Information & Ethics Committee on March 9th, 2020

[The Chair, Conservative, Rachael Thomas]

I thought perhaps I saw some hands up here earlier. I want to make sure they aren't missed.

You guys are good? Awesome.

Having heard from everyone, then, I will call a vote on the motion that is before the committee.

Before doing so, I want to take a moment to caution members. Based on principle, I have ruled this motion in order. However, let this caution stand: If this motion or a motion like it were to come forward to simply change a date, I would have no other choice than to rule that out of order. At that point in time it would be getting silly. I'm putting that out there as a caution to the committee. There have to be sufficient changes made to motions in order for them to come forward.

With that, I will proceed to a recorded vote.

(Motion negatived: nays 6; yeas 4)

At this point in time I will suspend, and we will prepare for our first witness.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rachael Thomas]

I call the committee back.

Let me call the committee's attention to a quick order of business before I formally invite Ms. Bélanger to give her remarks. We have a subcommittee report before us. I would look for agreement to adopt the subcommittee report.

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rachael Thomas]

Thank you so much, everyone.

Ms. Bélanger, thank you so much for coming today and for being willing to give your remarks and take our questions. We certainly look forward to learning from you today.

With that, I will hand the floor over to you for your opening statement.

[Nancy Bélanger, Commissioner of Lobbying, Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying]

Thank you very much.

Good afternoon, Madam Chair and committee members.

I am very pleased to be here today to meet many of you for the first time and to provide an overview of the federal lobbying regime, including my office's operations and activities.

The Lobbying Act and the Lobbyists' Code of Conduct recognize that lobbying is a legitimate activity, that lobbying should be transparent and that lobbyists should meet the highest ethical standards. The act and code are intended to foster public confidence in government decision-making.

As the Commissioner of Lobbying, I am accountable to Parliament, and my mandate includes three aspects.

First, I must establish and maintain a registry of lobbyists. As the main tool for enabling transparency of lobbying activities, the registry provides Canadians with information about who is communicating with public officials and about what subjects.

On any given day, there are about 6,000 active lobbyists registered. In the past year, they've provided details of more than 13,000 reportable communications.

A key strategic priority for the office has been to modernize the lobbyists registration system. As such, we consistently look for ways to improve the registry to make it more user- and mobile-friendly.

The second aspect of my mandate is to ensure compliance with the act and code. My office conducts verifications to ensure that registerable lobbying activities are properly reported and information provided by lobbyists is accurate and complete.

Allegations of non-compliance with the act and code are dealt with in two steps. First, a preliminary assessment is undertaken to evaluate the nature of the alleged contravention, to obtain initial information and to determine whether the subject matter falls within my jurisdiction. Following this assessment and when necessary to ensure compliance with either the act or code, an investigation is commenced.

When I complete an investigation under the code, I must table a report to Parliament. However, when I have reasonable grounds to believe that an offence has been committed, I must refer the matter to a peace officer, most often the RCMP. Offences under the Lobbying Act include failing to register; failing to file a monthly communication report; providing inaccurate information; and, lobbying while subject to the five-year prohibition.

In the current fiscal year, I have referred six investigation files to the RCMP, and as of today there are eight files with the RCMP. When such a referral is made, I must suspend my investigation until the matter has been dealt with. Once this has occurred, I can then complete the investigation and report to Parliament.

As of today, the office's ongoing compliance workload includes 14 preliminary assessments and 10 investigations.

Former designated public office holders are subject to a five-year probation on lobbying when they leave office. The act provides that I can grant an exemption from this prohibition based on a limited set of criteria.

Last fall, we launched an online tool to assist former designated public office holders who wish to make such a request.

Since the beginning of the current fiscal year, I have received 10 requests. Two exemptions have been granted thus far and three remain to be reviewed. Once granted, the exemptions are published on the office's website.

The last, but certainly not least, aspect of my mandate is to raise awareness of the act and code with lobbyists, public office holders and with any other stakeholders interested in lobbying.

This past year, we focused on updating our communication products and gave more than 50 presentations to stakeholders. This represents more than 600 individuals who now know more about the requirements of the act and code.

In addition, the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner and I offered teleconference sessions on post-employment obligations, gifts, and overall obligations for ministerial staff.

