Information & Ethics Committee on Sept. 22nd, 2011

[Karen Shepherd]

That's correct.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Yes, and there are about 300-and-some of us, so there are a lot of people knocking on our doors all the time--and there are different kinds of them. I think at the outset it's important to clarify that there are lobbyists who represent small organizations. There are people who might not even think they're lobbying. They're trying to just make connections with parliamentarians because we rely on information to do our job. Without these people coming to us and trying to tell us about their group or organization, whether it's the Heart and Stroke group or arts groups, we can't do our job.

We're not interested in those people who make mistakes if they don't file properly or even understand they're lobbyists. It's a question of the people who are different in terms of being able to open doors and make connections that are for political influence. That's where I think the act has to be vigorously enforced, and we certainly want to make sure there are no loopholes.

I'm looking at the question of some of these examples. For example, in your report I was reading that we had a Mr. Michael McSweeney from the Cement Association of Canada who helped organize a fundraising dinner for the then Minister of Natural Resources, the Honourable Lisa Raitt. In fact, he wasn't the only one; I think there was a Mr. Will Stewart who also helped do a fundraising dinner. You found them in breach of rule 8 for improper influence. What happened?

[Karen Shepherd]

Well, because I found them to be in breach, what I'm able to do under the act, or actually required to do under the act once I open an investigation, is to table a report to Parliament. In this case, because there were two lobbyists, I tabled two reports.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

So it just went to Parliament?

[Karen Shepherd]

Yes.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

I see. I mean, they weren't raising money for a hospital. They were raising political money for a minister who had access to all key departments. I would think that's a clear attempt to say “we raise money for you and we're expecting favours in return”.

It only goes to Parliament...? You have no other ability to sanction these people, to tell them it is completely inappropriate to be holding political fundraisers in the hopes of helping the cement industry get more contracts?

[Karen Shepherd]

The only authority or consequence for me under the act is, yes, to just refer it to Parliament. That is one of the things when we're going through the legislative review: whether any part of the code should be codified, which would then have other sanctions, potentially. Other sanctions that could be made available include whether I could limit their ability to lobby if I were to find an individual in breach of the code, but right now the only thing at my disposal under the act is a report to Parliament.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Did Parliament do anything?

[Karen Shepherd]

I don't believe so.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

I see. So it's essentially a boy scout's code, then, and as long as these guys do what they do, they're going to be able to continue what they do.

So you've suggested administrative monetary penalities as a way of, again, reminding people that it is completely unacceptable to raise political cash for ministers, obviously with the clear intent that down the road favours might be returned. What kinds of administrative penalties would you see as important?

[Karen Shepherd]

First of all, let me clarify that right now the Lobbyists' Code of Conduct is a non-statutory document, so therefore there are no fines or jail terms associated with it.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Yes.

[Karen Shepherd]

So if Parliament were to choose fundraising, for example, as you're saying, or if certain political activities were at issue and maybe should be codified under the act, that would be one thing. The second would be, yes, getting administrative monetary penalties that I would be responsible for administering and, as I've indicated in my five-year review of the act, the ability to post them as well, because it's not just finding.... If I'm going to show that there really is deterrence, I need to be able to post them on the website as well.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Right.

Well, we've had examples, because again, there are lobbyists and now we have consultants: people who know everybody on the inside and who can open doors by making a phone call. That might not be considered lobbying by some, but certainly it would be very effective if you wanted to get to the people in the know.

I'm thinking of Bruce Carson, for example. It's a notorious case. This guy was a convicted felon; he was the Prime Minister's senior adviser. He knew the Lobbying Act; he'd written briefs on the Lobbying Act. He felt he wasn't subject to the Lobbying Act and yet he was setting up meetings with John Duncan. He was going to set up meetings with Peter Kent.

He seemed to feel that he was exempt from the Lobbying Act because of the loopholes. Yet certainly, being an insider, his being able to open doors is a heck of a lot different from the person who.... What is the threshold limit? Is it 20% of your time? He might have been spending 5% of his time lobbying, but it would have been highly effective. How do we constrain guys like this? What steps are needed to make sure that just because you know somebody in the PMO you can't be opening doors for businesses?

[Karen Shepherd]

To be honest, because that case is currently.... I normally conduct investigations and reviews in private, but I have commenced.... When I'm speaking in front of this committee, if I'm talking about a matter that's in the public interest...I am looking into this particular issue. So I am looking at the different issues in this particular file.

In general, in response to your question, the act has quite clearly right now outlined that if you are communicating with a public office holder for payment on a registerable activity--so communicating to change or develop a policy or program to obtain a financial benefit. In the case of consultant lobbyists, there is also arranging a meeting and the awarding of a contract.

For in-house lobbyists the other thing that triggers is the significant amount of duties test, which is currently interpreted as 20%.

One of the things I have advocated or recommended during the legislative review, as I see it, as an improvement to the act, is to actually get rid of the significant amount of duties test requirement from the legislation. This will capture a lot more activities and organizations and corporations that are not currently having to register.

That said, as I recommended, there are probably exemptions to that that Parliament may want to consider. I think there was a reason for putting in the significant amount of duties test so that it wouldn't be an undue burden, because one of the principles of the act is that the system for registration should not impede free and open access to government.

[The Chair, NDP, Nathan Cullen]

Thank you, Ms. Shepherd.

Thank you, Mr. Angus.

Ms. Davidson, for up to seven minutes--or Mr. Del Mastro.

[Patricia Davidson, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Mr. Del Mastro is going first.

[Dean Del Mastro, Conservative, Peterborough, ON]

Very briefly, I just want some clarification. Mr. Angus pointed out that there are a number of registered lobbyists--I believe about 5,000. I would imagine that groups like the United Food and Commercial Workers Union and the CAW and so forth would have lobbyists registered with you?

[Karen Shepherd]

I can get back to the committee as to whether those are actually registered, but again, it would be if they are paid to communicate on a registerable activity and hitting cumulatively the significant amount of duties test.

[Dean Del Mastro, Conservative, Peterborough, ON]

I take from that that when they contravene the Accountability Act and sponsor party conventions and events at party conventions as registered lobbyists, they're probably seeking to get undue influence within a political party. Perhaps Mr. Angus might want to get back to the committee on whether or not they did in fact buy any undue influence within the NDP when they did contravene the Accountability Act, sponsoring events at the NDP convention in British Columbia.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

A point of order.

[The Chair, NDP, Nathan Cullen]

A point of order, Mr. Angus.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

I know my colleague is eager on this discussion, and I have great respect for Dean Del Mastro, but I don't think it's an issue for the Commissioner of Lobbying. It's actually before Elections Canada, where many of his colleagues are up on charges as a result...so he should refer it to Elections Canada.

Thank you.

[The Chair, NDP, Nathan Cullen]

We'll focus on the testimony in front of us today.

Ms. Davidson.

[Patricia Davidson, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

It's nice to see you again. Welcome to the committee.

I just want to continue a little bit with the numbers of lobbyists. You indicated in your report that there are currently around 5,000. Does that number remain fairly constant or does it fluctuate much?