Foreign Affairs Committee on April 1st, 2010

[Jim Abbott, Conservative, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

I understand that the meeting was very raucous and vitriolic. There was a lot of contentiousness at the meeting. It seems to be inconsistent with the other understanding, which is that at that meeting he chose to repudiate his own decision to pay out the contentious grants. I wonder if you could help to clarify this, because it goes to something that is rolling around--I think very irresponsibly, considering that this was the death of an individual--which is the idea that this meeting led to his demise. I think it's important to have that clarification.

[Aurel Braun]

Are you asking me, sir, to respond to that? Perhaps I could say a couple of words, and then others could join in.

This is one of the very distressing aspects of the process that has taken place. Floating out there you have ludicrous, irresponsible allegations directed against us, innuendoes that are absolutely horrific and that are totally at variance with the reality of what happened.

As chair, I have always asked people at these board meetings to treat each other with civility. I call on people to make sure they use parliamentary language and that individuals have an opportunity to speak. At this meeting, which took place on January 7, the meeting began with Mr. Beauregard being extremely concerned about his wife's health. Mr. Beauregard asked me to do something that we normally do not do at board meetings; he asked that he be allowed to leave his cellphone on. The reason was that his wife was in hospital. I immediately said to him, “Sadly, I understand all too well these kinds of problems and this kind of situation. I will absolutely make that exception. Please leave the cellphone on, and if there's anything we can do to help, we will do that.”

The meeting itself was civil. There was a disagreement over a vote about reappointing one of the members of the board who was a foreign member, but that was a normal disagreement and involved two democratic votes. The afternoon was entirely civil. There were no vicious attacks. There was no atmosphere of chaos or stress. We took vote after vote. The president and the rest of us spoke civilly to each other. The president, in fact, voted with the majority of the board on a number of these votes, including one of the last votes, and that was the vote about repudiating these three grants, with which he fully agreed.

Therefore, these accusations that have been floating about are not only totally false, they're incredibly hurtful. One needs to ask what the possible purpose is of these accusations, since they entirely misrepresent the facts.

Other members of the board who are here can also speak about the atmosphere that prevailed on that day and how that day concluded on a civil note.

Thank you.

[Jim Abbott, Conservative, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

Thank you.

[Aurel Braun]

Mr. Matas or Mr. Farquhar might want to say a few words.

[Brad Farquhar]

Yes, the meeting in January was my second board meeting. My first one was last June.

The meeting in January, as Mr. Braun said, was much more civil than the June meeting. The June meeting was unbelievable. It was an incredible introduction to this board and to the organization.

I remember saying to my wife when I got home from that January meeting that it had been a much more civil discussion than I had experienced at the first board meeting. I think it was quite constructive. Sure, there were disagreements. We disagree on things regularly, but there was certainly no acrimony.

[Jim Abbott, Conservative, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

Mr. Farquhar, last Tuesday you gave us one example of inconsistency in the testimony of the witnesses. You said you had a second example?

[Brad Farquhar]

The other example is not so much of consistency with their testimony--and it's been alluded to here--but it's that last May, before I attended my first board meeting, some of the first correspondence I received from the centre was a package of bylaw amendments that were proposed to be discussed at the June meeting. Mr. Beauregard circulated them in advance of the meeting for us to consider.

I read them over, and it was clear that some of them were housekeeping items. But one amendment would have gutted the responsibilities and the role of the executive performance review committee, and it would have placed the entire responsibility for his performance review criteria on him. I sit on another board, and last year, in the period leading up to this, we had been through a review of the performance review process. The proposed changes I saw in that document were completely outside the accepted norms of good governance.

I went to that meeting prepared to oppose those changes. As it happens, none of those amendments were considered at that meeting because we didn't get to that part of the agenda.

[Jim Abbott, Conservative, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you very much, Mr. Abbott. That's all the time we have.

We're going to finish off the first round with Mr. Dewar, for seven minutes, sir.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

Since I only have seven minutes, I'll focus my questions on Mr. Gauthier and maybe one for Mr. Braun. I have nothing against the other two guests, but their experience and the roles they play aren't pertinent to my questions.

So Mr. Gauthier, I'll start with my disappointment that today we learn that the requests this committee had made to you, as the former acting president, to bring forward documents with regard to contracts that recently were signed off by the board or by you--I'm not quite clear by whom--were not brought to committee. I think we did ask, in our request for your appearance, that you bring with you the contracts that had been signed off.

I'll just list them. The audit with Deloitte & Touche has already been mentioned. I think you secured legal services from Borden Ladner Gervais, and you hired the communications firm Prima Communications. And there was another, what I'll call a private investigative firm, SIRCO Solutions.

I wonder why you didn't bring those contracts with you. Or did you bring them with you today?

[Jacques P. Gauthier]

First, I must confirm that I received the request that you made reference to. The request, which is signed by the chair of the committee, was dated March 29, and it was sent to the office in Montreal. As I'm sure you know, I ceased to be president of Rights and Democracy last Friday. There is a new president.

I did visit Montreal on March 30 to help the new president understand a number of matters and to transfer files to him. Only that afternoon was I given a copy of an unsigned letter asking me to bring a number of documents.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

So up until that point you had no--

[Jacques P. Gauthier]

Can I please finish?

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

I just want to confirm. So up until that point you had no idea a request had been made?

[Jacques P. Gauthier]

There was reference, I believe, in some of the committee meetings--not a motion--to the fact that this would be forthcoming.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

But you acknowledge the contracts exist.

[Jacques P. Gauthier]

I would very much appreciate it if I could finish the answer.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

I only have a little bit of time, so you can appreciate that. I don't want to--

[Jacques P. Gauthier]

The answer is important, because you're suggesting something that is not accurate.

What I want to say, sir, is this. Yesterday I was, for the first time, able to consult the lawyers of the centre to ascertain what my rights and responsibilities were. Here is the answer to your question. I will give you an undertaking now to provide each and every one of the documents that you refer to, plus one that you did not refer to.

The contracts were with Samson Belair Deloitte, SIRCO, Ogilvy Renault--hired to do part of the investigation over the last months--Borden Ladner, and Prima Communications.Two of those contracts will be delivered after the first three because the investigations will be completed over the next weeks, and both Deloitte and SIRCO have asked that the contracts be delivered upon the completion of their investigation, which I understand is a matter of weeks.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

I really do have limited time, and you appreciate this. Can you tell us--

[Jacques P. Gauthier]

My response is that I will provide you with them.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Fine. That's great. Thank you very much for that. I appreciate that.

How much were these contracts worth, for instance, the SIRCO contract--which I'm calling a private investigative firm and you can call it something else--and with Prima Communications? Can you tell this committee how much those contracts are worth, or give a ballpark figure?

[Jacques P. Gauthier]

Looking at all of the contracts that I've referred to, I cannot answer the question because the accounts have not yet been received.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

I was just asking for an estimate, because you did engage these firms. I'm just wondering if, as the acting president of the time, you had an idea of how much they were going to cost. Was it more than $10,000?

[Jacques P. Gauthier]

I cannot give you... It's certainly more than $10,000.