INST Committee Report

            The question, then, for the Committee’s consideration was this: is the Act working to achieve in practice the right balance of the four principles? The inquiry often took us well beyond the Lobbyists Registration Act, into issues of ethics in government and conflict of interest; of election financing and the real nature of influence and, perhaps most importantly, transparency.

            But what do we mean when we say "transparency"? The word means many different things in the context of modern government: it means that the process by which government makes decisions must be one that people can understand, a process which they can access, a process which provides them with the opportunity to make their voices heard, and to have their say in the laws that will govern and affect their lives. As well, transparency means that the public should be able to find out exactly who is talking to government, and what they are talking about. For that reason, understanding transparency means broadening the discussion beyond narrow questions of how much information lobbyists should be required to disclose; of course, that discussion must also take place. It is important that the public has enough information to know what is going on in government. But, even more importantly, the discussion must be about how we can ensure that all Canadians ? not just those working within a kilometre of Parliament Hill ? can have real, meaningful input in the process by which they are governed.

            Perhaps one of the most important ideas to emerge from our discussions is how the Internet is changing the way policy is made, and the way people are talking to their government. Members of Parliament, of course, have already begun to experience a

            significant increase in E-mail from constituents. The Committee heard that, currently, at least one government department provides on its Web site a "consultations" portal ? at the click of a mouse, Canadians can now make their views known and not just to their Member of Parliament. The Internet, though only in the early stages of development, permits for the first time the possibility of seeing clearly into, and getting involved in, the inner workings of the bureaucracy: Web sites may provide detailed listings of departmental personnel, their responsibilities, phone numbers and E-mail addresses; department Web sites provide links to relevant legislation, regulations, guidelines, policy manuals and even discussion papers. These are just a few of the examples of the level of transparency that may be possible. The growth of the Internet will change the way governments make decisions, and its impact will be felt only more strongly in coming years. Both Members of Parliament and departmental policy makers may look forward to far more direct, individual input in the policy-making process.

            In a sense it is really impossible to talk about the lobbyists registration system without discussing the role of the Internet. Most obviously, the registry itself is Internet-based. Lobbyists register and update their filings electronically. The registry is fully searchable, allowing anyone to determine with a few mouse clicks who is talking to government and what they are talking about. As well, the Internet allows the timely reporting of lobbyists who fail or neglect to register.

            The majority of witnesses expressed the view that the system works well. This is perhaps best understood by looking at the information that the system provides, and what that information reveals about the discussions that are taking place between lobbyists and government; about the views being expressed and about what information is changing hands. The four principles, it might be said, recognize implicitly the critical role of information in the policy-making process. Information is the most valuable input in that process, and getting complete, up-to-date, and accurate information is always a priority for legislators and policy-makers. This information comes from stakeholders, from people or businesses with an interest in the outcome; people who are concerned enough to make the effort to speak out, to make their voices heard and their views known. Thousands of Canadians do this every year, in fact, when they write letters to their MP. In addition, individuals and businesses may join together as public interest groups or trade and industry associations to discuss issues and speak with government ? i.e. lobby ? with a strong and unified voice.

            The process of lobbying is often portrayed as the exclusive reserve of "powerful and influential lobbyists," using their "connections" to make "secret deals." This is far too simple a picture. The reality is that the overwhelming preponderance of government decision making ? and, therefore, lobbying efforts ? are directed not at legislators or legislation, nor even at ministers of the Crown. Rather, most lobbying is "low-level" activity aimed at many levels of the public service.

              Another important idea that was discussed is how government decision making and the role of lobbyists has changed since the Act was passed in 1989 and, indeed, since the major amendments of 1995. The Act was conceived as an antidote to the conflict of interest and influence-peddling scandals that beset previous governments. The solution was not to regulate lobbying ? which remains a valuable and legitimate activity ? but rather to make the system transparent by requiring people or groups to disclose their lobbying activities. The general consensus is that the Act has succeeded in this ? it provides precisely the kind of transparency for which it was created: lobbyists do, in fact, register. Today, by examining the registry, we can find out who is lobbying what department and what exactly they are discussing. Why is it important that we know this? Simply put, by knowing who is talking to government, the public (and, of course, other lobbyists) can form a clear picture of the information that is being provided and the policy options that are being considered. Ultimately, the registry makes it possible to achieve a true plurality of views without an unduly onerous compliance mechanism.