Yes, regulatory accumulation is quite well documented, but efforts have been made to reduce it. I mentioned a few in my opening remarks.
To echo what Mr. Trudel was saying, you must also understand that small businesses are far more vulnerable to this increasing regulatory burden because they don't have a department dedicated to these issues and can't hire lawyers to deal with them.
In addition, as I mentioned earlier, small businesses have less access to regulatory bodies. When you start considering a rule, you look at the usual suspects, which are the big businesses, and the small businesses, citizens and non-governmental organizations won't intervene in the regulatory process until later, at a stage where consultations have somewhat less impact because the original rule has already been quite well established.
It's a well-documented fact that rules are more complex now, but that was foreseeable because the areas of activity of government and even society are becoming increasingly complex. I don't think we'll be reducing the regulatory framework for artificial intelligence or new technologies any time soon because those new technologies are disruptive and the regulatory framework has to adapt.
Consequently, although that's the way society goes, we mustn't fall victim to over‑regulation, as has already happened in the United States. That's why, every 10 or 15 years, a committee like this one attempts to determine whether we've gone too far and whether we can establish new procedures to calm things down somewhat and come up with necessary rules that are also well designed.