:
Thank you, Mr. Chair and members of the Committee.
Chairman and Members of the Committee. I am pleased to be here today to discuss the first Annual Report of the Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying. I am accompanied today by senior counsel, Bruce Bergen, and by Pierre Ricard-Desjardins, Director of Operations. Mr. Chair, I thought that for the benefit of new members, I would give a brief overview of the Lobbying Act and the Lobbyists’ Code of Conduct before discussing our annual report.
[English]
The Lobbying Act ensures that lobbying activities conducted at the federal level are open and transparent. It provides for the public registration of individuals who are paid to communicate with public office-holders. The purpose of the Lobbyists' Code of Conduct is to assure the Canadian public that lobbying is done ethically and with the highest standards. This in turn conserves and enhances public confidence and trust in the integrity, objectivity, and impartiality of government decision-making. The code complements the registration requirements of the Lobbying Act.
I was honoured to be appointed as the first Commissioner of Lobbying in June 2009. My goal is to build on significant progress we've made in implementing the Lobbying Act. This progress, as well as our priorities and challenges, is highlighted in the Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying's first annual report.
The report, tabled in Parliament in June 2009, discusses three main areas: the lobbyist registration system; the office's education and outreach activities; and our efforts to ensure compliance with the Lobbying Act and the Lobbyists' Code of Conduct.
[Translation]
The Lobbyists Registration System, which is often referred to as the Registry of Lobbyists, is the primary tool used by the Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying to ensure transparency in lobbying activities conducted at the federal level.
[English]
The registry consists of an online database in which lobbyists disclose their lobbying activities. However, this is not simply a tool for lobbyists to register their activities. The registry is an easy-to-use, searchable database. It is visited by public office-holders, journalists, the Canadian public, and others looking for information regarding who is carrying out lobbying activities with the federal government. The registry is accessible free of charge, 24 hours a day, seven days a week via our website.
As discussed in my annual report, the Lobbying Act introduced new reporting requirements for lobbyists on July 2, 2008. This meant that we needed a major upgrade of the registry to allow for the efficient processing of a significantly larger number of transactions. Additional functions were also added to the registry to improve its usability and efficiency.
I am pleased to report that the changes required to the registry were made on time, within budget, and with no major difficulties. I am proud that our lobbyists registration system is at the forefront of electronic registration and it is considered to be a model for other jurisdictions involved in lobbying legislation.
From April 1, 2008, to March 31, 2009, the number of registered corporations and organizations increased by 7% and 10% respectively, while the number of individual in-house lobbyists contained in those registrations decreased by 17% and 9%. While it appears that there was an increase in lobbying activity, we have noticed a decrease in the number of individual in-house lobbyists registered by those corporations and organizations. We have attributed these changes to a rationalization effort on the part of corporations and organizations. The number of consultant lobbyists remained virtually unchanged during that period.
However, since April 1, 2009, we have seen a further decrease of 4.6% in the number of registrations for all categories of lobbyists, accompanied by an 18.6% reduction for the number of individuals actively involved in lobbying activities. The trend is particularly noticeable with regard to consultant lobbyists, where fewer lobbyists manage larger numbers of clients, and with regard to corporations, where fewer employees are involved in corporate lobbying activities. Although it may not be the only cause, the recent economic situation may be an important contributor to this decrease.
I should add that we have not witnessed a significant drop in overall registration activity. This is likely due to the new monthly communications reports.
[Translation]
The Lobbying Act provides the Commissioner of Lobbying with a clear mandate for education and outreach so that Parliamentarians, Canadians, departments and agencies, and lobbyists have a better understanding of the act.
[English]
This annual report provides details on the development and implementation of a comprehensive education and awareness strategy. We have used various means of communication, such as information sessions, online multimedia tutorials, and implementation notices, to raise awareness and build a greater understanding of the Lobbying Act.
Over the past year, presentations were made to lobbyists, public office-holders, and national and international organizations interested in Canadian federal lobbying. Meetings and briefing sessions were held with senior officials from various departments and agencies on the Lobbying Act. The office helped familiarize them with the new requirements of the act and addressed any issues regarding lobbying activities facing their departments or officials.
[Translation]
Although education is an important priority for me, actual enforcement of the Lobbying Act cannot be ignored. The act gives the Commissioner of Lobbying enhanced enforcement powers.
[English]
These include the extension of the period during which possible summary conviction infractions may be prosecuted, the doubling of monetary penalties available upon conviction under the act, and the fact that I may conduct investigations in order to ensure compliance with the Lobbying Act as well as the Lobbyists' Code of Conduct.
When allegations of non-compliance with the act are brought to our attention we conduct a preliminary information-gathering exercise called an administrative review. An administrative review involves searching the registry and other publicly available sources of information, as well as interviewing potential witnesses. The recommendations contained in an administrative review assist me in making my decision on whether or not there are grounds for further actions. In 2008-09, 13 administrative reviews were initiated by my office. Eight recommendation reports were sent to me for decision.
