CRD Watch Homepage

It’s Official: Provincial Government entities are reimbursing government employees for expenses spent on a registered lobbying organization representing corporate interests, involved in development and real estate.

The questions are:

1. Why?

2. How on earth is this an appropriate use of public funds?

————————————————————————————————–

This article is the sixth installment in a series of articles covering Crown Corporations and statutory entities in British Columbia, which are paying members of the Urban Development Institute (UDI) and have been evasive about that fact (see links at the end).

The UDI pulled down its members directory from public view on November 21, 2023, as the Provincial Housing Bills were being pushed through. The directory contained hundreds of corporate entities involved in development and real estate and numerous branches of government, including both local and regional governments, crown corporations, statutory entities; as well as media companies.

————————————————————————————————–


By Sasha Izard
Jan 3, 2025


On Dec 12, 2024, I wrote the previous article in the series:

The Land Title and Survey Authority of British Columbia (LTSA) is a paying member of a registered lobbying organization for real estate and development. – CRD Watch Homepage

While the LTSA, was initially uncooperative to my questioning regarding whether or not the organization had a membership with the Urban Development Institute (UDI) a registered lobbying organization representing the interests of hundreds of corporate members involved in development and real estate; when I sent the question to their Freedom of Information (FOI) department, and upon further digging, they were ultimately cooperative. This is much more than can be said for BC Assessment, the Crown Corporation whose denials about its UDI membership kickstarted this series of articles, inspiring the first 3 articles in the series:

1. BC Assessment denied that it is a paying member of a registered organization on the BC Lobbyists Registry. However, the evidence shows otherwise. – CRD Watch Homepage

2. How Crown Corporation BC Assessment’s Paid Membership with the Urban Development Institute is Being Obscured – CRD Watch Homepage

3. BC Assessment claims that its employees received reimbursements for memberships in a registered organization on the BC Lobbyists Registry that represents private companies involved in development and real estate. – CRD Watch Homepage

————————————————————————————————–

Take note of the beginning of the title of the third article in the series: “BC Assessment claims that its employees received reimbursements for memberships”

Although BC Assessment’s FOI department, made that claim, it was hardly cooperative in elaborating on or explaining that, to the point where it looked like one of many spurious answers I had received during my line of questioning regarding provincial entities e.g. Crown Corporations and Statutory entities, having UDI memberships.

Here was BC Assessment’s original statement regarding this:

“BC Assessment reimburses employees for their membership with the Urban
Development Institute (UDI)

BC Assessment has not made a decision to discontinue or terminate
reimbursing employees for UDI memberships

We were unable to locate the “year” that BC Assessment began to reimburse
employees for UDI memberships

The oldest invoice BC Assessment has in relation to reimbursing a UDI
membership is from 2018, however, we understand BC Assessment
reimbursed employees for UDI memberships prior to 2018″

Yet the invoices didn’t make apparent that employees were being reimbursed for UDI memberships, and BC Assessment continued to deny that it was even a member of the UDI, despite that it was clear from its own receipts, and the UDI’s own backed-up members directory that it is.

This led to this article: https://crdwatch.ca/2024/10/03/how-crown-corporation-bc-assessments-paid-membership-with-the-urban-development-institute-is-being-obscured/ and to article 3 in the series which focused on BCA’s reimbursements claim.

————————————————————————————————–

Despite BC Assessment’s denials claiming that the Crown Corporation isn’t a paying member of the UDI, the evidence showed otherwise: BC Assessment is indeed a paying member of the UDI.

It took eventual cooperation from the Crown Corporation BC Transit, and the Land Titles Survey Authority (LTSA) to finally figure out what was going on:

Provincial Government employees had been paying for UDI memberships, thus signing up entire branches of government as paying members of the UDI, and were then being reimbursed for it by the same government. In addition, government employees were paying to attend events with the lobbying organization including political luncheons, and were also being reimbursed for it by branches of the government.

This begs the question once again. Why on earth is the Province of BC reimbursing employees for signing entire branches of the Provincial Government up to be paying members of the UDI, including Crown Corporations and Statutory entities and then being reimbursed for it by the Province with government dollars afterward?

Why were Provincial Government employees paying to attend events including political luncheons with an organization that is registered as lobbying the Province, and then being reimbursed for it with government dollars?

