Information & Ethics Committee on Feb. 26th, 2021

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

This is going to give us a lot to think about this weekend.

I want to speak to the issue raised when you said that it feels like fraud. Under charity laws that I've been looking into, it's possible.... For example, I supported a foster child many years ago. We got her picture and we got her story, but we knew that we weren't actually paying for that one child. We were paying for the village, and we were paying for development projects. That's very clear in the small print. Charities do make announcements of a specific thing, but then the money is spread over other needs.

What concerns me is that you went to raise money for this school. You brought a lot of people to the table, and you were shown what they said was your son's school. That seems to me to be a verbal contract. Did you say that three weeks before that—or was it 13 weeks before that—they had given that school to the Stillman family? What was the difference between when you were told that it was the school you had built and the other family was told that this school had been built for them?

[Reed Cowan]

There are a couple of points. When Craig Kielburger came to Salt Lake, he told all of our donors during a well-televised fundraising that they would be building schools, and that for every $10,000 and $12,000 raised, a school would be built, right? They were told that this is what it costs to build a school, and you are going to build a school brick by brick. It's part of their branding. When Marc Kielburger came and spoke to a huge group of Broward school students, it was, “You are building schools; $10,000 to $12,000 builds a school.”

Donors think, “Okay, if we raise $100,000 here and $120,000 here....” You do the math and you think that on the ground there should be this much, brick by brick. A brick is a physical object that actually takes form to build a school, so you think it will be there. I am beholden to the people I engaged that those schools should be there, right? I have on video many Free the Children staffers saying, “This is Wesley's school—this school”, so why, in recent weeks and months, was that school photographed bearing the plaque of Esther Grodnik with the Howie Stillman Foundation?

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

You can't verify all the schools that were built. That's the question.

[Reed Cowan]

I can't. I can't verify that the promises that were given, which were that for every $10,000 to $12,000 that you help us raise, brick by brick you will build a school in Kenya. Do the math.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

I just wanted to clarify that, because I guess it's this issue that you were invited and your family was there on the first anniversary after your son's passing, and they opened the school and said, “This is your school.” To me, that sounds very much like a verbal contract, a commitment. From that, you fly away, back to the United States, and start to fundraise more. You were a big fundraiser for the WE organization, were you not?

It was based on that verbal commitment that this was the school for your son: “Look, you've seen it with your own eyes.” You brought television crews. You documented it. This was the school. Did that not give you the energy and the drive to go and help to bring more people and more corporations into the WE organization in the United States?

[Reed Cowan]

It did, without question.

In the documentary I did, I literally have Roxanne Kielburger saying, “This is Wesley's school”, and then I say that when you give money to an organization a continent away, you wonder if it's real, and then I put my hand on the brick, and it is. It's real. It's in a movie. I got it.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Thank you very much for this.

[The Chair, Conservative, Chris Warkentin]

Thank you, Mr. Angus.

We'll turn to Mr. Carrie now.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Cowan, if my voice is shaking a little bit it's because I really am struggling a little bit on what to say. I've been a member of Parliament for 17 years, and I don't think I've been moved more by somebody's opening of their heart to a committee before. All I can say is that I feel an extreme sadness for what has happened to you. I want to thank you for your courage and leadership. I'm a new member to this committee, and what you've done today for me, and I want you to know this, is to really explain the importance of the work that we're doing here, following up on and making sure that the legacy of your son Wesley is properly looked after.

What saddens me most is the effect that someone like you being a victim of fraud has on good people, because with the goodness that you wanted to put out into the world, you were able to bring in other people who wanted to do good, who wanted to spend their time and make a difference, and we need more good people in the world. We need more good people to do things and take action, and so I want to thank you for that.

I don't have a lot of questions, but I was wondering—because I'm really starting to feel the effect that this horrible situation is going to have not only on you but also on a lot of other people who have been connected to this charity—if you could you explain to people watching today why it is so important that we do a good job.

You said earlier that you don't know who the bad guys are. We don't know who all the bad guys are either. We're starting to see a picture and a pattern being formed here. Why is it so important that we do find the bad guys in order to restore trust? We need more transparency and trust in the system, as you were saying, because, into the future, we need more of the good work that you have shown you can do.

[Reed Cowan]

If my understanding of the holdings of Free The Children and WE Charity is correct, it's a huge lot of money. I see this as an opportunity, once things are cleaned by the refiner's fire, to make sure that those monies go.... To speak to the importance of this, there are kids in Kenya right now who have something to teach us, who are wonderful, who are rich in spirit but poor in access to all of the things that Craig and Marc Kielburger have advocated, on mike, that they should have, so it's a great opportunity, if all of you do your job right, to make sure that all of the holdings are accounted for and earmarked, that all of the agreements that have been made are honoured, and that the money that was made, which was not mentioned in the documentary that was referenced today, is reflected in what's on the ground in Kenya.

I don't believe it's there. When you pull the finances and pull the disclosures, I'm not seeing what could have been accomplished with the force of that money, and I'd love to see it being accomplished.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

I think all of us would.

I don't think I have a lot of time, but I just want to say, sir, that it's been an honour to have you in front of us here today. I know it was extremely difficult, but thank you, and we will do our best to get to the bottom of this.

