ANNEX II: A PUBLIC INTEREST ACCOUNTABILITY FRAMEWORK (PIAF)⁴⁷

In writing decisions, regulatory tribunals should conclude with an explanation of the tradeoffs that have been made in order to protect the public interest. This is a two-stage process.

PIAF Stage I Review of the Evidence

1. Has due process been followed in constructing the regulatory decision-making process, and can we with confidence say that decisions that result from that process have been shaped fairly? Key benchmarks here are accessibility, transparency (distribution and availability of information), mechanisms for participation and deliberation, accountability and neutrality in decision-making.
2. What is the state of Canadian public opinion on the issue? Are there clear majority views on various aspects of the issue?
3. Which specific interests are connected to the issue, and what are their views? How are the costs and benefits of different regulatory options distributed among these groups and more generally among the Canadian population?
4. What are the key common interests or public goods at stake in this area — examples would include health, security, safety, environmental protection, future generations, innovation, competitiveness. How are risks assessed? What is the balance of these common interests?
5. Are there shared values or normative guidelines that affect decision-making in this area? Are there specific legal rights of either individuals or collectivities that should be referred to in the decision-making process?

PIAF Stage II Balancing the Interests

A statement of how the decision has struck the balance among the interests at play in the proceedings — including those of the consumers, businesses, individual and collective interests.

⁴⁷ Assessing the Public Interest in the 21st Century: A Framework, by Leslie A. Pal and Judith Maxwell