Evidence of meeting #12 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was lobbying.
A video is available from Parliament.
1:55 p.m.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
I thank you for that.
I guess my concern here is that we're dealing with a very different type of political group. All the key ministers involved in the decision were feted and brought out to WE events. There were very close sets of relationships that made them able to call favours in. It was never seen as lobbying. I haven't seen a situation like this before in terms of gifting events where people are invited to big rallies and get to be public speakers and meet all kinds of famous people—
1:55 p.m.
Conservative
1:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
Now we go on to Mr. Warkentin. We're in the second round. It's five minutes, Mr. Warkentin.
November 27th, 2020 / 1:55 p.m.
Conservative
Chris Warkentin Conservative Grande Prairie—Mackenzie, AB
I know I'm going to run out of time here.
Mr. Dion, we appreciate your coming and testifying. You have a tough job, and I understand that. I've learned a little bit about how difficult it must be.
When we first started hearing about the WE Charity organization and hearing the testimony of the different players, we heard some information. Then it was contradicted by other members of the organization.
You may not want to comment in terms of who you're listening to or how you corroborate the testimony in this case, but when you get conflicting information from different sources, what process do you undertake to get to the root of it and to figure out the actual facts? Obviously, we as a committee are doing that. We are requesting additional documentation to corroborate the testimony. How would you do it?
1:55 p.m.
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
We do the same thing, and sometimes we end up interviewing somebody we thought we would not have to interview when something like this arises. At the end of the day, if there are conflicting versions, it's my role to determine, on the balance of probabilities, who is telling the truth and who isn't.
That's how it would happen in practice. It's not always easy. It's a difficult job, but that's essentially how we would solve it. It's by asking for additional documents, as you've mentioned, and by interviewing additional people. At the end of the day, I make a determination as to whom I believe and whom I don't believe.
1:55 p.m.
Conservative
Chris Warkentin Conservative Grande Prairie—Mackenzie, AB
In terms of the testimony, obviously one person's version of events may impact on the code and the act differently from somebody else's interpretation of the events. I'm thinking specifically about the Trudeau family's testimony that they were paid for speaking events, and then the organization said that it wasn't in fact for speaking; it was actually to have a relationship with corporations that in many cases the government would have some relationship with or would regulate.
In those cases, how would you make a determination with regard to whether or not they broke the code and the act, when one testifies that they were simply speaking to a bunch of youths and the other testifies that they were there to serve a corporate interest?
1:55 p.m.
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
I look at the totality of the facts and basically came to a conclusion, which I share in my report with the Speaker of the House in the case of the code and with the Prime Minister in the case of the act. That's how it works.
The interpretation I give to the act essentially cannot be attacked anywhere—it's final—although there are several grey zones. As in any other field of law, it's not always black or white.
1:55 p.m.
Conservative
Chris Warkentin Conservative Grande Prairie—Mackenzie, AB
You're the final arbitrator on a lot of this. We understand that.
Mr. Chair, were you indicating that my time was up?
1:55 p.m.
Conservative
Chris Warkentin Conservative Grande Prairie—Mackenzie, AB
Okay, I apologize. I thought maybe you were intervening there.
In terms of the larger picture, in terms of the amounts of money that were committed to the WE organization, and then the decision by the WE organization to not only discontinue its relationship when scrutiny started to be levelled against it but even to shut down their organizations in Canada, is there any risk that their ceasing operations in Canada will have an impact on the continuation of your review of those events?
1:55 p.m.
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
You see, there is a risk, but we haven't come across the real situation yet.
1:55 p.m.
Conservative
Chris Warkentin Conservative Grande Prairie—Mackenzie, AB
There is a risk that if they completely curtail operations—
2 p.m.
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
It's pure speculation, because we haven't come across that situation and we have not... Anyway, it's not relevant at this moment.
2 p.m.
Conservative
Chris Warkentin Conservative Grande Prairie—Mackenzie, AB
I appreciate that. I just got a sense that when members resigned, your investigations were impacted, so I worried that if they continued to curtail their operations here in Canada, that may have an impact on your study as well. I guess we'll cross that bridge when we get there.
Thank you so much.
2 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
Thank you very much, colleagues.
Commissioner, thank you very much for taking the time to testify before our committee. We greatly appreciate it. We need a little bit of time to transition now to our next meeting because, of course, it's hybrid like this one. It will take a couple of minutes.
2 p.m.
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
Thank you.
2 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
Colleagues, unless you need a break, while we transition, I wanted to read you something. Because of a question that was asked by—
Sorry, colleagues, we can officially suspend.
2:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
Welcome to the committee, Madame Bélanger. As you can see, we're one of the most entertaining committees on Parliament Hill.
We will start with your remarks and then go into questions and answers. I think you know the drill, so please go ahead. You have seven minutes for your opening remarks.
2:05 p.m.
