Procedure and House Affairs Committee on Feb. 10th, 2011

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK]

Thanks.

I have a couple of questions. I'll ask the latter one first.

Again, this is all supposition, but you're now conducting an investigation on a case that's basically unprecedented. You mentioned that you've never really dealt with a case where confidential information has been forwarded to a lobbyist. We're all obviously going to be awaiting the results of your investigation. Is it normal when conducting an investigation...or in this case are you contemplating making recommendations in terms of perhaps changing the code of conduct, strengthening it if it needs to be strengthened and that type of thing?

If you are basically going into uncharted waters, whatever the results are, would you be prepared to come back, either to this committee or to Parliament, and make recommendations on what may need to be done to prevent this type of thing from happening again or to at least put in some further sanctions if actions similar to that ever occur in the future?

[Karen Shepherd]

I guess the short answer would be yes. Given the situation, if for some reason I find no breach because of the rules that currently exist, I would be prepared to come back if I think there is a need to make changes based on what I find.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

You can have a little short question, if you want to.

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK]

If it has to be short, perhaps I'll pass to the next round.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Now we're picky about the length--

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Monsieur Paquette.

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for being here.

I am going to summarize what I have understood from your answers to various questions.

You are conducting an investigation into the situation where confidential documents were sent out by a member's employee to lobbyists who were able to use them. In fact, they even admitted to us, in some cases, that they did use them. In the investigation you are currently conducting, you are trying to determine whether there is a connection between what happened and the Lobbyists' Code of Conduct.

So you are not yet at the stage where you are trying to establish the facts to see whether there was a breach of the Code. Rather, you are trying to understand whether, in the Code, there might be something to get hold of, for a more in-depth investigation.

Have I understood correctly?

[Karen Shepherd]

The first step before deciding to initiate an investigation is an administrative review. I was in the process of doing an administrative review of the situation. I think you saw in my remarks that I said there may be four possible outcomes. One possible outcome, in this case, because we have five lobbyists, is that I would decide to conduct one or five investigations when I conclude my administrative review. At this stage, I cannot foresee whether I will have one or more than one about this.

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

I would like to take advantage of your presence to improve my very rudimentary knowledge of the Lobbying Act. A number of public relations firms that I know register only one lobbyist from their team. In that situation, if a lobbyist was convicted and banned for five years, would the firm have some liability or would it be penalized in some way or another, or is it rather really an individual responsibility?

[Karen Shepherd]

The five-year ban applies to the lobbyist. It's possible for a person to whom the five-year ban applies to work for a lobbying firm, but not to do lobbying. So if someone works for a lobbying firm somewhere and doesn't do lobbying, but, for example, provides strategic information or does research or something else, it doesn't apply. The five-year ban applies only to the lobbying activity.

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

We would have to think about that, because there may be incentives from the lobbyist's employer to violate the Code.

I have one last question. Once again, it is out of curiosity. Some organizations like unions and churches are not required to register as lobbyists, even though they advocate for a certain vision of society and try to influence members and government ministers to have decisions go in one direction or another. I wanted to know whether this is in fact the case.

[Karen Shepherd]

Honestly, it depends, because some unions are registered.

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Are there any churches that are registered?

[Karen Shepherd]

Honestly, I would have to check. But if churches make lobbying a significant part of their functions, I think...

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

I say this because a report was broadcast yesterday on this issue. It talked about an organization called My Canada, which is made up of young evangelists whose sole mission is to influence federal policies to suit their values. Would they have to register as lobbyists?

[Karen Shepherd]

There are volunteers who do lobbying. The law requires that if a person doing lobbying is paid, it is communication that has to be registered. For not-for-profit organizations or corporations, there is another criterion: whether it is a significant part of their functions.

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Right. Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Thank you.

Mr. Mulcair.

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Outremont, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Very quickly, I would like to know whether an email returned to a public office holder amounts to a communication.

[Karen Shepherd]

Yes, if it is a communication with a public office holder.

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Outremont, QC]

Thank you.

As well, you do your work with us, as parliamentarians, and you honour us with your presence here and by explaining your job to us. When you met with the New Democratic Party caucus, you used the expression "practical examples" to describe the best way of looking at the Act from the practice point of view. That lines up very well with the work we are doing here today. Apart from our interest in your job, we have to determine, with regard to Mr. Ullyatt passing on confidential pre-budget information that he was not entitled to pass on, which has been admitted, whether there was reasonably diligent oversight of his work.

We now have to look at the precedents in parliaments on the British model: Australia, New Zealand, and of course England. Mr. Lukiwski rightly said that we are awaiting the results of your investigation, in the sense that we are eager to know them, but this committee's work does not depend on your study. Properly speaking, we do not need to wait for your work, to do our own.

In terms of best practices, or, to use your term, exemplary practices, are there things a reasonably diligent parliamentarian should do in terms of their staff, when it comes to communications with lobbyists? I would like to know what methods you recommend so we can be sure that the communication, whether by email or otherwise, is registered. As elected representatives, we have a duty to report. But you told us earlier that there were best practices in this regard. Would you be so kind as to tell the committee what they are?

[Karen Shepherd]

You asked me whether a written communication about a change to an act or a program, for example, could be considered to be a lobbying activity for which the person must register. I want to clarify that it is not necessary to make a monthly report if it is a written communication. However, it must be done if it is an oral communication and was organized in advance.

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Outremont, QC]

My question wasn't about what came before, but about what comes after. I was trying to determine, with you, what the duties of elected members are. That is what I would like you to talk to the committee about. You spoke earlier about exemplary practices, about what has to be done to reflect that.

Can you tell the committee what you explained to us earlier about exemplary practices?

[Karen Shepherd]

In the cases where you wonder whether someone is a lobbyist, you can ask them whether they know that lobbying legislation applies, and if so, whether they are in compliance. That is the exemplary practice I was talking about. I think you can use the same approach before a meeting, if it is an oral communication, or if you have questions about written information.