Evidence of meeting #33 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was lobbyists.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Karen Shepherd  Commissioner of Lobbying , Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying
Bruce Bergen  Senior Counsel, Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying
Pierre Ricard-Desjardins  Director of Operations, Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying

9:05 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo

This is the 33rd meeting of the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics. Our orders of the day are pursuant to Standing Order 32(5), the annual report of the Commissioner of Lobbying for the fiscal year that ended March 31, 2009, referred to our committee on Wednesday, July 22, 2009. Our witness today, from the Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying, is Ms. Karen Shepherd, Commissioner of Lobbying, and she has a couple of colleagues with her.

Welcome, Commissioner. It's good to see you again. As you know, we have some new members on our committee, and we thought it was important to have the commissioners with whom this committee has a relationship come before us and update us on their affairs, as well as to have an exchange with the members so they can learn more about your office and its operations.

I welcome you. I understand you have some opening remarks. I would appreciate it if you would introduce the colleagues you have brought with you today. Thank you.

9:05 a.m.

Karen Shepherd Commissioner of Lobbying , Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying

Thank you, Mr. Chair and members of the Committee.

Chairman and Members of the Committee. I am pleased to be here today to discuss the first Annual Report of the Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying. I am accompanied today by senior counsel, Bruce Bergen, and by Pierre Ricard-Desjardins, Director of Operations. Mr. Chair, I thought that for the benefit of new members, I would give a brief overview of the Lobbying Act and the Lobbyists’ Code of Conduct before discussing our annual report.

The Lobbying Act ensures that lobbying activities conducted at the federal level are open and transparent. It provides for the public registration of individuals who are paid to communicate with public office-holders. The purpose of the Lobbyists' Code of Conduct is to assure the Canadian public that lobbying is done ethically and with the highest standards. This in turn conserves and enhances public confidence and trust in the integrity, objectivity, and impartiality of government decision-making. The code complements the registration requirements of the Lobbying Act.

I was honoured to be appointed as the first Commissioner of Lobbying in June 2009. My goal is to build on significant progress we've made in implementing the Lobbying Act. This progress, as well as our priorities and challenges, is highlighted in the Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying's first annual report.

The report, tabled in Parliament in June 2009, discusses three main areas: the lobbyist registration system; the office's education and outreach activities; and our efforts to ensure compliance with the Lobbying Act and the Lobbyists' Code of Conduct.

The Lobbyists Registration System, which is often referred to as the Registry of Lobbyists, is the primary tool used by the Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying to ensure transparency in lobbying activities conducted at the federal level.

The registry consists of an online database in which lobbyists disclose their lobbying activities. However, this is not simply a tool for lobbyists to register their activities. The registry is an easy-to-use, searchable database. It is visited by public office-holders, journalists, the Canadian public, and others looking for information regarding who is carrying out lobbying activities with the federal government. The registry is accessible free of charge, 24 hours a day, seven days a week via our website.

As discussed in my annual report, the Lobbying Act introduced new reporting requirements for lobbyists on July 2, 2008. This meant that we needed a major upgrade of the registry to allow for the efficient processing of a significantly larger number of transactions. Additional functions were also added to the registry to improve its usability and efficiency.

I am pleased to report that the changes required to the registry were made on time, within budget, and with no major difficulties. I am proud that our lobbyists registration system is at the forefront of electronic registration and it is considered to be a model for other jurisdictions involved in lobbying legislation.

From April 1, 2008, to March 31, 2009, the number of registered corporations and organizations increased by 7% and 10% respectively, while the number of individual in-house lobbyists contained in those registrations decreased by 17% and 9%. While it appears that there was an increase in lobbying activity, we have noticed a decrease in the number of individual in-house lobbyists registered by those corporations and organizations. We have attributed these changes to a rationalization effort on the part of corporations and organizations. The number of consultant lobbyists remained virtually unchanged during that period.

However, since April 1, 2009, we have seen a further decrease of 4.6% in the number of registrations for all categories of lobbyists, accompanied by an 18.6% reduction for the number of individuals actively involved in lobbying activities. The trend is particularly noticeable with regard to consultant lobbyists, where fewer lobbyists manage larger numbers of clients, and with regard to corporations, where fewer employees are involved in corporate lobbying activities. Although it may not be the only cause, the recent economic situation may be an important contributor to this decrease.

I should add that we have not witnessed a significant drop in overall registration activity. This is likely due to the new monthly communications reports.

The Lobbying Act provides the Commissioner of Lobbying with a clear mandate for education and outreach so that Parliamentarians, Canadians, departments and agencies, and lobbyists have a better understanding of the act.

This annual report provides details on the development and implementation of a comprehensive education and awareness strategy. We have used various means of communication, such as information sessions, online multimedia tutorials, and implementation notices, to raise awareness and build a greater understanding of the Lobbying Act.

