Jagmeet Singh says the Liberals and Conservatives are ‘controlled’ by corporate lobbyists. How true is that?

In this case, the NDP’s claims are part of a larger accusation that both Justin Trudeau and Pierre Poilievre are purely driven by corporate interests because of their ties to corporate Canada, from which they receive donations, and that ultimately shapes their political agendas, a party spokesperson told the Star.

For the purposes of this fact check, however, the Star focused on the NDP’s emphasis on lobbyists and dug into some recent examples the party provided.

Here’s what we found.

First, let’s bust out the dictionary

It’s worth noting right away that it’s not possible to truly know the degree to which corporations and their interests contribute to a government or political party’s myriad decisions.

But we can start by looking at the NDP’s language, and Singh’s use of the word “control.”

“Control, I would argue, is about almost compelling somebody to do something and leaving them with almost no alternative because the consequences of not acting on it are so great,” said Alex Marland, a political scientist at Acadia University. 

Such a dynamic is very likely not happening on Parliament Hill, Marland said, adding that “influence” would be a more accurate term.

“Influence doesn’t get people as upset as the word ‘control,’ right? So it’s about framing,” he said.

Next, let’s turn to what exactly a lobbyist is: they’re people who are paid to communicate with public office holders about things like legislation, regulations, policies, programs, funding opportunities and contracts.

Lobbying is a regular part of political processes around the world, as are laws to regulate the practice. Everyone from corporations and charities to unions and non-profit organizations uses lobbyists to make their appeals to governments. 

Not everyone is happy with how lobbying is conducted in Canada, and the federal lobbying commissioner has made recommendations for updating the country’s laws and rules to make the practice more ethical and transparent. 

Lastly, there are two kinds of lobbyists (remember this for later).

According to the commissioner’s office, in-house lobbyists “communicate with public office holders on behalf of the corporation or the organization that employs them.”

Consultant lobbyists, meanwhile, “are self-employed or work for firms active in the fields of government relations, law or strategic advice.” They’re paid to liaise between public office holders and their clients, and either arrange meetings between the two or communicate on their clients’ behalf.

So, are the Liberals “controlled” by lobbyists?

Again, “control” might not be an accurate word. 

But let’s look at two recent examples the NDP provided.

(We say recent because the party also pointed to the years-old SNC-Lavalin affair, which is now largely accepted as an example of a company aggressively lobbying the Trudeau government to secure legislative changes in its interests.)

The first concerns former federal health minister Jean-Yves Duclos, who last year faced allegations of caving to pharmaceutical industry lobbyists over changes to drug pricing reforms. 

At the time, three members of Canada’s drug pricing regulator, the Patented Medicine Prices Review Board (PMPRB), had quit the board, with one of them criticizing Duclos’s office for requesting a pause in consultations to lower drug costs for reasons “largely indistinguishable in form and substance from industry talking points.”

A report from The Breach also alleged Duclos’s office and pharmaceutical lobbyists were in close communication in the weeks before the new reforms would have come into effect, according to documents and lobby registry records the online outlet had obtained.

The reports were enough for the House of Commons health committee to study the matter, where Duclos strongly rejected accusations he had inappropriately interfered with the consultation process and explained how it was necessary for him to meet with anyone affected by drug cost changes, including industry stakeholders. 

As of last month, the committee was still reviewing a final draft of its study, so it’s not yet known what was concluded. 

In the NDP’s second example, the party points to a campaign from advocacy group Environmental Defence, which found the Liberal government met with oil and gas lobbyists more than 1,000 times last year. The NDP also referred to a report from The Narwhal that obtained departmental records showing that a Suncor executive provided input on a draft of Ottawa’s carbon management strategy. 

Similarly to Duclos’s defence, Natural Resources Canada and Environment and Climate Change Canada told the Star that addressing climate threats requires working with “the country’s largest emitters” as well as environmental and non-profit groups to achieve a “prosperous low-carbon economy.” 

It’s this point, says researcher and lobbying expert Maxime Boucher, that weakens the NDP’s argument that excessive lobbying is evidence of “control.”

“It’s a necessary evil in democracy, because the solution to the ailment of lobbying is worse than lobbying,” Boucher said. “It will be to say to people, ‘Well, you don’t have the right to associate (with) and to petition the government.’”

Boucher helped start a project at the University of Ottawa that mines data sources like Canadian lobbyist registries to better understand relationships between organized interests and policymakers.

So far, he’s found that corporations and their lobbyists do play an influential role in how government policies are formed, and that those meetings can shape their policy decisions.

Even so, he said it’s the government’s job to consult with all parties with a stake in an issue, and that ultimately, final decisions fall to the prime minister and his cabinet, not to a corporate CEO.

What about the Conservatives?

With all of this in mind, let’s turn to two examples Singh often cites when targeting the Conservatives.

The first, which is also repeated by Trudeau, concerns top Poilievre adviser Jenni Byrne. 

Both accuse Byrne of working as a lobbyist for grocery giant Loblaw — something they portray as hypocritical, given Poilievre’s criticism of rising food costs in Canada. 

In reality, Byrne heads a government and public relations firm called Jenni Byrne + Associates, which, according to Ontario’s lobbyist registry, has several employees registered to appeal to the provincial government on Loblaw’s behalf. Registry records show those lobbying efforts were centred on issues concerning cannabis, energy conservation and organized retail crime. 

Byrne does not appear in any of Canada’s provincial or federal databases as a registered lobbyist for Loblaw Companies Ltd. 

Her firm told the Star that Byrne has “never” lobbied on behalf of the company, and that its work is limited to Ontario’s government.

Another of the NDP’s claims is that almost half of the Conservative party’s national council is made up of lobbyists for oil, pharmaceutical, real estate and “anti-union” companies. It cites a 2023 report from The Breach, which found that seven of the 20 national council members elected to the party’s governing body at its convention last year had worked as corporate lobbyists.

The Star was able to confirm that at least seven members are registered as current or former lobbyists, according to Canada’s federal and provincial registries.

But there are two caveats here. 

First, the Conservative National Council is not the parliamentary arm of the party. Members are elected by party members at policy conventions, but it is a volunteer body primarily responsible for party governance. That’s not to say it has zero influence over political matters, but its members aren’t the people on Parliament Hill making political decisions.

Second, those members are “consultant lobbyists” — remember that term from earlier? 

That means that while they may lobby on behalf of oil and gas companies or pharmaceutical giants, they don’t work in-house for those corporations. 

The majority of those national council members also lobby for a wide range of other clients, including arts and culture groups, data storage companies, advocacy groups for vulnerable populations, non-profits, and, in one case, a teacher and educational workers’ union.

So is all of this a problem?

“A cautious yes,” said Marland, but only because of how negative perceptions about lobbying can colour the public’s thoughts, regardless of whether improper influence is actually happening. 

“I just think that as much as possible, it’s always better to take the high ground and to avoid any of those types of perceptions,” he said.