In the B.C. position, there are exceptions. As I mentioned in my answer to a previous question, I think the commissioner—or in my case, the registrar—should have some latitude to determine the basis of that exception, based on the diverse fact circumstances that apply.
Your other question was about whether there should be a scaling. In B.C. now, we have, “You're in or you're out.” You're a defined former public office holder, the definition of which is similar to senior public office holder. If you're a senior public office holder—for example, if you're not a parliamentary secretary and not a member of cabinet but just an MLA without one of those positions—then you're not a former public office holder. If you're a director in government, then you're not a former public office holder. If you're an ADM or a parliamentary secretary, then you are. It's just two steps.
I would go back to the principle of simplicity. If you introduce a scaling mechanism with many steps, then you start to get into confusion. What about this position? What about that position? Remember, lobbying legislation applies to a broad range of organizations. We're not just talking about MPs' offices or about departments. We're talking about the whole range of Crown corporations, agencies, boards and commissions that are covered. Their organization charts can be really complicated, so if you try to introduce a scaling mechanism that is too complex, you get into endless little debates about whether someone is at this level or that level and whether they are in or out.
My advice to you, as it would be to my own legislature, is that there's a beauty in simplicity. That would be the answer to both aspects of the question you asked.