design. A draft Triage Statement should be shared with the Regulatory Affairs Sector of the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat (TBS-RAS) in order to determine the requirements to be met at all stages of the regulatory process, based on the level of costs or adverse impacts and other considerations.
Triage Objectives
The objectives of the Triage Statement are to:
- Facilitate early involvement by TBS-RAS in the regulatory development process to avoid delays that may occur at later stages in the process when requirements have not been met;
- Assist regulatory organizations in focusing their efforts on regulatory proposals that have medium or high levels of cost or adverse impact;
- Determine the appropriate requirements for each regulatory proposal and the level of analysis required;
- Support the use of the appropriate Regulatory Impact Analysis Statement (RIAS) templates (low impact versus medium or high impact);
- Assist in determining which proposals should be considered for exemption from pre-publication in the Canada Gazette, Part I; and
- Support more consistent regulatory impact analysis across federal regulatory organizations.
Completing the Triage Statement
The Triage Statement should be completed and submitted to TBS-RAS at the earliest stages of regulatory design (this can be as soon as a regulatory organization has made a decision to amend or introduce a regulation). TBS-RAS analysts can then provide early assessment and input before the regulatory organization has initiated consultations or conducted a detailed analysis of the regulatory proposal.
The answers to the questions in the Triage Statement should be based on readily available information. The specific information and level of detail required in a RIAS is not required at the triage stage. The Triage Statement will help determine the proposal’s analytical requirements so that the regulatory organization can then initiate consultations, conduct the regulatory analysis, and draft the RIAS appropriately in developing the regulation.
TBS-RAS is available to help regulatory organizations complete the Triage Statement and will provide comments on draft Triage Statements.
Amending the Triage Statement
The Triage Statement is an initial assessment to determine the potential levels of impact of a regulatory proposal. Consequently, as new information becomes available and additional analysis and consultations are completed, the previously assessed impact levels may change, thereby requiring the Triage Statement to be amended. The Triage Statement can be amended as necessary throughout the course of the regulatory development process. Any changes to the Triage Statement by the sponsoring regulatory organization should be made in conjunction with a TBS-RAS analyst.
TBS-RAS Service Standard
A TBS-RAS analyst will send comments to the originating regulatory organization within 10 business days of receipt of a Triage Statement unless a different timeline is mutually agreed upon.
Security Classification
The originating regulatory organization will need to determine the security classification of the Triage Statement on a case-by-case basis. This determination should be made based on government-wide information laws and policies, including the Access to Information Act and the Privacy Act, the Policy on Government Security, the Policy on Access to Information, and the Policy on the Security of Cabinet Confidences.
Should security requirements permit, regulatory organizations are encouraged to share the Triage Statement with stakeholders as part of their consultation process.
Emergency Situations
When there is an immediate and serious risk to the health and safety of Canadians, their security, the economy or the environment, expedited processes are required to allow the government to respond in a timely manner. It may be determined, in consultation with TBS-RAS, that a Triage Statement is not required for certain regulatory proposals arising out of emergency situations.
Miscellaneous Amendments Regulations
Miscellaneous amendment regulations (MARs) are used to correct errors, omissions and inconsistencies in regulations in an expeditious way. The MARs process is faster and less costly than other regulatory approval processes. Regulatory organizations must ensure that they obtain the agreement of TBS-RAS before sending the drafting instructions to the relevant regulatory section of the Department of Justice Canada. To maximize efficiency, MARs should be submitted in an omnibus package.
Criteria
MARs can be used to implement corrections that have been triaged as having no impact. These corrections are restricted to the following:
- Errors in format, syntax, spelling and punctuation;
- Typographical errors, archaisms, anomalies and numbering errors;
- Inconsistencies between the English and French versions, as long as these inconsistencies are non-substantive;
- Obsolete regulations (i.e., regulations that are outdated but still legally enforceable); and
- Spent regulations (i.e., regulations that have no further application or effect).
MARs can also be used to implement regulatory amendments requested by the Standing Joint Committee for the Scrutiny of Regulations that have been triaged as having no impact or a low impact. In the event that a change requested by the Standing Joint Committee for the Scrutiny of Regulations is triaged as having a medium or high impact because, for example, it affects Canadians in a significant manner and some form of consultation may be needed, departments are to consult with TBS-RAS to assess whether the MARs process is appropriate.
Process
Ensure receipt of TBS-RAS’s concurrence before proceeding with MARs. Unless otherwise indicated (e.g., statutory requirements), the following requirements apply to MARs:
- Complete the Low-Impact Template;
- The minister or agency head does not have to sign the RIAS;
- No communication plan is required;
- No pre-publication is necessary; and
- MARs require the words “Miscellaneous Program” to appear at the end of the title.