Is the same thing being done by employees at the Local Government level? Many indications indicate that it is, and that local government employee sign-ups led to the vast majority of the dozens of local and regional Governments that have become paying member organizations of the UDI, without votes by elected officials to have done so.

Is this not a conflict of interest for government employees? Well, according to the Ministry of Housing and Municipal Affairs headed by Ravi Kahlon: “conflict of interest rules under the Local Government Act and Community Charter do not apply to local government staff.”

See: Ministry of Housing and Municipal Affairs: “conflict of interest rules under the Local Government Act and Community Charter do not apply to local government staff.” – CRD Watch Homepage

Well what about Provincial Government staff?

I previously had enquired the same question to the Province and received a response that “There are no laws per se” in regard to Conflict of Interest Law applying to the BC Public Service.

See: Anarchy for the BC Public Service in Regard to Conflict of Interest Law: “There are no laws per se”. – CRD Watch Homepage

So without firm legal rules in place by the Province and without mandatory lobbyist registries set by the Province for Local Governments, there is a free for all allowed, whereby government employees can get away with all sorts of potential conflict of interest, get away with it, and even be reimbursed for it; that is, if you consider signing your branch of local government up unilaterally to be a paying member of a registered lobbying organization for development and real estate, without actual votes from elected officials, to be a conflict of interest. Clearly the Province of BC doesn’t, as it actively works with the same organization at multiple levels, as it simultaneously lobbies the Province and the Province institutes the policies lobbied to it, all the while helping to finance this full circle with taxpayer dollars.

———————————————————————————————

The evidence regarding employee reimbursements:

On Dec 3, 2024, I received from the The Land Title and Survey Authority (LTSA) a completed FOI response, which I wrote about in this article.

The LTSA included the following in their overview of the response:

“Attached are the records within LTSA’s custody or control that are responsive to your request, organized as follows:

1. All invoices and receipts issued by UDI to LTSA (records 1 to 15)
2. All records of payment by LTSA to UDI (record 16)
3. All records related to LTSA membership in the UDI (records 17 to 25)

To assist in your review, please note the following:

1. The responsive records package contains information that is excepted from disclosure under section 22(1) of FIPPA: The head of a public body must refuse to disclose personal information to an applicant if the disclosure would be an unreasonable invasion of a third party’s personal privacy. The redacted content is marked in Record #1 and Record #19.
2. LTSA was able to search records of accounts paid by LTSA to UDI back to 2006. The results of this search are contained in record 16.
3. LTSA was able to search for invoices or receipts issued by UDI to LTSA back to 2019, when LTSA implemented software that enables such retention.  All invoices and receipts located are contained in records 1-15. In each case, the amount was paid by an LTSA staff member and subsequently reimbursed by LTSA to the staff member, not to UDI.
   
   

LTSA was unable to locate any records responsive to the following items in your request:

Records showing the year the LTSA began to pay the UDI for membership and also communications, or other data showing the reasons, and those responsible for that initial decision.

All communications regarding payments between the LTSA and the UDI.

———————————————————————————————

I replied:


Hi LTSA FOIPPA,

Thank you for your help,

2 questions:

1. Where is the events/membership spreadsheet mentioned in the email with subject line RE: UDI Membership shown in record 20?

2.  Where are the records of LTSA employee reimbursements for UDI memberships?


———————————————————————————————

The LTSA responded:

Dear Sasha Izard,

The LTSA is in receipt of your email dated December 15, 2024. Thank you for your patience as we to gather the necessary information to address the questions posed.

In regard to the first question, a copy of the events/membership spreadsheet as mentioned in Record in 20 is attached. The responsive record contains information that is excepted from disclosure under section 22(1) of FIPPA: The head of a public body must refuse to disclose personal information to an applicant if the disclosure would be an unreasonable invasion of a third party’s personal privacy

In regard to the second question, all records showing invoices and receipts for payment by the LTSA to the UDI, including employee reimbursement were provided on December 3, 2024; please refer to records 1-16.

Sincerely,

[I bolded the last paragraph]

———————————————————————————————

I responded:

Hi,

Thank you for your response.

