Yes.
Evidence of meeting #7 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 letter.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #7 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 letter.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Noon
Liberal
Sukh Dhaliwal Liberal Newton—North Delta, BC
This letter was prepared by your lawyers. Does this letter document what you describe as an attempt to have you perjure yourself?
Noon
Liberal
Sukh Dhaliwal Liberal Newton—North Delta, BC
In the January 26, 2000, letter, your lawyer indicates that he received two calls directly from Mr. Mulroney, both on October 17, seeking a letter from you to absolve Mr. Mulroney from ever receiving that $300,000. At any time, did Mr. Mulroney call you directly or communicate this request to you in any way?
Noon
As an Individual
Number one, sir, I think it is not correct to say that there's anything spelled out on the $300,000. I think it speaks in general about.... To be quite frank with you, this is how the trouble started, when I refused to sign such an affidavit that Mr. Mulroney never received any payment or whatever from me. From that time on, I got pretty lousy treatment--for example, through Luc Lavoie: Schreiber is the greatest fucking liar on earth.
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
Sukh Dhaliwal Liberal Newton—North Delta, BC
My question back to you is this. Did Mr. Mulroney call your lawyer, or did you receive any calls from Mr. Mulroney directly, on any conversation?
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
May I ask that we try to use parliamentary language, if that would be all right, please.
Carry on, Mr. Dhaliwal.
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
Sukh Dhaliwal Liberal Newton—North Delta, BC
Thank you.
Also in your letter of May 2007, your letter to Mr. Mulroney, you said you will disclose the reason for Mr. Mulroney's trip to Zurich in 1998. At this meeting, Mr. Mulroney was attempting to determine if anyone else would know about the $300,000 cash payment. Is that correct?
12:05 p.m.
As an Individual
No. He was concerned about whether there was evidence of any payment he ever received. It's similar to the letter.
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
Sukh Dhaliwal Liberal Newton—North Delta, BC
So basically he just wanted to make sure there was no proof of any money that Mr. Mulroney received.
December 6th, 2007 / 12:05 p.m.
Liberal
Sukh Dhaliwal Liberal Newton—North Delta, BC
On another point, you state that you are prepared--Madame Lavallée asked the question and I'm going to elaborate it--to disclose in the letter that Mr. Mulroney received payments from GCI, Frank Moores, Fred Doucet, or Gary Ouellet.
Did GCI or Frank Moores or Fred Doucet or Gary Ouellet receive any commissions or payments from Airbus?
12:05 p.m.
As an Individual
Yes. They had been shareholders from GCI and were entitled to those funds.
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
Sukh Dhaliwal Liberal Newton—North Delta, BC
So your answer to this question is yes, they received it.
12:05 p.m.
As an Individual
Yes, but I cannot say whether they transferred money from there.
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
Sukh Dhaliwal Liberal Newton—North Delta, BC
Mr. Schreiber, were any of these payments you claim Mr. Mulroney received from these parties related to Airbus, yes or no?
12:05 p.m.
As an Individual
I cannot say. I've no idea.
Look, when you receive money from five different clients and you pay a third party, how can you say what money you've paid? It's impossible.
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
Sukh Dhaliwal Liberal Newton—North Delta, BC
Can you tell me, then, what did happen, with all the conversations you were having with Madame Lavallée?
12:05 p.m.
As an Individual
Yes, I tried to make clear that this all started at the beginning, when Mr. Mulroney wanted to become Prime Minister. Everybody got something: one got a job; another one wanted to do business. I've said three or four times now that my understanding was that Mr. Mulroney, when he was no longer Prime Minister, might work together with GCI.
I witnessed that Mr. Mulroney supported the business of GCI in many ways. Whenever the Thyssen executives showed up--and this is why I'm so bitter on the whole thing--they were received by Mr. Mulroney. Mr. Moores went there with me and him and of course the executives from Thyssen. They got the confirmation from Mr. Mulroney that everything is fine and that he is grateful that Thyssen follows the invitations with Sinclair Stevens and is doing what the Canadian government wanted to do. It was very clear.
It is the same thing when you look at the Airbus thing. When Mr. Mulroney appointed Mr. Moores to Air Canada, it was a clear signal that he had the backing from the Canadian government. So what?
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
Sukh Dhaliwal Liberal Newton—North Delta, BC
Thanks, Mr. Chair.
This will be my last question to you. You also claim in the same letter that Mr. Mulroney supported fraud related to the Thyssen project and Moores. Was Mr. Mulroney ever aware of the commission IAL was to be paid upon an understanding in principle being reached to establish the Bear Head project, when there were three ministers present at that understanding in principle?
12:05 p.m.
As an Individual
This was my understanding from the discussions with Mr. Moores and Mr. Ouellet, because--
12:10 p.m.
As an Individual
--they all recommended that I would sue the government--which I also did, and I have still the statement of claim done by Ian Scott--because since Mr. Mulroney confirmed all the time to the Thyssen people that the project would go ahead, now came the two documents which were the basis for the payment. As I told you, this is in the document with the German tax authorities that Thyssen could deduct the money they paid.
Then, of course, without saying one word to anybody, Mr. Mulroney killed the project. At the beginning, I couldn't believe it. I thought it was just saying it as a defence. Later on, I learned it was true.
Now I ask you, when this happens just a while after Thyssen paid...I don't know, if you would have been in my position or in Frank Moores' position, how you would feel. This is why, you may know, there was a huge and bitter fallout between Mr. Moores and Mr. Mulroney. And Gary Ouellet, who was also a lawyer, recommended heavily that I would sue him.