Certainly.
The first thing I should mention is.... I understand that you have, later today, representatives from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development coming to talk to you, and I think that's excellent. When Commissioner Bélanger and I and our colleagues from Quebec, who I understand are appearing next week, were recently in Paris at OECD meetings where they have created a network of lobbyists, it was very apparent at that meeting that Canada has long been seen as a leader in oversight and that, among those, B.C. and the LTA are recognized as a leading example. Canada was essentially the first country to introduce a lobbying regime.
Lobbying oversight is one of the least developed forms of integrity regulation in the world. However, it's growing, and Canada is seen to be a leader. This is a real opportunity for Canada to take the next step in leadership, and I think the OECD will be able to provide you with information on really what the next best practices are. It does excellent work, and we rely on its recommendations quite a lot.
Certainly, the recommendation that we rely on a lot.... One of the three that I characterized is registration by default, which has the benefit of a broad approach. This is consistent with OECD recommendations to be broad and inclusive. The OECD is of the view—and we agree at the ORL in British Columbia—that a lobbying regime should be all-inclusive and that people should have the ability to see the full scope of what is being recommended or who is trying to influence public office holders.
There are two aspects of this, if you'll permit me to explain why. The first is value neutrality. It's very important that the act not be seen to be embedded with values about what are good organizations and what are not good organizations. I think we all need to be honest. There's no question that the word “lobbying” comes with some stigma. I begin all of my speaking remarks by saying that lobbying is an important function in our democracy. It is how our public office holders come to learn about what the different organizations in our jurisdictions want and need from their government and government-controlled entities.
Lobbying, if it is transparent, is an important part of democracy. It's the transparency and the historical attitude towards this idea that lobbying takes place in the shadows that really are the basis for the stigma. There's no question that the stigma associated with lobbying is part of the concern for carve-outs and for groups to not want to be seen to be lobbyists. Even some public officials, senior public office holders, don't want to be seen to be lobbyists. However, lobbying is an important part of our democracy. I think it's best that we shine a light and address the stigma that's associated with it and, through that, build transparency.
Regulation by default is an important way to say that this act is value-neutral. It doesn't pick good and bad organizations and say that some are covered and some are not. Everybody is covered.
The other aspect is a little bit counterintuitive. Having everybody in the registry, whether they're pursuing corporate interests or not-for-profit interests or whether they're charitable organizations—as long as you're influencing, you're in—does allow the public to look in the registry and see who is getting more access to government officials and who is doing what type of lobbying. If, indeed, the playing field is uneven and if, indeed, as Mr. Hardy mentioned, the big businesses are the ones with the specialized access, then people can see the full suite of who is influencing and make those judgments for themselves. That's how we build trust.