Over the past year, presentations were made to lobbyists, public office-holders, and national and international organizations interested in Canadian federal lobbying. Meetings and briefing sessions were held with senior officials from various departments and agencies on the Lobbying Act. The office helped familiarize them with the new requirements of the act and addressed any issues regarding lobbying activities facing their departments or officials.

Although education is an important priority for me, actual enforcement of the Lobbying Act cannot be ignored. The act gives the Commissioner of Lobbying enhanced enforcement powers.

These include the extension of the period during which possible summary conviction infractions may be prosecuted, the doubling of monetary penalties available upon conviction under the act, and the fact that I may conduct investigations in order to ensure compliance with the Lobbying Act as well as the Lobbyists' Code of Conduct.

When allegations of non-compliance with the act are brought to our attention we conduct a preliminary information-gathering exercise called an administrative review. An administrative review involves searching the registry and other publicly available sources of information, as well as interviewing potential witnesses. The recommendations contained in an administrative review assist me in making my decision on whether or not there are grounds for further actions. In 2008-09, 13 administrative reviews were initiated by my office. Eight recommendation reports were sent to me for decision.

Under the Lobbying Act the commissioner may initiate a formal investigation if the commissioner has reason to believe an investigation is necessary to ensure compliance with the Lobbying Act or the Lobbyists' Code of Conduct. The act requires an investigation to be conducted in private. A report of the commissioner's findings and conclusions following the completed investigation is then tabled before both houses of Parliament.

The Lobbying Act introduced a five-year prohibition on lobbying on former designated public office-holders. The act also gives me the authority to grant exemptions to this five-year prohibition. An internal review process was developed to ensure that I have the information needed to make decisions on applications for exemption.

In June 2008-09 my office received seven applications for exemption from the five-year prohibition on lobbying. I believe that by enhancing both the awareness of the act's requirements and the nature of lobbying as an activity, compliance can be better attained. This is particularly true in the context of a recent Federal Court of Appeal decision that broadened the definition of conflict of interest referred to in the current Lobbyists' Code of Conduct to cover certain political activities performed by lobbyists, among other things.

Although educating people about the act is important, violations of the Lobbying Act and Lobbyists’ Code of Conduct have been and are still dealt with as rigorously as the Act permits.

Mr. Chair, this concludes my remarks. I hope that I have given you and members of the committee, a comprehensive overview of our annual report. Thank you for your attention and now I look forward to answering any questions that you may have.

However, as I mentioned in my opening remarks, before answering questions I would like to state that subsection 10.4(3) of the Lobbying Act instructs me to conduct investigations in private. Therefore, to respect this confidentiality I will not be confirming whether I have opened up an investigation, which I understand is different from what some of my other commissioners are able to do. Their acts permit them to at least confirm whether they have a file open on someone.

9:15 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo

Thank you. So in other words you will make no comment.

9:15 a.m.

Commissioner of Lobbying , Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying

9:15 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo

The Ethics Commissioner will confirm that she is conducting an investigation but will give no further details.

9:15 a.m.

Commissioner of Lobbying , Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying

Karen Shepherd

That's my understanding.

9:15 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo

So there's a difference. Okay.

Madam Simson, please.

9:15 a.m.

Liberal

Michelle Simson Liberal Scarborough Southwest, ON

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Commissioner Shepherd, for appearing before the committee with your associates. As you mentioned, we haven't seen you since your nomination, so it's nice to see you back. I also want to thank you for a very comprehensive annual report. It was quite interesting.

I want to zero in on the tail end of your opening remarks where you touched on the fact that the Lobbying Act introduced the five-year prohibition period for former designated public office-holders. You have the authority to grant the exemptions. Could you expand on the internal review process you implemented and the specific criteria you have in place to either approve or decline an exemption request?

9:15 a.m.

Commissioner of Lobbying , Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying

Karen Shepherd

In terms of the process, we have a description on our website of the type of information we would like to see. When an application comes in for review, we will look at their past employment, résumés, whether they happen to know any information on their future employer, and so on. Interviews will be conducted with witnesses, and maybe past employers, or the applicants themselves if there's a new employer. Once all of that is done and analyzed, the report is given to me for consideration.

Part of the process we introduced was to give the applicant 30 days to comment on my intent. In other words, if I'm going to be granting the exemption or not, they get 30 days to respond. If I grant the exemption, or an exemption with some conditions, they are given a letter with an exemption number that they then have to use for registration. If the exemption is granted, the act indicates that I must, without undue delay, post my reasons for that exemption on the website.

To answer your second question on criteria, the act provides some criteria, for example, if the person has been in an acting position for a short period of time--maybe student employment, administrative duties only--whether the employer would gain an unfair advantage. In the case of transition team members, there are a few others that are added.

