Evidence of meeting #48 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 campaign.
A recording is available from Parliament.
August 13th, 2008 / 11:05 a.m.
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you for coming this morning. I have only seven minutes, so I'll go to specific questions.
I have a copy of an affidavit that was signed on October 31, 2007, and Andrew Kumpf's name is on the bottom. I'm assuming you're familiar with it.
It says here in your affidavit, and I want to give you an opportunity to confirm it in front of us:
I further confirm that:
Advertising buys for the national party were segregated from advertising buys for participating candidates. Retail Media was advised of which Conservative Candidates were interested in participating in additional regional media buys.
Is that still an accurate statement?
11:05 a.m.
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
You said: Appropriate regional markets were identified for all participating candidates and specific media buys purchased in those markets.
Is that still correct?
11:05 a.m.
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
And this one is of particular interest as a clarification to a question that was just asked by Mr. Martin:
Appropriate tag lines were used in all advertisements identifying on whose behalf the advertisement was authorized.
Is that correct?
11:10 a.m.
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
So even though your company may not have produced the actual ad, you're saying in your affidavit that tag lines for all advertising identified on whose behalf that advertisement was authorized.
11:10 a.m.
As an Individual
After the ridings that were participating were determined, we issued to the creative agency, for which stations were going to be part of the buy, exactly which candidates should be included for those specific stations.
11:10 a.m.
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
And you provided that to the creative agency. I guess that's what you're calling your business.
11:10 a.m.
Conservative
11:10 a.m.
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
Well, it says “refer to affidavit sworn before”.
Okay, but this is your signature on this letter.
11:10 a.m.
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
Yes. It's a schedule.
I'm sorry, I may be referring to it as an affidavit. I shouldn't be referring to an affidavit.
The fourth point was this:
Appropriate invoices reflecting goods and services rendered were separately issued to participating Conservative Candidates and to the registered party based on the four segments identified.
Is that still correct?
11:10 a.m.
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
So is what you gave us this morning an actual invoice that was provided? Is that a sample?
11:10 a.m.
Conservative
11:10 a.m.
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
Okay, that's very good.
We're not your only customers. Is that correct?
