It's a gold standard for some but certainly not the gold standard for most. Having been a lobbyist in B.C. in years past—I'm not currently a lobbyist in B.C., for the record—I found it quite onerous representing various associations in that province. As I said, most communications—not just oral and arranged—require communications reports in the province. Sending out a tweet that says “Minister X, please do X”, or sending out a meeting request that never receives a response...all of those types of items require a communications report. When I was a consultant lobbyist sending out meeting requests to, let's say, 50 different MLAs in British Columbia, I thought that having to put in a communication report for all 50—despite my receiving a response on only five of them—was a step too far. It's not that it prevented transparency; I think that it gets in the way of transparency.
If we have too many communications reports for the public, the media and parliamentarians to look through, then we get past the level of transparency at which there's so much paperwork in front of individuals that they give up on looking through the paperwork. That's where the B.C. registry and requirements went to, and I would really warn parliamentarians here not to go in that direction.