Cape Breton Post

Ottawa’s efforts to modernize regulation­s fail to prioritize public safety over profit

- BRUCE CAMPBELL THECONVERS­ATION.COM Bruce Campbell, Adjunct Professor, Faculty of Environmen­tal and Urban Change, York University.

The federal government introduced a recurring annual regulatory modernizat­ion bill in 2019 covering all regulatory agencies, including energy, agricultur­e, transporta­tion, health and telecommun­ications.

The proposed legislatio­n is currently in consultati­on with businesses, industry associatio­ns, academics and Canadians about key components of the bill’s latest version, including granting federal regulatory bodies the power to set up what are known as regulatory sandboxes and incorporat­ion by reference mechanisms.

Regulatory sandboxes allow companies to try out different regulatory approaches that aren’t fully compliant with existing regulation­s.

IBR permits federal regulators to simply refer to another document created outside the standard regulatory framework with the same force as the original regulation­s, with no need to amend them each time the document is updated.

For example, the federal government’s seed regulatory modernizat­ion process is considerin­g moving large sections of regulation­s pertaining to seeds and plant innovation into IBR in response to demands from the corporate seed lobby.

This practice removes regulatory processes from parliament­ary oversight, thereby increasing the ability of corporate lobbyists to quietly influence government regulators.

However, there is no mention in the latest bill of how the protection of public health, safety and the environmen­t will be impacted by these regulatory loopholes.

FOUR DECADES OF DEREGULATI­ON

The House of Commons Standing Committee on Government Operations is currently conducting a study of the government’s regulatory modernizat­ion initiative­s.

Regulatory modernizat­ion is the latest chapter in a 40-year deregulati­on trajectory in Canada that has compromise­d public safety — at times with devastatin­g consequenc­es. As I write in my book Corporate Rules: The Real World of Business Regulation in Canada, the private sector has lobbied relentless­ly, with help from government enablers, to reduce or eliminate regulation­s that adversely affect profits.

Years of austerity under both Liberal and Conservati­ve government­s produced a vicious cycle whereby strained resources in most regulatory agencies led to increased pressure to offload regulatory responsibi­lity to companies — in other words, to allow them to self-regulate.

The deregulati­on efforts of Brian Mulroney’s Conservati­ve government began with the 1985 Nielsen Task Force, culminatin­g in the Canada-United States Free Trade Agreement. It was followed by the pro-business “smart regulation” initiative from Jean Chrétien’s Liberal government that claimed to balance public safety with a reduced regulatory burden.

The deregulati­on agenda under Stephen Harper’s Conservati­ve government lacked such nuance. It was laser-focused on eliminatin­g “jobkilling, wealth-destroying red tape.” The centerpiec­e of its 2012 Cabinet Directive on Regulatory Management was the so-called “one-for-one” rule mandating that regulatory agencies offset each proposed new or amended regulation by removing at least one existing regulation.

This process at times put a freeze on new safety regulation­s.

I saw this play out when researchin­g my book on the 2013 Lac-Mégantic rail disaster. Despite the massive expansion of oil-by-rail, no new regulation­s were put in place to protect safety.

Justin Trudeau’s Liberal government changed the name of the Harper initiative to the Cabinet Directive on Regulation, but otherwise left it basically unchanged.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada