Better late than never – 13 years later, Canada’s Lobbying Act undergoes review

On September 17, 2025, the House of Common’s Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics (the “Committee”) adopted a motion to undertake a comprehensive review of the Lobbying Act (Canada) (the “Act”). The Committee will assess the Act’s “…effectiveness in ensuring transparency and ethical conduct in lobbying activities…”. The Committee will hear from witnesses including the federal Commissioner of Lobbying, Nancy Bélanger (the “Commissioner”), civil society, former public office holders and ethics experts. The Committee will report its findings and proposed legislative reforms to the House of Commons, with the expectation that the federal government will provide a comprehensive response to the report.

Subsection 14.1(1) of the Act provides that a comprehensive review of the provisions and operation of the Act must be undertaken every five years. Notably, the last mandated review of the Act occurred in 2012.

Following the announcement of this overdue legislative review of the Act, the Commissioner appeared before the Committee on October 6, 2025. The key takeaways of the Commissioner’s testimony before the Committee are outlined below:

• New registration threshold for in-house lobbyists – the Commissioner has released an Interpretation Bulletin reducing the registration threshold for in-house lobbyists from 32 hours to 8 hours for a four-week period. See our Bulletin on these important changes here. During her testimony, the Commissioner set out her reasoning for arriving at the new threshold, noting that she reviewed the “important part of activities” test set out in the Act. Using the legislative intent of the Act and comparing other jurisdictions, the Commissioner came to a “defendable” 8 hours. When pressed by the Committee on the threshold, the Commissioner stated that there should be no threshold at all, citing the threshold for the lobbying regime in British Columbia. The removal of the federal threshold would need to occur by legislative amendment. The Committee also addressed the administrative burden of automatic registration with the Commissioner, with the Commissioner stating that she doesn’t view automatic registration as an issue and that it is, “…a small cost for transparency…”. She also noted that proving 32 hours is “almost impossible”. The Commissioner noted critically that in 2024 there were more than 22 lobbying “Hill Days” yet there were no lobbying registrations for those events.

 

• Monthly communication reports – The Commissioner addressed the monthly oral and arranged reporting requirements under the Act, noting that they are problematic. She used the example of meeting designated public office holders in airports or on street corners where the Act’s reporting requirements would not apply. Meetings with designated public office holders should be reported regardless of who organized the meeting, in the opinion of the Commissioner.

 

• Shadow lobbying and influence peddling – In addition to the monthly communication reports, the Act requires payment for lobbying activity to be considered registrable, which poses a potential loophole where advisors are not paid. The Commissioner testified that the current Act does not cover influence peddling, nor shadow lobbying, which, in her opinion, should be registrable activity.

 

• Enforcement of the Act – The Commissioner noted that from a practical perspective not all violations of the Act are the same. Currently, the Act mandates that the Commissioner must suspend its investigation and report an offence under the Act or any other Act of Parliament or of the legislature of a province to the RCMP – every violation is an offence. The Commissioner used the example of late registration, noting that in these instances, late registrations are not actioned, as it is better to accept late registration for transparency purposes. The Commissioner stated, “Transparency delayed is transparency denied.” The Act has no enforcement tools for training or fines, nor can the Commissioner make public compliance shortfalls or potential infractions. Unlike other lobbying regimes in Canada, the federal Commissioner has no discretion to impose sanctions. The Commissioner is advocating for more flexible and timely enforcement tools. While the onus to comply with Canada’s federal lobbying regime rests on the lobbyist, the Commissioner helpfully noted during her testimony that Members of Parliament should take notes when meeting with lobbyists to assist the Commissioner in carrying out her investigations.

 

We will continue to monitor the Committee’s review of the Act and will provide updates as they become available. Should you have any questions, please reach out to Lobium Law.