Nancy Bélanger Commissioner of Lobbying, Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair. This is the first time we have had an opportunity to meet. Committee members, bonjour.
I am very pleased to appear before you today to discuss the administration and enforcement of the Lobbying Act over the past several months.
As the Commissioner of Lobbying, I am accountable to Parliament. My mandate includes three areas of activity.
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 6,200 active lobbyists registered. Since February 2020, of the over 6,000 posted registrations, 1,757 were new. Since then, lobbyists have also provided details with respect to more than 21,000 arranged and oral communications.
When compared with the same period in 2018-19, it's clear that more communications are occurring in 2020. While health was the top subject registered and communicated in February, March and April 2020, economic development became the top subject in May and has remained so ever since.
To make it easier for Canadians to identify and track lobbying activities directly related to the pandemic, the office created an easy to access search feature of registrations for that topic. There are currently 640 such registrations.
Second, my mandate includes raising awareness of the Lobbying Act and the Lobbyists' Code of Conduct with lobbyists, public office holders and other stakeholders.
Since the beginning of the pandemic, to assist those who are new to the registration process, our client services team provided assistance. As the government announced funding programs related to COVID-19, we published guidelines to ensure continued compliance from lobbyists.
We also gave presentations to lobbyists and public office holders on the lobbying regime. This means that more than 300 individuals now know more about the requirements of the act and the code.
The office's website remains the main tool to reach lobbyists and the public. A new website was launched in April 2020.
Third, I enforce the act and code.
Allegations of non-compliance with the act and the code are dealt with in two steps. First, a preliminary assessment is undertaken to evaluate the nature of the alleged contravention, obtain initial information and determine whether the subject matter falls within my jurisdiction. Following this assessment, and when necessary to ensure compliance with the act or the code, an investigation is commenced.
When I complete an investigation under the code of conduct, I table a report to Parliament. When I have reasonable grounds to believe an offence under the act has been committed, I must refer the matter to a peace officer, most often someone in 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.
Since April 2020, I have opened 16 preliminary assessments, and I currently have five ongoing investigations. Also since April, I have referred three investigation files to the RCMP. As of today, there are 11 files with the RCMP.
When such a referral is made, I must suspend my investigation until the matters have been dealt with. Only once this has occurred can I complete my investigation and report to Parliament.
The act is clear that I must conduct my investigations in private. That means that I cannot comment. These matters may become criminal investigations, and I cannot jeopardize them.
Although I'm unable to comment on cases, I'd like to highlight certain aspects of the act as it relates to some of the issues that the committee is studying.
Under the Lobbying Act, communications in relation to the awarding of a contract is a registerable activity, but only for consultant lobbyists, not for in-house lobbyists.
As well, for in-house lobbyists, the act requires the most senior paid officer of the organization or corporation to file a registration when the collective lobbying activities of the organization or corporation represent “a significant part of the duties of one employee”. The “significant part of the duties” threshold has been established at 20% or more of overall duties. When this threshold is met, the senior officer has two months to register these activities.
When it comes to the five-year ban on lobbying for former designated public office holders, the act prohibits these former officials from lobbying as a consultant or as an in-house lobbyist for an organization. However, if a former designated public office holder is employed by a corporation, this individual is entitled to lobby as long as the communications do not amount to a significant part of his or her work.
Like any other allegations of non-compliance, these elements are all assessed when conducting a preliminary assessment or an investigation.
As I have stated to the committee in the past, the significant part of the duties threshold should be removed from the Lobbying Act, and this will be one of my recommendations should the Lobbying Act be reviewed.
I would also recommend the elimination of discrepancies related to in-house lobbyists regardless of whether they are employed by a corporation or organization. I believe that this would increase fairness and clarity in ensuring that both corporations and organizations are subject to the same requirements.
Finally, with respect to the impact of the pandemic on the results achieved by my office. I have been impressed by the team's ability to work together and continue to deliver excellence during a time of heightened stress and insecurity.
Not only did the employees of my office adjust quickly to a new way of working and find ways to support each other virtually, but they also continued to ensure the delivery of all aspects of the mandate. For this I am very grateful to each and every member of my staff.
Mr. Chair and committee members, thank you, and I welcome your questions.
2:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
Thank you, Ms. Bélanger.
We're now on to Mr. Barrett for six minutes.
2:10 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON
Commissioner, thank you very much for joining us today. It's a pleasure to see you again, even though it's only in virtual format.
Can you tell the committee how long it usually takes your office to compile and release a report on alleged illegal lobbying once you've started it?
2:10 p.m.
Commissioner of Lobbying, Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying
That is a good question. Do you mean to issue a report to Parliament or to issue a report to the RCMP?
2:10 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON
I mean to issue a report to Parliament.
2:10 p.m.
Commissioner of Lobbying, Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying
I haven't done one yet.