Thank you.
Frankly, that's all I was after. Your chief financial officer, whom you selected and who apparently read the rules, had this proposal made from the Conservative Party and thought about it. It was informed consent—they signed for it—and it is regrettable that you didn't know about it.
On this issue of comparisons with respect to ethical standards, let me go to Mr. Caldwell. I'm not asking you to comment on the specific case; I'm just asking how this compares--whether it is better, worse, or the same as what happened to you.
I'm going to read you an e-mail. This is from the affidavit Mr. Goudie has mentioned. This e-mail starts off on March 16, 2006, a few months after the election. The first e-mail is from Lucy. I won't read the last name out of respect, but Lucy is the bookkeeper for the New Democratic Party of Canada. This e-mail says:
Dear Official Agent: Please find attached an invoice from the federal party. The original will follow by mail. It is our understanding that these radio ads promoted your candidate during the election period. Please forward payment to the federal party as soon as possible. The amount should be reported in the candidate's election campaign return.
--in other words, expensed at the local level.
Not very long later, on March 30, Phyllis, who is identified as the financial officer for this NDP candidate, writes back and says:
Hi Lucy, this invoice is not ours. Mindful about the extended campaign and limited budget, we were only able to take out a few ethnic ads, Chinese media
—all coordinated through somebody, the NDP B.C. Chinese media liaison.
A cheque of $1,500 for our portion will be forwarded to the Canadian NDP and cashed. Please check this, because this is really, really bad for our ceiling.
I'm assuming that means it's going to push them over.
Right away, boom—almost the next day, on March 31—there is an e-mail sent back to Phyllis by the bookkeeper for the New Democratic Party. I'll quickly read it:
Subject: Federal Party Invoices.
Dear Phyllis, we are told by the communication folks in B.C. that these radio ads, with the candidate's personal tag at the end, therefore [are] a local expense to be reported under the candidate's expense ceiling, regardless of who pays. For rebate purposes, we were asked to bill each campaign—in the case of Vancouver East, $2,612.
The good news is that the federal NDP party will transfer $2,600 to the federal riding association, as we agreed to pay for the ads.
We hope that you are able to squeeze this under the ceiling. Some expenses are not considered election expenses subject to spending limits, such as fundraising costs. Please have a look at the totals and get back to us if you think you have a problem.
Clearly there's been money transferred from the national NDP party to Libby Davies' riding. Then they demanded payment for an ad that the national party organized, produced, paid for; now they want Libby Davies' local campaign to absorb the expense.
How, sir, is that different from what happened to you?