Pressing ahead with lobbyist registry in Vaughan

Yorkregion.com
Dec. 14, 2015

Vaughan is pressing ahead with plans to regulate lobbying activity in a bid to increase transparency and accountability at city hall.

But it could take two years before a full-fledged, mandatory lobbyist registry is in place, if that happens at all.

Councillors voted Tuesday to begin the process of developing a mandatory lobbyist registry complete with a definition of what constitutes lobbying, a lobbyist code of conduct, an online portal to record lobbying activity, as well as exploring the need for a lobbyist registrar to monitor the registry and potential penalties or sanctions.

“When it comes to the issue of transparency and accountability, I’d rather lead, not follow,” Mayor Maurizio Bevilacqua said. “I don’t want this city to be the 10th city, the 20th city, that is going to establish a lobbyist registry. I want to be ahead of the curve, not behind it.”

Lobbyist registries are designed to provide a public record of the people who meet with senior bureaucrats and councillors to influence decision-making and to document the issues or projects they’re meeting to talk about.

In Ontario, only a handful of municipalities have such registries.

They each have different definitions of what constitutes a lobbyist or lobbying activity and different regulatory processes.

Toronto, for example, requires lobbyists to register with the municipality and outline what they want to discuss before talking to any public officials. Then they must update the subject matter after the discussions take place.

A lobbyist registrar in Toronto oversees and maintains the registry and investigates complaints about alleged violations of the rules.

In Ottawa, by contrast, lobbyists don’t have to register in advance instead they must disclose lobbying activities within 15 business days of communicating with a public official.

Ottawa’s integrity commissioner oversees the registry.

The two other municipalities with lobbyist registries are Hamilton and Brampton.

Vaughan staff are recommending creating a registry similar to Ottawa’s where lobbyists would be required to disclose lobbying activities within a certain number of days after communicating with senior bureaucrats or councillors.

Regional Councillor Mario Ferri spoke in favour of implementing such a registry.

“I think it’s an important document to help with transparency, but I want it to work effectively and I want it to work for the right reasons, so I just wanted to stress the importance, from my standpoint, of the education and training component,” he said.

But not all Vaughan councillors are convinced a lobbyist registry is necessary, at this point.

“I’ve gotta tell you, I have a real bias against spending our money on one regulation system after another regulation system after another regulation system,” Thornhill Councillor Alan Shefman. “I definitely see the value in some, but how many layers do we need in this city to manage our responsibility?”

He suggested the city start by putting in place a code of conduct for lobbyists to lay out the rules and monitor that for a couple of years to determine if a more comprehensive regime is needed.

“I’m very concerned about assuming a lot more responsibilities at a time where we’re being very, very careful about our budget and we’re under huge pressure for any expenditure whatsoever,” Shefman said.

Concord/Thornhill North Councillor Sandra Yeung Racco expressed similar concerns and to regulate lobbying activity in a bid to increase transparency and accountability at city hall.

The cost of setting up and operating a lobbyist registry varies depending on the model.

Hamilton, which has a similar system to the one being considered for Vaughan, spends about $115,000 per year to administer its registry, according to City Clerk Jeffrey Abrams.

By contrast, the lobbyist registrar’s office in Toronto has eight full-time staff and a $1 million budget.

“Everything that’s new always seems to be burdensome, but I think, at the end of the day, we can’t put a value on public trust and this is just another part of that component to build public trust and retain public trust,” Maple/Kleinburg councillor Marilyn Iafrate said. “For me, if this enhances public trust then I think it’s hugely important for me to buy into this. Can we do it in cost effective manner? I think we can.”

Woodbridge West Councillor Tony Carella raised a number of concerns including the challenge of determining what type of communication constitutes lobbying.

He suggested if the city goes ahead, there should be a one-year phase-in period where there are no sanctions.

“I think we need a whole cycle of the year in order to get familiar with it and know what our responsibilities are. That’s what really concerns me,” he said. “I have no problem with the lobbyist registrar, I simply want to make sure that we are fully cognizant of what is happening, what is changing here and what, potentially, could come back to bite us.”

His colleagues welcomed that suggestion.

The plan, at this point, is for public consultations to take place in January and February.

A draft proposal for a code of conduct as well as recommendations for a registrar as well as potential sanctions and projected costs is expected to be before council in March.

If those are approved, it’s estimated the online portal would be in place by fall 2016 and a registrar would be appointed by early 2017.

Given that, a 12-month phase-in period means a full-fledged, mandatory lobbyist registry with sanction and penalties wouldn’t be implemented until 2018.