Hardly anybody noticed, but the federal government sneaked something into the Jan. 27 budget that would have caused an uproar just a few years ago. Canada’s banks were finally allowed into the auto-leasing sector, and not a peep of protest was heard.

The banking industry’s quiet triumph says a couple of things about the current political landscape. Obviously, the decision reminds us again how short public memory is. Less than 10 years ago, the banks’ entry into auto leasing would have been denounced as a death blow to car dealers and even the auto producers themselves.

Today, car dealers and automakers have other possible calamities on their minds. So do Canadian consumers. In addition, the auto industry has been groveling for government aid.

We may never know. But the sudden entry into auto leasing is probably part of a quid pro quo that Finance Minister Jim Flaherty had to make with the banks to secure their co-operation in getting the country out of recession.

The decision also illustrates how this government is different from its predecessor. The Liberals spent thousands of hours on hearings a decade ago inciting public debate on who should be able to do what in the financial sector. Not that the banks had any chance of winning the right to lease cars during that debate. It is apparent the Liberals decided in advance that the banks would get nothing before the massive debate started.

This government just does things with a minimum of debate, at least public debate. In fact, this government doesn’t much like public debate, period.

With this fall’s election and a constitutional crisis that shut down Parliament in December, there were no formal pre-budget hearings as in previous years. But that doesn’t mean there were no pre-budget hearings.

In the month before the budget, Conservative members of the Commons finance committee invited dozens of companies, business associations and their lobbyists to private meetings to discuss what they would like to see in the budget.

No public record exists of these secret hearings, even though this government’s own legislation requires all meetings between lobbyists and holders of public office to be registered with the Commissioner of Lobbying. However, thanks to several loopholes in the legislation, no reporting of this meeting was required.

Canadians can add lobbying activity to the list of ironies associated with a government that forecast a fiscal surplus but wound up delivering a $32-billion deficit, or vowed to reform the Senate but wound up making an orgy of appointments to the upper chamber in one day.

That’s the problem with ad hoc decision-making. One often winds up doing the opposite of one’s stated intention.

Most statutes have loopholes. But the Federal Accountability Act, this government’s marquee legislation of its first year in office, can be described as porous. MPs and senators, for example, are exempt from the five-year ban on holders of public office holders from entering the lobbying business after they leave office.

Last month, Ian Brodie, former chief of staff to Prime Minister Harper, went to work for Hill & Knowlton, a U.S.-based international public relations powerhouse with one of the largest lobbying presences in Ottawa. He is free to use his insider knowledge of how the system functions for his clients’ benefit, as long as he doesn’t make a phone call or send an email to a government official. This is because a lobbyist is narrowly defined under the law as someone who communicates with government officials.

As a result, a staffer who looks after scheduling in a minister’s office is banned from entering the lobbying business for five years, while an MP or senator is free to enter the business anytime he or she likes.

In-house lobbyists working for corporations and associations don’t have to register at all if they spend less than 20% of their time contacting those in public office. As a result, there are a lot of lobbyists in Ottawa who make sure they can demonstrate that they spend only 18% or 19% of their time on government relations to avoid registering their activities.

Meetings between lobbyists and MPs are not reportable if the MP initiated the meeting. A lobbyist could set up a meeting between a client and a cabinet minister but not have to report it if that lobbyist decides at the last minute not to attend.

@page_break@And on go the loopholes.

Less than 20 years ago in Ottawa there were perhaps a couple of hundred lobbyists, compared with thousands in Washington. Today, there are more than 5,000 people registered as lobbying the federal government in Ottawa, and probably a couple of thousand more who are not registered.

The future of lobbying looks pretty bright. After all, if a government discourages public discourse at the committee level, vested interests have all the more reason to turn to lobbyists to make their case.

Of course, lobbyists flourished under the former Liberal government. But the lobbying community can rightfully claim to be the first sector to enjoy the stimulus of this government. Lobbyists rule in Ottawa today, probably more than they do in Washington. IE