Information & Ethics Committee on Dec. 2nd, 2010

[Serge Ménard, Bloc, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

The consequence is that an attempt had been made, but an attempt is not an offence.

[Carole Freeman, Bloc, Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, QC]

There was no offence.

[Serge Ménard, Bloc, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

An attempt to commit a crime is an offence, whereas an attempt to commit a crime under a provincial statute is not technically an offence. And it is not hard to understand why that is the case. In fact, the criminal provisions of provincial statutes cover all sorts of things. Are you going to punish someone for an attempt at speeding which did not succeed? It covers all kinds of minor things. It also covers more major offences.

However, in this case, lawmakers did not feel it was appropriate to make this a crime, whereas under the Criminal Code, any attempt to commit a crime is a crime.

[Carole Freeman, Bloc, Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, QC]

In conclusion, then, the events that occurred did not involve either bribery or a violation of any statute.

[Serge Ménard, Bloc, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

That's correct.

[Carole Freeman, Bloc, Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, QC]

That is what we should conclude.

[Serge Ménard, Bloc, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

That is how I understand it.

[Carole Freeman, Bloc, Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Ménard.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Ms. Boucher, you have time for one quick question.

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

I have been listening to you from the beginning, Mr. Ménard. As you know, I also worked in Quebec and I know that you are a leading expert, something that it is important to recognize.

However, there is one thing that bothers me. We often tell women they should break their silence when they are caught up in a vicious cycle. Why did you have such a low opinion of yourself as to let Mr. Vaillancourt have such ascendency over you? You talked about your integrity and Mr. Vaillancourt's integrity.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Sorry, but there is a point of order.

[Carole Freeman, Bloc, Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, QC]

I'm sorry, but I have a point of order.

I think Ms. Boucher's allegation that Mr. Ménard had a low opinion of himself is insulting. That is absolutely unacceptable and inappropriate in this context.

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Then I'll put my question a different way.

[Carole Freeman, Bloc, Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, QC]

You would do well to rephrase it.

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Why did Mr. Vaillancourt have such ascendency over you? You had no less integrity than he did, correct?

[Serge Ménard, Bloc, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

That's an excellent question. I'm glad you asked it, because women who are asked to disclose certain things may be asking themselves the same question and may feel that I set a poor example. But I think these women will also understand that it's hard for someone to disclose something when it's his word against the other person's word.

I made an objective judgment, and based on my objective judgment, I was sure about what would happen afterwards. I was sure that Mr. Vaillancourt would vehemently deny everything and make all sorts of moves to try and discredit me. Perhaps I didn't have the courage to face that. As I see it, that would not have been courage, it would have been temerity.

Furthermore, I don't have a low opinion of myself. As I said, I was aware of the fact that I had a good reputation in the legal community and with journalists. However, among average citizens, my profession was not, unfortunately, one that inspired the greatest confidence.

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Ménard.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

That, colleagues, concludes the rounds of questions. We are getting very close to 5:30.

I am going to ask Monsieur Ménard if he has any closing remarks or comments he wants to make to the committee at this time.

[Serge Ménard, Bloc, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

I believe I clearly explained the situation. I see that no one doubts the fact that the events I recounted did in fact occur. I ask that you show some understanding. It is important to realize that, under the circumstances, had I denounced Mr. Vaillancourt, I would have had to take up a battle from which I would not have escaped unscathed. The worst thing is that, since he had not committed any offence and would most likely not have been charged, he probably would ultimately have been seen as being more credible than myself. I therefore felt the best solution was to just move on, wait until there was evidence, and contribute to the government's efforts to investigate the situation in Laval.

However, I would just like to reiterate that this investigation did not allow it to secure evidence to support our suspicions. The fact is that a lot of administrative suggestions were made.

If individuals who disclosed this sort of thing have to face this kind of questioning subsequently, perhaps we should think of a way to encourage them to make such disclosures. A lot of potential whistleblowers might not like to receive the treatment that I have received, and this could dissuade them from making such disclosures.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Monsieur Ménard, on behalf of all members of the committee, I want to thank you very much for your appearance here today.

As I pointed out when the meeting started, Monsieur Ménard was not a compellable witness. He could have declined our invitation if he had wanted to. He voluntarily decided to attend.

Again, we want to thank you for your appearance, sir.

Since there is no other business before the committee, I will now adjourn the meeting.