The position I have taken is that Parliament put the five-year prohibition in the act for a reason, which was to stop the revolving door. To me, the rule is that the five-year prohibition holds, and it is only with exceptional circumstances that I will grant an exemption.

9:15 a.m.

Liberal

Michelle Simson Liberal Scarborough Southwest, ON

Okay.

Your report stated that you received seven applications in 2008 and 2009. Two were granted, and you have to post that information to the website. Is there any access for the public for the other five that maybe were declined, or is that kept private?

9:15 a.m.

Commissioner of Lobbying , Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying

Karen Shepherd

I have actually received ten applications to date. Two applications dealt with individuals who had left prior to the act coming into force, so even though they were comprehensive applications, there was no authority for me to grant an exemption. Two individuals withdrew. I denied three applications. And there is one current application.

With respect to those who are subject to the five-year prohibition, if they are not granted an exemption that is posted on my website, then they are subject to the five years.

9:20 a.m.

Liberal

Michelle Simson Liberal Scarborough Southwest, ON

Is the information on the ones you decline publicly accessible?

9:20 a.m.

Commissioner of Lobbying , Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying

Karen Shepherd

The department is subject to the Access to Information Act and Privacy Act.

9:20 a.m.

Liberal

Michelle Simson Liberal Scarborough Southwest, ON

So the public could access that information.

9:20 a.m.

Commissioner of Lobbying , Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying

Karen Shepherd

They could put in a request and we would go through the process of analyzing it. Because they are public office-holders, I would assume that some of the information would be permissible to give out. However, according to the Privacy Act, if the information is of a personal nature or there is confidentiality from a third party, I couldn't give it.

9:20 a.m.

Liberal

Michelle Simson Liberal Scarborough Southwest, ON

I'd like to move on to page 11 of your report, where you indicate that approximately 600 reports are filed monthly but that a small percentage of the reports contain errors. Can you be a little more definitive on what percentage, approximately, of the monthly reports contain errors?

9:20 a.m.

Commissioner of Lobbying , Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying

Karen Shepherd

Those are 600 monthly communication reports. We verified about 6% of the 5,000 entries last year and found that more than 90% of them were accurate. The errors were more on wrong dates, spelling mistakes of the individual's name, or they were over-reporting in terms of, say, putting in meetings with a director general, who is not a designated public office-holder.

9:20 a.m.

Liberal

Michelle Simson Liberal Scarborough Southwest, ON

So if you over-report, that would be considered an error?

9:20 a.m.

Commissioner of Lobbying , Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying

9:20 a.m.

Liberal

Michelle Simson Liberal Scarborough Southwest, ON

Okay.

It says in here that as you move forward, you're planning to introduce a “new registry functionality” to allow registrants to amend those errors on a monthly basis.

If it's only 6% and they're negligible errors--clerical, maybe, or wrong spelling--what's the rationale behind allowing them to fix it?

9:20 a.m.

Commissioner of Lobbying , Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying

Karen Shepherd

Actually, that communications function, I'm pleased to say, is actually in place. Registrants can go in now.

The way I view the Lobbying Act and the need to report on the monthly communications is that it should be as accurate as possible. If there have been communications that are letters, for example, and not oral or arranged, which is what the act requires, this is part of trying to make the database as accurate as possible.

We found that we actually had lobbyists calling us who wanted to change their own data. Because that's their responsibility, we were giving them access to it.

9:20 a.m.

Liberal

Michelle Simson Liberal Scarborough Southwest, ON

What percentage of all the errors are clerical in nature? In other words, are there one or two companies that have more frequency in terms of their errors, or is it basically all over the map?

9:20 a.m.

Commissioner of Lobbying , Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying

Karen Shepherd

It's more like factual errors, and that's what we're trying to correct.

In terms of whether it's specific companies, I don't think we've noticed a trend at this point.

That's something I can get back to the member on, if she's interested, Mr. Chair.

9:20 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo

Thank you.

Madame Freeman, s'il vous plaît.

9:20 a.m.

Bloc

Carole Freeman Bloc Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, QC

Thank you.

Good morning, Ms. Shepherd. Thank you for coming to make this presentation on your annual report. I would like to ask you a few questions.

In your presentation, you said that under the act you now have expanded powers. You referred to at least three of those powers. Regarding the first, you said: “These include: the extension of the period during which possible summary conviction infractions may be prosecuted”. I would first like to know what the nature of that extension is.

Second, you talk about the doubling of monetary penalties. I would like you to give us more details on that subject.

And third, you talk about the fact that you “may conduct investigations in order to ensure compliance with the Lobbying Act as well as the Lobbyists' Code of Conduct”. You have the power to conduct investigations. There was a time when you could do that if you had “reasonable grounds to believe”, but now it is “reason to believe”. I would like you to explain what the distinction is between the two wordings.