Yes.
If an enterprise organization retains a consultant lobbyist to lobby on its behalf, the consultant lobbyist must register in the registry of lobbyists. If the same enterprise organization instead instructs one of its employees to do the same lobbying, the most senior officer must register the purpose of those activities only if they represent a significant part of the activities.
In addition, proof that certain lobbying comprised "a significant part" is often difficult to establish. The city of Toronto has solved this problem by not making this kind of distinction. The communication for the purpose of influencing is a communication covered by the municipal code. Given the public's right to know who was attempting to influence decisions made by public institutions, it is important that all lobbying be reported, not just lobbying that comprises a significant part.
It is crucial that the act be easy to apply. On that point, it should be easy to identify the lobbyists covered, by answering a very simple question. Is the purpose of the communications for the purpose of influencing made by a person to a public office holder to influence the decision covered by the act? If so, the person should be registered in the registry.
Let's talk now about the role of public office holders. Lobbying involves two actors: one who is seeking to influence and one whom it is sought to influence. In other words, a lobbyist and a public office holder. That relationship must be transparent, and accordingly must be registered in the registry of lobbyists. That is what the act clearly requires. A person who seeks to influence has an obligation to register. However, that does not mean that the public office holder has no role to play. On the contrary: they have the role of ensuring that the people who seek to influence them comply with their obligation to register. Accordingly, the responsibility for ensuring transparency is not the exclusive prerogative of the lobbyists commissioner. The best way to ensure the effective application of the act is undoubtedly for public office holders to play their role fully.
Let's look now at the power to impose administrative penalties. Lobbyists commit numerous minor offences under the act. In general, these offences go unpunished since the people who commit them do not always deserve the stain on their reputations that might result from penalties or disciplinary measures. It is nonetheless important for consequences to be possible when there are breaches of the rules laid down in the act or the code. For that reason the lobbyists commissioner should have the power to impose administrative penalties, which might encourage respect of the act and the code.
Take the case of the consultant lobbyist who regularly registers in the registry after the time allowed by the act, sometimes even after the decision of the public office holder has been made. By doing that, they circumvent the public's right to know who is attempting to influence decisions made by their public institutions. Because the decision has already been made, the public is presented with what amounts to a fait accompli, and there is nothing at all that it can do in time.
Lastly, I want to talk about the ability of the commissioner to initiate prosecutions. While we must recognize that the efforts made to enforce the act must not be limited to prosecutions alone, we must nonetheless acknowledge that prosecutions are sometimes the only available option when a lobbyist stubbornly refuses to comply with their obligations. Accordingly, prosecutions can play an important role in enforcing the act and the code. While the lobbyists commissioner may conduct inquiries where he believes on reasonable grounds that there has been a breach of a provision of the act or the code, the act does not authorize him to initiate prosecutions personally.
The legal framework governing lobbying is a relatively new and specialized area of the law. The lobbyists commissioner is the only entity who has been empowered to publish notices concerning the carrying out, interpretation or application of the act or the code. It is up to the commissioner to inquire and determine whether there has been a breach of the act or the code, having regard to the facts brought to his attention. Therefore, as a result of his knowledge and expertise in the act and the code, the lobbyists commissioner is best suited to evaluate the relevance of initiating prosecutions and submitting the cases to the tribunal.
Madam Chair and committee members…
thank you for giving me the opportunity to share these observations with you. I remain at your disposal to answer your questions.