Information & Ethics Committee on Feb. 5th, 2008

[Norman Spector]

During those years, I had no knowledge of his dealings with Mr. Schreiber. Mr. Mulroney did hand me the Bear Head file. But with what we've learned subsequent to 1996, it certainly looks as though Mr. Mulroney had more than passing dealings with Mr. Schreiber.

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Thank you.

I'm going to ask Mr. Mulcair to take the microphone.

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Outremont, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I would like to come back to something Mr. Spector said a little earlier. He said in English that the RCMP botched the Airbus investigation, because there are certain points made in Mr. Johnston's report. It contains two rather surprising statements.

[Norman Spector]

Yes, very surprising. Well-tilled ground.

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Outremont, QC]

Yes, that is right, there is a reference to well-tilled ground. And to demonstrate that we do not need an investigation into Airbus, he mentions the two books written by Stevie Cameron. It is rather surprising to use that to prove that there is no need for an investigation into the Airbus matter.

The second point is directly related to the RCMP issue, and it disturbs me somewhat. The fact that is from the beginning, there has been a certain vagueness in the statements made by the RCMP. I am referring to page 18 of the English version of Mr. Johnston's report, where he states:

Despite Mr. Schreiber's recent statements before the Ethics Committee to the contrary, the RCMP advises that Mr. Schreiber and his counsel were interviewed several times over the course of the RCMP's investigation. On a number of occasions between August 1999 and September 2004 [...]

And he gives other dates, up to 2006.

Unless I am mistaken, all of that happened after the Airbus settlement. During your own conversations with the RCMP, which date back to 1995, did anyone at the RCMP tell you that he or she had spoken to Mr. Schreiber?

[Norman Spector]

I will answer the first part of your question, in the main.

I think Mr. Johnston's statement that the RCMP had conducted the investigation—and this is well-tilled ground—is absolutely incorrect. I'd go one step further. This may not be common knowledge, but I have this from Bill Kaplan, who wrote the book A Secret Trial, and you can buy it at your bookstore.

[Carole Lavallée, Bloc, Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC]

That is very difficult.

[Norman Spector]

Yes, it is very difficult, and it was difficult from the beginning, Ms. Lavallée. The book was almost killed by McGill-Queen's University Press.

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Outremont, QC]

We would like to hear the answer.

[Norman Spector]

Almost killed.

Excuse me.

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Outremont, QC]

No, that's fine. You were talking about the investigation.

[Norman Spector]

Yes.

The RCMP did not know about the cash when it shut down the investigation in 2003.

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Outremont, QC]

You're saying that it did?

[Norman Spector]

They did not know about the cash when they said that the investigation was over.

I can assure you that Mr. Kaplan—and I'm sure you'll have him here—has impeccable sources. They did not know. They had heard a rumour about it, which makes it even more extraordinary that they shut down the investigation. I mean, they don't shut down murder investigations in this country. They allow investigations to go cold, but to shut down an investigation is an extraordinary act by the RCMP, particularly when they had heard rumours of the cash payment. But they had not confirmed the cash payment. They shut it down.

Secondly, on the question of whether they did or did not, I have no knowledge of that. I think you'll have to ask the RCMP. But I suspect what's happening here is that people are playing games with the word “Airbus”. A lot of people have played games with the word “Airbus”. Airbus is one contract, but it's also an affair that incorporates three separate proposals. So people, I think, play with that term to give slightly evasive answers. I would think the example you cited in French is an example of that evasiveness.

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Outremont, QC]

I can tell you that I asked the questions, and when I put them to Mr. Schreiber, it was very clear that I wanted to know if the RCMP had spoken to him before paying the $2.1 million settlement to Mr. Mulroney. However, that is not what comes across in Mr. Johnston's report.

[Norman Spector]

When the RCMP questioned me in 1995, I had the impression that it was just beginning its investigation. But it was only that, an impression, it was not based on any facts.

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Outremont, QC]

I see. Thank you, Mr. Spector.

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

Merci.

