Information and Privacy Commissioner and Registrar of Lobbyists David Loukidelis today released the following public statement:

Concerns raised in the Legislative Assembly on April 18, 2007 about Ken Dobell's registration under the Lobbyists Registration Act prompted me to initiate my own independent review on April 19 into Mr. Dobell's registration under the Lobbyists Registration Act. I stated early on that the report of my review would be made public and that a copy of the report would be provided to the Ministry of Attorney General.

My report, entitled "Report on Registration of Ken Dobell Under the Lobbyists Registration Act", is being posted concurrently with release of this statement on my office's home page on the web, at www.oipc.bc.ca, under What's New.

We attach our own extracts

[6] I have concluded that Mr. Dobell undertook and performed contract services for the City that were lobbying within the meaning of the LRA. If Mr. Dobell had been a City employee section 2(1)(d)-which excludes local government authorities, their elected officials and employees-would have excluded his activities from the LRA. Because he was a contract consultant and not a City employee, he was required by section 3(1)(a) of the LRA to register as a consultant lobbyist within 10 days after he started undertakings to lobby on behalf of the City on April 5 and August 16, 2006.

[79] This review has led me to conclude that Mr. Dobell's contracts with the City were, among other things, paid undertakings to lobby on behalf of a client requiring him to register as a consultant lobbyist under the LRA and that his registration as a lobbyist in October 2006 was not done within 10 days after he entered into the undertakings, as was required by section 3(1)(a) of the LRA.

[81] The purpose of the Lobbyists Registry is transparency. There was in my view no intention by the City or Mr. Dobell to hide the consulting contracts. Mr. Dobell has said that he decided to register, not because he believed he was a lobbyist, but to deal with any question of compliance with the LRA and to be completely open and transparent. For him the simple and straightforward way of answering the question was just to register. Transparency to him took precedence, as it should, to perceived technicalities around the requirements of the LRA. Registration was also, in my opinion, the correct and required course of action under the legislation.