Under the Lobbying Act the commissioner may initiate a formal investigation if the commissioner has reason to believe an investigation is necessary to ensure compliance with the Lobbying Act or the Lobbyists' Code of Conduct. The act requires an investigation to be conducted in private. A report of the commissioner's findings and conclusions following the completed investigation is then tabled before both houses of Parliament.
The Lobbying Act introduced a five-year prohibition on lobbying on former designated public office-holders. The act also gives me the authority to grant exemptions to this five-year prohibition. An internal review process was developed to ensure that I have the information needed to make decisions on applications for exemption.
In June 2008-09 my office received seven applications for exemption from the five-year prohibition on lobbying. I believe that by enhancing both the awareness of the act's requirements and the nature of lobbying as an activity, compliance can be better attained. This is particularly true in the context of a recent Federal Court of Appeal decision that broadened the definition of conflict of interest referred to in the current Lobbyists' Code of Conduct to cover certain political activities performed by lobbyists, among other things.
[Translation]
Although educating people about the act is important, violations of the Lobbying Act and Lobbyists’ Code of Conduct have been and are still dealt with as rigorously as the Act permits.
Mr. Chair, this concludes my remarks. I hope that I have given you and members of the committee, a comprehensive overview of our annual report. Thank you for your attention and now I look forward to answering any questions that you may have.
[English]
However, as I mentioned in my opening remarks, before answering questions I would like to state that subsection 10.4(3) of the Lobbying Act instructs me to conduct investigations in private. Therefore, to respect this confidentiality I will not be confirming whether I have opened up an investigation, which I understand is different from what some of my other commissioners are able to do. Their acts permit them to at least confirm whether they have a file open on someone.
:
In terms of the process, we have a description on our website of the type of information we would like to see. When an application comes in for review, we will look at their past employment, résumés, whether they happen to know any information on their future employer, and so on. Interviews will be conducted with witnesses, and maybe past employers, or the applicants themselves if there's a new employer. Once all of that is done and analyzed, the report is given to me for consideration.
Part of the process we introduced was to give the applicant 30 days to comment on my intent. In other words, if I'm going to be granting the exemption or not, they get 30 days to respond. If I grant the exemption, or an exemption with some conditions, they are given a letter with an exemption number that they then have to use for registration. If the exemption is granted, the act indicates that I must, without undue delay, post my reasons for that exemption on the website.
To answer your second question on criteria, the act provides some criteria, for example, if the person has been in an acting position for a short period of time--maybe student employment, administrative duties only--whether the employer would gain an unfair advantage. In the case of transition team members, there are a few others that are added.
The position I have taken is that Parliament put the five-year prohibition in the act for a reason, which was to stop the revolving door. To me, the rule is that the five-year prohibition holds, and it is only with exceptional circumstances that I will grant an exemption.
:
I'm not even going to ask you for the rationale, as I don't think any reasonable rationale would exist. Why you would, after all the work we went to, to put a Lobbyists Registration Act, a toughened registration act, in place.... And on the Federal Accountability Act, as I say, the ink is hardly dry.
I think we should remind ourselves as a committee how important this act is. The difference between lobbying and influence peddling is about five years in prison. And it's a fine, fine line. Lobbying in an incorrect way, lobbying in the way that we were trying to address under the Federal Accountability Act, bastardizes democracy, undermines democracy in a very substantial way. So you have one of the most important jobs on Parliament Hill.
I don't mean to be critical, but we didn't put in place a robust Lobbyists Registration Act so it could be ignored within months of it being finally implemented. We had frustrations with the former act. I turned in Don Cherry for lobbying on the Hill, I believe, illegally, and we are very frustrated that even after a lengthy investigation, they found nothing wrong with Don Cherry bringing his jar of COLD-fX into the Prime Minister's Office and the very next day having COLD-fX deregulated under the Canada Health Act as a medication.
There have been glaring problems with lobbying.
Well, I suppose my question would be this. Does it not concern you that somebody like these two individuals can peddle the information they used to have privileged access to, to advantage a private sector corporation or organization?
:
In terms of education purposes, one of the requirements for filing a monthly return is just that, if the individual communicates with a designated public officer-holder. But there are also other reasons why a person may file a monthly communication, such as new information, he or she is now lobbying another department, additional subject matter, maybe the chief operating officer in the company has changed, or an addition or the termination of the activity. So those are some other reasons that may occur.
In terms of confirming accuracy, the answer is yes. I have one person who's dedicated to reviewing the previous communication entries on a monthly basis, doing a sampling of those entries that we send off to the designated public officer-holders to confirm whether the entries are, indeed, accurate. Things are brought to our attention from designated public officer-holders themselves, who are looking at the entries.
As I mentioned to the other member, in terms of the errors, what we're finding when we go through is not that people aren't reporting meetings; they're over-reporting. They're putting in meetings with members of Parliament, for example. While that requires an initial registration because you are public officer-holders, you are not designated public officer-holders, so the communication entry is not required. Or they're putting in meetings with the directors general, which is lower than what they're required to report. Or the meetings haven't occurred. Or there are written communications, which don't fall into a requirement to file.
