Government Operations Committee on April 28th, 2010

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Chris Warkentin]

Thank you, Mr. Guimond.

We are going to turn it over to Monsieur Gourde for eight minutes.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Gillani, your company needed specialized services and you hired his company. Have you ever hired other companies previously? You have been in business for 23 years, I believe.

[Nazim Gillani]

Sir, I can give you some background on myself. My father founded a company called Xantrex Technology. It's one of the largest underwritings ever done in Canada by RBC. The symbol on the Toronto Exchange was XTX. I grew up, obviously, around my father. He taught me a lot of stuff with regard to government funding, but he never needed an intermediary. I dealt with my dad. My dad taught me a lot of the manners in which to submit funding applications to the WED, etc. IRAP is an example.

I'm familiar with standard programs, but to me it would be much easier.... It's not my cup of tea. I don't want to spend my time trying to get through all of the nuts and bolts of how a company works and what their financials look like and everything else to submit something to the government and have it assessed. I would much rather find an intermediary.

So as far as ISI is concerned, we have never applied for government funding in the last five years for anything, specifically for that reason: because it is too complicated, takes too much time, and in my mind, is too cumbersome a process.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC]

You referred to the past five years but, previously, had you ever hired other consultants to help you get financing?

[Nazim Gillani]

Yes, I've probably used U.S. consultants for U.S. government bodies that have programs, because most of the companies I deal with are U.S.-based versus Canadian. Obviously the Canadian government has a tendency to want to fund Canadian companies, but the majority of my work was in the U.S. up until two years ago.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC]

Had you used Canadian consultants before the past five years?

[Nazim Gillani]

No, not personally.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC]

Were you aware that after the sponsorship scandal the government had passed a Responsibility Act? The party in power at the time still owes $39 million to Canadians. Where you aware of the Federal Responsibility Act?

[Marcel Proulx, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

It's on the relevance, Mr. Chair.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Chris Warkentin]

I'll hear the point of order.

[Marcel Proulx, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm questioning the relevance of the member's comments. He is questioning a witness here. The witness is very open. The witness has given us documents, he has given us a list of timelines, and so on and so forth. I think the member should refer to today's participation by the witness in regard to the file we are looking at.

Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Chris Warkentin]

I believe he was asking specifically as it relates to the Federal Accountability Act. I'll let the member proceed with that question. Of course, let's keep to the relevant topic at hand, but certainly I don't see there being an issue with Federal Accountability Act questions being brought forward.

[Marcel Proulx, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

With that part, I agree.

[Nazim Gillani]

I was not aware of that. I'm not a big handbook on the Federal Accountability Act or the Lobbying Act--not until three weeks ago. Obviously I've heard a lot about the Lobbying Act and the Federal Accountability Act ever since this scandal broke.

To be brutally honest with you, I was completely unaware of the Lobbying Act or the Federal Accountability Act, or what had to be done or what didn't have to be done, before this happened.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC]

So, Mr. Gillani, you support the legislation implemented to avoid any repetition of the past events?

[Nazim Gillani]

Absolutely.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC]

I shall give the rest of my time to Mr. Brown.

[Patrick Brown, Conservative, Barrie, ON]

Thank you.

I do think it's very important that Mr. Gourde referenced the theft of $39 million, because it is in the context.... It's the very reason we have the Federal Accountability Act: as a response to that. So I think there is a zero tolerance attitude with this Prime Minister and this government towards lobbying, towards lobbyists who aren't registered appropriately. That's why we have questions about whether it was expressed, whether it was asked, if Mr. Jaffer was a registered lobbyist.

On that note, Ms. Coady referenced success fees. I want to touch upon that a little bit further and on whether you knew that under the Lobbying Act they are prohibited. Actually, it was this government that created the Lobbying Act, with a budget of $4.6 million to pursue this. People can actually end up in jail; people can end up with serious fines if they breach it. That's how sacred these laws are.

I want to know if success fees are something that was ever discussed. It's very relevant right now, I think, that the government is recuperating in one case, the Dingwall case—I think it's officially the Wallding case—a success fee of $350,000 paid to someone who lobbied inappropriately.

Were any success fees talked about and are you aware of the gravity of these allegations?

[Nazim Gillani]

Well, I'm aware of the gravity of the allegations now. I wasn't then.

As to success fees, you have to understand the kind of relationship.... I mean, I am of the same religion as Mr. Jaffer, which means that we have a community tie. There's an inherent trust that comes from having a community tie. For anyone I met who was of the same religion, I would immediately assume them to be trusting, trustworthy, and trustful. As a result of that....

One of the things that I mentioned was Green Rite, as an example, or RLP as another example, companies that we worked on somehow, in some way, together, yet you couldn't find a piece of paper that says I get anything out of any involvement with RLP with Mr. Jaffer or GPG. There's a certain amount of trust that comes here.

Everybody expects that you have to build a relationship with an individual and build a bit of a relationship to get to the point where you can build a company and get it to the point it needs to reach. In all fairness, I'm saying that this guy's of my religion; he's in my community. There's an inherent trust that comes with that so I don't need to have a signature on a document to show that he's going to pay me if I give him a good deal or if I get a deal that comes to him, etc.

But there were no success fees, as you call it, no. But there's an agreement, which you have in front of you, that says quite clearly that if something came to fruition, a deal would have to be put in place in writing.

[Patrick Brown, Conservative, Barrie, ON]

And that's the concern. Regardless of community ties, if Mr. Jaffer had presented the expectation to you, or if you had presented the expectation to him, that's in direct contradiction to what this government has aspired to in terms of having the strictest possible lobbying laws in the world.

So did this suggestion come from Mr. Jaffer or was this suggestion something that you just—

[Nazim Gillani]

I would say the suggestion actually came from me.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Chris Warkentin]

Just give a short answer.

[Nazim Gillani]

Sure. It was me who said that we will deal with this at the time when a deal came into play. I did that, not Rahim.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Chris Warkentin]

Mr. Martin, we'll give you the floor for eight minutes.

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Gillani, for being here and for being so cooperative and for your honesty with us. I appreciate the willingness you've shown to help us with this.

I, too, am concerned, though. What jumps off the page with this contract is, first of all, that we didn't know such a contract existed, based on the testimony we got from Mr. Jaffer. He certainly led us to believe that his contact with you was cursory at best, and brief, and that no such plans for future business were in the works at all. So thank you for correcting that.

But this idea of a finder's fee does worry me. From Mr. Jaffer's point of view, he should certainly know better--that lobbying with the intent of a reward later, as part of a success fee or finder's fee, is illegal, plain and simple.