1. You answered.

2. “In regard to the second question, all records showing invoices and receipts for payment by the LTSA to the UDI, including employee reimbursement were provided on December 3, 2024; please refer to records 1-16.”

Question: Which specific records in 1-16 showed the employee reimbursements?

Thank you again,
Sasha 

———————————————————————————————

The LTSA responded:

Good morning Sasha Izard,

Records 1-15 are invoices and receipts identified as employee paid, and reimbursed by the LTSA.  

I hope the above response provides the clarity you were seeking.


———————————————————————————————

Finally the evidence I required was here for the employee reimbursements.

I replied:

Hi LTSA,

Thank you that finally brings clarity to this matter.

– Sasha

———————————————————————————————

Below are records 1-15 from the FOI response which according to the LTSA: “are invoices and receipts identified as employee paid, and reimbursed by the LTSA.”

Generously, and painstakingly for privacy purposes, I have redacted the names of the employees myself. Wherever you see the following grey rectangle, it covers the name of an employee that was in the FOI response:

Record 1:

Record 2:

Record 3:

Record 4:

Record 5:

Record 6:

Record 7:

Record 8:

Record 9:

Record 10:

Record 11:

Record 12:

Record 13:

Record 14:

Record 15:

———————————————————————————————

With the above records 1-15 of FOI, the evidence is shown, along with the LTSA’s statements shown previously that these are regarding employee reimbursements.

As the LTSA said: “Records 1-15 are invoices and receipts identified as employee paid, and reimbursed by the LTSA.”

Other records in the FOI response, I wrote about in this previous article.

———————————————————————————————

Conclusion:

Provincial Crown Corporations in British Columbia and Statutory entities have been reimbursing their employees for memberships in the Urban Development Institute (UDI), a registered lobbying organization, that lobbies the Province; and in the process of the purchases by employees and their reimbursements with government funds, the government branches have become paying members of the lobbying organization, and are thus funding lobbying efforts towards the same government by that organization.

I think that on an ethical basis this is conflict of interest. That there seems to be no law against it shows that the government has failed in protecting itself from what is clearly ethically speaking, serious conflict of interest, that leads to infiltration of government, and its policy generation and implementation by private outside interests. It is not difficult to see this as a potent breeding ground for undue influence from the development/real estate lobby on government decision-making.

In addition, public employees have been able to pay for attendance at events including political luncheons held by the lobbying organization for development and real estate interests and been reimbursed for those by the Government of British Columbia, and that this is a systemic issue operating at multiple levels of government, including local governments.

What this all amounts to, in my view, is the systemic normalization of conflict of interest at all levels of government.

The Province of British Columbia and the media by all means can continue to play blind to this issue, as they repeat it over and over again, while the government continues selling out public interests using public funds to private interests.

They can do that, all they want and I will continue documenting it, as they do. The joke after all, is on the general public; as long as it continues to accept this from its government that is at least in theory, supposed to represent them.

———————————————————————————————

This was the sixth installment in a series of articles covering BC Crown Corporations’ (and Statutory entities’) paid memberships in the Urban Development Institute, after the UDI took to hiding its members directory from the public in late 2023.

The following links are of articles in the series so far:

1. BC Assessment denied that it is a paying member of a registered organization on the BC Lobbyists Registry. However, the evidence shows otherwise. – CRD Watch Homepage

2. How Crown Corporation BC Assessment’s Paid Membership with the Urban Development Institute is Being Obscured – CRD Watch Homepage

3. BC Assessment claims that its employees received reimbursements for memberships in a registered organization on the BC Lobbyists Registry that represents private companies involved in development and real estate. – CRD Watch Homepage

4. After a Comedic Exchange of Emails, BC Transit Admits that it has a Membership with the Urban Development Institute. The Implications of that for BC, may be more Tragic than Comic. – CRD Watch Homepage

5. The Land Title and Survey Authority of British Columbia (LTSA) is a paying member of a registered lobbying organization for real estate and development. – CRD Watch Homepage

6. It’s Official: B.C. Provincial Government entities are reimbursing government employees for expenses spent on a registered lobbying organization representing corporate interests, involved in development and real estate. – CRD Watch Homepage

7. The federal department Public Services and Procurement Canada had (or still has) paid memberships in a lobbying organization for development and real estate interests. – CRD Watch Homepage