The office's website remains the main tool to reach lobbyists and the public. We have been updating and redesigning it to make information more readily accessible. A new website will be launched at the beginning of the next fiscal year.

All of this work and the effort required to fulfill government reporting obligations is being performed by a very small team of 28 employees. It is important to recognize the unwavering engagement, professionalism and resolve of the employees of the office who, more often than not, are asked to go well beyond what is required by their positions.

Creating and maintaining an exceptional workplace is a key priority, and it is important to me that the employees feel valued and understand the importance of their work. In the most recent Public Service Employee Survey, 100% of the employees in our office specified that their workplace prevents discrimination, treats them with respect and provides the equipment they need to do their jobs. Over 90% agreed that they have the support to balance their work and their personal lives, are proud of the work they do and would recommend the OCL as a great place to work.

In terms of financial resources, the office has a budget of $4.5 million that has effectively not changed since 2008. Personnel costs represent 70% of the expenditures, which is practically $3.4 million. The remaining $1.1 million is used to acquire program support and corporate services including HR, finance, IT and contracting.

Looking ahead, I have concerns about the current budget. Our fiscal reality is attempting to operate with a budget established more than 10 years ago. At that time $4.5 million may have been sufficient, but today it means there is practically no flexibility to reallocate financial resources, hire additional human resources or make necessary investments in an IT system with today's price tags.

The registry is a statutory requirement and is vital for transparency. Constant investments are required to ensure that the registry remains up to date with evolving IT and security standards and with the necessary enhancements to improve accessibility of the information.

I have recently taken steps to secure additional funding for the coming years by submitting a budget request to the government. Should we get this funding, we will hire additional employees with expertise in IT and information management to ensure the registry remains secure, reliable and easy to use.

Finally, I cannot conclude my remarks without mentioning that the Lobbying Act has been up for statutory review since 2017. I have developed a targeted number of recommendations to enhance the federal framework for lobbying. These recommendations are values-based, aimed at enhancing transparency, fairness, clarity and efficiency. Should the Lobbying Act be reviewed, I am ready to share a summary of my recommendations or a more comprehensive document detailing the rationale for each of them.

Madam Chair and committee members, thank you.

Thank you. I'm happy to answer any questions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rachael Thomas]

Thank you very much, Ms. Bélanger.

With that, I will move to questions by the members, starting with Mr. Barrett.

You have five minutes.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

Thanks, Madam Chair.

Thank you, ma'am, for your testimony today. I had the opportunity to meet with you before to hear about the work you do on behalf of Parliament. I appreciated that and hearing from you today. Thank you very much.

You mentioned in your conclusion that a statutory review of the Lobbying Act is required, and that 2017 is fast approaching and that you do have recommendations in mind.

At this committee we will fill up our agenda with lots of different items. I'm just wondering if you'd be able to give us an idea about the scope of the type of recommendations that you would make.

[Nancy Bélanger]

When I appeared on my nomination back in December 2017, I was asked to be prepared for a legislative review by the spring of 2018, so I've been working really hard for the last two years to come up with some recommendations. And experience helps, because the more I get along, the more I think of other things.

What I've done is gone through the recommendations that were made back in 2012 and what the committee had gone through and recommended. I decided to take a value-based approach. The values I've enunciated are transparency, efficiency, clarity and fairness. There are different things that can be recommended, and I've come up with 11 recommendations that would enhance those aspects. They can be put into two categories, some with respect to registration and some with respect to compliance.

With registration, the first one that everyone knows about, and I've said it in this committee before, is eliminating the “significant part of the duties” threshold. It's very difficult to apply, and it's difficult for organizations and corporations to know when they've met the 20% threshold. If you look at the different charges that have been laid, these have always been for consultant lobbyist or lobbying while prohibited. It is difficult for them to interpret and, therefore, very often they possibly over-report, or I investigate, and it's 13% or 15%. That is the difficult one.

What I highly recommend is that it be transparent and that it be registration by default with very clear criteria. If you fit in those exemptions, then you wouldn't need to register. Of course, we need to have a balanced approach as well.