Mr. Hiebert, please.

[Russ Hiebert, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Chair, it's a matter of public record that the RCMP spent eight years, and likely millions of dollars, investigating allegations regarding the Airbus purchase by Air Canada, and the Bear Head project. The plain fact is that the RCMP announced on April 22, 2003:

After an exhaustive investigation in Canada and abroad, the RCMP has concluded its investigations into allegations of wrongdoing involving MBB Helicopters, Thyssen and Airbus... The RCMP has now concluded that the remaining allegations cannot be substantiated and that no charges will be laid...

Mr. Spector, the first questions I have relate to the relevance of your testimony to this committee.

First of all, do you have any evidence for this committee of any wrongdoing by any public official with respect to Airbus?

[Norman Spector]

I said I was not in Ottawa when the Airbus contract was let.

[Russ Hiebert, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC]

So you have no evidence of any wrongdoing by anyone related to Airbus?

[Norman Spector]

Mr. Hiebert, with respect, your committee invited me here today. Your committee knew that I was not in Ottawa in 1985. So I don't know why you're interrogating me this way. You summoned me to Ottawa. With the things I've written in The Globe and Mail and the things that I've written in the afterword of the Kaplan book, assuming you've read them, this committee obviously felt that I did have information that was relevant. So I'm not sure why you're saying this to me.

As for your citation of the RCMP's statement, I don't believe them and I don't think Canadians believe them. I think Canadians now are very skeptical about the RCMP. I think they're skeptical about the RCMP for a whole bunch of reasons: for events that have taken place in British Columbia recently, for a certain announcement that took place during the last election campaign. I think the Canadian people are very skeptical about the RCMP, and I don't believe them. I think you should get the RCMP here under oath, and I will give you the name of the inspector whom you should ask as to whether they had established the fact of these cash payments when they shut down the investigation. I think the RCMP is part of this problem.

You're from British Columbia. You know. In British Columbia, we have had two premiers investigated by a special prosecutor, one from each party, and criminal charges were laid. Both were acquitted. That's part of our system. Our justice system doesn't demand convictions; it demands equal justice. We've had a third premier investigated, and the special prosecutor recommended against the laying of charges. And British Columbians said that's fine too.

In Ottawa, the scorecard is zero at whatever level of the executive council. I have worked as a deputy minister in both jurisdictions. I worked as a deputy minister in Victoria and I worked as a deputy minister in Ottawa. I can tell you that politicians in Victoria are no more corrupt than politicians in Ottawa. You need a transparent process.

Stephen Owen, in his recommendation, in what he did as ombudsman of British Columbia...the insight was the following: to ensure equal justice, which is what our system is based on, sometimes you have to put in place special arrangements for high-profile and particularly political cases. So what happens in British Columbia is that when there's an allegation made against a politician, the assistant deputy attorney general, a career public servant, names an outside counsel from a list developed by the bar association and the department, and that person investigates and determines whether charges should be laid. That is a clean system. This is the system that our British cousins are looking at now. That's the system that Mr. Harper spoke of in the last campaign, when he talked about a director of public prosecutions. It's not quite what we got, but it's the system that we need in Ottawa if we're to stop the slide that this country has seen in Transparency International ratings.

[Russ Hiebert, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Spector. I do appreciate the fact that our numbers have improved in recent years and I appreciate your passion with respect to this issue. I do want to give you an opportunity, however, to provide to this committee any evidence you might have about wrongdoing. I'm very sincere in my questions. So if you have any evidence about wrongdoing by any public official, relating to the consulting agreement between Mr. Mulroney and Mr. Schreiber, or with respect to the correspondence, or with respect to Airbus, these are all elements of the mandate that we've established for ourselves and I'm trying to keep us to the relevance of this matter.

So do you have any evidence of wrongdoing on those issues, before I proceed?

[Norman Spector]

I have no evidence one way or another.

[Russ Hiebert, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC]

All right.

When it comes to the Cape Breton Bear Head project, when was it finally rejected by the government?