Thank you.
Good morning, Mr. Chair and committee members.
I am pleased to have the opportunity to discuss the Lobbyists' Code of Conduct, which I submitted to you on November 15, along with a document explaining the changes.
I am joined by Scott Whamond, our office’s policy analyst.
As Commissioner of Lobbying, it is my responsibility to develop the Code which defines the standards of ethical behaviour required of registered lobbyists. It contributes, along with other ethical regimes, to enhancing public confidence in federal government institutions.
My experience administering the 2015 Code highlighted challenges in applying its rules of conduct and in providing guidance to lobbyists. In updating the Code, I aimed to address these challenges by using clear and plain language, by focusing on lobbyists' actions without importing various ethics regimes, and by creating a comprehensive code which eliminated the need to consult separate guideline documents to define the key concepts.
We conducted three rounds of public consultations over a two-year period. Overall, we received positive feedback on the new code, particularly with respect to the clarity of its objectives and its rules of conduct.
I received passionate but widely divergent feedback on two issues. These were political work and the value of allowable hospitality.
On political work, the 2015 code prevents a lobbyist who participated in a political activity from lobbying the official and their staff who benefited from this participation for a specified period. There is no definition of political activity or what is meant by a specified period. A separate guidance document suggests that the cooling-off period for higher-risk political activities should be equivalent to a full election cycle. There is no specified period for lower-risk activities; there is only a recommendation that lobbyists exercise caution if they are frequently involved in such activities.
During the consultation, some stakeholders suggested that after participating in important political work, the cooling-off period should be at least 10 years, while others argued that any such restriction could infringe on a lobbyist's charter rights. This is a concern I shared.
The updated rule was carefully crafted to achieve its objective of restricting lobbying if a sense of obligation could reasonably be seen to exist and to provide the greatest clarity for lobbyists, all while complying with the charter.
The new rule defines and provides examples of the political roles that could reasonably be seen to create a sense of obligation. It also excludes from its application certain forms of political participation. The rule does not prohibit lobbyists from engaging in political work, but prevents them from lobbying officials who benefited from this work and their close associates. The rule also sets out a cooling-off period of one or two years, based on the significance of the political work or the level of interaction with the official.
When considering other regimes and the five-year restriction on lobbying that applies to senior officials when they leave office, I believe these cooling-off periods are reasonable and appropriate.
I am confident that as currently drafted, the rule is on solid constitutional footing. I have real concerns, however, that extending the cooling-off period beyond two years creates risks with respect to charter compliance, particularly given that the code is a non-statutory instrument.
With respect to hospitality, the 2015 Code prevents a lobbyist from offering gifts to an official that the official is not allowed to accept. This rule therefore requires the commissioner to defer to various federal authorities governing the ethics of such office holders to determine whether lobbyists can offer hospitality. The new rule allows lobbyists to know when they can offer it and the permissible value, regardless of other regimes.
Some argued that lobbyists should not be allowed to offer any hospitality. Others said having a monetary value added to clarity, but some argued it was too low. Some believed the status quo should be maintained.
I determined that a $40 limit for food and beverage, excluding taxes, was reasonable, with an annual limit of $80. The low value amount is based on federal hospitality standards, recent average restaurant meal costs and the impact of inflation over the past two years.
In my view, this rule will promote equitable access for all lobbyists and avoid creating a sense of obligation on the part of the official.
Although it is not possible to anticipate all scenarios, a lot of thought went into revising the ethical standards that federally registered lobbyists must follow.
Mr. Chair and members of the committee, I look forward to your questions and your comments and I welcome any suggestions to improve the code before I finalize it.
Merci.
