![](\"http:\/\/spacingmedia.com\/spacingvancouver\/wp-content\/uploads\/features\/indepth_feature-VAN.gif\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
When most people hear the word lobbyist<\/i>, they think of expensive suits, closed-door meetings, and backroom deals. In Vancouver, as in most Canadian cities, lobbying evokes images of developers, corporate lawyers, and well-connected insiders whispering into the ears of decision-makers. It conjures the kind of influence that happens over catered lunches, not at community centres.<\/span><\/p>\n But lobbying isn\u2019t just the stuff of political thrillers or development boardrooms. It\u2019s also, at least in spirit, something any of us can do. Communicating with public officials to influence decisions\u2014writing to your city councillor, calling a minister\u2019s office, organizing a group of neighbours to push for safer intersections\u2014all of that falls under the broad<\/i> cultural definition of lobbying. <\/span><\/p>\n But legally speaking, especially under B.C.\u2019s Lobbyists Transparency Act<\/i><\/a> (LTA), only certain kinds of activities\u2014usually involving paid representatives or formal organizations\u2014are considered registrable lobbying. And therein lies part of the problem.<\/span><\/p>\n The tent is technically open to all, but only some<\/i> folks are invited to the party. To lobby effectively, you don\u2019t need a tuxedo or secret handshake, but you do need something almost as rare: time, access, fluency in policy-speak, and usually, a Rolodex of government contacts (or at least someone who still knows what a Rolodex is).<\/span><\/p>\n It\u2019s not that community groups aren\u2019t engaged. Many are passionately involved in civic life. But lobbying\u2014the behind-the-scenes kind that actually shapes policy\u2014is often out of reach. <\/span><\/p>\n The folks who can afford to show up during working hours, who know how to write a briefing note or organize a strategy lunch, tend to be the same ones who are already doing just fine. Developers, real estate associations, and landowners are well aware of this game, as a quick glance at the Urban Development Institute<\/i> website<\/span><\/a> will make clear. Such organizations meet regularly with staff, submit detailed reports, and often walk into meetings where everyone already knows their name.<\/span><\/p>\n Meanwhile, tenant advocates and nonprofit volunteers often struggle even to get a call back. <\/span><\/p>\n They\u2019re busy working second jobs, navigating housing insecurity, or just trying to decipher<\/a> the latest planning memo written in bureaucratic hieroglyphics. And when they do show up\u2014often with placards instead of policy papers\u2014they\u2019re too easily dismissed as emotional, disruptive, or not constructive enough.<\/span><\/p>\n To make matters even murkier, the very definition of lobbying in British Columbia leaves some rather large shadows. The law doesn\u2019t even define the word lobby<\/i> as a noun. That may sound like a grammatical quibble, but it\u2019s more like missing the sign above the door. Without a formal legal definition, entire organizations whose sole purpose is to influence policy can operate without ever being identified as lobbyists.<\/span><\/p>\n This loophole<\/span><\/a> creates a kind of bureaucratic invisibility cloak<\/i>. <\/span><\/p>\n Groups that function as lobbies\u2014by any ordinary understanding of the word\u2014can fly under the radar simply because the law doesn\u2019t call them what they are. And that lack of naming makes it harder for governments to disclose who they\u2019re talking to, or for the public to understand who\u2019s shaping what.<\/span><\/p>\n Some<\/a> have proposed expanding the scope of the registry to include not just paid lobbyists\u2014those who receive salaries or sit on remunerated boards\u2014but also unpaid lobbyists<\/i>. These are the volunteers who do the same advocacy work, minus the paycheque or the tailored suit. <\/span><\/p>\n In a city where much of the public interest work is done after hours and on a shoestring, recognizing this form of civic labour isn\u2019t just symbolic\u2014it\u2019s necessary.