Information & Ethics Committee on June 8th, 2026

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

I apologize for interrupting you, but I only have about a minute of my time left.

I understand your analogy of getting a ticket and paying it, but thinking that there will still be more in the future. However, we're talking about lobbying, and you're a lobbyist. You're the head of a lobbying firm. If the Commissioner of Lobbying told you that she was imposing a penalty, regardless of the penalty, wouldn't that have a greater impact on you than getting a ticket because you parked your car in the wrong place?

[W. Scott Thurlow]

I would like to think that would never happen because I treat this very seriously—

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

What if it happens?

[W. Scott Thurlow]

If it happened, of course I would pay it. Of course, I would be reminded of it, but again, we don't design the act for Scott. That would be great if we did design the act for Scott, but we design it for the entire population.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

I'd like to hear your thoughts on another aspect.

We're tightening the criteria for lobbying. Actually, we're not tightening them—we're expanding them to include more activities.

In every riding, people often seek out their member of Parliament. People call me at my office every week. Business owners, chambers of commerce and citizens ask what they should do if they haven't received their immigration documents or their employment insurance benefits. Some businesses want to hire more temporary foreign workers. These are just a few examples.

Should this be considered lobbying? How should we handle these situations?

[W. Scott Thurlow]

That's the impossible choice that Parliament has in defining what is or is not lobbying.

I think that doing the work of your constituents should not be lobbying. I think that's doing your job and representing the voices of your community. There is a very clear test in the act of what isn't lobbying. You can have a very good conversation about that as well.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

I need a very quick response.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Fortin.

Mr. Barrett, you have five minutes. Go ahead, please.

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

Mr. Conacher, if I give you 60 seconds—my time is limited—can you share with us your methodology for the 19,822 offences that you pulled from the commissioner's annual report, sir?

[Duff Conacher]

Yes. It's very easy.

She has been doing audits of communications and the accuracy of communications, and she finds that certain numbers of those are inaccurate. She also tracks whether registrations are accurate or late. The numbers are in her annual report for each of those since 2018. You just add them up.

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

It's inaccurate filings and late filings as listed by the commissioner in her annual reports since 2018.

[Duff Conacher]

That's right. Some of them are short time periods, as Mr. Thurlow said. You have a sliding scale of penalties. One day late is a very small penalty, but many of them are six months, five months or three months late, and inaccurate again and again after they try to correct them.

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

Thank you.

How do we and how should we distinguish between a volunteer board member or representative from a local non-profit, a staff member at a local municipal agency, a business owner for an independent business and the vice-president of government relations for a large multinational when they're dealing with their member of Parliament?

The question is for both of you, starting with Mr. Conacher. Take a minute or less, if you could.

[Duff Conacher]

If you want to have a carve-out, I think B.C. does it right. Small organizations that are not there to advocate have a certain time threshold. If they are under that, then they're just dealing with problems. But I would add one thing that B.C. doesn't have, which I mentioned in response to Mr. Hardy's question. If they fundraised for you, campaigned for you or assisted you in some way, then they should be required to register. We need to track those conflicts of interest created by the favours they've done for you.

That's what this whole system is about. It's not just about transparency. It's about government integrity. Otherwise, all of those others, because it's organized lobbying, should be required to register. They're not just a volunteer or an individual.

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

Thank you.

Mr. Thurlow.

[W. Scott Thurlow]

I don't believe there's such a thing as a volunteer lobbyist. I believe in free speech. I believe in free assembly. I think having the nexus to “paid” is something that I can prove. If I were working for the RCMP and I talked to the café owner that Mr. Hardy mentioned, I wouldn't be able to tell if he was lobbying or not or if he was just complaining that there was a dog on his lawn. If he was being paid to do the work, that's something I could actually adduce as evidence in a court of law to allow for the offence to be established.

Should we differentiate on size? I think we do differentiate on size. The reason I think this is that as part of the commissioner's test, it's not one person, one man or woman; it's the collective of all those employees to the equivalent of one full-time employee. I think that is an aspect there.

Personally, I think as long as Parliament defines what that time is, the community will respond to it and recognize it for what it is.

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

The differentiation, from your response, is between paid and unpaid.

[W. Scott Thurlow]

Yes.

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

Okay.

I have 90 seconds left here, so I'll give you each 45 seconds. If Parliament were to adopt only one change to the act, what would it be? Do you have evidence that supports that it would be a substantive improvement?

Mr. Thurlow.

[W. Scott Thurlow]

I would change the designated public office holder provisions. I have met hundreds of people who have found it very difficult to find employment after working in government. I don't think we should have that type of barrier to public service. Very few cabinet ministers can't find some work to do. It's a little more challenging for 26- or 27-year-olds.

I think a sliding scale is appropriate. The sliding scale could go down as far as one year. That's what the test was a long time ago.

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

Mr. Conacher.

[Duff Conacher]

It would be the biggest loophole that the commissioner said—the unpaid lobbying and these time thresholds. You just have to eliminate them. They're huge loopholes that are mostly exploited by big businesses to hide their lobbying.

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

Again, that's going to paid lobbyists.

[Duff Conacher]

Unpaid lobbying should be covered. On just having the line of paid, the commissioner said it's one of the biggest loopholes. I don't know why she didn't recommend closing it.

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

All right.

Thank you both.