This was clear negotiation. No lobbying was involved here.
One of the things we need to do is to make sure that there is no means of hiding the lobbying process.
Right now what we are doing with the intent of this bill-the Lobbyists Registration Act started it, this bill amends it and its intent is to strengthen it. It is recognizing the reality of lobbying in our present system.
As I have said, if we are going to have it, we need to be totally open. We need to make sure that the people of the country understand this. What we want is for the rules for lobbyists to all be the same.
Presently the bill does not require the disclosure of who is lobbied. Therefore I come to another very important point. One of the amendments in this group-and I do not remember the exact number, perhaps it is Motion No. 17-indicates what we want to include in the registration of the lobbying process. It is not only which government department is being lobbied. That is what is being called for now. We also want to have specific individuals.
Again, how general is this going to become? We need to recognize that just because a person makes a phone call, that is not lobbying. A person who talks to someone to ask who is in charge of a department, is not lobbying.
We must go back again to the definition which says if you are influencing or attempting to influence government and you are being paid for it, that is the definition of a lobbyist. If that is occurring, then the people of Canada should know not only who the lobbyist is on this side but also who the government official is on the other side.
What is there to hide? Why should we hesitate for a moment to say who the deputy minister was in the meeting to present the information? Why should we hide that? There is absolutely no reason. Again, the more information we can get to the people, the greater their trust will be in the whole process.
Another one is, how much money passes the hands? Obviously this is a matter of great importance. In talking to my constituents I have found that they are very concerned about the total costs to run an MP's office. For example, there has been a lot of interest in my constituency about the fact that the average MP gets an additional present value of around $2,500 a month in order to provide for his pension benefits. They are interested in those things.
Our question is, how much is being paid to lobbyists? People should know this. If it is a small amount, probably there is no big deal but if we are dealing with millions of dollars, that should raise a flag. People should know that.
I would like to quote someone: "I think fees and major disbursements should be registered". Later in the same session, the same person said: "What is wrong with a system that would disclose fees and major disbursements? After all, if the whole business of having a registration system is to identify who is doing what to whom so that the competing interest has a right to
know, how do we know who is doing what to whom unless there is a price tag, unless there is a caveat at the end? At what cost?"
I am quoting the hon. member for Glengarry-Prescott-Russell who, when he sat on this side of the House, said that we need to disclose these things. We need to make sure that the people know not only who is doing what but at what price. This is a very important aspect of the bill.
I would also like to read another quote: "One of the reasons I believe we must reform the act to declare lobbyists' fees is because at times"-and then he interrupted himself and said: "Just take the referendum. Millions of dollars were put through the system by lobbying firms advocating a particular point of view and very little of that was known". That too was spoken by a member of the Liberal Party, the hon. member for Broadview-Greenwood.
Obviously, I am speaking of things that members on that side of the House agreed with when they were on this side. So let us stay with our principles and let us support these amendments.
I appreciate the additional time, Mr. Speaker.