This is a very important question, and I think my colleague from Health Canada has started to explain that. The regulators, under the cabinet directive, are required to minimize the cost to business as they are developing the regulations. It's part of the regulatory cycle. It's part of what they are required to do.
When a regulatory package is considered by the Treasury Board, the proactive work up front has already been done. The challenge function has already been executed, both within that department and then by officials at the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat, in terms of asking those hard questions about whether you really need this. Can you reduce this? Can you do this in a different way, in a better way?
The submission that is approved by the Treasury Board is the lowest-cost option to the business. Sometimes that administrative burden is required, which is the one-for-one rule, and the offset allows for a recognition of something that was required maybe 10 years ago that is not required anymore. There's a better way of doing it, and that allows us to reduce that burden while recognizing that we may need, from an administrative perspective, a new part of burden. Within that, there are two questions about administrative burden. What is the minimum that is required in terms of administering this new regulation or this change in regulation?