Information & Ethics Committee on Feb. 2nd, 2012

[Dean Del Mastro, Conservative, Peterborough, ON]

Very good.

I'll start with the Public Affairs Association of Canada.

Mr. Capobianco, you have two recommendations. You wouldn't pick just one of them; they'd have to work in unison. One is to reduce the five-year ban on lobbying to one year. The other is to reduce the 20% threshold.

If you simply remove the 20% threshold, you're really saying that anybody who has been in a position in which they've been deemed to be a designated public office holder can't work at all in these firms for five years--unless, of course, you reduce the five-year ban. Is that not correct?

[John Capobianco]

Yes, or unless you register your activities.

[Dean Del Mastro, Conservative, Peterborough, ON]

But right now you've got a five-year ban, which means the 20% threshold allows them to do some government communications as long as it's not the dominant part of what they're doing. If you leave the five-year rule in place and eliminate the 20% threshold, they would then be entirely out of the profession for a full five years. Is that correct?

I'm just trying to understand what it is you're recommending. You're not recommending to eliminate the 20% rule and replace it with x; you're just saying eliminate it, right?

[John Capobianco]

You're right. Our goal is to get both of them taken into account.

Stephen, I don't know if you have a comment with respect to this aspect, but our intent was not to eliminate anybody from actually getting into the profession.

[Dean Del Mastro, Conservative, Peterborough, ON]

Okay.

[Stephen Andrews]

Right now the provincial jurisdictions that have lobbying registration systems have a cooling-off period for political staff or public office holders of one year.

There are some differences, such as a cabinet minister, for example, who was involved in sensitive negotiations in a particular sector becoming a lobbyist in the same sector where his or her ministry dealt with a variety of very sensitive files. We think that to make the system fairer, individuals leaving public office or political staff roles or senior civil service roles should have a cooling-off period of one year. That would be consistent. With the 20% rule, it would mean.... Typically, they would not be able to engage in lobbying activity for a year.

[Dean Del Mastro, Conservative, Peterborough, ON]

The point is that you wouldn't want to do one without doing the other. I understand.

My own impression is that the public has a real misperception about what government relations people and lobbyists actually do. In some ways I think lobbyists are given far too much credit for how legislation and government policies are actually adopted. In other ways I don't think you're given enough credit for raising the awareness of public office holders or MPs about things that might be going on in the Canadian economy or things such as unintended consequences of legislation, which does happen. I think these things are invaluable. I will say that your profession is certainly misunderstood.

I think there was a consequence, and this is something I've witnessed over time, of the rules the way they are, but I don't know that there's a perfect way of doing it and I don't want to suggest to you that there are any changes one way or the other coming in this regard.

In any case, as we were working to become more transparent and to make sure that government was accountable to Canadians, these rules were adopted; an unintended consequence was that staffers--in our case, Conservative staffers--who were in place prior to the Federal Accountability Act were suddenly in huge demand. Everybody wanted to hire them. Some of them do very well, because they weren't covered under the act and they have no more connection in this current government than people who perhaps were working in government relations in previous governments prior to our taking power. After the last election, everybody was racing around looking for anybody who had any kind of ties into the NDP, because they were suddenly the official opposition. Government relations people were out buying orange ties and trying to see if they could get a table at Brixton's. There was all kinds of weird stuff going on.

[The Chair, NDP, Jean Crowder]

Mr. Del Mastro, could you wrap up?

[Dean Del Mastro, Conservative, Peterborough, ON]

The bottom line is do you see this as an unintended consequence of the act, the way it operates?

[Charles King]

It is a little bit of an.... It is. I mean, there is a chill out there in the sense that there is a five-year ban. It's good for the people who are in the business as it is, because if fewer people are coming into your marketplace, you have the field to yourself.

[The Chair, NDP, Jean Crowder]

Perhaps you could wrap it at that. You are well over time.

[Dean Del Mastro, Conservative, Peterborough, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, NDP, Jean Crowder]

Great. Thank you.

