On the complaints, I think you're right. This is essentially a complaints-based investigation process, which is very similar to any other tribunal or officer of Parliament you can think of. Media stories sometimes bring cases to the attention of the commissioner, and I think she has mentioned that in front of the committee.
I don't see that changing, short of the commissioner putting on a disguise and staking out Brixton's on a Wednesday night. Good advertising for Brixton's today. I think it will continue to be a complaints-based process.
With respect to your second question, I think most lobbyists would err on the side of caution. If you hit an area and you're not sure.... I must have a record of fifty e-mails to the commission checking a point on something. They're very good about trying to help lobbyists understand the rules.
Sometimes the answers don't clarify things as much as we'd like—we've pointed to a couple of examples—but I have to say the staff there is typically excellent. The processes they have put in place for their computer systems have become much easier. They've heard concerns about that and they've responded.
I'd say the comfort level of how lobbyists interact with the commission on a day-to-day basis is pretty high. I don't know many people who are shy about calling up and saying they're about to go into a meeting and they don't know if they have to report it. The advice you usually get is along the lines of “err on the side of caution”, but it's better to ask for an explanation than forgiveness later. I think most people would find the day-to-day interaction between the commissioner, her staff, and the lobbying community to work very well.