The following is a link to the petition: https://www.change.
The petition reads as follows:
We the signed, call on the Province of British Columbia to define the word “lobby” as a noun in the Lobbyists Transparency Act (LTA).
——————————
Summary:
The Province of BC currently does not define “lobby” as a noun in the so-called Lobbyists Transparency Act, thus while the Act acknowledges that organizations lobby as an activity in verb form (through hiring in-house lobbyists), it does not identify lobbies as actual entities, a major blind spot that provides plausible deniability to the BC government and to lobbies themselves about the true nature of their organizations.
This provides the government with the ability to deny that branches of the government have not only partnered with lobbies through paid memberships in them, but in addition provides the government the ability to deny that they are simultaneously funding and using lobbies as advisors both outside and within the governmental system, when they are.
For democracy’s sake, this must be changed immediately.
——————————
Background: The so-called Lobbyists Transparency Act (LTA) of British Columbia is not as transparent as its name makes it appear on first sight. On the contrary, it lacks crucial transparency when it comes to lobbies by not defining them at all as actual entities.
The LTA contains a major glaring loophole that creates a massive blind spot when it comes to lobbying in British Columbia.
While the LTA defines “lobbying” and “lobby” as verbs, it does not include the term “lobby” as a noun, or recognized entity as such.
In other words, while “lobbying” takes place and the LTA acknowledges and defines this, there are no recognized “lobbies” as organizations recognized as such, in the LTA.
As the BC Lobbyists Registry put it in an email:
“As you can see from this definition, the LTA defines “lobby” in the form of a verb (“to communicate with…”). The LTA does not provide another definition of “lobby”, and most specifically does not provide a definition of “lobby” in which it is referenced as a noun (person, place or thing). Consequently, the ORL is unable to respond further on whether [an organization whose activities are registered on the BC Lobbyists Registry] is a “lobby”, as this question appears to fall outside the scope of the LTA.”
The original email from the BCORL, included the name of a specific organization, but I have replaced that name of the organization with my own text in parentheses: [an organization whose activities are registered on the BC Lobbyists Registry] to make a general point about this crucial blind spot in the LTA and to make it clear, rather than to merely point fingers at a specific organization and thus lose sight of the broader picture, as this could be the case with any organization on that registry.
While the LTA does contain individual definitions for “lobbyist” and “organization”, it does not define a “lobbyist organization”.
As the BC Lobbyists Registry put it in an email:
“Please note that the LTA does not contain a definition of “lobbyist organization”. Rather, the LTA defines “organization” and requires that any “organization” with “in-house lobbyists” register its lobbying activities in accordance with the requirements set out under the LTA”
Using the terms lobbyist or lobbyists, instead of lobbyist organization(s), provides the appearance that responsibility for lobbying activities falls to mere individuals rather than on organizations carrying out lobbying activities, e.g. a breach of conduct can be ascribed to a ‘bad apple’ or a ‘few bad apples’ and is open to scapegoating of individuals who can be used as “fall persons” rather than organizations facing organizational culpability.
——————————
The takeaway:
In the US, almost anyone on the street can name a lobby. Probably the most recognized lobby in the US, is the NRA.
Yet, how many people can name a lobby in Canada?
In early 2024, a well known radio host on the popular station CFAX 1070 was unable to identify on-air a single lobby in Canada when asked if they could do so. This is despite that the radio station has on more than one occasion had the Chair of a registered organization on the BC Lobbyists Registry interviewed on-air.
If not only media outlets, but even the government itself cannot identify lobbies as distinct entities, then there is a major blind spot for proper governance when it comes to interacting with such entities.
If to follow the BC Lobbyist Registry’s logic: there aren’t any lobbies in BC, only organizations that lobby in BC. This of course makes no sense whatsoever, unless we are to believe:
1: There are no lobbies in British Columbia, or in the world for that matter.
Or alternatively option 2: There is a massive black hole of a loophole in lobby law in British Columbia that amounts to a giant elephant in the room that doesn’t legally recognize the existence of lobbies as such, and needs to be addressed as soon as possible, for the sake of preventing serious likely undue influence on the Provincial Government of British Columbia.
By not addressing this issue, the Province of BC has no way of identifying if organizations sitting on its committees (internal or external), or that it meets with, advises it, or it consults with are lobbies. This is open to major abuse by both the government and by outside organizations acting as lobbies not excluding the likely possibilities of regulatory capture, corporate capture, deregulatory capture and even state capture by lobbies who have found an advisory status to the government, while not being recognized as lobbies, and thus achieving a sort of Trojan Horse status by being able to operate under the radar in and around the governmental system.
Alternatively, and also very likely, the government is perfectly aware of this entire situation and allows it to continue, because it provides plausible deniability in regard to it being advised by lobbies according to the traditional English definition of that word.
It also allows situations where entire branches of the government e.g. local/regional governments, statutory bodies/authorities etc. become paying members of lobbies (a form of co-option). It is not unusual for such membership joins to have been made by staffers without even the knowledge of elected officials.
Google provides an Oxford Language definition of “lobby as a noun”: a group of people seeking to influence politicians or public officials on a particular issue.
Why does the Province of BC not have a definition of this in its so-called Lobbyists Transparency Act?
Not defining lobbies, allows them to go under the radar, and allows them to advise the government, while serving as experts/consultants on committees etc., without being identified as lobbies, an absurd state open for major undue influence that can be disastrous to a so-called democracy.
——————————
Another takeaway from all this is that lobbies by not being identified in the BC LTA as such, can thus avoid much public scrutiny of their lobbying activities, by hiding these under the guise of being registered Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) e.g. non-profits, so-called professional organizations, etc.
As such, by registering as non-profit organizations, organizations that are carrying out lobbying activities on behalf of their paying members (including businesses) that they offer representation to through their membership; non-profits can function as lobbies, while themselves being income tax exempt.
——————————
Conclusions:
British Columbia and Canada should aim to be an open and transparent democracy.
By not defining lobby and lobbies as noun(s) in the BC Lobbyists Transparency Act, this opens a major blind spot in the law for abuse to thrive inside and outside the government system in regard to lobby activity within and without the government, while simultaneously offering lobbies tax exempt status, as they lobby the government on behalf of their paying corporate members’ and other donors’ interests (financial or otherwise).
The situation, if left undealt with, is more than a perilous situation for any state that claims to be an open and transparent democracy acting in the public interest, instead of potentially acting for private corporate, even extra-national interests against the public interest.
The full separation of lobby and state is critical for the protection and full achievement of democracy in Canada.
For these and other crucial reasons, in the interests of faithful and protected democracy in British Columbia:
We the signed, call on the Province of British Columbia to define the word “lobby” as a noun in the Lobbyists Transparency Act (LTA).
——————————
For more information please contact BCPetition@mail.com
Resources:
Lobbyists Transparency Act (gov.bc.ca)
Nonprofit Law in Canada | Council on Foundations (cof.org)
LETTER: Local governments should distance themselves from lobbyists – Saanich News
Transparency International Knowledge Hub |INTRODUCTION TO UNDUE INFLUENCE ON DECISION-MAKING