Evidence of meeting #7 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 letter.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Bloc
Carole Lavallée Bloc Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC
Was Mr. Mulroney still in power? Was he still prime minister at the time?
Bloc
Carole Lavallée Bloc Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC
OK. During the 10 years when you were having dealings with GCI and GCI was having dealings with Mr. Mulroney, why was GCI providing money to Mr. Mulroney? What contracts was he owed money for? You arranged some, when the Progressive Conservatives were in government.
As an Individual
No, Ma'am. Sorry, I have to repeat myself again.
This was all agreed upon, in my understanding, already in the early eighties, that GCI would do the business and look after Mr. Mulroney when the time came that he was no longer Prime Minister and he could work with them. So I took it in that basket. This is why I was somehow shocked when--
Bloc
Carole Lavallée Bloc Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC
Well, you certainly worked with him, because when we make a list of the contracts that you arranged, it is lengthy.
Let us talk about Airbus. In a $1.8 billion contract, you earned $20 million American in commission, about 2%. Then, your company, IAL, was paid $3.9 million Canadian in commission by Thyssen for the armoured vehicle factory. Then there is a Coast Guard contract worth $26 million. IAL got $888,000 and GCI got $353,000, or about $1 million. There are others, of course, but we do not have the time to list them all today. We will have the opportunity to do so in a future meeting. Give or take, you made about $25 million in a few years.
To sum up, under the government of Brian Mulroney, you obtained contracts for your clients worth $2 billion, and you and your companies took in $25 million in commissions, thanks to your friend the former Conservative Prime Minister of Canada. So the $300,000 that you paid to Brian Mulroney were less than 1.5% of the commissions you received. To get to 2%, we meed to see what GCI paid him. Have I understood correctly?
As an Individual
Ma'am, first of all, as I said earlier, IAL is not my company. That's number one. Number two, the commissions were not for me; they were for GCI. This is why the other day I gave you some interesting correspondence between Mr. Moores and Mr. Strauss. For sure you have seen other documents there.
Let's make this very clear. My business was after the agreements had been made. And think about it. Mr. Sinclair Stevens came to Germany to negotiate with Thyssen. Mr. Sinclair Stevens came to Bavaria and negotiated with MBB together with Bob Brown. Mr. Sinclair Stevens saw Franz Josef Strauss.
So I had only to do one thing: make sure we had Mr. Pelossi and the trust company move that money there, and then make sure it would come to an account, from where it would go.... At the beginning this trust business was merely a joke. Mr. Pelossi was in custody, and I received a call, “What if MBB sends the first money to an account for me?“ All the garbage was deduced. The bank had even sent it back to MBB and said, “What is it? This account is impossible.” Then they told him that yes, it's correct, it's from Mr. Schreiber.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
Thank you, Mr. Schreiber.
I'm looking at the clock, and I want to see if we can let you know what I think we can do in the remaining time. I want to hear from Mr. Tilson, followed by Mr. Martin, followed by Mr. Hubbard. We'll try to do that. We're going to give them their time.
Then, and I hope all those who are in the room here will listen carefully, the committee has to go in camera to discuss future meeting dates and witnesses. We do have to have a report and probably a vote. I'm going to ask, after I excuse the witness, that everyone who is not part of the in camera proceedings—that's members and their authorized staff—should exit the room immediately.
We'll start the meeting as soon as that happens. I know that members want to go scrum, but if we do our business quickly, you'll have ample opportunity before question period for that. So I'm going to ask members, as soon as this room is cleared, to start our meeting. We need to make some decisions.
Let me move quickly now to Mr. Tilson.
Conservative
David Tilson Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON
Mr. Schreiber, you have indicated to the committee that there have been conspiracies by the Liberal government--and Mr. Cotler's role in this--by the Conservative government, and by the German government.
Conservative
David Tilson Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON
Okay. I don't know what that means.
Can you tell us, when you say there are conspiracies, what that means?
As an Individual
It started early in 1995, I found out later on, approximately in May, when people from the justice department, and the RCMP, by the way, through the Canadian embassy contacted the people in Augsburg, the prosecutors, and made them aware about the developments in Canada—you may recall the book On The Take and all the things—long before the letter of request from Canada or from Germany went to Switzerland. From then on they met from time to time. For example, as you may be aware, I have about nine complaints against the RCMP people, that they investigated in Switzerland, violating Swiss sovereignty, introducing witnesses.... Mr. Pelossi was asked the first time by the guys in Augsburg in July 1995.
What it was all about, what I later on saw, is that really under the times of the Liberal government, the justice department, with the support of the RCMP, was very keen to get support and help from the people in Germany in their case against Mr. Mulroney in Canada...Frank Moores and myself, related to the letter of request. This is how it started.
In the meantime, Minister Nicholson right now...he refused to look at a letter from the Swiss minister of justice telling him what's going on in Germany.
