Evidence of meeting #46 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 witnesses.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Gary Goodyear Conservative Cambridge, ON
There's another statement here: “I understood that it was to be spent on the media in Sherbrooke, around Sherbrooke”. That kind of contradicts your earlier statement that you said it was to be spent in all of Quebec. I'm just pointing that out to you.
August 11th, 2008 / 11:10 a.m.
As an Individual
If I can respond, as I said to Monsieur Rivard, Sherbrooke is a major media poll in Quebec.
Conservative
Gary Goodyear Conservative Cambridge, ON
I have no doubt about that, and that's why we do regional buys. Thank you.
You said:
Sherbrooke is the media poll for all television programs, and that is exactly why we do regional media buys. It was to be spent on television, and I had confidence in the person who asked me to do it. So it's on that basis of confidence I agreed to do it.
That's very interesting to me.
There's one thing I would like to mention to you, in case you're not aware of it, and perhaps you can tell us. Mr. Mayrand was here a couple of weeks ago, and he stated very clearly and confirmed that under the Canada Elections Act it is perfectly legal, in fact quite routine, for all parties to transfer funds from the national party to local campaigns and back--that the transfer of money is absolutely legal.
You were aware of that, correct?
As an Individual
No, I have no comment on that. I realize that the central party—any party—can give money to the local riding association, but when we examined this further I became convinced it was only a legitimate local expense if we in fact spent it, which was not the case.
Conservative
Gary Goodyear Conservative Cambridge, ON
You're not wrong on that. Mr. Mayrand went on to say very clearly that expenses can't be transferred, and that's pretty much what you're saying.
If I may read you an example, please, what we're trying to determine here is ethical standards, and really the only way to do that is to compare colleague to colleague. I'm going to read you a statement, and I hope the chair does not cut me off on this. This is from the director general of the Liberal Party of Canada in Alberta:
During the past election campaign, the Liberal Party of Canada in Alberta transferred funds and/or paid for services in kind directly to the candidate on whose behalf [they] were acting as official agent.
We've established that there's nothing wrong with that, right? With transfers of funds, there's nothing wrong there.
The letter goes on to refer to an expense incurred by the national party for northern Alberta candidates, an ad placed in the Edmonton Journal, that should be claimed at the local level. This is a transfer of expense. How do you explain that to be different from what happened to you?
As an Individual
I don't think it is incumbent on me to explain that. I was not a party to it in any way and I am unaware of the circumstances. The only thing I feel obliged to comment on is our behaviour and our actions in Compton--Stanstead.
Conservative
Gary Goodyear Conservative Cambridge, ON
I appreciate that. I wasn't actually asking for a comment on the particular circumstance, only how it is extremely similar to what has happened to you.
We have a number of other issues that I could read to you. One, in fact, is an NDP candidate, which is probably why my colleague across the way is so eager to not have his people brought before me. But again, in an attempt to compare candidates to candidates for the purpose of deciding whether something is ethical or not, we understand that the federal NDP party wrote a letter to Libby Davies' financial officer and basically said, we want to transfer money to you on the basis of you spending money on radio announcements.
In that particular documentation—and I have the e-mails here—the financial agent....
Am I out of time? How much time do I have left, Mr. Chair?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
When I told you one minute, you used up 45 seconds and we haven't had an answer yet.
Conservative
Gary Goodyear Conservative Cambridge, ON
When I was timing the other gentleman, accordingly to mine, it was eight minutes.
All right. Let me just move on, and suffice it to say that in the next round we have all kinds of examples of the Liberal Party, the Bloc, and the NDP not just transferring funds--and that's perfectly legal--but transferring expenses, explicitly being told by the national parties to use this expense at the local level. In fact, some of the members who are accused are here.
Why do you think Elections Canada chose not to investigate those things?
As an Individual
Again, I don't feel it's incumbent on me to respond to that.
Liberal
Marcel Proulx Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC
It's a question of translation.
I want to hear Mr. Goodyear explain to us if he has said—I'm not arguing with him, but I just want to find out if what we heard in French is what Mr. Goodyear said in English—that Mr. Mayrand would have said that expenses could be transferred. That's what we heard in the French.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
Order, please.
There is no matter called a “point of clarification”, and there's no opportunity to ask questions of another member unless you're recognized to speak. That's not a point of order.
Mr. Proulx, as you know, we have the opportunity to review the blues. If there is a problem in the translation, I'm sure that you will bring it to the attention of the committee and that an erratum change would be made.
Mr. Hubbard, you have five minutes.
Liberal
Charles Hubbard Liberal Miramichi, NB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Being from Atlantic Canada, Mr. Goudie, I'd like to deal with Newfoundland. As Mr. Martin has already said, you are the Honourable Joe Goudie, a former cabinet minister in Newfoundland. You were nominated and took on the role of Conservative candidate for the Conservative Party of Canada in the 2006 election.
Liberal
Charles Hubbard Liberal Miramichi, NB
Mr. Goudie, with that background, you must be very disappointed to find yourself involved in having to come and listen to what you heard this morning. To hear the director of the Conservative Party here having to leave the table, it must have been of concern to you.
You had an official agent, you had a campaign manager, and you had a legal adviser. When Elections Canada brought up this issue, you spoke with your legal adviser, and he or she said you should make sure that money, that in-and-out money, that money that was sent to you that you couldn't control, should not be part of your campaign report. Is that correct?
As an Individual
If I understand the question correctly, I sought legal advice on the matter of money in and money out following a public report by CBC television at home that four ridings were involved in this event that took place during the campaign. I did not seek legal advice on any other matter.
Liberal
Charles Hubbard Liberal Miramichi, NB
Mr. Goudie, Ms. Singleton was told when this money arrived that it could not be spent locally, for you directly, in your 32 communities in Labrador. Is that correct?
As an Individual
We have no idea.
Again, I remind you and the honourable committee that I personally was not aware of this until after the campaign was completed and not really in any detail until the news report came out in April. The money was not spent by us.
Mrs. Singleton and Mr. Barnes were both.... More specifically, Mr. Barnes, my official agent, was directed by a gentleman, Mr. Hudson of the Conservative Party of Canada, once funds had been transferred to our account.... It was explained that 60% of that amount could then be claimed on our election return--which seemed unusual, but nevertheless they were following directions--but that the amount of money transferred to our account would then have to be returned to the Conservative Party of Canada as soon as possible.
Liberal
Charles Hubbard Liberal Miramichi, NB
To clarify, if you gave somebody $10,000 and wanted it back and they could claim that $10,000 in the expense, which they didn't spend, do you mean to tell me you'd get $6,000 back from the Government of Canada as a result?
As an Individual
As I understand it, that was the implication of the explanation. Yes.