Information & Ethics Committee on July 17th, 2024

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Good morning, everyone.

I call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 125 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(3) and the motion adopted by the committee on Tuesday, May 7, 2024, the committee is resuming its study on the compliance of a minister with the Conflict of Interest Act.

I've explained to the witnesses about the earpieces. I would remind all members to make sure that their earpieces are in the appropriate places on the table so that we're not causing damage to the interpreters. I want to thank you all for your co-operation on that.

Before we begin, I will go to Mr. Brock on a point of order.

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

Given the nature of the anticipated evidence and the controversy surrounding it, I will be requesting that both witnesses be sworn in or affirmed to tell the truth.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Thank you, Mr. Brock.

You're moving a motion to have the witnesses swear an oath or affirm.

Is there any objection to that?

Mr. Naqvi, go ahead.

[Yasir Naqvi, Liberal, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

I will object to this. We've had this conversation before in other committees with Mr. Brock on the other side asking for something similar. I've always made the point that this is not the practice in parliamentary committees. It is assumed that all witnesses will be telling the truth. This is not required by the Standing Orders either. I think it sets a dangerous precedent.

I think it really undermines the witnesses, that they somehow will not be sharing the truth if they are not sworn in or affirmed, so I request that this motion be denied.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Thank you.

Just for clarification's sake, Mr. Brock, you moved this on a point of order. You can't move it on a point of order. I've been notified of this by the clerk.

I see that we have no consensus on this.

I do see Mr. Fisher's hand. I also have Mr. Green and then Mr. Villemure.

Effectively, there's no discussion to be had on the motion at this point because it was moved on a point of order. I will not allow this to happen, so I don't see any further discussion on this.

I see that Mr. Villemure's hand is down.

Mr. Fisher, do you have...?

[Darren Fisher, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

I was going to say exactly what you said, Mr. Chair.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Thank you.

We will now go to our witnesses, who are here as individuals.

Mr. Anderson, I want to welcome you to the committee.

Welcome as well to Kirsten Poon, who is here by video conference.

Ms. Poon, you have up to five minutes to address the committee. Go ahead, please.

[Kirsten Poon, As an Individual]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Chair and members of the committee, thank you for inviting me today.

I would like to take this opportunity to set the record straight. There has been considerable conjecture and innuendo in the media over the past couple of months. I understand why that is the case, but I'm here to provide you with the facts. I'm confident that a fair reading of those facts will confirm that the public conjecture is misplaced.

I have known the Honourable Randy Boissonnault since 2009. I count him as a close friend. Over the past 15 years, we have occasionally worked together. We did so before he was elected to public office. After the 2019 election, when Mr. Boissonnault was again a private citizen, we collaborated on projects in 2020 and 2021.

One of our clients included the Edmonton International Airport, whom I have acted for since 2018, before they'd even met Minister Boissonnault. Both Xennex and, later, Navis Group registered as lobbyists in compliance with the requirements of the federal Lobbying Act and the Lobbyists' Code of Conduct. Minister Boissonnault was a shareholder of Xennex, but it's important for this committee to understand that he was not involved in its lobbying activities. He did not help me engage or set up meetings with the federal government during his time as a private citizen, in compliance with his cooling-off period. The core of Xennex and the core of Navis Group is strategy consulting.

In the fall of 2021, Minister Boissonnault was re-elected to public office. At this time, Xennex ceased its day-to-day business operations. To address his compliance obligations under the Conflict of Interest Act, Mr. Boissonnault fully disclosed the Xennex operations. He appointed me as the director of Xennex to manage his business. This arrangement and my own lobbying activities have been regularly and thoroughly disclosed to the Ethics Commissioner. Since the fall of 2021, Xennex has been inactive and merely holds investments. Xennex has not lobbied the federal government. My responsibility as the director is limited to annual returns and tax filings.

I continued my work with the Edmonton International Airport. Here again I would note that my work with the airport predates the engagement of Xennex and Minister Boissonnault. This airport work is conducted through my own company, Navis Group. Minister Boissonnault has no financial interest in Navis Group, and has not done anything to advance the work of Navis Group. He has made no introductions and never intervened on our behalf or on behalf of our clients.

The media speculation has focused on two issues. I want to speak to them here.

First, in March and June 2022, I took meetings with the staff in Minister Freeland's office. During this time, Minister Boissonnault served as the tourism minister and the Associate Minister of Finance. The staff I met with reported to Minister Freeland and did not report to Minister Boissonnault in any way whatsoever. To use the language of the Lobbyists' Code of Conduct, these staff would have had no “sense of obligation” to me, even had they been aware of my connection to Minister Boissonnault. To be clear, I in no way told staff about this connection or otherwise used my connection to Minister Boissonnault to advance the file. I reported these meetings in the Registry of Lobbyists at the time. I'm confident that a fair review of the facts will conclude that I've complied with all of my obligations under the Lobbying Act.

Second, Minister Boissonnault has made public disclosures about outstanding business revenues from my company, Navis, to his company, Xennex. To be clear, the payments received by Xennex from Navis since Minister Boissonnault's re-election are related to contracts received while Minister Boissonnault was a private citizen, before his re-election. He has no economic interest in, has not been involved in and has not received payments for any contracts following his re-election. The suggestion or innuendo that Minister Boissonnault somehow had an economic interest in the outcome of the work that was before the government while being a minister of that government is entirely without merit and factually incorrect. The amount owing to Xennex was an obligation entirely unconnected to the outcome of the engagement. No intervention that Minister Boissonnault made would have affected the amount he received.

