Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'll try to move through this relatively quickly.
I am pleased to be here today as part of your review of the Red Tape Reduction Act.
My colleague from the Treasury Board Secretariat has given us a great overview of the RTRA. What I hope to do this morning is provide a brief perspective from a regulatory department.
The health portfolio regulates tens of thousands of products that we all use in everyday life. These cut across a number of different industry sectors. They range from children's sleepwear and toys to the medicines that we might take. They also include pesticides, vaping and tobacco products, cannabis and controlled substances. There's quite a wide range of products.
The health portfolio is responsible for the administration of 18 acts and 137 regulations. Health Canada is among a small number of departments that represent a significant portion of the regulations administered by the Government of Canada. The key drivers for our regulatory activity are to protect the health and safety of Canadians and to facilitate access to products that are vital to well-being.
As my colleague has just outlined, the purpose of the RTRA is to reduce the administrative burden that regulations impose on businesses.
That is something we take seriously at Health Canada when considering the development and amendment of regulations. Since the Red Tape Reduction Act and the one-for-one rule were enacted, the health portfolio has made notable progress in meeting the purpose of the act: 13 regulatory titles have been eliminated and $4.2 million in administrative burden has been reduced.
It's important to note that this reduction has been accomplished in a period when the department has seen the emergence of two entirely new industries. The vaping or electronic cigarettes industry and the cannabis industry did not exist at the time of the RTRA's passage. Both have required legislative and regulatory frameworks to be established, adding new titles to our stock.
Health Canada has implemented regular monitoring and reporting regimes to measure compliance with the act and reports annually to Canadians through the Treasury Board Secretariat. The Red Tape Reduction Act and the one-for-one rule are an important part of our efforts to control administrative burden, but there are a number of other measures that contribute to this work as well.
The Government of Canada has a robust regulatory management and modernization agenda. My colleague from the Treasury Board Secretariat would be able to provide detail on this if you wish, as it is led by his department.
Health Canada is an active participant in the Government of Canada's regulatory co-operation efforts. We work with partners in the United States and the European Union to reduce unnecessary differences and eliminate duplicative requirements and barriers among jurisdictions. One example of this is the 2019 approval of two oncology drugs through joint reviews with the United States and Australia. Further, Health Canada has worked with the United States Center for Veterinary Medicine and has simultaneously approved 11 veterinary drugs.
Regulatory alignment with international partners not only reduces burden on industry, it also makes Canada a more attractive market for business development and expansion.
Health Canada participates in the sectoral regulatory reviews led by the TBS. A review of regulations in the health and biosciences sector was conducted in 2018 to identify and address regulatory barriers to economic growth and innovation. The results were published in the health and biosciences sectoral regulatory review road map. The road map sets out a variety of initiatives that aim to reduce burden and foster innovation that the department will pursue over the coming years.
One example of this, as noted in the 2018 fall economic statement, is Health Canada's proposal to reduce clinical trials record retention requirements from 25 years down to 15. This will not only reduce burden on industry, but it will align with international standards in other jurisdictions like the U.K., the U.S., the EU and Australia. Potential savings of up to $40,000 are estimated per clinical trial from this change.
Finished product testing is another good example, where the department is pursuing regulatory change intended to create an exemption to retesting requirements for some lower-level products imported from certain countries with comparable safety standards to Canada. This will reduce the burden on industry, much of which would be small and medium-sized enterprises. During our consultation on this, one of the industry associations estimated that the reduction of this duplicative testing requirement could result in approximately $32 million in savings to industry annually.
Instrument choice is another important mechanism to reduce burden. One of the trappings of regulators is that they regulate. Regulation by default is something that has to be guarded against. When it is determined that some level of intervention is required to respond to an identified need or risk, considering non-regulatory instruments is important. Solutions through policy, guidance and in some cases voluntary measures can be a way of achieving policy objectives with a view to minimizing the amount of regulatory burden imposed. Even in cases where it is determined that a regulation is required, regulatory design is important. Where possible, outcome or performance-based regulations should be considered, where regulations specify the desired result of the regulation, rather than just a prescriptive manner in which to comply with the regulation.
As you can see, with the RTRA as a backdrop, there are a number of measures being employed at Health Canada that also seek to reduce burden.
Just before I close my remarks, I would like to briefly reflect on one of the important challenges the department faces in its quest to reduce administrative burden. Health Canada is the department responsible for helping Canadians maintain and improve their health. In short, our regulations are rooted in health protection. When regulating in the interest of the health of Canadians, there's always a need to balance this policy objective with the burden imposed on the industries that we regulate. Where regulatory intervention is required, the health of Canadians will be the determining factor in the approach we take.
Mr. Chair, I think I'll leave it there in the interest of time. I'm happy to take any questions you may have.