Regulation, permitting, and licensing are not administrative formalities—they are how governments protect people. They safeguard environmental integrity. They uphold safety standards. They ensure fair markets. They give Canadians confidence that development happens responsibly.
Across governments and sectors, I hear the same quiet concern from senior officials: “We know the system isn’t keeping pace. But we can’t just hire our way out of this.”
That tension is real. It deserves more than talk about “cutting red tape.” It requires smarter regulation.
The Structural Mismatch
Many of Canada’s permitting and licensing systems were designed in the 1980s and 1990s. They were built for a slower economy, paper-based processes, and fewer cross-government dependencies.
Today, those same systems are expected to support:
- housing acceleration
- major clean energy and critical mineral development
- climate adaptation infrastructure
- advanced manufacturing and industry
Across jurisdictions the pattern is consistent: the legislation still makes sense. The policy intent still reflects Canadian values of safety, stewardship, and fairness. What has changed is the administrate weight around it.
Over decades, requirements have quietly accumulated—new forms after audits, extra attachments after incidents, additional checklists “just to be safe.” But together, they have created dense, document-heavy processes that few would design intentionally today.
In several regulatory reviews, a meaningful portion of required documentation rarely influenced final decisions. Yet it consumed weeks—sometimes months—of effort.
This is not carelessness. It is simply what happens when small changes stack up over time. And without periodic redesign, systems slow under their own weight.
This is not a policy problem.
It is a design problem.
And design problems can be fixed.
3 Ways to Tackle Regulatory Modernization
1. Start with what the law requires
Effective modernization starts with a simple shift: stop starting from existing forms.
Instead ask:
What risk is this law meant to manage? What evidence is truly required to make a defensible decision? What information alters the outcome?
In my program modernization work, we’ve applied a zero-based documentation review. We rebuilt application requirements from the statute outward. In some cases, this removed decade-old processes without weakening a single safeguard.
This was not deregulation.
It was clarity.
When documentation aligns directly to legislative intent review cycles shorten, appeals decrease, and privacy improves because unnecessary data is no longer collected.
Less paperwork. Stronger decisions.
2. Make it easier to follow the law
Permitting systems often mirror government structure instead of the applicant experience.
Applicants do not think in terms of branches or divisions. They think “what do I need to do to comply?” And yet they face multiple portals, overlapping guidance, unclear sequencing, and inconsistent interpretation across offices.
In one multi-department transformation effort, mapping the end-to-end journey exposed duplication that no single team could see in isolation. Removing that duplication reduced timelines without changing any legal thresholds.
When applicants understand what a compliant submission looks like quality improves, rework drops, regulators spend more time assessing risk and less time chasing missing information.
Clarity saves time and money. For everyone.
And, in a country as complex as Canada, this type of clarity can be a strategic economic lever.
3. Use technology to support judgment—not replace it
There is understandable caution around artificial intelligence in public administration. Regulatory decisions must remain human, accountable, and transparent.
But most permitting delays are not caused by judgment calls. They are caused by friction in the process. Tasks like completion checks, cross-referencing prior approvals, or routing files can be better handled with appropriate technology.
When thoughtfully deployed, case management platforms and AI tools can flag missing documents before submission, surface relevant precedents for decision-makers, and move files efficiently between reviewers. In programs where we introduced these tools alongside clear human oversight, timelines improved and defensibility strengthened.
Technology should not replace regulatory judgment. But it can give regulators more time to exercise it.
The mistake is not AI adoption, it is digitizing inefficient processes instead of fixing them first.
Let’s Put Our Heads Together
Davis Pier is inviting a small number of regulatory leaders across Canada to participate in a focused co-design workshop aimed at modernizing and streamlining high-impact permits.
Book a call with our team to discuss your key challenges and explore options that may fit your context.
Program Overview
The permitting and licensing co-design program is a short, focused sprint. Regulators, frontline teams, and applicants work together to design processes that are clearer, more practical, and grounded in how adjudication actually works.
The work will focus on mapping real workflows, translating regulatory requirements into clear and defensible guidance, and co‑creating a future‑state experience that reduces ambiguity and rework.
Digital or AI‑assisted supports will be explored where they can reinforce, rather than replace, human judgment.
The program offers a low‑risk way to achieve tangible progress without committing a large-scale investment. Participants gain validated insight into where burden truly lives, leave with concrete, reusable artifacts, and build solutions that staff can operate and defend. The result is practical improvement grounded in regulatory intent, with shared ownership from the people responsible for delivery.
The program is a low-risk way to make real progress without a big investment. Participants will see where the burden actually sits and leave with tools they can use right away. The result is simpler, more effective permitting that is grounded in regulatory intent and owned by the people delivering it.
Click here for a full program overview.
