Evidence of meeting #10 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 mulroney.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Russ Hiebert Conservative South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC
After you stepped down as Prime Minister, did you ever have an agreement with Mr. Schreiber to act for him in connection with any--and I quote from the code--“specific ongoing proceeding, transaction, negotiation, or case to which the government of the day was a party”?
P.C., As an Individual
Mr. Hiebert, that's a very important question. If you'll allow me, I'd like to respond to the words of Mr. Schreiber himself, just so you'll know.
Mr. Schreiber testified in the MBB Helicopter case under oath, and here's the question from the chief prosecutor, Mr. Bernstein:
Those thoughts or this idea that you had, this plan [to retain the services of Mr. Mulroney], what time are we talking about?
Mr. Schreiber: After Mr. Mulroney has left government.
Question: Mr. Bernstein: After he had ceased? After he had stepped down as the Prime Minister?
Answer: Mr. Schreiber: Yes. Ja.
Under oath, Mr. Schreiber repudiates completely the basic provision. Under oath, given within a stone's throw of this room in 2004, in the Eurocopter case he repudiates the key provision of the affidavit that he filed on November 7, which gave rise to this activity. He is saying under oath that he hired me only after I was no longer Prime Minister, which is true. In the affidavit he filed, he said the exact opposite, that the deal was taking place on June 23 at Harrington Lake.
I told you, sir, at the beginning that every single relevant provision that Mr. Schreiber made in that affidavit about me is false, and with your permission, I will go through that affidavit with you and indicate the extent to which these falsehoods are now on your record unchallenged.
Conservative
Russ Hiebert Conservative South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC
Mr. Mulroney, after you stepped down as Prime Minister, did Mr. Schreiber ask you to contact any federal government department on his behalf?
Conservative
Russ Hiebert Conservative South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC
After you stepped down as Prime Minister, did Mr. Schreiber ever ask you to advise him on how his business could benefit from the programs or policies of any department of government at the time?
Conservative
Russ Hiebert Conservative South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC
Mr. Mulroney, there have been some questions related to your activity after you stepped down as Prime Minister but while you were still sitting as a member of Parliament. I'm now referring to the provisions under the Parliament of Canada Act.
You've already indicated that you accepted some amount of money—Mr. Schreiber says $100,000, and you say $75,000—in cash while you were still sitting as an MP. Did you render any service to Mr. Schreiber, either directly or indirectly, in relation to any bill, proceeding, contract, claim, controversy, charge, accusation, arrest, or other matter before Parliament?
Conservative
Russ Hiebert Conservative South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC
Did you influence or attempt to influence, on behalf of Mr. Schreiber or any of his interests, any other member of Parliament while you were sitting as a member of Parliament?
Conservative
Russ Hiebert Conservative South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC
Mr. Chair, I believe it's clear to everyone that Mr. Schreiber is desperate to avoid facing extradition to Germany. We've known about his legal proceedings. He testified to those in the last meeting we had. Prime Minister Harper has stated that he has never spoken to or met Mr. Schreiber, and Mr. Schreiber confirmed that in his own testimony.
Mr. Mulroney, you are undoubtedly aware that Mr. Schreiber hoped you would advocate on his behalf to Prime Minister Harper to help him with his extradition problems. Mr. Schreiber indicated that he believed you were going to raise this matter with Prime Minister Harper last summer. Prime Minister Harper has stated that he has never discussed this matter with you.
My question to you, Mr. Mulroney: Can you tell the committee whether you raised this matter with the current Prime Minister, and if you did not, why not?
P.C., As an Individual
Prime Minister Harper is completely accurate. Moreover, he has had nothing to do, directly or indirectly, with any aspect of this, in any way.
I did not raise, directly or indirectly, anything relating to Mr. Schreiber, not only with Prime Minister Harper, but with any member of the House, on either side, at any time.
Mr. Hiebert, let me draw this to your attention. I'll read it carefully because it's very important. I've told you, and I just indicated to you, about the falsity of Mr. Schreiber's statements in his affidavit. He repudiated himself in his own testimony under oath.
Here's another article from his affidavit, section 39:
I wrote the July 20, 2006 letter at the request of Mr. Mulroney because he told me that he was going to meet with The Right Honourable Stephen Harper, the current Prime Minister of Canada...and that he (Mr. Mulroney) was going to show to Mr. Harper a copy of Exhibit 15....
He wrote the letter “because he told me”. I have not spoken to Mr. Schreiber in seven years, so that's a complete fabrication, and it's an indication of the entire affidavit that has generated this feeding frenzy.
Look, he succeeded. He got what he wanted. He's succeeding. He's sitting in his mansion over in Rockcliffe, chuckling. He organized this November 7 affidavit. It's all false--demonstrably false--but he got his “get out of jail” card. He's sitting over there, and he got what he wanted.
One thing he did do--and I point this out to all members--I think he seriously misled every member of this House, and all of you, with this false affidavit. It is false. I'll conclude, sir, by this. How do we know it's false? Because he has repudiated every single important provision of it in different testimonies given under oath.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
Thank you.
Before I move to the next questioner, Mr. Mulroney, you made reference that--
Conservative
Dean Del Mastro Conservative Peterborough, ON
On a point of order, Mr. Chair, if I could, you extended the opportunity to the witness to make a statement at any time, should he wish. The witness did indicate that he would like to go through the affidavit of November 7. I'd like to request that the chair grant the witness the opportunity to go through the sections of that affidavit for the committee. I think it's very relevant. You did extend the opportunity to the witness, if he wished, to make a statement. I'd like you to extend that offer to him regarding the November 7 affidavit.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
If it's germane and relevant to the proceedings, and you feel, Mr. Mulroney, that it's very important, I'm going to give you that opportunity.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
We're on a point of order. Hang on for a moment.
I'm contemplating our next break, and I'd like to know from you, Mr. Mulroney, how long a statement that might be.
P.C., As an Individual
I would say that would be the max. I won't go through the entire affidavit; I've dealt with a number of them.
Let me draw to your attention something that should be persuasive to all of you, irrespective of political parties. If the object of this is a quest for the truth--and I assume it is--then those who appear before you must respect you by telling the truth in regard to everything, even, sir, if it's embarrassing, as it is for me, to have acknowledged the transaction with Mr. Schreiber.
I would just say, sir--
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
I'm going to allow you to make that statement on the affidavit. But if I may, in one of the responses you made to Mr. Hiebert--it was about the money received--I believe you indicated it was not in violation of the House of Commons Act. Were you in fact referring to the Parliament of Canada Act?
December 13th, 2007 / 10:50 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
Okay, and that was with regard to section 41, under influence peddling. Thank you.
If you wish, Mr. Mulroney, is this an appropriate time for you to make your comments? Would that be a way to complement or finish off what Mr. Hiebert had asked you?