Information & Ethics Committee on May 7th, 2026

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Linda Lapointe]

I call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 41 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics.

Pursuant to Standing Order 81(4), the committee is resuming consideration of the main estimates 2026-27, specifically vote 1 under Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying, vote 1 under Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, vote 1 under office of the Senate ethics officer, votes 1 and 5 under Offices of the Information and Privacy Commissioners of Canada, referred to the committee on Thursday, February 26, 2026.

I would like to welcome the Commissioner of Lobbying.

Thank you for being with us today.

In the second hour, we'll have another guest.

Ms. Bélanger, I assume you're ready to make your opening remarks. You have five minutes.

I'll let you start.

[Nancy Bélanger, Commissioner of Lobbying, Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying]

Madam Chair and committee members.

It is a pleasure to be here with you today to discuss the main estimates and my office’s plans for fiscal year 2026-27.

As many of you know, the Lobbying Act requires that my office maintain the registry of lobbyists. My team works to consistently improve the registry so that both filing and finding information is as easy and efficient as possible. The registry is the transparency tool that allows Canadians to know who is lobbying federal public office holders and about what.

We provide educational sessions and develop various information products to help people better understand the requirements of both the federal Lobbying Act and the lobbyists’ code of conduct. We also do compliance work to support respect of the act and the code.

The objective of the federal lobbying framework is to ensure that lobbying is both transparent and ethical. This is a cornerstone of a healthy democracy that supports citizen trust in public institutions.

My total budget for this current fiscal year is approximately $6.1 million. Roughly $4.8 million goes to salaries and benefits, leaving an operating budget of around $1.3 million. About $700,000 of that operating budget is spent on obtaining services from other federal organizations, including services related to human resources, finances, procurement and information technology.

This is a very small budget, and not surprisingly we were not subject to the comprehensive expenditure review. However, I am always very mindful of our stewardship of resources. Ever rising costs—including expenses for the information technology, licenses and infrastructure needed to run our office—is increasingly putting pressure on our budget and limits our flexibility in the allocation of funds.

Related to the budget, I would be remiss if I did not take this opportunity to highlight the challenges posed by the current funding model for agents of Parliament. Requiring us to seek funding through a ministerial portfolio undermines our independence. I would urge this committee to consider a new funding model that recognizes and reinforces the independence of agents of Parliament.

Let me turn to our plans for this year.

Given your current study of the Lobbying Act, you are well aware of one of our current priorities. It is a great pleasure to support you in identifying legislative improvements that can keep Canada at the forefront in lobbying transparency for years to come.

I will say the following in relation to my recommendations. They recognize that the amount of effort required to electronically file and maintain information in the registry of lobbyists is not onerous. Adopting clear, consistent and easy-to-follow registration and disclosure requirements would reduce the amount of time and effort that stakeholders must invest in understanding the current intricacies of the act. Not only would this help stakeholders, but it would also reduce the extensive resources currently used by my office to provide clarifications and explanations. These resources could, in turn, be allocated to other priorities, including providing even greater support to a growing number of stakeholders.

As for other priorities, we continue to develop ways to expand awareness and understanding of the act and the code. In particular, we are updating our online materials, including advisory opinions, always with the goal of simplifying the guidance we provide and increasing clarity for stakeholders.

In addition, we're advancing on 19 ongoing compliance files. As you are aware, the act imposes strict confidentiality requirements, and I therefore cannot discuss the specifics of any particular compliance matter. However, I can say that currently, three files are with the RCMP.

All of this work is accomplished through the contributions of, on average, 35 employees. I am always extremely proud of my team and the work we do. According to a study based on the most recent public service employment survey, our office—and I'm very proud of this—was the top-ranked federal organization. For example, we had leading scores in management and in being a great place to work. This reflects the team's collective sense of shared purpose, collaboration and integrity. Words cannot express how grateful I am for my team's unwavering dedication to lobbying transparency, ethics and compliance.

Thank you again for the opportunity to be here today. I'm pleased to answer any questions you may have.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Linda Lapointe]

Thank you, Commissioner. That was exactly five minutes.