[The Chair, Conservative, Chris Warkentin]

Thank you, Mr. Carrie.

We'll turn to Mr. Fergus, if Mr. Fergus has some final questions.

[Greg Fergus, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thank you very much for being with us today, Mr. Cowan. Several committee members were deeply touched by your testimony.

My question is quite simple.

You said you are always looking to make things better in Africa, in Kenya. Based on your experience with WE Charity, I'd like to know if you have any advice for people who, like you, want to do good and do their part to help those much less fortunate than them.

What advice can you give them so they can ensure they don't end up in a situation like yours?

[Reed Cowan]

In addition to what I've already said, I'll tell you a quick story. On our trips I met a Masai warrior named Wilson. Wilson taught me that the first step every morning, in warming up charity and kindness that can spread out to changing and saving lives, was doing this: Jambo, rafiki. jambo. I joked back at Wilson that in the gym culture in the United States, we would call that his “kindness calisthenics”.

What advice would I have for my donors and all of the kids you see in the WE Day videos who are out and excited, excited to do good for others? In the absence of answers, while you all do your work to find out who the bad guys are, if they are bad guys, do not forget this: Jambo, rafiki. Do your kindness calisthenics, because this translates to this translates to this. Those out there who start here and go here and then project it outward to the world can honour not only my son but the beautiful kids who I have felt for years his legacy served.

[Greg Fergus, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Mr. Cowan, I sincerely hope that the memory of your son brings you comfort.

Mr. Chair, I have no further questions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Chris Warkentin]

Thank you, Mr. Fergus.

Mr. Cowan, thank you so much for coming to our committee today. I thank you for your moving testimony that revealed your heart and your betrayal. As a father, I can only imagine the pain you have endured and then have continued to endure over the last number of weeks. On behalf of all of us, thank you for your testimony.

Colleagues, I will suspend the meeting for just a couple of minutes. We'll let Mr. Cowan leave. Then we'll come back to discuss some committee business.

The meeting is suspended.

[The Chair, Conservative, Chris Warkentin]

Colleagues, we'll call the meeting back to order.

We have just a couple of things that I think we need to discuss. We are still in public. This is not an in camera discussion. I want to remind colleagues of that.

There are two points. First, Mr. Victor Li has agreed to our arrangement with regard to the questions we will submit to him. He will supply us with an opening statement.

There are a couple of things with regard to how we would do this. My view would be that we would wait for his opening statement to be provided to us. Then we would supply him with the questions. The questions would then be able to reflect the statement he made or if there are issues that he brings up. That's if this is the appropriate arrangement.

Second, if in fact we agree that this should be the arrangement, then we have to ask him to supply that statement at a specific time. I guess we're just looking for the deadline with regard to those questions to be advanced to Mr. Li.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

I have a point of order.

[The Chair, Conservative, Chris Warkentin]

Go ahead, Mr. Angus.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

I'm sorry. I tried putting my hand up, but I don't have that little icon.

I have two things on this issue. I would rather just get the questions to him. I feel that we really need to get this study done. This is carrying on and on and on. We could end up playing tag with him for another month or so.

I'm sure his opening statement's great. I have a number of specific questions and I think some of what Mr. Cowan raised in terms of finances and getting a picture of them. I would prefer to get my questions in and have them answered so that we can move on. When we get a statement, we can decide whether or not we're going to have him come in person.

I would like to get the questions in soon and I would like to have a bit of a deadline so that we can get them back. The clock is ticking on this study.

[The Chair, Conservative, Chris Warkentin]

Yes. I'm seeing some nodding heads. There seems to be agreement with that arrangement.

I guess the next point would be is the deadline we would make for questions to be submitted to him, if that is the agreement.

Mr. Barrett, we'll turn to you.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

I would say soonest for questions to be submitted to him, because we want those replies soonest. Today being the 26th of February, I think questions should be transmitted to him or to his representatives by a week from today at the latest—so if I'm saying “latest”, then that day, and then I think we would have two weeks or less for a reply.

To Mr. Angus's point about the length of the study, we're going to hear from witnesses on the March 8, so ideally we can wrap this up in March, if possible. That way, we'll have his replies before the end of March, and then we can make a determination as to whether we do in fact need to hear from him in person in April. Perhaps, following his replies, we won't need to do that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Chris Warkentin]

Thank you.

Madame Gaudreau, we'll turn to you.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Given that the Kielburger brothers are appearing before the committee on March 8, we are all prepared to submit our questions to Mr. Li. Considering also that Mr. Li was aware of everything and that he surely keeps his documents close at hand, I believe that one week should be enough to send him our questions. Therefore, I would suggest no more than one week.

The Kielburger brothers will be appearing on Monday. I think Mr. Li should give us the documents a few days after they appear so that we can quickly ascertain whether or not we need him to appear before the committee.

Time is of the essence. We are not rushing things at all. We have been very lenient and patient, but we need to wrap this up. I feel it's very much in order this way.

[The Chair, Conservative, Chris Warkentin]

What I'm hearing is a growing consensus to have the questions submitted to the clerk so that they can be submitted to Mr. Li's representative for March 5, for a response from him by March 12.

Mr. Dong, we'll turn to you.