Evidence of meeting #9 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was code.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:20 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
And in the last fiscal year, 2009-10, you received $7.1 million, but only used $5.7 million.
12:20 p.m.
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
That's correct.
12:20 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
It seems that consistently you have come in under budget.
12:20 p.m.
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
Yes, but this was a new office, as of almost three years ago now, and a lot of staffing needed to be done.
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
You don't have to be defensive. It's a good thing to come in under budget.
12:25 p.m.
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
Sure. I'm not defensive, I'm just explaining.
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
I'm asking for information purposes. It seems as if you are coming in well under budget and your actual spending seems to have risen only modestly. It seems that from the 2007-08 year you had $5.1 million and in 2009-10 you used $5.7 million.
12:25 p.m.
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
Yes, that's correct.
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
Forgive me, I don't have my calculator here, but is that growth in line with the broader budgetary increases that have occurred across government?
12:25 p.m.
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
I'm not quite sure where you're at.
The increase in the expenditures relates to the increasing staff.
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
Okay. So as your office has grown into the role that was mandated in the Federal Accountability Act, you have taken some time to reach capacity and slowly that has increased?
12:25 p.m.
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
That's right, and we're just about there now.
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
Good. All right.
I'd be prepared to turn the remainder of my time over to anybody who needs it. Anybody?
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
12:25 p.m.
Bloc
Ève-Mary Thaï Thi Lac Bloc Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC
Commissioner, based on what you stated earlier, the letter sent to you by the Prime Minister contained no allegations. Furthermore, there was no document appended to it. There was a letter, but no allegations and no attachment. Did I understand correctly?
12:25 p.m.
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
That is correct.
12:25 p.m.
Bloc
Ève-Mary Thaï Thi Lac Bloc Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC
I am going to quote a question that my colleague for the riding of Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord recently asked in the House of Commons:When will the government confirm that it is these allegations of influence peddling that were forwarded to the RCMP?
The answer given by the minister of Foreign Affairs was the following:Mr. Speaker, I want to remind the members of this House that the Prime Minister acted as soon as he was made aware of these allegations. He forwarded the documents and the allegations to the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner so that she could take the necessary action; he also referred them to the RCMP. The Prime Minister did the right thing under the circumstances.
You have just denied having these allegations and documents in your possession. The minister of Foreign Affairs says that you have them in your possession.
12:25 p.m.
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
I'm not sure which allegations we're dealing with.
The original letter from the PM....
12:25 p.m.
Bloc
Ève-Mary Thaï Thi Lac Bloc Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC
Commissioner, we are not just talking here of a letter, but also of documents forwarded to you. The minister of Foreign Affairs says that the Prime Minister did exactly what he had to do. He provided you with the documentation and the allegations. You say that, in his letter, he says that an individual had knowledge of certain things. In the House, it was stated that the Prime Minister was made aware of the allegations and that he provided them to you. You are denying this information?
12:25 p.m.
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
I am saying I got a very short letter that said there were some serious concerns, and that if I wanted to find out more about them, I could contact this person.
12:25 p.m.
Bloc
Ève-Mary Thaï Thi Lac Bloc Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC
The answer provided in the House by ministers was that the documents were provided to you by the Prime Minister's Office, but that is false?
12:25 p.m.
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
I didn't make that statement in the House. I received a letter.
12:25 p.m.
Bloc
Ève-Mary Thaï Thi Lac Bloc Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC
No, I said that the ministers had, in the House, answered that the Prime Minister has supplied documents to you. But this is false. The Prime Minister did not forward documents to you. That is what I want to know.
Did he forward documents to you, yes or no? Are the ministers lying to us in the House, or do you have the documents and...
12:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
I think I understand.
Madam, the rules in this committee are applied the same as in the House, and to suggest that any one specific person has been lying is unparliamentary. Maybe you could withdraw that word.