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.
Noon
Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Canada
I'm satisfied that I did not.
I don't know, unless there is other information that suggests a link to Elections Canada, which I would very much like to see.... As the e-mails that you have cited show, there was a real concern at Elections Canada about anything of that nature, given the importance we attach to our independence, impartiality, and fairness.
Noon
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
Well, you've been very vigorous in investigating our party. You certainly have not and should not let us investigate ourselves. Why would you think it appropriate that you would personally investigate yourself and your communications director would investigate herself—
Noon
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
—with respect to this leak? Why would you consider that to be a reasonable inquiry method?
Noon
Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Canada
When allegations are made, put in written form, and put before the proper authorities, I will welcome an investigation into this matter. At this point, it's allegations made mostly through the media, which we reviewed. We didn't see any cause to take further steps or carry out a formal investigation into the matter.
Noon
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
In the series of e-mails that I mentioned earlier, you said that you wished to “kill” or “dispel” the news stories about the leak. Those words were used four times by you and Ms. Vézina. In an April 18 e-mail, Ms. Vézina said:
Perhaps we do it through a joint press release with the rcmp and the commissioner's office and the dpp (if appropriate)?
I understand the DPP to refer to the Director of Public Prosecutions. Has the Director of Public Prosecutions investigated the leak, and if not, why was the Director of Public Prosecutions mentioned in this e-mail?
Noon
Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Canada
He was not involved in this. It was strictly internal to Elections Canada, the review that was done. I did not ask the RCMP to review the matter and I did not ask the DPP. Why is the DPP involved? The DPP is the counsel that presented the motion to obtain the search warrant, so they are familiar with the file.
Noon
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
Thank you. That completes the first round of questioning. I think it is a logical breaking point for us.
I'm going to suspend the meeting till 2 p.m., so that members will be able to refresh themselves and to prepare for our next session. I want to remind the members that before the end of the next session we want to deal with the business of future witnesses, the timing of meetings, and Mr. Tilson's motions. I hope the members will give some thought to this during this break.
Thank you. We'll suspend.
2 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
We're resuming our meeting of this morning. Welcome back, Mr. Mayrand, Mr. Bernier.
During the break, the media and others have had some questions with regard to the various proceedings that are going on. There is a civil case involving certain people, there is a federal action—I believe it's a judicial review—and there is an investigation ongoing by the Commissioner of Elections Canada. Could you, for clarification, please inform the members of these processes and where they go from here?
There has been a suggestion that maybe the work of the commissioner of investigations may be delayed by these other proceedings going on concurrently, or may not--I'm not sure. I'm not an expert in these matters, but I know that with Mr. Bernier's help maybe you could clarify for all concerned the nature of these proceedings, how they go forward, and ultimately what might happen as we go forward following the investigation and what possibilities there may be.
2:05 p.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Canada
Yes, Mr. Chairman.
As I indicated earlier today, I have made two decisions on this matter so far. The first one was to refuse to reimburse the claims presented by a number of candidates. That decision was challenged before the Federal Court under judicial review process. That judicial review process seeks to challenge the reasonableness of my decision. It also seeks an order from the court, a mandamus order, that would be ordering the Chief Electoral Officer to pay the claims as submitted. This is a matter now before the Federal Court. The matter has proceeded for the last year. Evidence has been presented by all parties, there have been examinations of various witnesses before the court, and it's proceeding as we speak.
The other decision I took at the time was to refer the matter to the Commissioner of Canada Elections. The commissioner is tasked with investigating whether offences to the electoral legislation have been committed. The commissioner's investigation is a penal investigation as opposed to a civil process. It takes its own course, and it's subject to various rules and limitations of the penal law. That investigation involves, again, looking at the 67 claims that were presented to Elections Canada. It's a complex investigation that will take time, I assume, to carry out.
At the end of the investigation, the commissioner, if he has determined that there are enough facts, evidence, to support charges being laid, will make a recommendation to the Director of Public Prosecutions, the DPP, who in turn as the prosecutor—the DPP is the prosecutor—will assess again the facts gathered through the investigation and determine what charge, if any, in his professional judgment, should be or could be laid before a court of law.
2:05 p.m.
Liberal
2:05 p.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Canada
What is referred to as the civil suit is the Federal Court review of the decision. There are only two processes that I'm aware of at this point in time. There's a process before the Federal Court seeking a review of my decisions and seeking a mandamus. That's one, and the other one is the investigation being carried out by the commissioner. The two processes are completely independent from each other.
2:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
There is also a civil suit that has been launched by two candidates or their official agents with regard to their own returns?
2:05 p.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Canada
This is the same.... No, this is the judicial court review application. It's two candidates out of 67 who have taken those proceedings at this point in time. It could have been 67, and initially it was close to 67. After discussion with counsel, it was agreed that two candidates would remain on the file as applicants.
2:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
And finally, you gave us an extensive presentation this morning. You also took one round of questions. Is there any answer or information that you gave that you would like to clarify, correct, or amend from what's happened so far?
2:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
Okay.
We'll then proceed with questioning. We're now in round two. These are five-minute rounds, and we'll begin with Mr. Dhaliwal, please.
July 15th, 2008 / 2:10 p.m.
Liberal
Sukh Dhaliwal Liberal Newton—North Delta, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Mayrand and Mr. Bernier, for appearing before us, and thank you for your excellent presentation as well.
My question is to Mr. Mayrand. You had mentioned that the public prosecutor--who is the equivalent of the crown prosecutor--was acting for the commissioner of elections when the offices of the Conservative Party were raided; he was involved. Could you please tell us what his involvement is and how far is that involvement? Maybe Mr. Bernier might be able to help you with that.
2:10 p.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Canada
I will provide an explanation and Mr. Bernier may want to complete it if needed.
The commissioner, in the course of his investigation, determined that he needed some additional information that was not readily available, so he put a motion together with the information he had gathered that, in his mind, would warrant the issue of a search warrant. That is presented to the Director of Public Prosecutions, who is the prosecutor, who will again assess the request for a search warrant to determine whether it meets the test of law and whether the facts gathered would convince a judge to issue the warrant. The counsel of the crown prosecutor does present the request to a judge to issue the warrant.
2:10 p.m.
Liberal
Sukh Dhaliwal Liberal Newton—North Delta, BC
Is that the only involvement the public prosecutor has, or is there further involvement in this particular case?
2:10 p.m.
Liberal
Sukh Dhaliwal Liberal Newton—North Delta, BC
You also mentioned this morning that there are some new developments that are already in the public domain. Would you be kind enough to tell us what those new developments are?
2:10 p.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Canada
Without getting into the details, I think information has become available as a result of various proceedings before the courts over the last year that I was not necessarily aware of at the time I made the initial decision. Again, at some point in time I will have to make other decisions on these files to bring closure, and of course I will have to consider all the information in making that decision.
2:10 p.m.
Liberal
Sukh Dhaliwal Liberal Newton—North Delta, BC
You have also refused to grant the rebates in these 67 cases because you believe they violated the Elections Act. Is that right?
2:10 p.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Canada
I'm sorry, I did not understand your question.