<\/span><\/p>\n And yet, while proposals to expand transparency circulate, the actual policy trend has gone in the opposite direction. This spring, the B.C. government passed amendments<\/a> to the Lobbyists Transparency Act<\/i><\/a> that will make it harder\u2014not easier\u2014to track who is seeking influence. <\/span><\/p>\n One of the biggest changes? <\/span><\/p>\n Lobbyists no longer have to disclose when they request government funding. That’s not a bureaucratic formality\u2014that\u2019s a direct ask for public dollars that now disappears into the fog. Requests will only be visible later, if funding is approved.<\/span><\/p>\n Critics point out that this undermines one of the most basic forms of democratic oversight: following the money. It also weakens the ability to cross-reference lobbying activity with political donations\u2014something that, while far from perfect, previously offered at least a faint trail of accountability.<\/span><\/p>\n The new amendments also relax disclosure timelines and maintain several other long-standing loopholes. Federally, in-house lobbyists can devote up to 20 percent of their time to lobbying without having to register. Provincially, B.C. previously had a similar threshold but now exempts small organizations\u2014those with fewer than six employees who lobby for under 50 hours annually\u2014from registration entirely. Meanwhile, petitions to reduce regulatory enforcement don\u2019t need to be disclosed, and lobbying initiated by an elected official remains untracked. Add in the fact that unpaid lobbying still flies completely under the radar, and the system starts to look less like a sunshine law and more like a guide to strategic shadows.<\/span><\/p>\n Yet, the deeper issue isn\u2019t just who gets named in the registry\u2014it\u2019s whose voice carries<\/i>. Our civic culture tends to give legitimacy to those who arrive with binders and logos, while dismissing those who arrive with hand-painted signs. \u201cStakeholders\u201d are taken seriously; \u201cactivists\u201d are considered a nuisance.<\/span><\/p>\n So, what would it take to change the game?<\/span><\/p>\n First, let\u2019s stop pretending that the playing field is level. We need to fund and train community groups in the mechanics of influence\u2014how to write effective submissions, how to track policy cycles, how to get a meeting without knowing someone\u2019s cousin. We need to open up decision-making spaces that aren\u2019t just reserved for those with industry clout. And yes, we need municipal lobbying registries so we can actually see who\u2019s whispering in whose ear.<\/span><\/p>\n More broadly, we need to stop thinking of lobbying as a dirty word. It’s just a tool\u2014like a hammer. And like any tool, it can be used to build something good or to hit people over the head with. The question is who holds it\u2014and who\u2019s even allowed to walk into the hardware store.<\/span><\/p>\n The truth is, developers and other similar lobbyists don\u2019t just build housing\u2014they help write the rules for what housing gets built, where, and at what profit margin. If public interest is to be more than a slogan, it needs a seat at the same table, on the same terms, and in the same rooms\u2014recorded, scheduled, and structured the same way public hearings are, not backroom briefings over finger food.<\/span><\/p>\n One reason lobbying feels so invisible in Canada is that it often blends into the wallpaper. While most Americans can name a major lobby\u2014like the NRA<\/a>\u2014most Canadians can\u2019t name even one. That\u2019s not because lobbying doesn\u2019t happen here. It\u2019s because the very structure of our laws and civic culture fails to make these organizations visible. The result is a democracy where power moves in whispers, and most people don\u2019t even know how to raise their voice.<\/span><\/p>\n So let\u2019s name the game. Let\u2019s write the rules in plain language. And let\u2019s ensure the rules are written\u2014and the doors kept open\u2014so that more people, especially those advocating for the public good, can participate in the game of influence.<\/span><\/p>\n Democracy was never supposed to be a spectator sport. And lobbying? That\u2019s not just for lobbyists<\/i>. It\u2019s for all of us who care about the shape of our city.<\/span><\/p>\n ***<\/span><\/p>\n Other related articles:<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n **<\/span><\/p>\n Erick Villagomez<\/i><\/b> is the Editor-in-Chief at Spacing Vancouver and teaches at UBC\u2019s School of Community and Regional Planning. He is also the author of <\/i>The Laws of Settlements: 54 Laws Underlying Settlements Across Scale and Culture<\/span><\/a>. <\/i><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"\n