Government Operations committee  That is an excellent question again. When you develop a standard, you have a technical committee, and it has to have a balanced matrix of interests, including regulators, so the first thing is that regulators are at the table. Regulators influence the process. Regulators vote. If regulators as a bloc say, “We don't like this standard, it doesn't meet our requirements and it's not going to help you comply with our legislation”, it's not going to go anywhere.

Government Operations committee  The distinction is in the way that the standards system works. It has the right checks and balances. It forces people to make decisions in thinking through the issues. When it comes to digital governance, our digital standards institute in Canada can develop a standard within a year.

Government Operations committee  I'll let our colleague from the Quebec Employers' Council answer your question. What I can tell you is that, if the provincial, territorial and federal regulations are not aligned, that causes problems for industry, which then has to develop and certify its standards two, three, four or five times across the country for a small market of 35 or 40 million people.

Government Operations committee  Thank you, Ms. Vignola. To your first question, regulatory authorities would have to find a new way to get companies to comply with legislation. If they wanted to use standardization to do that, then they would have an amazing new tool at their disposal that they are not currently using.

Government Operations committee  Well, I don't think I'm able to answer that question directly in terms of the regulatory costs. I think there is a need to understand a lot better how we frame compliance, both through standards and through regulations, and what the impacts are of creating new regulations. I don't see a lot of reports on outcomes.

Government Operations committee  Given what you just mentioned before, I'm assuming it has not. I think the track I'm proposing in the paper would help reduce the regulatory burden. If we take a hard look at compliance to laws through standards as opposed to regulations—and standards are co-designed by industry and academics and regulators—we could probably find a way to reduce the regulatory burden while keeping Canadians safe.

Government Operations committee  I am past my five minutes, but I'm so excited to be here.

Government Operations committee  To conclude, then, we think that establishing this separate track would make sense for Canada. It would improve safety. It would give you a tool that you need in order to keep pace with digital technologies. Thank you. I am done.

Government Operations committee  Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I'm delighted to have been invited this morning to present to you the key features of a paper that CIGI published in July of last year. The title of the paper—“Canada Needs Its 'New Approach' to Streamline Digital Rulemaking”—is squarely framed in the modernization of our regulatory framework in Canada.