Step-by-Step Summary of the Triage Statement Process
Step 1: The Triage Statement should be completed and submitted to TBS-RAS at the earliest stages of regulatory design (this can be as soon as a regulatory organization has made a decision to amend or introduce a regulation). Upon receiving the Triage Statement, TBS-RAS analysts will contact the originating regulatory organization with any comments within 10 business days.
Step 2: Once finalized and agreed upon, the Triage Statement should then be signed by the regulator (director) and sent to the TBS-RAS analyst for approval (signature). Regulatory authorities shall resubmit the Triage Statement to their TBS-RAS analyst if the level of impact changes from their initial assessment. The Triage Statement can be amended as necessary throughout the course of the regulatory development process.
Step 3: The analytical requirements are then determined for the regulatory proposal, including when it is a MAR, based on Section III of the Triage Statement.
References
For general public inquiries, please contact the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat:
Email: publicenquiries-demandesderenseignement@tbs-sct.gc.ca
Telephone: 613-957-2400
Toll-free: 1-877-636-0656
TTY: 613-957-9090
Fax: 613-943-5071
Mail: Regulatory Affairs Sector
Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat
155 Queen Street, Suite 1100
Ottawa, ON K1A 0R5
For federal regulatory organizations requiring assistance on applying the Triage Statement, please first contact your TBS-RAS analyst.
Triage Statement
I. Overview
Type of proposal:
- new
- amendment
- other
Title of the regulatory proposal:
Sponsoring regulatory organization(s):
Statutory authority:
Approximate target month/quarter of submission of regulatory proposal to PCO-OIC:
(RAS service standard: 10 business days)
Background
Provide any background information that is relevant to this proposal (e.g., historical information, information on a relevant program, prior policy approvals, links to websites, etc.).
Issue
Describe the issues or problems this proposal will address and demonstrate why government intervention is needed.
Objectives
State the objectives of this proposal.
Description
Summarize the proposed regulatory text under consideration in non-legal and readily accessible language.
Key Stakeholders
List all key interested stakeholders, including those that would be impacted by the proposal.
II. Triage Questions
Q1. Benefits of the proposal
Identify all potential benefits (or savings) as a result of the regulatory proposal within the following list. Provide a brief description of the benefits (or savings) identified, including any available supporting qualitative or quantitative information.
- Health and safety benefits: Will there be any benefits to public health; human, animal or plant health; product safety or consumer protection; occupational health and safety; and recreational safety?
- Environmental benefits: Will there be any environmental benefits? (Note: A preliminary review based on the Cabinet Directive on the Environmental Assessment of Policy, Plan and Program Proposals will assist in determining environmental benefits.)
- Benefits to society and culture: Will there be any benefits to people’s way of life, culture, community, political systems, well-being, personal and property rights, fears and aspirations, or ethical concerns?
- Public security benefits: Will there be any benefits to national safety and security, transportation and travel safety, criminal activity or policing, emergencies and disasters, family and home safety, financial security, and Internet security?
- Benefits to the economy, business and trade: Will there be any benefits to the economy (national and regional), trade (national and international), business, competition, jobs, labour mobility, etc.?
- Government savings: Will there be any benefits (savings) for the government?
- Administrative cost decreases to business: Will there be any reduction in administrative costs on business (regardless of business size)?
- Administrative or compliance cost decreases to small businesses: Will there be any reduction in administrative or compliance costs on small businesses?
- Will there be any other benefits not listed above? (Specify)
Justification:
A1.
Q2. Costs to the government, business (industry), consumers and Canadians
With readily available information or preliminary analysis, estimate the potential gross costs to the government, business (industry), consumers and Canadians as a result of the regulatory proposal in Canadian dollars. Calculate the total estimated costs and select the appropriate level (low, medium or high) based on the scale provided. Instructions:
- Estimate costs either in terms of present value (PV) based on a minimum 10-year forecast and a 7 per cent discount rate, or expressed annually, and state the base year used;
- Estimate only incremental costs, which are the costs related to the proposed regulatory option as compared with the baseline (usually of no government intervention). Costs that would occur under the baseline scenario are not incremental costs;
- Do not include the costs of developing the regulatory proposal in the costs to the government;
- Do not double-count costs, e.g., if fees or other charges are levied by the government to provide a service, estimate the total costs to the government of providing the service. Do not include the fee or other charge as part of costs to business or consumers/Canadians.
- Provide a justification to support your analysis.
| Potential gross costs as a result of the regulatory proposal: | Preliminary estimated cost ($ annual or PV): |
|---|---|
| (i) Costs to Canadians (including costs to consumers) | |
| (ii) Costs to the government (e.g., costs of implementing the proposal) | |
| (iii) Costs to business (including compliance and administrative costs) | |
| (iv) Other quantifiable costs (specify) | |
| Add all preliminary estimated costs, and select the appropriate cost level below: | Total: |
Cost Levels:
| |
Justification:
A2.