So to try to correct some of those things to make the database more accurate, we did a mass mail-out about three weeks ago, listing all the common errors we're finding. And we have the feature that lobbyists themselves can now go in and correct something, if something is brought to their attention.
:
There are a number of reasons. I think the economy has played a role. I've seen in some articles in American newspapers that they've noticed a drop in registrations due to the economy as well.
In addition, among corporations and organizations, we also noted in last year's annual report that the number of firms actually increased, but the number of lobbyists dropped. I think what was going on was that firms were restructuring.
While there's not a cost of registering if they file online, what some companies have said to me is there is a cost of compliance. In order to make sure they are complying with the act, they've either hired somebody specifically to keep track of meetings and to file the registrations or if there need to be changes made to the monthly report they have somebody taking care of that. Pierre can comment further, but where there maybe used to be six individuals in a firm, we're noticing that this number has almost dropped by two people per corporation on average. And in-house organizations are doing the same thing, reducing the number of people.
The other thing we've seen with the in-house organization is that they're pretty small in this grand scheme of things anyway. So what I think some of the previously registered ones have done is not to register. Previously, if they were hitting 15% of their time, they thought they'd register, but our anecdotal evidence is now showing that with the additional requirement of the monthly communications, they are looking at their activities and if they're not hitting a specific amount of time, they seem to be choosing not to register.
It's one of the things we take seriously and are keeping track of. Pierre's shop is keeping track of what's happening with the stats, and he and I actually meet on a weekly or bi-weekly basis to go through the statistics. At some point we're going to try to look through them, and if our analysis picks up a trend among some of these firms, we may actually go back out and—
:
First, there are two kinds of entries. There are the underlying reports, the large reports that contain information concerning the purposes in terms of federal institutions that are the target of lobbying activities. Those reports are examined one by one. There are nearly 4,000 active reports in the registry at present. The purpose of that review is essentially to verify the accuracy of the information in terms of the requirements of the act. Those are not investigations, but we want to ensure that the information provided is plausible and clear, and can be easily understood by a member of the public who wanted to consult the registry.
Second, there are the communication reports, which are monthly reports that are called, internally, “ComLogs”. On the 15th of each month, the communication reports for the previous month are submitted, with the designated office holders. Given the quantity of reports submitted and the fact that they are generally submitted before midnight on the 14, we decided to allow the reports to be entered in the registry as they are. Systemic checking is done by the system itself, to validate information, and so on, so human intervention is reduced to a minimum.
That being said, if we had to do a detailed review of each of those monthly reports, it would probably take several months to get them on line, given how many of them there are. So a choice had to be made. It seemed to us, when the system was designed, that it would be in the public interest for the information to be available as quickly as possible, even if a small portion had to be corrected afterward. As the commissioner said, there is a function in the system that allows a person who made an error in submitting the monthly report to correct the date or spelling of a name or things like that.
If there is over-reporting, if a monthly report should not have been submitted regarding a person because the person is not designated, the report can simply be deleted. I say “deleted”, but access to what was submitted and was published in the registry is always possible. A correction is superimposed, but what was originally submitted is always available. The information is not really deleted, because it is still there.
:
Thank you, Ms. Freeman.
[English]
Again, thank you kindly, Commissioner, and to your colleagues for being with us. I think it's been a very interesting meeting, a good meeting, to help members to appreciate the challenges you face. Of course, we look forward to working with you in the future on other matters related to your mandate.
Thank you kindly. You are excused.
We have a couple of administrative matters I want to deal with before we adjourn.
Colleagues, there are two items. One is that the clerk has circulated a copy of the latest—and it's not actually the latest because for Thursday's meeting it shows two possibilities. It shows privacy report or the access report on the 10 fixes. We're only doing one of those at the meeting. The only reason I had this initially as a question mark is it was dependent on whether or not Mr. Marleau was going to be available. Mr. Marleau is only available on Thursday. He will not be in the country for the following two weeks. I thought it would be helpful to have him maybe to answer any of your questions as we review that response, and maybe give you an opportunity to formally say goodbye to him as he left that position after we had met. So we will be dealing with the access quick fixes on Thursday only.
With regard to the November 5 meeting, similarly there's only the Privacy Act quick fixes. The Privacy Commissioner is not available on that date or any near date. As a consequence, we will be having the deputy commissioner appear at that one. PCO has also confirmed that they will be sending someone here; I just can't tell you who. It looks like until at least mid November this schedule of our work should be fairly reliable, and you can prepare for those meetings accordingly.
The last item circulated to you was a response from the President of the Treasury Board with regard to the panel on oversight. This committee had expressed a question or concern about whether or not the supplementary funding to the Access to Information Commissioner should have been extended, and I think the president has responded to us appropriately that the oversight panel, of which I'm a member in this committee, provides input but the decision is made taking broader factors into play. I think we'll have to consider that matter closed.
There being no further business, thank you, colleagues.
The meeting is adjourned.