Evidence of meeting #19 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was lobbyist.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
John Carmichael Conservative Don Valley West, ON
Me too.
When you go through a program like that, you understand what your responsibilities are on a board. It can be a terrifying experience.
Could you go a little bit deeper in your thoughts about corporate board members working with paid lobbyists in firms? They come and advocate on behalf of their product, or whatever they're here particularly to do. I'm wondering if we're on a collision course where that area has to be better defined or included, etc., to ensure that corporate boards of directors, be they not-for-profit, charitable, or otherwise.... They're all included in that milieux. I just wonder if more consideration should be given to that. Can you go a little deeper on that?
12:35 p.m.
Senior Consultant, The Capital Hill Group
It is an issue that needs discussion. For clarity, my point had more to do with non-corporate boards. I think corporations are in a position to decide what structure they use for their government relations, and clearly, corporate board members are paid above expenses. What I was talking about is associations, non-profits. If they pay one cent above documented expenses and they're expecting those board members to engage in advocacy, you get in a situation where now you have to go to this person and say “Not only did we get you to volunteer to do this, and we're paying you expenses that in all likelihood aren't really covering your expenses, but now you have to file as a consultant lobbyist, and there may be some tax implications to that, and if you do this wrong, you could end up in jail”.
I'm not sure that's helpful when at the same time we're trying to increase not only the definition but the performance of what these boards are supposed to be doing. For the longest time, especially in public sector boards, these were seen as places to stick people as favours, and what we are finding is that we now expect these boards to do a job, and if you want people to do a job, you should treat them accordingly. I see a danger that this is bumping into that and we may end up hurting these organizations' chances to get quality people.
To complicate things, you have parliamentarians who sit on corporate boards, so this gets rather incestuous. If policy is discussed at a corporate board meeting and a sitting parliamentarian is a board member, how do you reconcile that? How do you go public? With a publicly traded company, how do you now file a communication report? You don't. So you're not getting at that.
You need to look at it.
12:35 p.m.
Conservative
John Carmichael Conservative Don Valley West, ON
That's on a publicly traded company or public board.
12:35 p.m.
Conservative
John Carmichael Conservative Don Valley West, ON
When you talk about public board members, though, being paid for their expenses and being accommodated for the effort they put in, say to come to Ottawa or whatever, are you not automatically lumping them into that lobbyist mix?
12:35 p.m.
Senior Consultant, The Capital Hill Group
As soon as they're paid, and part of their job is advocacy, the 20% rule doesn't apply, so you can't make the argument that it's only a little bit of what they do. If it is any of what they do and they are paid a dime, now they are covered by the same rules as I am, and I do it full-time.
Down the road there could be a point of friction there that is unintended.
12:35 p.m.
Conservative
John Carmichael Conservative Don Valley West, ON
That's a good point. But then stepping back to the not-for-profit charitable sector, you take volunteers and put them into that mix, not only are they under the gun now for the time, volunteer fatigue, which we all know is a real problem in the charitable sector, but now with the risk, the liability, the potential, you're going to dry up your volunteer corps.
12:35 p.m.
Senior Consultant, The Capital Hill Group
On the other side of that, let's say you get a volunteer board that is extremely effective and well positioned to effect policy change. They don't have to register because they are not paid. That is an anomaly that needs to be looked at, at least.
12:35 p.m.
Conservative
12:35 p.m.
NDP
The Chair NDP Jean Crowder
That was right on time. Thank you, Mr. Carmichael.
Mr. Jordan, I want to thank you very much for coming before the committee today.
We are going to suspend for two minutes and we will go in camera for some committee business, so I would ask you to clear the room.
[Proceedings continue in camera]