Evidence of meeting #13 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was questions.
A video is available from Parliament.
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
Thank you very much, Madame Gaudreau and Mr. Tassé.
Now we move on to Mr. Angus for two and a half minutes.
12:50 p.m.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'd like to follow up on my good friend, Mr. Sorbara, who told us that—
12:50 p.m.
Chartered Professional Accountant - Chartered Accountant (Ontario - Quebec), University of Ottawa, As an Individual
Mr. Angus, will you be speaking in English or in French?
12:50 p.m.
Chartered Professional Accountant - Chartered Accountant (Ontario - Quebec), University of Ottawa, As an Individual
Very good.
12:50 p.m.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
I want to follow up with my friend Mr. Sorbara, who told us that the Clerk of the Privy Council insisted that we question the financial capabilities of WE. I think that was really important. That was at the same time that the Prime Minister said he was concerned about the appearance of conflict of interest, so they held the WE project back.
Having read the 5,000 pages of documents, I don't see anywhere in those 5,000 pages that the questions that Mr. Shugart put about financial capability were ever asked, and no questions were asked about the potential conflict of interest that the Prime Minister found himself in.
Do you think that if they had taken those two weeks and done that work, maybe they would not have gotten themselves in the trouble they did?
12:50 p.m.
Chartered Professional Accountant - Chartered Accountant (Ontario - Quebec), University of Ottawa, As an Individual
It's cutting off on me. Could you just repeat the last 30 seconds of what you were saying?
12:50 p.m.
NDP
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
12:50 p.m.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
Thank you.
Mr. Shugart apparently said that they were going to look into the financial viability of the group before signing off. The Prime Minister also held off signing off because he said he was aware of issues of conflict of interest, yet we don't see in the 5,000 pages of documents any evidence that those questions were asked.
Those were questions that had to be asked. We don't see that they were asked. Do you think that the Prime Minister may not have got himself into as much trouble if they had done this due diligence?
12:50 p.m.
Chartered Professional Accountant - Chartered Accountant (Ontario - Quebec), University of Ottawa, As an Individual
It's possible. It would definitely have helped; that's one thing for sure. I'm surprised that they would not have acquired the information, but there might be some explanation.
To a forensic accountant, it always comes down to whether there is an explanation. If there's no explanation, then we have an issue. If there is an explanation that explains why....
12:50 p.m.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
Thank you.
My final question is on your really important point about bypass routes for certain actors. We see in the documents that Craig Kielburger contacts Minister Ng directly and Minister Chagger directly. He contacts Minister Bill Morneau and talks about his family. Then those ministers contact their public servants.
However, Craig and Marc Kielburger were not registered to lobby. Their government relations director did not register to lobby. Mr. Kielburger says they didn't need to lobby because they were technically volunteers. They were volunteers who had the power to fire their own board of directors.
You say we have rules in place, and I agree, but how do we ensure that people like the Kielburgers can't use their friendships with key ministers to get these deals off the ground when there's no respect for the lobbying code?
12:50 p.m.
Bloc
Marie-Hélène Gaudreau Bloc Laurentides—Labelle, QC
Mr. Chair, I missed the first 25 seconds of what was said.
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
We're going to try to get Mr. Tassé back online here. Mr. Tassé, we can't hear you right now. There appears to be something wrong with your sound. Are you on English right now?
We have our ITs working on it right now, colleagues.
Mr. Tassé, they're going to give you a phone call and see if we can work this out. I've stopped the clock, and we'll wait for his answer, Mr. Angus.
1 p.m.
Conservative
1 p.m.
Chartered Professional Accountant - Chartered Accountant (Ontario - Quebec), University of Ottawa, As an Individual
No, I don't, unfortunately. I'm sorry.
1 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
It's a technical issue, Mr. Angus, so I'll allow you to pose the question again. This will be the final question and final answer for Mr. Angus.
1 p.m.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
I'm really interested in what you said about the issue of bypass routes that can be used by certain actors. We have a lobbying code, and it's very strong, and we also have the Conflict of Interest Act.
However, we noticed in the documents that Craig Kielburger reached out directly to Minister Ng. He reached out directly to Minister Chagger. He wrote personally to Bill Morneau. He bypassed the normal systems, but he wasn't registered to lobby, and because of his close relations with them, they were very comfortable.
That project and his ideas were then given to the civil service, yet he was not registered to lobby. He says technically he's just a volunteer. Do you think we need to have clearer rules about lobbying? With clearer rules, these things would have been recorded, there would have been a better process and the civil servants, I think, would not have been compromised in the WE scandal.
1 p.m.
Chartered Professional Accountant - Chartered Accountant (Ontario - Quebec), University of Ottawa, As an Individual
I totally agree.
Let's say Mr. Kielburger might be telling the truth when he says he doesn't need to do so because of the fact that he's volunteering. Well, that means there is a loophole in the law. He found a loophole. We want to avoid that, so we need to amend the act and the lobbying code. We need to do something. That's probably what Mr. Dion will do, if that is the case.
If not, probably Mr. Kielburger is actually reading the law in his own way, and he's misreading it. It's one of the two.
If it's true, I would consider it a worst-case scenario. It means there was a loophole, and he found the loophole and he's using it. If that's the case and there is a flaw in the law, then you need to change it dramatically. You need to amend it in order to prevent that from happening.
1 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
Colleagues, it's 1:02 at the moment. We're past the time of our scheduled meeting. Unless I see unanimous consent to continue with one more round, we'll adjourn the meeting. Is there consent to give two more questioners...? I don't see any dissent.
Mr. Warkentin, we'll continue with you for five minutes.
Oh, Mr. Tassé, do you have another 10 minutes?
1 p.m.
Chartered Professional Accountant - Chartered Accountant (Ontario - Quebec), University of Ottawa, As an Individual
Yes, I do.
1 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
Mr. Warkentin, it will be you and Mr. Fergus, and that will bring our meeting to a close.
You have five minutes, Mr. Warkentin.