Evidence of meeting #44 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was elections.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:40 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
Ms. Lavallée, I'm sorry.
Time has expired for your turn, but we will have another round.
We'll go to Mr. Martin, please.
July 15th, 2008 / 11:40 a.m.
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Mayrand, thank you for your comprehensive briefing. I think it's useful that we all start from the same base level of information. The clarification was very helpful.
Mr. Mayrand, the 2006 election was decided by razor-thin margins. I think over 50 ridings were won or lost by fewer than 1,000 votes. In other words, 50,000 votes could have turned the outcome of the election. That's why it's so important to us. This $1.3 million in extra advertising by this one party, above and beyond their spending limits, could have decided the outcome of the 39th election. It's really quite a serious matter when put in that context.
Now, you've made it clear that perhaps the “in and out” term is a misnomer. There's really nothing wrong with the transfer of money from the federal party to a riding and back again. That much I think we should put to the side for the context of the rest of our study.
What would be wrong would be if there were a deliberate conspiracy to defraud the Canada Elections Act and put in place a scheme so that they could exceed election spending by millions of dollars. That's where we find the allegations of wrongdoing. Is that accurate? Is that one of the elements, of course, of the allegation being dealt with here?
11:40 a.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Canada
Again, it's the matter of the transaction surrounding this program that we referred to the commission.
11:40 a.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Canada
As to the specific offences, there is a whole range, but these remain, in my mind, highly hypothetical. The commissioner's investigation will determine, at the end of the day, if there was an offence.
11:40 a.m.
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
Well, I know you have to be very careful and cautious in the language you use.
Okay. Number one, I think, is that what we see is a fairly obvious and deliberate conspiracy to exceed the spending limits. I'll say it, even if you can't.
The second thing, though, is the possibility of falsification of records. And let me bring it back to the mandate of the ethics committee. The filing of false election returns, of course, is a very serious matter. The official agents and the candidates themselves have to sign off on election returns; the content of these returns is accurate and the information found therein is true, to the best of their knowledge. That means that Maxime Bernier and Stockwell Day and Lawrence Cannon and other public office holders signed off on documents that you believe weren't true. They perhaps contained falsified information regarding the advertising purchase. Is that accurate?
11:45 a.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Canada
I made no conclusion on those points. I think that's why the matter is now before the commissioner, who is responsible for investigating whether offences have been committed with respect to the act.
11:45 a.m.
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
In terms of the falsification of documents, the CEO and director of the advertising firm Retail Media is the one who said she didn't recognize invoices. She said the invoices must have been altered or created by someone else. Is that some of the false documentation that concerns you in the returns of people like Lawrence Cannon, Josée Verner, Stockwell Day, and Maxime Bernier?
11:45 a.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Canada
Again, I'm not privy to the commissioner's investigation. It is—
11:45 a.m.
NDP
11:45 a.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Canada
Well, even at that, I know the statement was made. However, it's for the commissioner to determine in the course of his investigation whether there's an offence—
11:45 a.m.
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
In the course of your original investigation, you or your staff must have spoken to the official agents of the 67 ridings in question.
My question is, it would seem that the Tory party was looking for pledges from various riding associations that had room in their spending limits. Did you interview any other official agents or candidates who were asked to take part in the regional media buy and who chose not to?
11:45 a.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Canada
Again, that is part of the investigation of the commissioner. I cannot comment on those points, I'm sorry.
11:45 a.m.
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
I will ask one last question then.
During the 2006 election campaign, the 39th election campaign, did the Conservative Party seek advice from Elections Canada or opinions from it on whether or not their regional media buy scheme would be legal? Is there any evidence of phone calls, faxes, or e-mails of advice or consultation, where they came to you and asked, would this be okay if we structured ourselves in this way?
11:45 a.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Canada
We did look into this matter and didn't find any such evidence of any records. We have logs of discussions with agents, counsel, and representatives of the parties. We don't have any record in those logs of that.
11:45 a.m.
NDP
11:45 a.m.
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
No one asked you directly, would this scheme be allowed or legal under the elections spending--
11:45 a.m.
NDP
Thomas Mulcair NDP Outremont, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to afford Mr. Mayrand the opportunity to go back to a subject he touched upon that will no doubt be addressed a little further.
On a number of occasions during your presentation, Mr. Mayrand, you said that the rules were consistently applied. You even referred to the Auditor General, who examined the Commissioner's operating method. You understood, as we all did, that that was part of the backdrop to all these discussions: were the rules properly enforced for everyone?
Let's go back to your very prudent choice of terms. You say there is a set of factors—you enumerate five of them—and you say in your explanation that you examined the returns of the other parties, but that there was no transaction or group transactions that met all the factors. In your oral presentation, you only said that there was no other group of transactions.
Would you be in a position to provide the parliamentary committee with a clear indication as to whether, in the last two elections—that's your frame of reference—there was a transaction in the case of the other political parties? You talked about groups of transactions in your presentation. I simply want to know because you enumerate factors that are not found in the act. That's very subjective; these are things that you've retained.
11:45 a.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Canada
You'll allow me to have some reservations. I think those factors are directly related to the definitions and to the concepts that I presented to you earlier this morning. That follows directly from the responsibilities of the official agents, from the definition of what an electoral expense is, from the notion of commercial value, from the notion of transfer and so on. They are all there.
11:50 a.m.
NDP
Thomas Mulcair NDP Outremont, QC
I've read them all. You are very prudent in your choice of terms when you say that there is no other group or that there is the whole. So were there any cases among other political parties where three or four of the five factors were met? If so, can you share that information with us?
I'm trying to give you the opportunity to discuss this notion, which is nevertheless fundamental and explains why you are here today. It is a very serious allegation to say that there was negative bias toward one political party. I don't share that perception, but I nevertheless want that to be clear between us.
By the same occasion, I would like it if, in the documents that were requested from you earlier, you could tell us in detail what you did to determine whether anyone at your office had informed the journalists and the Liberal Party because no one informed us. But it's obvious that the journalists were informed that there was a raid on the Conservatives, and it's obvious that the Liberal Party was aware that there was a raid on the Conservatives.
We would like to know in detail what you did, to whom you spoke, what your investigation turned up and what its scope was. As elected members, we are entitled to know.
11:50 a.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Canada
I'm going to do that now because I think that's an important question. It is indeed important.
The review consisted in inquiring and seeking to know who was aware of the operation and how it was conducted and what measures had been taken to ensure that it was conducted as discreetly as possible.
I can confirm to the committee that only three persons from Elections Canada knew that there would be a seizure. I was one of those three persons, and I can assure you that I did not transmit that information.