Mr. Speaker, I enjoyed the presentation of my colleague from the Bloc. I was particularly intrigued with the examples he used of actual blatant lobbying or presumed lobbying, but we do not for sure.
I have to underline what he said in the sense that the process being produced as a result of Bill C-43 falls completely short of having the ability to assure Canadians there is nothing wrong when nothing is wrong. In other words, if there is something wrong here we should have an ethics counsellor who would have total freedom to investigate and so declare it. If there is nothing wrong he should have total freedom and independence so he would be believable. Both these elements are missing in the bill.
It is so important when we talk about Bill C-43 that we also talk about the openness and accountability provided in it and the potential missed by the things not disclosed.
One of the elements that is a source of great annoyance and suspicion to Canadians is lobbyists very often are trading on previous attachments and previous connections.
I would like the member to comment on that aspect of it, whether lobbyists if they are to be required to register should also be required to indicate their previous political work, their political connections, and whether they should be required to indicate things like substantial donations to political parties. That would increase the openness and I suppose it would do a great deal to introduce a self-policing effect to the whole process.
[Translation]