Mr. Andrews, you have five minutes.

[Scott Andrews, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

Thank you.

Almost on the same line of conversation, John, you mentioned earlier that you are in a government relations firm, that this is the business you're in as well. Can you explain to me the difference, if there is one, between a GR firm and a lobbying firm?

[John Capobianco]

I think by and large they are one and the same. We prefer to call them government relations firms, but my firm, Fleishman-Hillard, is a strategic communications firm. We do both public relations and public affairs. Within public affairs, we do public relations.

So there are firms out there like ours, and there are others, like Hill and Knowlton, where they do strategic communications as well, who do communications and public affairs. There are other firms that are just strictly government relations. They have individuals who will do strictly government relations activity, where they don't do much on the communications side of it.

I think when someone says “lobbying firm”, it is an organization that does government relations. It could be a firm that is just strictly government relations or a firm that does strategic communications, which involves a communications component and a public affairs component.

[Scott Andrews, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

So can you be a government relations firm without doing any lobbying?

[John Capobianco]

I'd like to see that happen. I don't think you can.

You can be a government relations firm and not do lobbying in the sense that you can do a lot of public affairs activities, one of them not being lobbying, which means you can do stakeholder management, advocacy, etc. But just given the rules, I think any interactivity with government you'd want to register, so therefore you would become a lobbying firm, just to be on the safe side.

[Scott Andrews, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

So how could former—

[The Chair, NDP, Jean Crowder]

Mr. Andrews, the other Mr. Andrews had a comment.

[Scott Andrews, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

Oh, sorry.

[Stephen Andrews]

Generally speaking, there is a distinction in the act. Certain types of communications are registerable communications. Certain types of government relations consultants and firms would not have direct conversations with government. They would advise clients on, for example, who makes what kind of decision. It would be like a Government 101 kind of service.

I mean, there are firms out there, people out there, practices out there who do that. For example, in the work that I typically do, I don't lobby. I say, “This is how government makes certain kinds of decisions. Here are the basic rules of lobbying compliance. Here is what you're going to have to do to kind of communiqué a case to government that makes sense.” But I don't lobby—

[Scott Andrews, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

So should we be able to catch those individuals...and in particular former public office holders who go out and start a government relations firm?

John, you said you can't do a government relations firm without lobbying, basically. My question is how would former public officer holder Stockwell Day be able to have a government relations firm and not do any lobbying?

If he's strictly doing what you just suggested, Stephen, that...you don't catch that, he doesn't follow by the five-year ban, and I would argue that would have a lot more influence than a lobbyist.

[John Capobianco]

Just to that, Mr. Andrews, I think if a public office holder or a former member or a former cabinet minister decides to go into a government relations firm or strategic communications firm, that person is absolutely bound by the five-year rule. Therefore, they will not engage in any lobbying activity. They could advise clients and they could advise internal staff as to the inner workings of government and how that works, but none of that is registerable activity, so they would still be bound by the five-year rule.

I think your question is about a lobbying firm versus a government relations firm. I think there are lots of similarities, but the distinction I make is that in a strategic communications firm that has both communications and public affairs, if a public office holder happens to be working in that firm, he or she could be doing communications or issues management work without doing lobbying work.

[Scott Andrews, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

Okay, but you also wield a lot of influence, even if you don't lobby, as a former public office holder. If you were a former cabinet minister, you would have influence. You would be able to tell whoever to meet with whomever, and that is a non-registered activity.

Should we look at changing the Lobbying Act to capture that type of influence?

[Charles King]

Good luck. I would argue no. Providing somebody strategic advice one on one? There's no lobbying. Let's take a former cabinet minister. People are going to ask about the dynamics around that cabinet table and how it works. If I just provide advice and walk away, what have I done that is illegal? What have I done wrong here?

I've not done anything wrong--unless you guys want to create an influence act or something. You're going to have to start getting into.... Good luck.