BY THE NUMBERS — Lobbying Commissioner NANCY BÉLANGER published her 2022-23 annual report this week. Playbook spotted some stand-out stats. 8,467: Lobbyists who registered at least once in the year. 30,681: Communication reports filed in 2023, a new record and up by nearly 20 percent from the previous year. 1,602: Lobbyist meetings with the Prime Minister's Office. 56: Meetings with the PM alone. 11,511: Meetings with MPs. 1,421: Meetings with senators. 5,960: Meetings with senior public servants (DMs, associate DMs, assistant DMs). 2: Interviews granted to journalists. Zero: Exemptions granted on the five-year restriction on lobbying for former designated public office holders. (The commissioner received 10 requests. Two were deferred to 2023-24.) — Most popular targets: The commissioner's report revealed the distinction between who lobbyists hope to meet and who they actually sit down with. Every time a lobbyist wants to bend the ear of somebody in government, their registration includes a list of target institutions. The PMO is the second-most popular among all registrations, but doesn't crack the top five for posted meetings. Registry devotees will note a steady stream of lobbyists whose companies or clients are in the clean energy space — many looking to influence tax policy or secure federal money (say, the ever-popular Strategic Innovation Fund). Here's how the numbers break down: → Top 5 registrations: House of Commons; PMO; Innovation, Science and Economic Development; Finance; Senate. → Top 5 meetings: House of Commons; Innovation, Science and Economic Development; Environment and Climate Change; Finance; Natural Resources. → Most popular subject matter in meetings: Environment, economic development, energy, industry, health. FOR THE RECORD — Sen. IAN SHUGART, the former clerk of the Privy Council, delivered his maiden speech to the Red Chamber on Tuesday. Shugart urged his colleagues to show restraint from their perches in the Senate. Here's an excerpt of his remarks: "In this Parliament, we have witnessed a sea change in the composition of the upper house. If the present government is reelected, we can expect further evolution of the Senate. The further we get from a party-based Senate, the more entrenched will be the idea of independence and freedom of action. Taken too far, we could find ourselves with many senators effectively setting themselves up as a de facto opposition to the government. We could be left with a frequent or perpetual standoff between the two chambers, as more and more independent senators claim a right to block legislation coming from the elected chamber. "Alternatively, notwithstanding the current attention being given to foreign interference, I am convinced that our democratic institutions and process are healthy enough to give us a different government. Should that be the case, some senators may feel it is their right and obligation to oppose any legislation from the other place if it reflects a philosophical perspective with which they disagree. Given the numbers that can be projected, this could be a recipe for legislative paralysis. To be blunt, either scenario creates the possibility that this institution could be at risk of acting undemocratically — ironically, by allowing tightly held principle to trump constitutional convention and deference to the will of the elected chamber. "In either situation, we have the seeds of constitutional crisis. An essential ingredient in avoiding or resolving such a crisis will be the practice of restraint. Our Constitution is black-letter law and convention — practices developed over decades and centuries, in which the instinct to exercise raw power is restrained for the common good. Absent restraint, the convention that the Senate’s duty is to scrutinize, amend and pass legislation — balanced against deference to the chamber that most directly reflects the will of the people — is incomplete."
| 