Q3. Other costs and distributional issues
Identify other costs or potentially adverse impacts and distributional issues arising from the proposal that are not quantified in Q2 within the following list. Provide a brief description of the costs or potentially adverse impacts and distributional issues identified, including any available supporting qualitative information.
- The economy (national and regional), trade (national and international), competition, jobs, and labour mobility
- Society and culture (including Canadians’ way of life, culture, community, political systems, well-being, personal and property rights, fears and aspirations, or ethical concerns)
- Any other unquantifiable costs or potentially adverse impacts (specify in justification)
- Health, safety, security or the environment of Canadians
- Vulnerable social and economic groups, such as Aboriginal peoples, official-language minorities, lower-income Canadians, recent immigrants, and groups affected on the basis of age, gender, race or culture
If the level selected in Q2 is “not quantifiable,” qualitatively assess the costs or potentially adverse impacts and distributional issues identified in Q2 and select the appropriate level. For example, the assessment can be based on the impact level of similar regulatory proposals in the past, impact levels of similar proposals in other countries, level of stakeholder concerns, etc. Provide a justification.
- No costs
- Low costs
- Medium costs
- High costs
Justification
A3.
Q4. Public interest, stakeholder support or potential controversy
Indicate the level of support and opposition for key stakeholders (e.g., business/trade associations, other levels of government, key trading partners, non-governmental organizations, etc.).
Note: It is possible for a proposal to have both support and opposition; please present both positions in the justification section. If applicable, include a link to the Consulting with Canadians website and/or departmental website:
- N/A
- Low support (For example, there has been little feedback or discussion related to the proposal)
- Low opposition (For example, there has been little feedback or discussion related to the proposal)
- Medium support (For example, stakeholders have expressed their position or have publicly discussed the issue in the media)
- Medium opposition (For example, stakeholders have expressed their position or have publicly discussed the issue in the media)
- High support (For example, there has been active lobbying for either position, a national news story and high public interest in the issue)
- High opposition (For example, there has been active lobbying for either position, a national news story and high public interest in the issue)
Justification: Describe the nature or source of the controversy and the stakeholders’ anticipated positions. Include details on consultations that have occurred or that will occur in the future, any outstanding issues that have not been resolved, points of contention, etc.:
A4.
Q5. Regulatory coordination and cooperation
Note: The sub-questions below are not mutually exclusive, i.e., it is possible that a proposal can both minimize regulatory differences with other jurisdictions and have specific Canadian requirements.
Q5.1 Is this regulatory proposal introduced to minimize or reduce regulatory differences and increase regulatory compatibility with another jurisdiction (such as other federal departments and agencies, provincial and territorial governments, governments of other countries, international and multilateral organizations, supranational institutions, etc.)? (If yes, assess the impacts of minimizing regulatory differences, including the impacts of not doing so and/or introducing specific Canadian requirements instead in the justification below. Provide relevant links or documentation, such as the regulation(s) in the other jurisdiction(s) that are the target of regulatory cooperation.)
- Yes
- No
Q5.2 Will this proposal introduce specific Canadian requirements that differ from existing regulations in other jurisdictions? (If yes, demonstrate that specific Canadian requirements are needed and that they are not a restriction to trade in the justification below.)
- Yes
- No
Q5.3 Is this proposal enabling regulatory alignment with the United States as committed to under the Joint Action Plan for the Canada-United States Regulatory Cooperation Council? (If yes, state what the commitment is and how it will be met in the justification below.)
- Yes
- No
Justification: Describe the regulatory coordination and cooperation aspects of the proposal and justify answers to Q5.1, Q5.2 and Q5.3 as required.
A5.
Q6. International agreements, obligations and standards
Indicate whether the regulatory proposal is being introduced to comply with, or has an impact related to an international agreement (trade, environmental, human rights, etc.), obligation, and/or voluntary standard, as well as the impacts of not pursuing the regulatory proposal.
- Check if Canada has formally announced that it will implement the international agreement, obligation or standard.
- Check if this proposal has trade impacts and requires a 75-day comment period and World Trade Organization notification.
If applicable, name and link the international agreement(s), obligation(s) and/or standard(s) that the proposal is intended to comply with:
- N/A
- Agreement
- Obligation
- Voluntary Standard
Justification: Report on any efforts to ensure that Canada’s international obligations are respected in such areas as human rights, health, safety, security, international trade and the environment:
A6.
Q7. Legal risks, policy or government priorities or miscellaneous amendment regulations (MARs)
Indicate whether the proposal is expected to have legal risks, policy or government priority considerations or is a miscellaneous amendment regulation (MAR).
- Check if this proposal is an amendment requested by the Standing Joint Committee for the Scrutiny of Regulations.
