Evidence of meeting #86 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was friend.
A video is available from Parliament.
11:10 a.m.
As an Individual
You know, I didn't say that was the only reason he was invited. I gave three or four factors. When you're making a decision under a piece of legislation, every case is a little bit different. You look at the various factors you have in front of you and you make a judgment call as to whether something's the case.
I'm not quite sure if that answers your question, but basically there was no one factor that led me to my conclusion.
11:15 a.m.
Liberal
Nathaniel Erskine-Smith Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
Okay.
The other question I have is about implications for world leaders interacting. The Aga Khan is not your average lobbyist, of course. He's a spiritual leader of 15 million—
11:15 a.m.
Liberal
Nathaniel Erskine-Smith Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
He's a chair of a foundation that is a registered lobbyist, as I understand. It's not your typical situation, though. He is also a spiritual leader of 15 million Ismaili Muslims. When we have a situation of a world leader building bridges, and the goal is to increase friendship in many ways between these world leaders and to improve relations, do you think that a rule such as this...?
I'll use a hypothetical example. Theresa May invites the Prime Minister to her private residence and talks about free trade and has an agenda in talking about free trade, because the United Kingdom has just left the EU. Is Trudeau in accepting that gift of visiting that private residence a concern that we should, as the Canadian public, be concerned about?
11:15 a.m.
As an Individual
No. There are world leaders and then there are political leaders. This has been a very interesting exercise, because it raises all sorts of interesting questions.
Obviously, world leaders have to have relationships with each other, and it's a good thing for the country that they have relationships with each other. I think, in this case, the problem was that specific requests were being made for funding from the Government of Canada, but the Government of Canada has had, as I say in my report, a long, very good relationship with the Aga Khan. I tried to make comparisons between relationships with Obama, for example, and those sorts of things. You can have all sorts of interesting discussions around that, but the fact of the matter is that I think the Aga Khan is almost like a pope. That's the closest thing I could associate him with. In fact, he is the leader of a religious group. They have very interesting and good tenets. I learned a little bit about the Ismaili religion in doing this report and I found it quite interesting.
Sorry, I'm wandering off. I'm not sure quite what answer you're looking for.
11:15 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Bob Zimmer
Thanks.
Thank you, Mr. Erskine-Smith.
Next up, for seven minutes, is Peter Kent.
January 10th, 2018 / 11:15 a.m.
Conservative
Peter Kent Conservative Thornhill, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Happy new year and thank you, Commissioner, for attending today. As I said when you entered the room this morning, I think you deserve the lingering honorific, at least this close to your stepping down from office.
The Prime Minister has said he fully co-operated with you and your office through the year, but we learned from your report that after you began your investigation and made the initial invitation to the Prime Minister to meet with you to discuss the allegations or complaint against him, it took fully two months for him to make time to see you. Did you see that as somewhat less than full co-operation?
11:15 a.m.
As an Individual
No, given that he's the Prime Minister and he has lots of stuff on his plate.... He had travels and stuff. What can I say? It took a bit of time, but other people have taken similar amounts of time. I was getting documentation as well during that period, but that was the first face-to-face meeting I had.
11:15 a.m.
Conservative
Peter Kent Conservative Thornhill, ON
In that first meeting in April and then the latter meeting in October, you would characterize it as full co-operation, with no reluctance, no disputing any of the—
11:15 a.m.
Conservative
Peter Kent Conservative Thornhill, ON
Your report is thorough and detailed. As you say, it's an exceptionally detailed report, somewhat longer than most of the reports from your office over the last 10 years now, almost.
11:15 a.m.
Conservative
Peter Kent Conservative Thornhill, ON
It has the record.
Your findings in the four areas where you found that the Prime Minister clearly violated the act are very clear. He has yet to address with members of Parliament your report's findings. It was released by your office a week after the House rose, and the Liberal members—
11:15 a.m.
As an Individual
Believe me, I tried very hard to get that out as quickly as I could. In fact, I worked very hard that last couple of weeks to get it out before I was gone.
11:15 a.m.
Conservative
Peter Kent Conservative Thornhill, ON
I'm not finding fault at all, Commissioner.
Yesterday, as you probably know, the Liberal members of this committee voted against a motion to invite the Prime Minister to come to this calm and respectful setting to discuss your findings with the members.
11:20 a.m.
Conservative
Peter Kent Conservative Thornhill, ON
He said in a news conference yesterday that his only conversation needs to be with you. I'm wondering whether you feel, in retrospect, as a former commissioner, that the Prime Minister has a duty and responsibility, now that you have made these findings in “The Trudeau Report”, to address them with his fellow members of Parliament.
11:20 a.m.
As an Individual
I have the utmost respect for Parliament, but I think it's Parliament that decides the answer to that question. It's not for me, the former Ethics Commissioner, to say what action either Parliament or the Prime Minister should take. I would not wade into that.
11:20 a.m.
Conservative
Peter Kent Conservative Thornhill, ON
Still respecting the confidential aspect of remarks made to the Prime Minister that you don't refer to in your report, could you say whether, in general, any of his answers to you took less than 35 seconds—which, as we all know but the public may not know, is the length of time for the Prime Minister to answer questions in question period?
11:20 a.m.
Conservative
Peter Kent Conservative Thornhill, ON
I would guess that very few of them were less than 35 seconds.
11:20 a.m.
Conservative
Peter Kent Conservative Thornhill, ON
Right.
Were there any times when the Prime Minister requested to submit a written response or a correction of a response that he made during the interviews with you?
11:20 a.m.
Conservative
Peter Kent Conservative Thornhill, ON
Well, did he make any written...? Did he have any written correspondence?