The German supreme court has decided there was no fraud in Thyssen, no fraud on the Saudis, and there was no bribe on Mr. Pfahls. And all the same things are still in the record of the case.
So I strongly believe that even if you will not agree with everything the Liberals want--an inquiry or whatever--you will agree with me on one thing. It is not right when the Canadian Minister of Justice tolerates that the German government--that means the people in Augsburg--lie constantly to the Canadian courts. And here's the reason. You may not believe this, but I have to say this. When we asked to change the records of the case, the answer from the Germans was, “We cannot; the case for Mr. Schreiber was put to rest, and we can only open it when he appears.” But when he appears he goes into custody, and then you'll see all the complaints from the human rights commission and other organizations in Europe. People in Germany were between seven and 11 years in custody and never got a day in court. This is why I say, why can't we do...and this is the other lie under the treaty, when the minister says, “I am obliged under the treaty to send Mr. Schreiber to Germany.” It's a mere lie. The treaty says the parties are not obliged to send nationals.
Now I ask you, sir, as a Canadian, should Canadians not have the same reciprocity, the same privileges, as the Germans? If you want to have a German in Canada, the Germans will say no, we will try him in Germany for you. This is exactly what is in the treaty. If Canada would treat me the same way the Germans treat their nationals, they would try me here; they would prosecute me here in front of a Canadian court. I would be happy to do this, to begin tomorrow.
Conservative
David Tilson Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON
Is that what this is all about, this whole thing before this ethics committee? You're the centre of attention in this thing, the public inquiry, the RCMP investigation back some time ago. Is that what this is all about, that you have felt that you've been wrongly treated by the Germans?
As an Individual
In part, yes, sir, and I'm really satisfied especially that you raise this question. Would you not agree with me that when you look at all the mess the Conservative Party members, including myself, have had for the last 12 years with this horrible thing the Liberals did when they started this investigation with Allan Rock...? I told him in a letter, I don't care about your apology; I'll see you in court.
Don't you think that I could really expect, when the Conservative Government came to power, that they would do exactly what Mr. Mulroney, by the way, said when you saw my last letter to Prime Minister Harper, where I'm coming from? This is a matter that is in the interests of each and every Canadian, that fundamental justice takes place. I think Canadians should have the same quality of citizenship that other people have around the world.
When you leave tomorrow on a business trip or on vacation abroad, I can show you a scenario where you could be in the same position I am.
Conservative
David Tilson Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON
I have one more question, Mr. Schreiber, and then I'll pass it on to Mr. Hiebert.
This $2.1 million that was paid by the federal government to Mr. Mulroney as part of an out-of-court settlement--it was about 10 years ago—
Conservative
David Tilson Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON
The settlement was over an investigation by the RCMP and the justice department into allegations with respect to kickbacks from you. So the government of the day really thought the whole matter was cleared up, which is why, they say, they paid $2.1 million. Ten years later, here we are again.
My question to you is, what was all that about?
As an Individual
Sir, when you look at that situation, I think we could go out of here hand in hand and have the same—
As an Individual
—understanding. There's a saying in Germany: we agree on something.
I have not the smallest clue anymore about what's happened. Let me say this. Stevie Cameron was a police informant. If she really was, the feeling was the sergeant was entitled to speak to her. But he was fired. Now, is she or is she not? If she's not, who are all the others who spoke to her and did not get fired at that time? And what did they really know?
May I tell you something? He had to sell hotdogs, and his officers had to sell hotdogs, to get the money for a lawyer. He gave out little pins with a Canadian justice scale and his RCMP number. When we had discoveries with him, he gave this pin as a gift to me and said, “Mr. Schreiber, I apologize for what I have done to you. I don't know what to say.” Wait until they come here. This is all crazy.
And your colleague, who was so much.... Allow me, please, to say this too. I really am trying to be fair as much as I can. But when he speaks about my letter, it was not the first letter I was asked to.... I was even asked to sign an affidavit, which was phoned by Mr. Mulroney. I would not touch this field too much anymore; otherwise it may not be in the interest of Mr. Mulroney.
But anyhow, I hope you understand what I said. This is so crazy, this whole thing, and the point is...and I can only hope that you believe what I'm saying. I have to pinch myself once in a while and look at this whole thing and think it's real.
Conservative
Conservative
Russ Hiebert Conservative South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Schreiber, I'm concerned about some of the answers you provided a few minutes ago, when you said you were willing to sign anything you were given.
You've basically indicated to this committee that the July 20, 2006, letter is not one that you believe or think is true, but you were willing to sign it anyway. It makes me wonder what other letters you've signed that you didn't believe or are not perhaps true.
My most important question to you, sir, is are you not concerned that you have perjured yourself, once, perhaps twice, maybe many times in the past, based on your willingness to sign, say, or nearly do anything to avoid extradition?