- N/A
- Legal Risk
- Policy / Government Priority
- MAR
Justification:
A7.
Q8. “One-for-One” Rule and small business lens
Answers to these questions will help determine whether the “One-for-One” Rule or the small business lens apply. For more information, consult Controlling Administrative Burden That Regulations Impose on Business: Guide for the “One-for-One” Rule and Hardwiring Sensitivity to Small Business Impacts of Regulation: Guide for the Small Business Lens.
Q8.1. Is the proposal expected to increase compliance or administrative costs on small businesses?
- Yes
- No
Q8.2. If the level selected in Q2 or Q3 is “low costs,” provide a rough estimate of the total compliance and administrative cost increase per small business:
Q8.3. Is the proposal expected to increase administrative burden on business?
- Yes
- No
Q8.4. Is the proposal a new regulation?
- Yes
- No
Q8.5. Is the proposal expected to decrease burden on business?
- Yes
- No
There are circumstances where the application of the “One-for-One” Rule may be inappropriate or unworkable. On these occasions, the rule provides flexibility for the Treasury Board (Part B) to “carve out” certain regulatory proposals on a case-by-case basis. The following categories or types of regulatory changes may be exempt from the application of the “One-for-One” Rule. If a carve-out is being sought, select the appropriate category and provide the necessary rationale to justify your choice. The decision to grant a carve-out will be made by the Treasury Board (Part B).
- Regulations that implement non-discretionary obligations. For example, regulations that implement certain international or other obligations (e.g., United Nations Security Council resolutions or regulations to be amended as a result of a Supreme Court decision).
- Regulations related to tax or tax administration.
- Regulations that address emergencies or crisis situations or are deemed by the Treasury Board (Part B) to address other, unique exceptional circumstances. Regulations that address emergency situations generally require immediate action to protect health, safety, security, the environment or the economy. There may also be unique, exceptional circumstances, as deemed by the Treasury Board (Part B), to grant a carve-out.
Justification:
A8.
III: Submission/Analytical Requirements
Criteria
- If no costs (Q2 or Q3)
- No Impact / N/A Complete the Low-Impact Template.
- If answer to Q2 or Q3 is “Low costs”, “Medium costs” or “High costs”: see table below
Analytical requirements
| Criteria | If answer to Q2 or Q3 is
“Low Costs” |
If answer to Q2 or Q3 is
“Medium Costs” |
If answer to Q2 or Q3 is
“High Costs” |
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| |
| Cost-Benefit Analysis |
|
|
|
| Note: Benefits and costs are to be estimated for each stakeholder through cost-benefit analysis, risk assessments and strategic environmental assessments. Data “readily available” means that it is possible to retrieve necessary data from literature reviews, departmental records, benefits transfer methods, consultation or expert advice. | |||
| Performance Measurement and Evaluation Plan | N/A | N/A |
|
| Regulatory Impact Analysis Statement (RIAS) | Complete the Low-Impact Template. | Complete the Medium- and High-Impact Template. | Complete the Medium- and High-Impact Template. |
| Small Business Lens | N/A, unless costs on small businesses are disproportionately high (to be determined on case-by-case basis, based on answer to Q8.2) | If the answer to Q8.1 is yes, consult the small business lens guide and complete the following:
| |
| “One-for-One” Rule |
| ||
Pre-publication and other requirements
The regulatory organization should provide a rationale in writing if the regulatory organization wishes to obtain an exemption on some of the requirements listed above:
Recommended comment period (e.g., 30 days, 60 days, etc.), following pre-publication:
- 30 days
- Other (provide length and rationale):
- Exemption from pre-publication (provide rationale):
- Proposal is a MAR (no pre-publication required)
Remarks
This section will be completed by TBS-RAS and should not be completed by department and agency officials.
Date concurred by TBS-RAS (DD/MM/YYYY):
- Remarks (yes/no)
RAS: Enter remarks, e.g., list any additional requirements for this proposal, such as policy cover, program funding or other information:
In the case of a MAR, TBS-RAS agrees to the use of the MARs process:
- Yes
- No
Sign-offs
Departmental sign-off (director):
Date:
Name and title (print):
Name and address of departmental contact person(s):
RAS sign-off (analyst):
Date:
The regulatory organization should send two signed copies of the final Triage Statement to TBS-RAS. TBS-RAS will then sign the two Triage Statements and return one copy to the regulatory organization.
Regulatory Affairs Sector
Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat
155 Queen Street, Suite 1100
Ottawa, ON K1A 0R5
Definitions
Please refer to Hardwiring Sensitivity to Small Business Impacts of Regulation: Guide for the Small Business Lens and Controlling Administrative Burden That Regulations Impose on Business: Guide for the “One-for-One” Rule for definitions of “small business,” “administrative costs” and “compliance costs.”