Public Accounts Committee on June 15th, 2023

[Prof. Mel Cappe]

Mr. Chair, I am very hesitant to go there. I am here to talk about the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation, and you're asking me about your job, whether to have a public inquiry.

Let me make two points.

The first is that I think the substantive issue of foreign influence is very, very important, and I commend Parliament for taking that seriously.

The second thing I would say is that it depends on what you mean by a public inquiry, as to what—

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

As of yet, sir.

[Prof. Mel Cappe]

Well, part I of the Inquiries Act creates inquiries, but doesn't say what they're to look at. Is it to be forward-looking or backward-looking? Is it going to be what happened and what did the government do, or is it how could we avoid this from ever happening again?

I think that a public inquiry is very important for the second question, the future. I think a public inquiry is inappropriate for looking backwards, and that's because I think the leaker—he's not a whistle-blower; he's a leaker—violated the law, and the Parliament of Canada should not be able to see the documents that he leaked.

Mr. Johnston said that members of the Privy Council should have access to it, and I know that the Leader of the Opposition, for instance, is a member of the Privy Council, but he suggested that the other leaders have access to it. I know that Mr. Singh is thinking about it.

I really don't think a public inquiry is helpful in looking backwards.

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

That's really helpful, Mr. Cappe. I do appreciate your expertise on this. I think this helps and serves Canadians to understand what a public inquiry can do, and you mentioned the kinds of ways it can do that.

In terms of a forward-looking public inquiry, one that would look to seek ways we could recommend, for example, processes or even laws that could stop or limit foreign interference in a way that's appropriate, particularly in our democratic system, but also by way of fundraising, I think are important. Wouldn't you agree?

[Prof. Mel Cappe]

Yes, I would agree.

My problem is what “public” means. With the greatest respect, Mr. Chair and Mr. Desjarlais, I suspect we mean different things by “public”.

My notion of a public inquiry is not one that's going to disclose all the secrets to the public. We have two quite successful examples of using part I of the Inquiries Act. One was Justice O'Connor's inquiry into Maher Arar, and the other was Justice Iacobucci's investigation into Abdullah Almalki and other alleged terrorists. They didn't disclose anything that was public, that would satisfy the interest that I think has been created for the public to have a voyeuristic look at what went on.

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

I think independence is an important piece to it. I think the independence is what's in question with Mr. Johnston, for example. We've seen members of the opposition, of course, attack that perspective, and I think independence is part of it.

[Prof. Mel Cappe]

It's not in question for me, sir.

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

I'm not asking you that question, Mr. Cappe.

With all due respect, I think your role here is to help answer our questions—

[Prof. Mel Cappe]

I agree.

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

—not to try to find ways to inform us as to what is or isn't our job, first of all.

I am asking, with all due respect, your advice as to what you believe a good public inquiry is, considering you are a witness here today, but you've also made a statement that you don't want to look backwards, and you're part of that backward-looking review. I can sense your private interest or personal interest in trying to protect or not do that, so I hear that point you're making. I didn't think it was necessary to be made.

I do think that, when I come back to this questioning in a further round, I'd like to focus on what kind of importance a public inquiry has, but also the kinds of perspectives that are important to that public inquiry, like independence—

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you, Mr. Desjarlais. You will have another opportunity.

For our second round, to start, Mr. McCauley, you have the floor for five minutes.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Thanks.

Mr. Cappe, I want to comment on and address something you have stated. We have heard repeatedly throughout this whole debacle with the Trudeau Foundation of various promoters, almost propagandists, with blatant misinformation about the unanimous support, as we've heard it, from all parties for the development of this. You just heard it today.

I want to quote from Hansard in 2002. This is from MP John Williams, a United Alternative at the time, who said:

Mr. Speaker, could the President of the Treasury Board confirm that the bill is in its usual form for an appropriation bill and that the $125 million donation to the Pierre Trudeau foundation and opposed by the opposition is actually in order?

Further, the Journals show that every single non-Liberal and non-NDPer, which means the predecessors of the Conservatives and the Bloc, all voted against the appropriation. There also wasn't a single vote from the opposition parties in the industry committee when the estimates were being reviewed for this.

I am not looking for a comment, but I want to put it on the record and put an end to the misinformation and propaganda being put forward by very many people involved in the foundation that the opposition parties were in favour of this, when clearly they were not.

I want to go back to another comment. You mentioned a worry about the foundation not getting the best students because of the politicization.

Are you familiar with who John McCall MacBain is?

[Prof. Mel Cappe]

I know of him. I've never met him.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

I want to go back to your comment about not getting the best students. Do you think the abhorrent handling of the sexual harassment lawsuit has anything to do with students not wishing to apply?

I bring this up because the lady who brought forward the suit against the Trudeau Foundation has been harassed. In fact, John MacBain, who I think was noted as the largest single donor, took her aside separately at the behest of the foundation to try to bully her into retracting her claim.

Do you think maybe that has something to do with the best students not wanting to be involved with the foundation?

[Prof. Mel Cappe]

I have no idea.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Did you see any of this going on? Remember, you were at the same St. John's conference when these allegations were put forward.

[Prof. Mel Cappe]

I did not see anything like that, no.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Okay. Thank you.

I want to get back to the foundation's charitable status. We've seen the issue with the donations from Communist China. We've seen that apparently, the foundation is not following its obligations under the CNCA requirements as a soliciting corporation. I think it's been eight years now. We've seen that they haven't been following their disbursement obligations.

Do you think the foundation should be audited by the CRA?

[Prof. Mel Cappe]

I really don't have a view on that. I assume that the foundation has independent auditors. Anything incorporated under the Canada Not-for-profit Corporations Act would have to have independent auditors, I assume.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Enron had and a lot of other companies have independent auditors, but I get your point.

I want to go back to your time as a mentor. Was there any training given to the mentors around dealing with younger people? Was there any sexual harassment training? Was there any HR training around that, or guidelines provided?

[Prof. Mel Cappe]

There is certainly nothing on sexual harassment. My God, it should go without a need to remind anyone, but still, there wasn't. However, there was a session—

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

It should go, but apparently it didn't go.

Did you receive anything? You'd be a mentor and a person of power and prestige, and these young people are forced by the foundation to have a mentor. It's not an option. They have to have a mentor, so you would think the power differential is quite significant.

Was there anything—any advice, any training that you had to go through or anything you had to sign off on—before taking a mentee under your wing?

[Prof. Mel Cappe]

There was nothing to sign. I don't recall signing anything. There was a session we had the day before the first meeting with our mentees. We had a group of former mentors and us newbies in a session, when we talked about what worked and what didn't work, and I found that quite useful.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Thank you, sir.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you very much.

The bells are ringing. I'm going to seek agreement to extend for 15 minutes. Is that acceptable to everyone?