Hon. Tony Loffreda: Honourable senators, I rise today at third reading to speak to Bill S-6, an Act respecting regulatory modernization. I want to thank Senators Woo, Smith and Deacon for their excellent speeches. I intend to be brief and complementary. It is getting late. This must be the latest I’ve spoken on a bill, so I will be brief.

My gratitude goes to all senators from the seven standing committees who studied the subject matter of certain parts of the bill, as well as my colleagues on the Banking Committee for their review of the bill.

As you know, the bill makes common-sense changes to 29 different acts of Parliament that will modernize Canada’s regulatory system.

Senators may remember that the government’s commitment to regulatory modernization was first announced in the Fall Economic Statement 2018. At the time, the government acknowledged — as Senator Deacon expressed so eloquently — that:

Many federal regulations have been developed and built up over decades. Over time, some regulations can become obsolete and present a real barrier to innovation.

The government committed to introducing an Annual Regulatory Modernization Bill to remove outdated and duplicative regulatory requirements. This is an important step forward and one that is certainly appreciated by the business community.

As Senator Woo pointed out last week:

The modern regulatory system must . . . promote business investment and innovation; second, it must ensure the health, safety and security of Canadians and the protection of the environment. . . .

I agree completely with him. It’s no secret that Canada’s regulatory system is complex, often outdated and a red-tape nightmare for many businesses — which has the chilling effect of slowing down innovation, stalling growth and hindering productivity. The changes proposed in Bill S-6 are meant to eliminate irritants and reduce the overall administrative burden.

For instance, the bill accelerates the coming into force of amendments to the Trademarks Act that were introduced as part of Canada’s Intellectual Property Strategy. I asked Ms. Miller from Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada about this provision when she appeared before the Banking Committee. I argued that having a strong intellectual property and trademarks system is key to attracting foreign investment and to Canada’s overall global competitiveness. Indeed, Ms. Miller confirmed how important it is. She said:

The importance of intellectual property in making sure that Canada is an attractive place to do business, an attractive place for Canadian companies to grow and scale up and be able to compete globally, cannot really be overstated. It’s an incredibly important asset for businesses to be able to understand and then use and deploy strategically.

She went on to say:

By permitting the entry into force of the amendment, that will really underline the importance of using that intellectual property, that trademark, in Canada; that not only reinforces your brand in Canada, it reinforces it as well globally. . . .

Colleagues, this amendment, like most others in the bill, although minor in scope, has the combined effect of making our regulatory system more efficient and less burdensome.

As Mona Fortier, President of the Treasury Board, said, “We’re modernizing rules to make it easier for Canadians to get things done.”

Allow me to say a few words about results and consultations.

In its Regulatory Policy Outlook 2021, the OECD reminds us that governments “spend far too little time checking whether rules work in practice, not just on paper” and they need to “move past the traditional “set and forget” rule-making mindset and develop “adapt and learn” approaches.”

But for the government’s annual regulatory modernization exercise to be successful, the government must engage early with all relevant stakeholders. As the OECD suggests:

People —

— and I would suggest businesses too —

— are more likely to view regulations as fair if they are engaged in the deliberative process and the outcomes of consultations are clearly explained.

And as early as possible. Even in business, when we did budgets and looked at projections and strategies, we obtained the best results when we involved stakeholders — the bottom-up approach. You then take the decision on top, but you need the engagement. To get the engagement, you have to get them involved, and it’s important to involve stakeholders early in the process. We’ve heard Senators Woo, Smith and Deacon make the same point, and it’s an important point.

As we described in our Banking Committee report:

. . . a number of witnesses expressed their dissatisfaction —

— and I’m stressing the point —

— with the limited or, in some cases, the lack of government consultations on the regulatory changes proposed in Bill S-6. Since extensive and inclusive consultations lead to better regulations by allowing the government to gather valuable expertise and feedback, the committee urges the government to improve its consultation process for the regulatory modernization by including more diverse stakeholders —

— diversity is very important —

— using online consultations more frequently and reaching out to stakeholders sooner in its regulatory development process.

The government’s Let’s Talk Federal Regulations pilot project is a good start and will help address some of the concerns raised by industry when it comes to consultations. This new platform has a lot of potential and I hope it will be able to enhance the government’s engagement practices — engagement, engagement, engagement. You need engagement from the business community. There is a lot of talk that the government must improve those links to the business community, and I think it’s a fine place to start.

It is also extremely important for the government to monitor and assess the impact of any new regulatory changes. In my view, our Joint Committee for the Scrutiny of Regulations is an important part of that review.

Honourable senators, although we may have felt rushed in pre‑studying and studying Bill S-6, we did some great work, and we should feel confident in adopting this bill at third reading today.

The government’s commitment to reviewing regulations yearly, through legislation, is a great decision. I certainly look forward to participating in the legislative review of any such bill in the future. The Senate can contribute much value and expertise to this exercise. Thank you.