New Brunswick May Enact Canada’s Most Onerous Lobbying Disclosure Law

New Brunswick has long sat at the quieter end of Canada's lobbying compliance map. That may be about to change.

[Update: Bill 44 was enacted into law on June 12, 2026, without amendment. The bill is now law, but it may take a year, or more, before it is brought into force.]

The government has introduced Bill 44, which would transform the province's modest regime into arguably the most onerous public disclosure system in the country.^[1] If enacted, the bill would:

• significantly expand who must submit a lobbyist registration,

• require tracking and public disclosure of virtually every lobbying communication, and

• arm the Integrity Commissioner with new powers to investigate and directly impose administrative monetary penalties.

The bill proposes several reforms of the type recommended by Canadian lobbying regulators and reflects a clear direction of travel in how Canadian jurisdictions are approaching lobbying transparency. Its timing is also significant: a parliamentary committee is currently considering what would be the first amendments to Canada's federal lobbying law in nearly 15 years, and Bill 44 may serve as a meaningful signal for where that federal review is headed.

Businesses, associations, charities, unions, lawyers and consultants that interact with the New Brunswick government should understand the bill’s proposed changes and monitor its progress through the legislature.

Registration by Default

The bill’s most impactful change would be to require that all in-house lobbying be registered by default. A single lobbying communication would trigger registration.

Under current law, in-house lobbying by employees^[2] need not be registered unless they spend, in aggregate, about 96 hours lobbying New Brunswick officials over a three-month period (excluding preparation and travel time).^[3] The bill would abolish that test.

New Brunswick is somewhat unusual^[4] in that it regulates in-house lobbying differently based on the employer’s legal form:

• The first category generally captures business entities.^[5] For those entities, each individual employee must register their lobbying and is liable for failure to do so.

• For other entities, the most senior officer must register all in-house lobbying performed by employees and is likewise liable for failure to register entity-wide lobbying activity.^[6]

The bill generally preserves that distinction with one exception: it would insert a new general prohibition on unregistered lobbying that would apply to all lobbyists. The net effect of that would be, for business entities, to continue to place liability only on individual employees who lobby, while for other entities, liability would be placed on both the senior officer (who remains responsible for filing registrations) and individual employees who lobby.

Report Every Communication, Every Month

The maintenance burden would also climb steeply. Virtually every lobbying communication would need to be individually reported on a monthly basis. Each report would contain the name of the official lobbied, and the date and subject matter of the communication, and would be publicly disclosed. There is no carve-out for written communications, chance encounters, or when junior officials are lobbied.

To ensure compliance, private sector organizations will need to consider establishing tracking systems for communications to public officials, and employee training to ensure those systems function – or otherwise ensure that absolutely no lobbying of provincial officials occurs.

The deadline to update a registration would also change from 30 days later to the 15th of the following month, and semi-annual renewals would be replaced by an obligation to make a confirmatory filing if no filings have otherwise been made for five consecutive months.

Real Enforcement Powers and a Code of Conduct

Together with more registrations and more disclosure come more enforcement tools. The bill would provide the Integrity Commissioner with significant new powers to:

• Investigate complaints, including the power to compel testimony and production of documents.^[7]
• Publish the names of non-compliant lobbyists and other findings from investigations.
• Ban individuals from lobbying for up to two years.
• On finding non-compliance, impose administrative monetary penalties (AMPs), without the need for prosecution or other court proceedings.

Fines on conviction would continue to be up to $25,000 for a first offence and $100,000 for subsequent offences. The maximum AMP would be set later by regulation.^[8]

If an AMP is imposed, the bill provides for reconsideration by the Commissioner and judicial review, but no independent administrative appeal.

The Integrity Commissioner would also be required to develop a lobbyists’ code of conduct with ethical and behavioural standards. Breaching the code would expose lobbyists to offence proceedings and the Commissioner’s new powers noted above.

Monitor, Then Prepare to Comply

The bill is not yet law. Amendments are possible (perhaps in response to the bill’s many drafting issues - see Endnotes). Regulations and a code of conduct must still be developed, and full implementation will take time.

But its direction is clear: New Brunswick is set to move from one of Canada's lightest lobbying regimes to one of its most demanding, consistent with Premier Susan Holt’s commitment to be “the most accountable and transparent government New Brunswick has ever seen.” Organizations active in the province should follow the bill's progress and begin to consider where they would sit under the new rules. The detailed work of compliance can wait for the final law; the thinking should start now. 

Endnotes

1. Proposed s 18.1 would prohibit lobbying “unless… registered”. That conflicts with ss 18.2(2) and (3), which do not require in-house registration until “two months after” lobbying commences, and also sits awkwardly alongside the 15-day consultant lobbyist registration deadline in proposed s 18.2(1) (discussed in the next paragraph). The provisions can be reconciled only by reading the s 18.1 prohibition as applying to lobbying that should have been registered under s 18.2, but the text does not say so on its face.
2. Currently, s 5(1) of the Lobbyists’ Registration Act requires consultant lobbyists to register within 15 days after commencing performance of an undertaking. The bill would repeal that section and insert proposed s 18.2(1), the French version of which would effectively continue the old standard (“dans les quinze jours suivant le commencement d’un engagement”), while the English would require filing “within 15 days after entering into an undertaking”. Both linguistic versions are equally authoritative, which means there is a meaningful inconsistency (starting vs entering an undertaking).
3. Proposed s 32.1 contemplates a consultation period for the code of conduct, following which the Integrity Commissioner must submit it to a committee of the Legislative Assembly. However, s 32.1(4) would then require that the code be published in The Royal Gazette once it is submitted to the committee. This would seem to make the committee submission a mere notice rather than a substantive consultation. It contrasts with the approach taken in the federal Lobbying Act, s 10.2(3) of which provides that the federal code “shall be referred to a committee of the House of Commons before being published” in the Canada Gazette. This is particularly significant because, unlike at the federal level, compliance with the New Brunswick code would itself be a statutory obligation, breach of which is an offence under proposed s 37(1).
4. Proposed s 18.3(2)(a) would require reporting “every communication with a public office holder […] related to a return submitted under s 18.2.” The expression “every communication” is ambiguous and potentially could include, e.g., otherwise exempted communications. The intention may have been to require reporting of every lobbying communication, or every communication under paragraph (a) of the definition of “lobby”.
5. While not a drafting issue, it is notable that the bill would leave in place one of Canada's only "pre-employment" revolving door restrictions. The Lobbyists' Registration Act would continue to prohibit a former consultant lobbyist from being employed virtually anywhere in the provincial public sector until six months after the lobbyist informs the Commissioner that they had ceased to be a consultant lobbyist. The more common approach in Canada is to require a cooling-off period before a former public official can engage the public sector on behalf of the private sector. A limited post-employment restriction exists in New Brunswick for legislators and senior civil servants in other statutes. Notably, the bill's proposed new powers for the Commissioner (e.g., to investigate and impose AMPs) would apply to violations of the "pre-employment" restriction.
6. Finally, the proposed renewal period is curious. In most jurisdictions, there is a requirement to file a semi-annual renewal every six months. Federally and in BC, the requirement is that if five consecutive calendar months would otherwise elapse without a return, then a return is due on the last day of the fifth month (referred to as a "six-month return"). Proposed s 18.3(4) would require that if no returns are submitted for five consecutive months, then a return is due by the 15th day of the next month.