Information & Ethics committee  In the definition of lobbying, I would include all the preparation activities. If the definition of lobbying was broadened to include all those preparation activities, the time spent travelling would become a relatively minor component, whether it's one hour or 10. If we included all the preparation time, I think it wouldn't necessarily become a discriminating factor.

Information & Ethics committee  In an ideal world, I would say yes, but given the bureaucratic burden it would create, I'll say no.

Information & Ethics committee  I agree with my two colleagues. From a perspective of transparency, I think the idea is not to reduce, but to keep that broad definition, at the cost of broadening certain other positions. However, it's important to take the concept of the waiting period into account. I think a five-year waiting period is extremely excessive for a political advisor of the leader of the official opposition who did not necessarily have access to privileged information.

Information & Ethics committee  The question is quite relevant. I would tend to eliminate the distinction between arranged communications and communications that have not been arranged. All communications should be registered in the registry. I know that the fact that public office holders also have to report communications they have been party to has also been much discussed by this committee.

Information & Ethics committee  Very briefly, I want to point out that I support what you just said. I think the symbolic aspect of the financial penalty is also important. For administrative reasons, I think that I would trust in what is done in other jurisdictions.

Information & Ethics committee  All the same, it's important to mention that the act stipulates that it's either the person him or herself who reaches this 20% threshold or a group of people within the same organization. So it's cumulative. If four people each lobby for 5% of their time, the 20% threshold is reached.

Information & Ethics committee  As for the 20% rule, I think the objective is the same. We want to be able to target the true lobbyists and ensure that the individual citizen or single community organization that knocks on an MP's door once or twice every six months doesn't have to register. Mr. Chenier said that rules need to be made to establish that distinction between true lobbyists and occasional lobbyists, if we can call them that.

Information & Ethics committee  This question refers back to the famous definition of what constitutes lobbying. If we consider that it's a communication activity, so contact between a lobbyist and a public office holder, 5,000 may seem an appropriate or logical number. But if we take into account all the preparation behind these activities, I think it's fair to say that the number of people hired by this industry is much higher than that.

Information & Ethics committee  Absolutely. I concluded my brief with that aspect. I think the commissioner's concerns are founded, in that she conducted reviews and inquiries, and that didn't necessarily resonate with the RCMP for various reasons. There should really be a regime that I believe she calls an intermediate regime, where we would have administrative penalties that would target breaches of the act and the code of conduct.

Information & Ethics committee  In my brief, I clearly stated that I am in favour of keeping the concept of the 20% threshold. I think it's important to keep it just so we can target lobbying as it is currently understood, including preparation activities, and not the lone citizen who meets with his or her MP twice a year.

Information & Ethics committee  I think a lot of improvements were made when the act was reviewed in 2008. The very fact that the commissioner is independent is, in my opinion, an essential ingredient to the proper functioning of the act. Also, when we compare the various registries, it's obvious that the Canadian registry is fairly complete, even though I support the fact that we should perhaps add certain fields, particularly to clarify the funding of certain organizations.

Information & Ethics committee  We're talking about the distrust and cynicism of the public toward politics. But if these groups had to disclose their sources of funding, there would be much more transparency. We've recently heard in the media about Friends of Science, which presented itself as a group that questions the role of human activity on climate change.

Information & Ethics committee  As for the methods of disclosure, the legislator would have to look into the matter a little more. But it would be possible to arrive at that. In fact, the five-year rule would say that it couldn't be done because it would constitute lobbying. So there would be no disclosure because the person would simply not do it.

Information & Ethics committee  Before I answer the question, I'd like to go back to the first one, which was whether there are inspiring examples elsewhere in the world. I agree that no legislation is necessarily perfect. But to come back to the American example, I think the definition of lobbying adopted by the American legislator seems quite relevant.

Information & Ethics committee  That's right. I didn't mention that specific example in the brief, but I mentioned a recent example from Quebec. When we talk about the cynicism and suspicion of the population toward politics, it's those type of situations that make sure that people become very cynical toward politics.