Mr. Barrett, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands—Rideau Lakes, ON]

Thank you, Commissioner.

How do you assess whether the current approach of your office on enforcement, audits, referrals and public reporting under the act is delivering good value for money for taxpayers? What metrics do you use?

[Nancy Bélanger]

That's a very good question.

In my view, we could do a lot better with changes to the act, because currently, a lot of resources.... I review everything that comes in front of me. We review every matter. Many matters lead to files to the RCMP. It takes a lot of our time, it takes a lot of the RCMP's time, and then it is returned to me and closed. If we changed the act so that I could impose administrative monetary penalties, so that I could deal with the issues right away, it would take less time, and people would understand how the regime works.

I may not have understood your question—

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands—Rideau Lakes, ON]

No, I think that's good.

Typically, when you come before the committee—which is often, and we appreciate your coming—you provide us an update, either in your remarks or, predictably, with the opening round of questions, on how many files are with the RCMP. That number changes. Do you know the change in that number since the last time you were here?

[Nancy Bélanger]

Yes. The last time, March 9, they had four. They just returned one. They have three.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands—Rideau Lakes, ON]

When that happens, is there...? You have reason to believe, when you refer a matter to the RCMP, that the act has been broken.

[Nancy Bélanger]

Yes.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands—Rideau Lakes, ON]

The test the RCMP would use is different from the test you would use.

[Nancy Bélanger]

Yes.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands—Rideau Lakes, ON]

When it returns to you, with you being of the belief that the act was broken, does the public get to see reports 100% of the time on those files that come back to you?

[Nancy Bélanger]

No.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands—Rideau Lakes, ON]

Why not?

[Nancy Bélanger]

It's because the way the act is arranged right now, I can't make findings of breaches. If the RCMP and the Public Prosecution Service decide that they can't find an offence, I don't have the authority to do that. All I can do is say that I had reason to believe. Then procedural fairness would have to kick in. Usually, two, three or four years will have passed since the events occurred.

We have some procedural fairness issues here.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands—Rideau Lakes, ON]

Therefore, the solution to that, you believe, would be to change the act to allow you to issue administrative monetary penalties when you have determined that breaches have occurred, and then the penalty would be levied and a public report would be made.

[Nancy Bélanger]

Absolutely.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands—Rideau Lakes, ON]

How many matters have you referred to the RCMP during your tenure?

[Nancy Bélanger]

Nineteen.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands—Rideau Lakes, ON]

Of those, how many have you reported on publicly?

[Nancy Bélanger]

None.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands—Rideau Lakes, ON]

How many times have you found breaches of the act that did not rise to the level to which they were reported to the RCMP?

[Nancy Bélanger]

Well, obviously I had reasonable grounds to believe for the 19 of them, and they pressed charges in two.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands—Rideau Lakes, ON]

Right, but you would find times when the act was not complied with, and then you would seek to have corrective action taken, perhaps compliance retroactively, have people register their meetings. Obviously they haven't followed the law, having not registered, but you haven't deemed it necessary to report them to the police. The act wasn't followed, you advised the individual, you're satisfied with their compliance and you consider the matter closed. Would you be able to quantify how many times that has occurred in your time in office?

[Nancy Bélanger]

Probably not, but I could look into it and see if I can give you a number.

What happens is that the files I send to the RCMP are sent because I open an investigation, because I feel an investigation is necessary to ensure compliance.

There are many times when people will call us and say, “Hey, I'm late.” They volunteer that they're late. Being late is an offence. However, I don't have to investigate. They come and raise their hand, saying they're late, so I just accept their registration for transparency purposes. I do not investigate those matters, and I don't send them to the RCMP.

How often does that happen? Well, I can tell you that, in the last year, at least 8% of registrations were late and 5% of monthly communication reports were late, but I accept them for transparency purposes. I certainly will not send those to the RCMP, because I don't need to investigate. I send to the RCMP only those I've actually investigated.