Information & Ethics committee  Since the act does provide for criminal sanctions, I have no choice but to ask the RCMP to investigate.

Information & Ethics committee  I think it would, but it is up to Parliament to change the rules in order to give me the power to do so.

Information & Ethics committee  Yes, we have established a process. So far, we have checked some 13% of monthly reports up to the end of November. Moreover, and that is something very good for us, public office holders regularly examine those monthly statements, and have noted that there could be errors in the system.

Information & Ethics committee  In the 13% of the monthly statements we have checked so far, we have noted an error rate of approximately 7%.

Information & Ethics committee  There's no requirement under the act for them to keep specific records, except there's now the new requirement in the Lobbying Act for monthly reporting. Should they meet with a designated public office-holder and they have arranged the meeting, then they must file a monthly communication log.

Information & Ethics committee  Ten investigations were initiated under the previous regime. Four of them have been closed and have actually been tabled with Parliament. I'd have to go through all of the details, but they dealt primarily with individuals who had not registered.

Information & Ethics committee  I understand that one of the points the government intended was that the predesignated public office-holder could not take advantage of anything they might have gained, or personal connections, while in that post and use it for lobbying activities. The act, then, is very specific as to what constitutes communication: the individual must be paid and must be communicating with the public office-holder.

Information & Ethics committee  Again, at this point the act has just came in, so I really find it too early to comment further. It's something that Parliament may want to look at when the act comes up for review.

Information & Ethics committee  I'm trying to see if I understand your question fully. If the individual is a designated public office-holder and it's about a financial benefit, which I believe would be the case with most of the issues being discussed by the finance committee, it wouldn't matter whether the lobbyist had arranged the particular meeting or the designated public office-holder.

Information & Ethics committee  I think there are two things there. MPs are public office-holders, but not designated public office-holders. But if there were communication going on with public office-holders, then they would need to look at whether they needed to file.... There would still be an initial registration being filed.

Information & Ethics committee  I'm aware that a selection process is under way. I am not privy to any of the details; the process is being managed by PCO.

Information & Ethics committee  I have not found it affects the work I've had to conduct. In terms of the office I set up, obviously I had to replace myself, so I have a director of investigations in place. One of the things required by the act, or which I felt I needed to do as an agent of Parliament, was to hire a lawyer, which I've done in the six months.

Information & Ethics committee  There are two ways of answering that question.

Information & Ethics committee  The reason I say so is that we have active files open, and I believe we have opened 61 over time and currently have 43 active files. But more than that, one of the things we do is—

Information & Ethics committee  Yes, but I'm just going to verify the numbers. Since 2005, we have initiated 61 administrative reviews, as we call them, and 10 investigations have been open since 2005.