Lobbyist watchdog to revise conduct code this summer

Attention federal lobbyists: The current rules of engagement that govern your interactions with public office holders as well as theway you doyour job may be about to undergo a major rewrite.

After spending months listening to what academics, industry veterans and other stakeholders had to say on the subject, Lobbying Commissioner Karen Shepherd has announced that she intends to proceed with her planned revision of the Lobbyists' Code of Conduct over the summer.

• Analysis | Greg Weston: Lobbying watchdog seeks tougher penalties
• Lobbying rules changing amid PMO chief's controversy
• MPs want lobbyists fined for breaking rules

A draft version of the revamped rules is to be presented to those same interested parties this fall.

In a written statement, Shepherd said her first round of consultations "reaffirmed that the Lobbyists Code of Conduct provides a solid foundation," but also made it clear that there are "areas where it could be improved."

"The views I heard, as well as my own experience, will inform my reflections on how the Code can be strengthened.

Focus on scope, balance

The release states that Shepherd will "concentrate her review" on three broad areas, namely:

• Determining whether the scope of the code needs to be revised
• Maintaining an appropriate balance between principles and rules
• Striking an appropriate balance between offering additional clarity and keeping the code simple and succinct

But the accompanying report goes into more detail on the "key themes" that emerged during the first round of consultations,as well as some specific recommendations that might give some indication of what the revised code could include.

• Read Lobbying Commissioner Karen Shepherd's full report here

Should she, for instance, add a provision that would explicitly "promote respect for public institutions"?

What about putting a time limit on the existing rules related to "political activities" which are also not defined in the code?

Do we need a rule that would bar lobbyists from potentially putting a public office holder in conflict with his or her own code of conduct or values and ethics rules or, for that matter, one that would advise lobbyists not to provide gifts, hospitality or any other benefit to those being lobbied?

Should there be more detail on what sanctions can be imposed under the current code which, as a non-statutory instrument, does not allow for fines or other penalties, but does require the commissioner to file a report to Parliament if she concludes that a breach has occurred?

Should the guidelines be expanded to include relationships between lobbyists and their targets or, for that matter, with their clients?

What about providing "preferential access" to personal friends who also happen to be public officials?

Those, it seems, are just a few of the ethical conundrums with which Shepherd will be wrestling over the next few months.

2012 pledgeto toughen lobby laws

Government Relations Institute of Canada president Jim Patrick told CBC News he thinks Shepherd "has identified all the right areas for further consultation and consideration."

"It's nice to see a regulator take their mandate to consult stakeholders so seriously, and to execute that part of the job so thoughtfully," he said.

Patrick noted that the industry is also awaiting amendments to the Lobbying Act which is separate from the code of conduct as well as the Conflict of Interest Act.

"That's something we'll have to take into account in the next phase of this process as well."

In 2012, the House ethics committee issued a report that called on the government to make substantial changes to the lobbying laws, including giving the commissioner the power to impose administrative penalties.

That fall, Treasury Board President Tony Clement advised the House ethics committee that just two of the more minor recommendations would be adopted, including one that would require the names of in-house lobbyists to be included in filings to the communications log.

As of today, however, not a single amendment has been tabled.

When asked about the delay in the past, Clement's office said it was waiting for the committee to wrap up its five-year review on the Conflict of Interest Act.

The committee submitted its final report in February.

The government has until June 20 to respond.