There are two final points I'll make. There has been a lot of talk about what's called “Rule 8”: registered lobbyists' participation in elections and the electoral process. Good luck with that. It's a bit of a tricky one. What you are trying to do there is balance my rights as an individual, my constitutional rights to participate in the democratic process, with trying to prevent me from creating obligations that I would exploit further down the line.
I will say this. Whatever decision you come up with, I think the industry would welcome very, very clear rules for what can and cannot be done, as opposed to the interpretation bulletins that essentially say, “Well, do whatever you think is right, and if you do something that is wrong, we'll come a-knockin'”. We're talking about a Criminal Code underpinning here and I think we need a little more clarity around that issue.
I'll leave you with this thought, then, and I'll welcome any discussion or questions you have. The relationship between business and government is one of the principal determining factors in the performance of our economy and the quality of our society. I think politicians, bureaucrats, entrepreneurs, and citizens have a vested interest in this relationship functioning at as high a level as possible.
It's important to ensure that the transparency objectives of this legislation are realistic, attainable, and effective and that the compliance burden does not contribute to the insularization--I think I made that word up--of the public decision-making process. In other words, anything that causes government to retrench from consultation, to make decisions in a vacuum because of the burden of complying with this legislation, I think is taking us backwards.
Again, I think the committee has quite a challenge ahead of it. I look forward to discussing any or all of those points or any points that you want to bring up based on my experiences.
I'm at your disposal. Thank you, Madam Chair.