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.
Commissioner of Lobbying, Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying
If employees are involved in the communication, it's the senior officer who is responsible for registering on behalf of all their employees.
One of my recommendations is that these employees inform senior responsible officers that they must register. There must be a single registration per organization. The registration will include all the names of employees who are engaged in lobbying.
Liberal
Linda Lapointe Liberal Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
You can continue on the British Columbia system. I'm interested in that. I wanted to clarify this point first.
Commissioner of Lobbying, Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying
Another worthwhile aspect of the British Columbia system are the communications reports. Once the registration is done, there is an additional obligation. Currently, the federal act provides for this obligation when there is an oral meeting organized with designated public office holders—that is to say, with senior officials. Lobbyists are responsible for preparing a report in which they indicate that they had that conversation orally during a meeting organized with a designated public office holder.
In British Columbia, that obligation also applies in cases of written communications, which I find worthwhile. There isn't really a reason to treat written communications and oral communications differently.
Commissioner of Lobbying, Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying
Lobbying does not need to be arranged in advance. That's another problem.
It is the substance of the communication that is important, not the form—whether it took place at the corner of the street, while waiting for the plane at the airport or at a coffee shop. All communications should be reported, not just those that were prearranged. So that's another worthwhile aspect of the British Columbia system.
Liberal
Linda Lapointe Liberal Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
So if I am at the airport and I meet with someone who handles one of my files, I would have to report that I had an informal conversation, since I represent someone's interests.
Is that correct?
Liberal
Commissioner of Lobbying, Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying
You can say that it's informal, but the form of communication shouldn't affect the content. If the lobbyists gave you the information they wanted to give you and you listened to them, whether at the airport or in your office, the fact that you retained it indicates that you were the subject of a communication that I think matters.
This is about transparency, to which Canadians are entitled. The information is not for me or for organizations and businesses. It aims to increase trust in our public institutions. If there are too many secret conversations, that's not good.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
Thank you, Ms. Lapointe.
Mr. Thériault, you have the floor for six minutes.
Bloc
Luc Thériault Bloc Montcalm, QC
Thank you.
Let's continue the discussion.
I imagine that what could help ensure that no distinction is made between formal, informal and impromptu meetings would be precisely to establish not an eight-hour threshold, but a zero threshold. If I meet with someone impromptu, they can always say that the conversation did not last eight hours.
In a way, we would be sidestepping that and circumventing the Lobbying Act.
Is that correct?
Commissioner of Lobbying, Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying
That's exactly what's happening right now. That is why the threshold should not be eight hours. That said, right now, I have no choice; I have to work with the words in the act in mind.
My first recommendation would be to remove the threshold. This notion of “significant part of duties” appears three times in the act. I'm sure we'll have a chance to talk about it again. Registration should be by default. That would remove the complexity of wondering whether or not the communication should be reported. If you have a communication, you report it.
By the way, registration takes five minutes, and entering the information takes less than 20 to 25 minutes. So it's a minimal effort to make. It's a small price to pay for communicating with you.
Bloc
Commissioner of Lobbying, Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying
I'm always interested in that.
Bloc
Luc Thériault Bloc Montcalm, QC
At one point, I asked the Prime Minister's chief of staff about the application of the conflict of interest screen.
He told us that he and his colleagues were not suggesting things, they were imposing an obligation on the Prime Minister not to meet with representatives of the companies listed on his disclosure form. I asked him if they were also prohibiting the Prime Minister from receiving or answering phone calls. Mr. Blanchard answered that Mr. Carney is aware of his obligations. I expected that they would have imposed that obligation, given that Mr. Sabia and Mr. Blanchard were boasting about imposing, not suggesting things to the Prime Minister, which I found to be quite ethically comforting.
The Lobbying Act, as it currently stands, was enacted in 2006. In 2011, there were 11 recommendations, which were never applied. We now find ourselves in a world of social media, which provides multiple ways to reach people. After the pandemic, we had Zoom meetings, for example. So this technological advance has taken place in the meantime.
Does the act, as it currently stands, provide a framework for all that according to its objectives?
If so, how does it do that? If not, should an additional amendment be made to the act on this subject?
Commissioner of Lobbying, Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying
One very positive aspect of the Lobbying Act is that it talks about any communication. It's very broad.
Unlike in most provinces, the concept of influence at the federal level has been removed. We're talking about communication regarding a request or a change to the act. When you make a request, you exercise some influence, but I interpret the word “communication” very broadly.
Communication through social media is communication. The same goes for telephone communications. The act includes written and oral communications or even communications through a public announcement. If someone takes out an ad in the newspaper asking Canadians to contact you, that counts as communication under the Lobbying Act.
So I would say that it's quite broad, and that's good. It could be specified that it includes all social media.
Bloc
Luc Thériault Bloc Montcalm, QC
How do we monitor that? How do we manage that broader accessibility versus what existed before?
How can the Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying ensure that everything is done according to the rules?
Commissioner of Lobbying, Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying
I have 35 employees. Right now, there are more than 9,000 registered lobbyists, and I expect the numbers to rise.
Bloc
Luc Thériault Bloc Montcalm, QC
Would you be able to ask the person in the highest office of the government, the Prime Minister, to provide you with his telephone communications?
Commissioner of Lobbying, Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying
Yes. I already do.
Commissioner of Lobbying, Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying
I do. I ask public office holders to submit any communication to me, and I have no trouble obtaining the information.
Commissioner of Lobbying, Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying
I couldn't, because I gained access as part of my investigations. So it's confidential information.
I still request access to all communications. I'm even checking to see—