Evidence of meeting #31 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was communication.
A video is available from Parliament.
Bloc
Luc Thériault Bloc Montcalm, QC
Okay.
In short, you're telling us that you want the discretionary power to make the files public, in the interest of transparency. What you're telling us right now is that you can't provide the full transparency required, transparency that's at the very core of the act.
Have I understood correctly?
Commissioner of Lobbying, Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying
You understood correctly.
What's a bit tiresome is that, when the RCMP closes a file, it sends it back to me and tells me that it has closed the file. In all honesty, I could table a report in Parliament to explain the work I did. If I do that, though, the principle of natural justice kicks in. I have to contact the people I investigated two, three or four years ago. Very often, those organizations no longer exist, or the people are no longer there.
That means there would be a concern about the principle of natural justice. I don't know what else I could investigate if the act were to tell me to continue the investigation. If the RCMP has done its investigation and decided not to continue, I'm not sure what more I could do with my small team.
Could I prepare a report that explains all that? Perhaps, but to what end? Would it just be to show that I did my job? I'm not sure. I think there would be an attempt to stop me, out of concern for upholding the principle of natural justice.
Bloc
Commissioner of Lobbying, Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying
When someone is late, I accept their registration and I ask them to take a training course that my team gives. Some take it, some don't. I wish I had the power to tell someone who's late for the third time, say, that they have to take a training course and that, the next time, they'll have to pay a penalty. Then, if it happens again, they will be prohibited from lobbying for a short time, and after that, the RCMP will deal with it.
I really wish I had a range of options to ensure compliance with the act, instead of always having to investigate the most serious offences. A lot of little things happen that I can't do anything about.
Bloc
Luc Thériault Bloc Montcalm, QC
Is it your sense that sometimes the late reporting is due more to a lack of knowledge than to negligence?
Commissioner of Lobbying, Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying
Very often, it's probably due to a lack of knowledge, a poor understanding of the regime. Some people tell me they didn't think they were lobbying. Public servants are the ones who tell them that they should think about registering because what they are doing is actually lobbying.
That said, it tends to be the same people who are always late. Maybe it's about money. They engage in lobbying without registering, and when it winds up in the news, they decide to register.
It might be a good thing to be able to impose a penalty after a small investigation, instead of referring the matter to the RCMP.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
Thank you, Mr. Thériault.
We'll go to Mr. Barrett for five minutes.
Go ahead, please.
Conservative
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands—Rideau Lakes, ON
With respect to the post-employment lobbying activity ban for former members of Parliament, I'm going to use a real-life example so that I can understand it, because it's something that I've been asked about several times.
The former defence minister, Mr. Sajjan, has started a defence technology company. Their stated intention is to be an answer to the problem that is the gap that we currently have in the defence tech sector in Canada created by the fracture in the closeness of our relationship with the U.S. and companies there. The government has said that there's an awful lot of money and very specific pots of money that are available for small and medium-sized companies specifically like this one. Mr. Sajjan's company has identified itself as seeking some of those pots of money.
To my knowledge, Mr. Sajjan has not contacted any government officials. I'm not making any accusations or anything like that. What I want to understand though is, in an example like this, a former public office holder, a former member of Parliament, a former cabinet minister, starts a company, and their company doesn't have any customers so the first person they hire is someone to go to the government to say, “Hey, here's what we can do. We have this guy, and he has really great experience. He's a Canadian forces veteran. He's a former cabinet minister. He's a former member of Parliament. He had great visibility on what DND capability gaps were, and we think that we can fill those gaps for you.”
In this example, as we're going to assume innocence, it's likely the case that Mr. Sajjan has not directly communicated with anyone in government. Truly, I'm not trying to indict or cast aspersions with this example. I hope that there's life after politics for everybody. What I want to know is, do we have a regime that's set up, both in practice and in spirit, to ensure Canadians' confidence that there isn't a two-tier system when it comes to lobbying the government?
Commissioner of Lobbying, Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying
This is a very complex question you've just asked, so I'll start at the beginning.
A former minister would have to clear whatever work he or she wants to do in the future with the conflict of interest and ethics office. Let's assume that's been done and that's cleared. Any communication in relation to a contract.... This example you're giving me is a corporation, so it's for profit. Therefore, that individual would be able to lobby up to a significant part of their work—up to eight hours and historically up to 32 hours. This person, according to the Lobbying Act, is entitled to lobby up to eight hours. That's a problem, so that's the first thing that needs to be fixed.
Conservative
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands—Rideau Lakes, ON
I'm sorry. For clarity, in the hypothetical, a former member—
Commissioner of Lobbying, Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying
A former minister who opens up their own business for profit would be allowed to lobby up to eight hours, because that's what the law says right now. If they go work for a charitable organization, they can't lobby, but if they go work for a corporation, they can. That's the first thing.
Any communication, however, in relation to obtaining a contract is not lobbying, which is one of my recommendations for a company. If you hire a consultant to get you the contract, it's considered lobbying, but a communication in relation to a contract for employers, organizations and corporations is not covered under the Lobbying Act. The communication you're telling me about, if it's to obtain a contract, would not be lobbying. If, however, it's to get contributions, if it's to get grants, then that's lobbying, and that would be covered by the regs, and that person would not be entitled to do it. If they send their employee to do it for them, it's okay.
Conservative
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands—Rideau Lakes, ON
I have more questions, but I have no more time.
Commissioner of Lobbying, Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying
I'm sure you do.
Commissioner of Lobbying, Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying
I tried to fix that issue in one of my recommendations.
Liberal
Leslie Church Liberal Toronto—St. Paul's, ON
Commissioner, thank you for bringing up the careful interaction between the lobbying regime, the ethics regime and even the interplay of aspects like cooling-off periods, which may also be pertinent in various situations post employment.
I have a few questions for you.
First of all, there's grassroots lobbying versus public advocacy. What is grassroots lobbying? What does that encompass, in your view?
Commissioner of Lobbying, Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying
According to the law, it is when an organization, corporation or consultant lobbyist uses what they call “an appeal to Canadians” to communicate with decision-makers to change their minds or to influence them about an issue. It's ads in the paper that say, “Please call your member of Parliament about whatever and tell them what your opinion is on this.”
Liberal
Commissioner of Lobbying, Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying
No, it's orgs and corps as well. It's everybody. Grassroots lobbying is considered a communication method for everyone who lobbies.
Liberal
Leslie Church Liberal Toronto—St. Paul's, ON
How would you register that or designate it? Is it a designation of the actual communication that is calling the public to action?
Commissioner of Lobbying, Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying
Currently, the only thing they need to do when they do their registration is put a check mark that they will be using grassroots as a method of communication.
Liberal
Commissioner of Lobbying, Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying
No, there's nothing. That is why my recommendation is to try to add a bit of meat to that, in particular when it begins. Maybe they haven't started it, but in six months when they do the actual campaign, they should be going into the registry to say that they're doing it now.
Liberal
Leslie Church Liberal Toronto—St. Paul's, ON
On another point, you recommend registering all oral or written communications regardless of whether they are arranged in advance. I just want to ask you if you see any challenges with that. Do you envision any constraints on that?
As a parliamentarian, in some ways that's one of the recommendations that stands out to me in terms of creating perceptions of lobbying and access where there actually might not be any.
How do you see that playing out in practice?