Evidence of meeting #33 for Industry, Science and Technology in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was regulatory.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:40 p.m.
Bloc
Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
We are talking about carbon footprint criteria in particular. I feel that once you're in the system, it's quite easy and it works well. However, it's difficult to get into the system. It's also a rather opaque way of doing things.
What demands are made on businesses? Could the process be improved by making it more transparent?
12:40 p.m.
Senior Consultant, Public and Economic Affairs, Fédération des chambres de commerce du Québec
That's right. Once you are in the system, the experience is generally positive and things go well. In fact, entrepreneurs realize that, yes, there is some complexity, but also that they just didn't know that they could get in and register, which is the main issue.
There is a real lack of communication and openness when the federal government could be more present. For example, the government could communicate with the chambers of commerce to say that there is a contract available in such and such field, in such and such region, and to invite them to tell their members about it and to encourage them to apply.
12:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sherry Romanado
Our next round of questions goes to MP Masse.
MP Masse, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.
12:40 p.m.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I want to go back again to Ms. Tiessen.
We have such an integrated economy with the United States, but we don't have the proper competition bureau supports here. If you had two changes that we could make, what would they be? What would be the two things that we would focus on?
I want to get a larger review, because the Competition Bureau finally got some extra money, which is something we've been asking for at this committee for a long time. What are the kinds of things you would prioritize for a change that hopefully will happen? Even without legislative changes, they are going to have at least some more resources.
12:40 p.m.
National Representative, Research Department, Unifor
Resources are number one, and it's great that that has been accomplished. The second is to reverse that 2009 change and reinsert the word “purchase” so that something like wage-fixing can be investigated and is considered to be illegal.
Another one is to develop those guidelines to investigate the effect of mergers and acquisitions on workers. A third is to eliminate the efficiencies defence.
If we did those three things, that would be a great start.
12:40 p.m.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
Maybe I can get a question to the analysts with regard to the reversal of 2009. I was just wondering if that's a legal change made or a regulatory one. I'd like to get that response back, because that will be important. I know there was a change, but I think it might be a regulatory one, at the end of the day, that we could do.
Do you have cases that you can highlight with regard to wage-fixing? That would be interesting to hear.
12:40 p.m.
National Representative, Research Department, Unifor
That's something I can do a lot more research on, absolutely. The one that is front and centre for us at Unifor is looking at this pandemic pay cut where all three of the grocery giants cut pandemic pay on the same day and the Competition Bureau came back and said it couldn't investigate because of that change. We don't even know what happened, because it wasn't able to investigate at all.
Thank you.
12:40 p.m.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
Thank you.
That's so interesting, because that happened at this committee. We even had them in front of us publicly talking about how they talk to each other and walk this fine dance with lawyers.
12:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sherry Romanado
Thank you very much, Mr. Masse.
We will now go to MP Poilievre.
You have the floor for five minutes.
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
Thank you, Madam Chair.
My first question is for Mr. van Raalte.
What is the dollar cost of federal regulation today in Canada, just the number?
12:45 p.m.
Executive Director, Regulatory Policy and Cooperation Directorate, Regulatory Affairs Sector, Treasury Board Secretariat
I don't have an actual number, Madam Chair.
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
Right, but you said that your government is respecting the one-for-one rule, that is to say that, if there is a new dollar of regulation added, there has to be one subtracted. The only way to enforce that is to know what the total is to ensure that it never goes up, so surely someone over there must know how much we're paying as Canadians for federal regulations, and your bureau is responsible for that.
12:45 p.m.
Executive Director, Regulatory Policy and Cooperation Directorate, Regulatory Affairs Sector, Treasury Board Secretariat
Since the one-for-one rule has been in place, accumulative reductions in administrative burden sit around $382 million, Madam Chair.
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
12:45 p.m.
Executive Director, Regulatory Policy and Cooperation Directorate, Regulatory Affairs Sector, Treasury Board Secretariat
No benchmark was taken, Madam Chair.
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
You can't possibly know that it's been reduced by $300 plus million if you didn't know what it cost before or what it costs now.
12:45 p.m.
Executive Director, Regulatory Policy and Cooperation Directorate, Regulatory Affairs Sector, Treasury Board Secretariat
Madam Chair, the way the one-for-one rule works is that for every dollar that's been proposed to increase administrative burden, another dollar has to be taken out.
12:45 p.m.
Executive Director, Regulatory Policy and Cooperation Directorate, Regulatory Affairs Sector, Treasury Board Secretariat
Over the course of.... First, the one-for-one rule was a policy, and then it was legislated.
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
I understand all that, but it just strikes me as odd that if you guys are supposedly capping the cost of regulation, you have to know what the cap is set at, and we would appreciate getting that number from you.
How many regulations does the federal government have?
12:45 p.m.
Executive Director, Regulatory Policy and Cooperation Directorate, Regulatory Affairs Sector, Treasury Board Secretariat
Madam Chair, the approximate number of regulatory what we call “stock” is around 3,000.
12:45 p.m.
Executive Director, Regulatory Policy and Cooperation Directorate, Regulatory Affairs Sector, Treasury Board Secretariat
Three thousand sets of regulations, and then every year—
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
Sets of regulations. How many regulations are there in each set?