Evidence of meeting #55 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was lobbying.
A recording is available from Parliament.
10:10 a.m.
Conservative
10:10 a.m.
NDP
Richard Cannings NDP South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC
Thank you.
I'm not sure if this is a fair question, so feel free to answer it as you will.
Several times you have referred to how it would be good to have the Lobbying Act reviewed. I'll just frame it this way. If you were an MP drafting a private member's bill on updating the Lobbying Act—you don't have to go into details—what areas would you concentrate on? What are clearly the most important places to fix things?
10:10 a.m.
Commissioner of Lobbying, Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying
The first one definitely would be to close the gap on the “significant part of the duties” threshold. For an organization and a corporation, there's a threshold to be met in order to decide whether they should register. We need to eliminate that. That's the first thing that needs to go.
Also, there are monthly communication reports. The individuals need to put in the registry that they've had an “oral” and “arranged in advanced” meeting. Communications that happen anywhere else that were not arranged in advance do not need to make it to the registry. That's a problem.
The other area would likely be the spectrum of sanctions, because right now we've got the code, and if I issue a report to Parliament, there's a reputational thing. Anything else is an offence under the act, and that is the RCMP, and there's nothing in between. I would like to have the opportunity to give monetary penalties, to prohibit someone from lobbying and to issue mandatory orders of education, which I do. I ask them to show up when there are some issues.
Those would be probably the top three that come to mind.
10:10 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
Thank you, Mr. Cannings.
Thank you to all members of the committee and Ms. Bélanger for today's session.
That concludes the formal part of our meeting in terms of questioning, but I did sort of pre-empt Ms. Bélanger a bit at the beginning of this round.
On the timeline for publishing the proposed changes to the Lobbyists' Code of Conduct, and for the benefit of the committee, if you could tell us what your thoughts are on where you're going to go with this, we would appreciate it.
10:10 a.m.
Commissioner of Lobbying, Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying
The first thing I will say is that I have very much appreciated this conversation. I was hoping that you would invite me, because I'm very much about public discussions and transparency. I appreciate that you have taken the time. I have seen that you have a busy schedule, and I'm therefore really happy to have been able to have this conversation with you.
We've been doing this process since 2020. We have been looking at this a lot and have spent a lot of time on it for over two years. There have been three rounds of consultations. I have looked at every comment more than once. It's time. We need to do this code, because the longer the current code is in place, the longer the issues continue.
It was in my departmental plan and in my annual report that I wanted this code to be in place before the end of this fiscal year, which is March 31. I am completely aware that this does not give you a lot of time. I would ask the committee to do it ASAP, because I really want this to start, to be in force.
The code makes reference to calendar years, and therefore it would have been nice to have as full a calendar year as possible, but if that's not doable, I am hoping for the end of March or by April 1 that I could do this, but I will not proceed until I get your sense that you do not have recommendations to make. If you do have recommendations to make, I will wait for them, but I would really ask that you do this as soon as possible.
You may hear from witnesses. I will listen to see if there is anything new that comes up that I am not aware of, because I really want to get this right. It's not a question of going ahead with what we've proposed, and if there are some improvements to be made, we will make those improvements, but we've stretched where we can, based on everything we have heard.
I really am in your hands, but I would really beg that we work on this as soon as possible so that we can move on to something else. I think our team wants this to move along.
10:15 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
I thank you for that, because, based on the discussion today, there may be some further discussion, as Mr. Fergus implied, that may have to occur. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect that the end of this fiscal year, which is March 31, is a reasonable timeline in order to publish the code.
I think it's safe—and if I'm wrong, please let me know—that on behalf of the committee, we ask that these not be published until at least the end of the fiscal year. If that's your goal, I don't see that as an unreasonable timeline. That will give the committee time, and it will give, based on today's testimony and today's questions, outside stakeholders an opportunity to provide input as well. If there is new information, you can consider that, as you say.
The problem we have as a committee—and we discussed this the other day—is that we now have 29 meetings left before the end of the year, and there are several issues that we are dealing with, not the least of which is access to information. Therefore, I am going to make that request, and I can do it formally in a letter as well, if it is the will of the committee to ask you to consider holding off on publishing this in the Gazette at least until the end of this fiscal year. That will allow committee members an opportunity, so if that's reasonable to you—
10:15 a.m.
Commissioner of Lobbying, Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying
Can I make a tweak to that?
10:15 a.m.
Conservative
10:15 a.m.
Commissioner of Lobbying, Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying
If I could make a suggestion, if you only provide me your comments by March 31, I need to gazette, and then it will not be enforced until sometime in the summer, which is not ideal.
10:15 a.m.
Conservative
10:15 a.m.
Commissioner of Lobbying, Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying
Okay. I need to publish.
10:15 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
Perhaps I'll go around the table and ask committee members what a reasonable timeline is on their part to provide you with some suggestions that you may consider.
Mr. Fergus, I'll start with you. One week, two weeks, or three weeks—what would you consider a reasonable timeline?
10:15 a.m.
Liberal
Greg Fergus Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC
I don't know. I want to be helpful, but I just don't know. As you said, it's March 31 for sure. We'd have to have a discussion about committee business and where we want to focus our concerns, and then who the appropriate people would be, if necessary, if we go outside of this committee.
10:15 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
I'm canvassing the room here, Mr. Barrett. What's a reasonable timeline to expect input from committee members?
10:15 a.m.
Conservative
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON
Again, it would depend on the tempo of our next few meetings. Am I correct that before the end of March, there are three non-sitting weeks?
10:15 a.m.
Conservative
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON
That will impact it as well.
It would be great, Chair, to find out from the commissioner.... If April 1 is her target to publish, by what date would she need to receive that feedback in order to be able to process it and then incorporate it, if that is her decision? We can do that instead of saying it's three weeks, four weeks, five weeks.
10:15 a.m.
Commissioner of Lobbying, Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying
If I want this code to be enforced on April 1, it needs to have been gazetted before that, and then I need to consider your suggestions, and I really do want to consider your suggestions. Depending on the extent of the suggestions, I may end up having to say it won't be April 1, because you may have many suggestions that I need to consider. We need to draft them and then proceed. I do want to give lobbyists the time to adjust to this new code and make sure that they've got time to....
Ideally, you would give me your comments by March 1. It would give me at least a month, but then that gives you less than a month, as we are at February 3.
If you were able to tell me whether or not you will have suggestions by March 1, that will help me figure out the timelines from there, because if you don't have any.... It will take you time to formulate those suggestions, as well. It does take time, and I'm not trying to rush.
10:20 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
I appreciate that.
Based on a discussion I had with the clerk, we may have some time to deal with this issue at our Tuesday meeting this coming week. We may have a bit of time at the end of the meeting to deal with that. I would suggest that perhaps we deal with this under committee business on Tuesday. That will give you the weekend to think about the testimony that we heard, and suggestions and input, etc.
Does that sound reasonable to members of the committee?
Ms. Normandin, do you wish to add something?
10:20 a.m.
Bloc
Christine Normandin Bloc Saint-Jean, QC
Since this will be discussed by the committee like an administrative matter, I do not want to speak for Mr. Villemure and impose any deadlines on him.
The first question that will arise then is how much time each member needs to at least submit recommendations. We will then have to determine how much time the committee needs to deal with them. I understand that will be done on Tuesday.