Government Operations Committee on April 21st, 2010

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

Okay, and I appreciate that. I suppose that's of some interest.

For me, what I'm trying to establish.... You've stated that you did not lobby on behalf of others, and you didn't receive compensation based on that. I'm just curious, what is your current cashflow? You've talked about developing and trying to establish emerging energy sources, and different things like that, but I guess for us we're trying to get a sense as to how you make your money. Where's the current cashflow coming from? What does the business look like today? I think that's going to help us understand what business you may have had as it relates to the allegations that are before us.

[Patrick Glémaud]

Yes, and that's a great question.

First of all, it's easy for you to find out if there is any contract or funding agreement between the Government of Canada and GPG. My answer to that is zero, not a penny, from taxpayers has ever come into our pockets or into our bank account whatsoever. Second, we also have not received any funds from anybody whatsoever, for any lobbying activities.

The way we work our project, as simple as it is, is we enter into an MOU with a potential project developer or with a financier. For the project we are working on right now, the funds will be coming mainly from the U.S. And for the project in China, the funds will be coming mainly from China. We bring the expertise, we bring the know-how, and we bring also other partners who have other capacities.

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

I appreciate that. What confuses me is I hear that on one hand, and yet I hear media reports that tell us that on your website, Mr. Jaffer, at some point it said that you could secure support from the Canadian government. I'm just trying to align that statement with what we're hearing today, that you're going after other markets and other projects and it has nothing to do with the Canadian government. I'm just trying to establish maybe why the claim was put out there and why that was established.

I'm wondering if Mr. Jaffer might be able to answer this, because that's the confusing part for me, and I assume for some of my colleagues as well.

[Rahim Jaffer]

Right. To my knowledge, when we created the website I know that one of the things we tried to ensure was that we wanted to maintain that we had experience, obviously, from our backgrounds, dealing with government. But by no means do we want to confuse anyone that we could have any undue influence, because that is not the direction of our business.

At the same time, I know you asked particularly about the condition of our financial situation. When Patrick and I started this company, we put in a significant amount of capital of our own to build this business, and to date it's been extremely difficult, because when you want to build a new business you have to put in a lot of sweat, blood, and tears.

Obviously this whole episode that we're dealing with is not helping our business in any way. Even though we've done nothing wrong, of what we've been accused of, it has been a difficult year, given that we put all our own resources into trying to build a very strong foundation that has now been derailed to some extent.

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

Just so that I'm completely clear, I haven't seen it, but it was reported that on your website at one point it said that you would be able to secure support from the Canadian government.

[Rahim Jaffer]

I don't even recall that that was what it said, and—

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

I haven't seen that, but I—

[Rahim Jaffer]

—we would have never put that in there because that's not the nature of our business. So I would even say that those particular reports are inaccurate.

[Patrick Glémaud]

I can categorically tell you it is not on our website.

It was raised in one article, again by The Toronto Star, that it was in Mr. Jaffer's website, but it is not on GPG's website whatsoever. In our website, the only link we talk about is knowledge of government legislation and facilitate government consultation. And if you look at the Treasury Board policy on transfer payments, this is one of the cores of the policy, to facilitate communication and consultation between stakeholders such as potential recipients and the Government of Canada. And this is not a lobbying activity: it's an exchange of information, and it's a gathering of information. I would advise you to check that Treasury Board policy on transfer payments, and I hope you did before calling us to testify.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Thank you.

We now go to Mr. Martin for eight minutes.

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

You know what I really hate, Rahim, is you're making us all look really bad—seriously. I remember we were elected the same year. I remember you rode in here on Preston Manning's white horse, and you guys were going to clean up government. You were going to drive the moneylenders from the temple. It was very sanctimonious, and frankly you were vilifying so many people in those days, you and your party, you actually hurt a lot of careers.

And you also, frankly, in accusing everybody in Ottawa virtually in those days of being sleazy hog-troughers or whatever the terminology you used, added to the cynicism in the voting public about their democratic institution. So it's a little rich for you to be lecturing us today on raising the bar of ethical standards when it's you, Rahim, that we're here to talk about a paucity of ethical standards in your—never mind your personal life, I don't even want to know about that, but how could you not think that the work you're doing doesn't fit into the category of lobbying? You were around when we did the Federal Accountability Act. You know it as well as I do.

Your old website—you deny that it's there now, but we didn't just take this from The Toronto Star, we went to the website, which was still up and running, and it said things like that Rahim will help you “through his countless relationships developed from his former career as a parliamentarian”. Anybody, any client would read that and say, “Well, if I hire Rahim, he will help, through his countless relationships, develop my business.” I honestly don't know how, I don't know what's wrong with your ethical radar, personally, that some alarm didn't go off in your head and say “I'm crossing a line here.”

Before I let you speak, I also want to comment on this. You said you left that meeting with Gillani with the feeling that there was no synergy there. Well, you left him with a completely opposite point of view, that he had hit a gold mine here. He was excited. I mean, you left with a feeling of no synergy and a pocket full of cocaine; he was left with the opinion that you guys were going to be great business partners and it was full steam ahead, and next stop the PMO. That's a serious contradiction, though.

I'll ask you, you said you didn't receive any money for services rendered from any client. Did he give you that cocaine in terms of part of your payment for services to be rendered?

[Patrick Glémaud]

I am objecting to this type of question, Madam Chair. We came here, Madam Chair, with the understanding--

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Mr. Glémaud, calm down.

Mr. Martin, we are here to study the green energy fund. I do not think we should touch matters that have already been dealt with by the courts. So if you could stick to whether--

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

We're talking about fee for services rendered, Madam Chair, and that can take many forms.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Let's keep it at a professional level.

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Okay, if you won't answer that, then let me discuss--

[Patrick Glémaud]

Maybe you should raise these types of allegations in the public forum. You should raise them outside of this Parliament with privilege--

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Mr. Glémaud, please stay calm.

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Influence peddling is a serious criminal offence.

[Rahim Jaffer]

Do you have any evidence of that?

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

I'm making this statement. Influence peddling undermines--

[Rahim Jaffer]

You don't have any evidence of that, Mr. Martin.

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

--the most fundamental basic tenets of our democracy.

[Rahim Jaffer]

You're setting a new ethical standard right now, because you have no evidence of anything and yet you're throwing out these allegations.

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Your statement that none of your clients ever received any government grants and contributions is of no comfort to me, because you don't have to actually succeed to be guilty of influence peddling. You can be a lousy influence peddler and not bear any results. If you promise somebody that you can use your influence to further their personal private interests, that's the very definition of influence peddling. And it's a very serious offence, which is one of the reasons I actually didn't want you here today. I don't want you to be able to hide behind parliamentary privilege if in fact the investigation of your actions leads to criminal charges some time in the future.