Interestingly—and as you may or may not know—British Columbia has just adopted a number of new recommendations. They have gone the approach.... Their law will be in force on May 4. I don't know if they chose that date specifically for a reason. What they are doing is to have registration by default. If you have fewer than six employees and spend fewer than 50 hours a year at lobbying, then you do not need to register. My recommendation would be—and I don't know if you want to hear my recommendation, but I will keep going—fewer than six employees, likely about eight hours and three months.... I find that allowing a full year before having to register is too long. I would highly recommend that within three months, if you meet the threshold, you register. If you ask for more than $10,000, you should be registering.

That's one aspect. The other one is the monthly communication reports. Right now they have to be oral and arranged by anybody other than the public office holder. To me, who organizes the meeting should not matter to Canadians, and whether it's arranged in advance should not matter. Those one-hour conversations while you wait for your plane together should matter. To me, that's an important one. Whoever is in the room while the lobbying is occurring should be named. That's another example of a recommendation.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

Thank you very much.

Who is in the room is a key question. Should the committee take a further look at this, I would find it to be very important.

Is there a move to disclose compliance statistics? How many investigations you've undertaken, how many complaints have been referred to you, how many you have found on your own, and how you found them, that type of reporting, that level of detail, I don't believe are currently in your annual report. Are it?

[Nancy Bélanger]

How many I've opened and how many I've closed are definitely in my annual report. How many I've self-initiated versus how many I've received complaints about are not in it, but I'd be happy to proceed to do that. I'm going to throw this number out, and I might be off by a little bit, but I would almost bet that 90% are self-initiated.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

I think that would be very interesting—

[Nancy Bélanger]

Yes.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

—and would also help inform us, particularly when there is budgetary pressure.

[Nancy Bélanger]

Yes.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

The work that you're undertaking, it certainly would make a case for an expanded scope—

[Nancy Bélanger]

Sure.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

—should that be the case.

How much time do I have left, Madam Chair?

[The Chair, Conservative, Rachael Thomas]

You have 30 seconds.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

I can't get much done in that time.

You said that having more resources available to you in digitizing...would be helpful. Are all of these reports, such as your annual report, available online online for the public?

[Nancy Bélanger]

Yes, absolutely.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

Thanks very much.

That's fine for my time.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rachael Thomas]

Thank you, Mr. Barrett.

We'll move over to Ms. Brière.

[Élisabeth Brière, Liberal, Sherbrooke, QC]

Good afternoon.

Thank you for your presentation and for accepting our invitation.

In your annual report, you explain, “the office updated its guidance documents on how to mitigate conflicts of interest related to preferential access, political activities, and gifts”. The update of this guidance on the Lobbyists' Code of Conduct ensures that rules 6 and 10 of the former guidance, which concern conflicts of interest and gifts, respectively, have been replaced by rules 7 and 10 of the new guidance, which concern preferential access, political activities, and gifts.

Could you explain the reasoning behind these changes?

More generally, how do you see the coexistence of rules on lobbying and rules to prevent conflicts of interest?

[Nancy Bélanger]

I'll start with your first question.

No rule has been replaced. The Lobbyists' Code of Conduct exists and I cannot change it without holding consultations and providing you with a summary afterwards. Therefore, rule 6 still exists, as do rules 7 to 10, but these rules are accompanied by guidelines to facilitate their interpretation. I updated these guidelines because I was new to the job—I had just come to this position—and also because there was going to be an election. There is a rule on political activities, and I wanted to make sure that it was well-understood by lobbyists.

The rules haven't changed. I have simplified and clarified the examples of activities that could lead to a finding of conflict of interest and which require attention. I can tell you that lobbyists have expressed their satisfaction with the updated guidelines. They have been simplified, but directly and separately for each rule.

Your second question dealt with how lobbyists could manage possible conflicts of interest. Rule 6 is general in nature: it asks lobbyists to be careful about all their behaviour and not to act in such a way as to place the individual who listens to them in a conflict of interest situation, that is, a member of Parliament. Rules 7 to 10 are more specific: a lobbyist must not offer gifts; if a lobbyist undertakes political activities to help you get elected, he or she cannot then lobby you; and he or she cannot use interpersonal relationships to his or her advantage. The purpose of these rules is to prevent a conflict of interest or to avoid creating tension, a conflict between a private interest and the public interest.

[Élisabeth Brière, Liberal, Sherbrooke, QC]

Have these changes been well-received?