Common menu bar links
Regulatory Cooperation Council Action Plan benefits
The RCC is developing ways to change how we work together to share information, align approaches and rely on the results of each others’ regulatory systems. A range of distinct requirements have been generated through our regulatory systems (e.g. different labelling requirements, standards or product approval processes), and these differences mean that businesses have to either change their products for each country or go through separate approval processes in order to market their product in both Canada and the U.S. This is costly and inefficient.
The Action Plan seeks to develop solutions that are not simply one-offs. Rather, the goal is to understand what caused the misalignment in the first place and create permanent solutions. Here are a few examples:
Naming of Meat Cuts
Canada and the U.S. use similar specifications for producing meat, however they often use different names to describe meat cuts. For example, in the U.S., terms such as “peameal bacon”, “chicken tenderloin”, and “flatiron steak” are widely used, however these terms are not permitted in Canada. Such variations, even when slight, create costly problems for Canadian and U.S. importers and exporters when managing supply chain steps such as meat production, labelling, inventory maintenance and certification. This can have a significant impact on the competitiveness and innovation of the integrated sector. In addition, they can create confusion for consumers. By aligning the approach to naming meat cuts, we could be saving business time and money and providing one information system for consumers.
Vehicle Standards
The North American auto market produces over 16.5 million vehicles annually, and is responsible for 500 000 direct and indirect jobs in Canada and 3.2 million in the United States. Cars are similar on both sides of the border but small things like differing standards for car frames can mean increased costs for manufacturers, which could be avoided if standards were aligned. Production procedures within the same plant and assembly line need to be adjusted to produce two versions of the same vehicle model – depending on where the vehicles are being sold. By aligning standards, companies could not only cut down on costs resulting from production, but also produce only one prototype for use in vehicle testing in both countries – saving several hundreds of thousands of dollars in prototype production per vehicle model.
Product Approvals
Getting products approved takes time and costs companies money. As a result, companies will make decisions on what approvals to pursue based on a variety of factors, including the size of markets. Since Canada is the smaller of the two markets, companies may decide that going through the approvals process twice is not worth the cost.
For example, Canadian farmers do not have access to all of the same veterinary drugs as their American counterparts. By aligning their applications for approvals, manufacturers can apply for approvals simultaneously in both countries, while maintaining each country’s sovereign right to decide whether or not products will be approved for its market.
Similar issues arise with consumer personal care products, such as over-the-counter topical ointment or pain relievers. By better aligning our approval processes we will make it easier and more cost effective for companies to market products in both countries simultaneously and for regulators in both countries to share information while still coming to their own conclusions on product approvals.
