Government Operations Committee on June 19th, 2008

[Meili Faille, Bloc, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

You told the investigators that you were there to provide information to reporters and not to be quoted. With respect to previous conversations or the diplomatic report on the meeting between the representative from Mr. Obama's office and the consul general, is it possible that there could have been some elements in the report that were not to your liking?

[Ian Brodie]

I think the timeline that's set out in Mr. Lynch's report is quite clear: there were conversations with people on Monday the 25th, and conversations in the budget lock-up on the 26th. I didn't receive the report from the Canadian consulate general in Chicago until later on that week. As a result, the investigators and Mr. Lynch drew the conclusions that they did about what I said at the lock-up, and what the basis was for that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Thank you very much.

We'll go to Mr. Moore.

[James Moore, Conservative, Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC]

Thank you very much.

Thank you as well, Mr. Brodie, for coming before the committee again on less than 48 hours' notice.

I do think it's important, because it's been tabled but not yet read, because the epicentre or purpose of this entire discussion at this committee is the Privy Council report, section 5.1, which deals with Mr. Brodie on this subject. I think it's important. I will just take a very brief second to read this. It says in the concluding statements:

There is no evidence that Mr. Brodie disclosed any information related to Senator Obama or his campaign. Any comments Mr. Brodie may have made during the lock-up did not reveal any information tied to the diplomatic report, of which he was made aware only on February 28. There is no evidence that Mr. Brodie disclosed any classified information.

So I ask the simple question that we heard a number of times in the House of Commons: have you in any way deliberately tried to help or harm Senator Barack Obama's campaign?

[Ian Brodie]

No.

[James Moore, Conservative, Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC]

Senator Hillary Clinton's campaign?

[Ian Brodie]

No.

[James Moore, Conservative, Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC]

Senator John McCain's campaign?

[Ian Brodie]

No.

[James Moore, Conservative, Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC]

Governor Romney's campaign?

[Ian Brodie]

No.

[James Moore, Conservative, Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC]

While we're at it, Ralph Nader's campaign?

[Ian Brodie]

No.

[James Moore, Conservative, Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC]

All right.

With regard to the handling of secret and classified information that comes into your disposal as chief of staff, with regard to this matter and the U.S. presidential campaign, tell us, to the degree that you can, about the procedures and responsibilities you have with regard to that information.

[Ian Brodie]

Thank you for that question.

I did discuss this in some detail with the investigators during the course of our two meetings. From time to time, as a result of my responsibilities, the Department of Foreign Affairs or the foreign policy staff in the Privy Council Office do have occasion to share diplomatic reporting with me on a variety of issues, and I appreciate that.

I would say I have a good familiarity with the classification system that's used to protect different categories of diplomatic reporting that we get from our missions overseas. It has been my experience that information of the sort that was in the report that came from the Chicago consulate general to me on February 28 is typically classified at the confidential or secret level.

So on February 28, when I finally received the text of the Chicago consulate general's report, I must admit it was a busy day. As you'll recall, I think I spent that morning here at this committee, asking to be heard on the Soudas investigation, and the committee declined to hear from me at that point. But I had spent the morning sitting here watching that committee hearing unfold.

I received the report from Chicago. The date and time are listed in the appendix of Mr. Lynch's report. Although I read the text of the report carefully, I assumed that it was classified at the confidential or secret level. It wasn't marked that way, and I must admit, I guess I didn't read the top routing information on the message. I assumed it was like other diplomatic reports I had seen in the past on the same sorts of subjects.

I handled it as if it were a secret document, printed it, read it, and then disposed of it by putting it in the confidential information shred box in my office here in the Centre Block. It was later taken by the authorized folks from the office, shredded and pulverized, destroyed.

So I read the report. It took me probably five or ten minutes to read it over a couple of times and absorb the report, and before I had even put it down, I walked over to the shred box and disposed of it securely.

That's my normal practice in dealing with diplomatic reports.

[James Moore, Conservative, Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC]

Whenever there's a transition in a foreign government, whether it's incoming Mr. Sarkozy or incoming Prime Minister Brown—they have a campaign coming up, of course, in Great Britain, and in the United States there will be a transition in power from President Bush to whoever succeeds him—of course there is research that's undertaken by governments in terms of the impact of whoever the next head of government may be in different countries. Who does that research, and to whom is that research handed?

[Ian Brodie]

I think that's a question that might be more fully answered by officials from the Department of Foreign Affairs. However, as I'm told you heard from folks early this morning from the Privy Council Office, because of the important relationship between Canada and the United States there are a variety of diplomatic efforts going on in the United States to try to understand the context of the ongoing U.S. presidential election and to prepare for the transition.

From what I understood during my trip to Washington on February 25, it seemed to me that the political officers and the advocacy staff of the embassy and Ambassador Wilson were fully engaged in trying to track the results of the election. I had gathered that pretty much all the consulates were involved in this effort as well, including the staff in the Canada-U.S. and North American division here at the Department of Foreign Affairs.

Because of the importance of the relationship across the border, from what I gather, there's a substantial effort under way to try to understand and interpret the results of the election for us.

[James Moore, Conservative, Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC]

Section 5.2 of the Privy Council's report addresses the issue of Ambassador Wilson. I remember that at the height of this, when we were debating, if it can be called a debate in question period, about Ambassador Wilson, people were calling for Ambassador Wilson to be fired.

The finding of the report, in the final sentence of section 5.2, is: “There is no evidence that Ambassador Wilson disclosed any classified information.”

Does the government continue to have confidence in Ambassador Michael Wilson?

[Ian Brodie]

Again, that's a question best addressed to the Prime Minister or the Minister of Foreign Affairs during question period, but as far as I can understand, the answer is yes.

[James Moore, Conservative, Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Thank you.

Mr. Angus.

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

Thank you, Mr. Brodie, for coming again on short notice. We certainly appreciate your diligence in coming before us and answering questions.

I was intrigued by your opening statement, because I thought it might be based a bit on a misunderstanding of what you're being asked to discuss here.

You said you deny anything to do with the leaked memo and that this was an investigation into your role in a leaked memo. In fact, the report is about the issue of alleged verbal disclosure.

Did you read the full report, Mr. Brodie?

[Ian Brodie]

I read the sections that involved allegations about me closely. I can't say that I read the other sections of the report, the sections about Ambassador Wilson, quite as carefully. I read the sections about me quite carefully, yes.

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

You didn't think the others were all that relevant?

[Ian Brodie]

I read the entire report, but as I say, I paid close attention to the sections about me.