Government Operations Committee on April 21st, 2010

[Patrick Glémaud]

Based on my recollection, I do not know.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Fair enough.

We will move now to Mr. Lukiwski for five minutes.

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK]

Thank you, Chair.

I have a couple of questions I wanted to ask both of you on your lobbying...or non-lobbying activities, because it seems that's another crucial question here.

This is for my own clarification. I'd asked the question whether certain statements that we had been told were on your website, either corporately or individually, were true or not. I think you had mentioned that they were not, except for the “key player in coordinating future policy”. You mentioned that Mr. Glémaud had that on, and that was in relation to his previous work within government. That's fair enough. But I believe I heard from Madam Coady that she had a piece of paper that said that on Mr. Jaffer's website you did say that you could secure support from the Canadian government.

That's unless I misheard. I'm just trying to clarify that, because it's a fairly big difference. You're saying something was not there. Ms. Coady said it was. If it was, then that takes us into a whole bunch of other questions.

[Rahim Jaffer]

I understand.

One thing we can't confuse.... My personal website talked about my experience when I was in government, not related to my business website. Our business website spoke directly on what type of work we were doing in our company.

A number of things that were outlined in my personal website talked about my experience, as I served as a member of Parliament, and the work that I did. One of those things was securing government support for different initiatives while I was an MP--in Edmonton, for instance--and that's what it was referring to.

I'm sorry if it's created a confusion, because it's obvious that this is what has happened, but by no means was it making any statements that were related to my business operation.

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK]

I thank you for that.

Let me go back to something else I wanted to ask, and that again goes to, I think, the crux of whether or not either one of you, or both of you, should have registered as lobbyists.

First, is GPG your only business interest, or do you do personal or private consulting as well?

[Rahim Jaffer]

We don't do any private consulting.

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK]

I believe I heard you mention that you had advised other companies on how to either deal with government, access government, or something to that effect. Is that correct?

[Rahim Jaffer]

There have been people who have come to us and said, “Can you help us with this?“ We would say, “That's not the business we're in, but this is where we can direct you. Either talk to the department person, call the minister's office yourself, or whatever it might be, but this is what you can do. That's not the type of business we're involved in.” But if we could share that information, that was fine with us.

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK]

Did you ever charge for that advice?

[Rahim Jaffer]

No, because that's not the focus of our business.

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK]

You mentioned you're familiar with the Federal Accountability Act and the specific provisions contained within it on lobbying. As you know, there are two different types of lobbyists. One is consultant lobbying, where one charges to advise clients. You have stated that you have never charged for advice you've given to others on how to deal with government. The other type, of course, is the in-house lobbyist. One of the determinants of that definition is if an official of a company who is given the responsibility of contacting, communicating, and working with governments spends in excess of 20% of their work day communicating with and dealing with governments. Then they are considered to be a lobbyist who needs to be registered.

Did you at any time in your communications with the federal government, whenever they might have happened, consider yourself to be spending more than 20% of your time, either individually or combined, on discussing with government about information, government programs, etc.?

[Rahim Jaffer]

No. I can say wholeheartedly that was never the case.

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK]

So you would state for the record at this committee that as both the definitions imply--the definitions of in-house lobbyist and consultant lobbyist--you did not fall within either of those categories, and that is why neither one of you registered as a lobbyist.

[Rahim Jaffer]

That's right. As I said, that wasn't the focus of our business.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Thank you very much.

We now go to Monsieur Guimond pour cinq minutes, s'il vous plaît.

[Michel Guimond, Bloc, Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Mr. Glémaud, in your previous testimony, you stated that you were a senior lawyer with the government and that you had even provided advice or opinions on the management of a green fund.

On the other hand, why would the company want to retain your services, Mr. Jaffer? What is your specific area of expertise? What more do you have to offer than anyone else?

[Rahim Jaffer]

I think for me the experience came from a couple of different fronts. One was obviously that through a number of years of serving as an MP you make a number of connections in the private sector. One of the things I wanted to focus on, in trying to develop a business that was focused on the private sector, was working with a number of individuals and businesses to look particularly--as I said in my statement--at new technologies and opportunities in emerging markets. That's exactly where my strength is. That's exactly what I've been trying to do. We've created links with some of the partners--that's what we're trying to do in both India and China.

[Michel Guimond, Bloc, Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC]

I understand.

However, you say that you had political experience and that you were National President of the Conservative Party. So, that is the primary asset that you, Rahim Jaffer, have to offer.

[Rahim Jaffer]

No, because you have to take a step back. Prior to being in politics--and even in the time after and when I was in politics--I had my own private business. Before I entered politics I ran a small business, owned property, and was involved in family business. I've had different experiences in business. I've also done my master's in business administration. So I think that gives me some experience in looking at how to open up new markets and leave my political life behind. That was my goal.

Unfortunately, I keep getting dragged back into things that don't really have credibility to stand water. My goal has been to build a business in the private sector. That's where I focus my attention.

[Michel Guimond, Bloc, Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC]

I see.

However, did you specifically talk about Wright Tech Systems with your wife, the former Minister for the Status of Women Canada, Ms. Guergis?

[Rahim Jaffer]

After we were introduced to the company, I recused myself because we decided we were not going to do any business. There was no ability to do business with them. So I believe that Mr. Wright approached my wife for a separate issue. I think it was to do with a landfill problem in part of her riding. I'm not privy to those discussions, nor did I take any interest, because we had recused ourselves. We weren't going to work with this company in any capacity.

[Michel Guimond, Bloc, Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC]

Did you go to Belize or Panama? Did you travel to Belize and Panama?

[Rahim Jaffer]

I don't know how this is relating to this study.

[Michel Guimond, Bloc, Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC]

No, no—

[Rahim Jaffer]

But I will answer the question.