I am proud of the business I have built. My success is due to my own hard work. The conjecture that Minister Boissonnault is the reason for any success I've had is frankly false and disheartening. I have never lobbied Minister Boissonnault, his staff or his associates, and he has not helped me in any of these matters. I take my compliance seriously, as does the minister, and I am proud of the work I have done.

I look forward to your questions.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Thank you, Ms. Poon.

Mr. Anderson, you have up to five minutes to address the committee. Go ahead, please.

[Stephen Anderson, As an Individual]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Let me start by saying how daunting and difficult it is to have one's personal and professional reputation smeared and diminished by those in a position of power and authority, with little to no recourse for a response. While I deeply respect and appreciate the role that parliamentarians, and especially this parliamentary committee, play in holding governments to account and protecting our democratic values, much of what has gone on in relation to this file has felt far more political, personal and targeted than those noble goals. Reputation takes a lifetime to build and can be destroyed in seconds, certainly by people in this room.

I will be the first to admit that not all of my business ventures since 2006 have worked out, but as a handful of you know, that's the nature of being an entrepreneur. What's been 100% consistent across every business I've been part of is that we've been ethical, legal and completely above board. I resent...and will take every option at my disposal to defend myself accordingly.

This great country we call home is divided and made up on a solid foundation that we are all created equally and are all afforded the protections of being Canadian. We may come from different political backgrounds. We may live in a Conservative riding, Liberal, NDP, or Bloc. But one thing that's paramount is that Canadians of all walks of life, even in a Liberal riding, go to church, and that, yes, we have gay and transgender friends who live in a Conservative one, such as me in Alberta. That doesn't make any of us more powerful or inferior than another. We are all treated equally. I have a fundamental belief in equality, and equality for all.

As hard as this may seem for, or to be accepted by, certain members of the committee, we have to call this for what it is. It appears from the beginning of these proceedings that the only fault you are looking for is to blame a successful business person who has spent their life protecting and defending the disadvantages of visible minorities, as well as people of different backgrounds.

As many of you are aware, I have not, will not and have never communicated with any parliamentarian in relation to business. This is highly unethical and was not the case. The Ethics Commissioner has ruled on this in the past few weeks.

Canada has been a champion on the world stage, from open business to free enterprise to equal protections for all people regardless of their background. I resent any connection to the opposite.

When it comes to Global Health Imports, a company I founded with Minister Boissonnault during a time when he was neither in cabinet nor in the House of Commons, this was absolutely the case. I'm glad to see the Ethics Commissioner has reinforced those points.

To the members, let me reinforce the following.

The company was founded by us to provide clients, including government like the City of Edmonton, with access to personal protective equipment at a time when it was both critical and challenging. Mr. Boissonnault has not had anything to do with the business since he was re-elected to the House of Commons in 2021. Given the challenges we faced during COVID-19, we were introduced to a variety of clients in health care in Canada, the U.S. and overseas.

The ongoing litigation in the state of California, which has been recently publicized, while it is complicated and has ties to GHI, has nothing to do with Mr. Boissonnault. Mr. Boissonnault and I have been in touch a grand total of six times since he was re-elected, each time about birthday wishes or some trivial personal matter.

Finally, with regard to the infamous text message featured by a Global News story about “the other Randy”, I hope the members of the committee can understand that this was an unfortunate autocorrect suggesting it was Randy.

On a final point, I am happy to share those messages and the correct name of the individual in the text with the committee members in camera only. I ask this because, after the incredible turmoil I have endured as a result of this story, the person in question is in a personal situation where media exposure could cause even more serious effects to their lives and their family around them. I'm sure the members understand. I have lost not only family but also a long-term relationship due to what has come out.

With that, I am happy to take any questions.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Thank you, Mr. Anderson.

We now move to the first round of questioning, six-minute rounds, and start with Mr. Barrett.

Mr. Barrett, go ahead, please.

[John Brassard, Conservative, Barrie—Innisfil, ON]

Mr. Anderson, who's Randy?

[Stephen Anderson]

As I said in my opening remarks, I would be delighted to share that information with you in camera only, simply based on the turmoil that I have gone through in my personal life.

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

Sir, that's not how this works. You're obligated to provide fulsome answers to the committee.

I'm going to ask you again, who's Randy?

[Stephen Anderson]

“Randy”, as I said in my opening statement, was an autocorrect.

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

Okay.

Who are Shawna and Felix at Global Health Imports?

[Stephen Anderson]

Shawna Parker was in our shipping department. Felix was the account manager for the Quebec government.

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

In 2022, who were the partners at GHI?

[Stephen Anderson]

The September 2021 federal corporate registries had me as being provincially registered. It was both me and Minister Boissonnault.

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

According to text messages we have from you, from September 6, 2022, Randy and Felix were to have a partner vote on a wire transfer to your business. It reads, “So we are game tomorrow? Or what do we expect will be the delay tomorrow. I am sending email to Randy and Felix right now, but I know if I send this and we miss tomorrow, it will be done, they will have a partner vote on this.”

It's a partner vote on a multi-million dollar deal. That “Randy” is not an autocorrect. That's Randy Boissonnault. Is that not correct?

[Stephen Anderson]

No.

Mr. Chair, I respect the question; however, at Global Health, we had two companies: Global Health Imports and Global Health Care Solutions.

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

How many “Randys” at GHI have ever participated in partner votes?

[Stephen Anderson]

At Global Health Imports, up until September 2021, it was Mr. Boissonnault.

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

Then you replaced him with another Randy.

[Stephen Anderson]

As I told you, it was an autocorrect for another company. I would certainly share that with you if you would like to go in camera.