Government Operations Committee on May 31st, 2010

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Good afternoon, gentlemen.

You are aware of what we are trying to do. We are trying to determine whether Mr. Glémaud and Mr. Jaffer were lobbying. You have already answered a number of questions. I will ask some questions that my colleague has already asked, but I just want to address them again to make sure we get our story straight.

I know that I have before me representatives from two companies. Mr. Jordan can answer the question. Mr. Hammerbacher or Mr. Arenburg can also answer. It is Mr. Glémaud's name that stands out. If I understood correctly, you did not see Mr. Jaffer in action.

Mr. Jordan, was Mr. Glémaud lobbying for you?

[Joe Jordan]

Well, the Lobbying Act offences are Criminal Code offences, so I'm not sure what value my speculation has. We had no contact with Mr. Jaffer in this regard. My contact with Mr. Glémaud involved one lunch he was at with a number of other people, and I was cc'd on two e-mails.

What he did, and I guess that's the missing piece here that you're going to have to sort out, would all come down to what kind of dialogue went on between him and the public office holders or the designated public office holders. I'm not party to what went on there, but I think that gets to the crux of your question. The rules are clear with respect to what you can and cannot do. But as I said, I don't think I'm in a position to give you anything other than a theory that anybody on the street reading this in the press would have. And I'm not sure that this is going to advance your study at all.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

Okay.

Gentlemen, do you have anything to add?

[Milfred Hammerbacher]

I apologize, but my French is not very good.

Again, that's a question I really can't answer, because I don't know what he did. Obviously, this was done without our knowledge. We did not pay him to lobby and did not have any kind of financial agreement with him, so it's a question I really don't feel comfortable answering, not knowing what he actually did. He wasn't authorized by us to do any sort of lobbying.

As background, I've worked in the energy business for quite a while, and on occasion we've had to interface with the government, and we've always used registered lobbyists to do that. I'm very familiar with the legality and the process, and we follow that.

[Joe Jordan]

If I could just add something, I watched Mr. Glémaud's testimony, and it was his contention that he was simply asking for information. If you look at the document Industry Canada prepared, in the second paragraph, I think, they make a statement as to whether these projects would qualify. I have to assume from this that he must have asked the question. But did he ask more than that? I don't know.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

Okay.

So, it is clear that there is no contract with you, Mr. Jordan and your company, or with you, Mr. Hammerbacher and Mr. Arenburg. No official contract was signed on anything.

I will now mention two names that will probably sound familiar. Was Mr. Gillani associated in any way with Mr. Glémaud in serving your business needs?

[Joe Jordan]

I've never met him. I've never laid eyes on him.

[Milfred Hammerbacher]

I don't know the gentleman.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

All right.

My last question will be as simple as the previous one. Did you have business dealings with Ms. Guergis, who was the minister for the Status of Women and Mr. Jaffer's spouse?

[Joe Jordan]

None whatsoever.

[Milfred Hammerbacher]

No.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

Okay.

Just make your next answer yes or no. To your knowledge, did your companies receive any money as a result of Mr. Glémaud and Mr. Jaffer's work? Did anything like that take place?

[Joe Jordan]

Absolutely none.

[Milfred Hammerbacher]

None.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

You don't have any more?

Mr. Warkentin is next for eight minutes.

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

Thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate the questioning time.

Thank you, gentlemen, for showing up this afternoon. We appreciate your testimony before our committee.

I'm still trying to get a handle on fully understanding what Mr. Glémaud and Mr. Jaffer were doing in terms of a business structure. I hear today that they were submitting applications that had the names of your companies on them. It seems strange that these gentlemen would be proposing any type of government subsidy for your companies without any type of arrangement with you gentlemen for how they might be paid if they ever received funding.

We heard from them that they were submitting requests for information about certain companies. You testified you didn't expect anything would be forthcoming in your relationship after you first met. But I'm curious whether there was a discussion that if your relationship were to proceed, they might do this and you might do that.

Were there any of those types of conversations, where if they were submitting and found an avenue for either of your companies to receive funding, they would proceed to be paid a certain number of funds, a certain number of shares, or anything like that?

[Joe Jordan]

Absolutely not, from our perspective. And just to add to that, I know my way around Ottawa too. I'm not going to pay somebody to fill out an application, and if I'm going to apply for funding, it's not going to be a page and a half.

The other thing I should point out is at that time their company was pitching projects in Bulgaria. They had a whole bunch of irons in the fire that they were trying to pitch, so it wasn't a case of this being a specific issue. This was one among many other things they were talking about that I really had no interest in.

I produced a one-page document that I'll give to the committee. It was just an overview of our company. And I never heard from them again. They never told me what they were doing. They never gave me any indication whether or not the criteria of this program covered solar. I literally never heard from them again.

[Milfred Hammerbacher]

It might be interesting for me to tell you that Canadian Solar Solutions is a fairly well-known company in the solar space. We have a pretty good name for this area of the world. Many times, unfortunately, companies have misrepresented their relationship with us. We kind of bring some credibility to whatever project they're pitching.

I would say at least a handful of times I've had a bank or something call me and say, “Company X has said they're a partner with you on this project. Will you confirm that?” Lots of times I don't even know the company that's using our name. It appears to be a pretty regular occurrence, where a new start-up company will try to associate themselves with us to gain some kind of credibility.

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

That disturbs me. In the personal lives of Canadians, that's called identity theft. You, as companies, have millions of dollars at stake if the reputations or identities of your companies are somehow compromised.

First, have you undertaken any type of legal action to ensure that this situation is rectified? Second, have you done anything to protect yourselves from the future action of other folks? What exactly have you done with this information now that you're fully aware of it?

Somebody has essentially taken your identify and has been requesting government funds. That may or may not be inappropriate and borderline criminal, if it is exactly how we've heard about it here today. I'm just wondering what actions you've taken to try to rectify the situation, which I surmise to be an identify theft situation.

[Milfred Hammerbacher]

We're not a litigious company. As I said in my opening remarks, we're a very busy company and we would prefer to just move on.

As far as what we've done to prevent this from happening again, it's very difficult to prevent this sort of thing. We definitely encourage people to look at our website to see who our real partners are, and those types of things. Maybe we need a little more scrutiny on who we let in the door. I may be a little naive, but I always give somebody who comes in my door for the first time the benefit of the doubt that they're a legitimate business person and may have an idea we're interested in.

[Joe Jordan]

The piece of testimony that struck me when they were here was that they don't have any money, so I don't think there's any legal recourse.

Just to go back, was there an application for that program like the one for this program? I don't know the answer to that, but if our company was being presented as an applicant, we would have to sign something. We would have to provide some due diligence. I don't understand how this program worked, so I don't know whether or not that was a formal application. At the end of the day, I think it's going to come down to whether this was contact or communication with a public office holder about the awarding of a grant in the government, or whether it was asking for information. I don't really know the answer to that. I guess that's what the committee is going to figure out.

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

I've asked you to review it and state your opinion. My understanding, from what we've heard in testimony, is that there was a request for additional information, and that's why things were submitted.

[Joe Jordan]

For additional information from whom?

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

You have the documents in front of you. What do you believe was being requested?