Summary#
Bill 44, An Act to Amend the Lobbyists’ Registration Act, would amend New Brunswick’s 2014 Lobbyists’ Registration Act. It would replace its existing registration divisions with new registration and reporting rules, and add a code of conduct and investigation measures. Its stated goal is to set ethical standards and responsibilities for lobbyists; the bill does not guarantee any particular result.
The supplied text is the tabled first-reading version. It is not yet law, and its provisions would start on dates set by proclamation.
- Consultant and in-house lobbyists would have to be registered before lobbying a public office holder. Initial returns would be due within 15 days for consultant lobbyists and within two months for in-house lobbyists; for an organization, its senior officer would file.
- Those who filed initial returns would generally have to file monthly returns reporting relevant communications with public office holders, corrections and new information. Some months with no activity would not require a return, but after five consecutive months without returns, an inactive-period return would be required.
- The Commissioner would have to develop a lobbyist code of conduct, consult people or organizations the Commissioner considers appropriate, submit it to a Legislative Assembly committee and publish it in The Royal Gazette. Lobbyists would have to comply.
- The Commissioner could investigate possible breaches, make findings of non-compliance and, if in the public interest, publish details, bar a lobbyist from lobbying for up to two years, or impose an administrative penalty. The penalty amount would be set by regulation.
- The bill would also let the Commissioner publish details of certain convictions or bar a convicted person from lobbying for up to two years. These measures would not take effect until one year after the relevant section starts.
What it means for you#
- Lobbyists: Consultant lobbyists and in-house lobbyists would have to register before lobbying and meet the new return and code-of-conduct requirements. The bill defines in-house lobbyists to include certain employees and compensated officers, with exclusions that may be set by regulation.
- Organizations that employ in-house lobbyists: A senior officer would have to file the initial and monthly returns for the organization’s in-house lobbyist.
- Consultant lobbyists leaving lobbying: They would have to inform the Commissioner when they stop being consultant lobbyists and could not work as an employee in the specified parts of the provincial public service for six months after informing the Commissioner.
- People whose conduct is investigated: They would get notice of an alleged breach and an opportunity to be heard. They could ask the Commissioner to reconsider a finding or measure and apply for judicial review. A lobbying ban or administrative penalty would be discretionary, not automatic.
- Public: The bill does not create a new independent agency. It assigns duties and powers to the Commissioner. It does not directly change taxes or create a public benefit.
Money#
No publicly available information on the bill’s costs.
- The Commissioner would have to develop the code and could investigate cases; the materials give no estimate of staffing or other costs.
- Administrative penalties, if imposed and recovered, would be paid into the Province’s Consolidated Fund. The amount would be set by regulation.
What is unclear#
- The Lobbyists’ Registration Act itself was not supplied, so the existing rules and the full change from current law could not be verified.
- The bill does not set the penalty amount, define all information required in returns, or say which people or classes would be excluded from the in-house lobbyist definition. Regulations may supply some of these details.
- The Commissioner would determine how an investigated person may be heard. The bill does not set a detailed hearing process or explain how the code’s ethical standards would be developed beyond consultation and committee submission.
- The bill starts only on dates set by proclamation. The supplied materials do not give those dates.
- Only the first-reading text was supplied. No amendment versions were provided, so changes from later amendments—or whether any proposed amendment was adopted—cannot be identified.
Case for#
- A possible argument for the bill is that regular reporting of lobbying communications could give the Commissioner and the public more current information about lobbying.
- A code of conduct could set shared ethical expectations for consultant and in-house lobbyists.
- Investigation powers and possible penalties or lobbying bans could give the rules consequences beyond registration and reporting.
- Requiring notice and an opportunity to be heard, along with reconsideration and judicial review, provides steps for challenging a finding or measure.
Case against#
- The bill leaves important details to regulations or the Commissioner, including penalty amounts, some return information and the hearing process.
- The Commissioner could investigate on their own initiative or after a complaint, use powers under the Inquiries Act, and impose significant measures. The bill gives the Commissioner discretion over when to investigate and what measure to take.
- The code must be followed, but it is not subject to the Regulations Act. The bill does not specify its standards in advance.
- The new duties and investigations could require staff and resources, but the available material gives no cost estimate.