Evidence of meeting #17 for Government Operations and Estimates in the 40th Parliament, 3rd session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was gillani.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Patrick Brown Conservative Barrie, ON
Why do you think some people are trying to inflate the claims that Mr. Jaffer and Mr. Gillani have allegedly made?
As an Individual
I've given up trying to think of how you people operate up here. Obviously it becomes a sensationalistic endeavour. How can we paint the angle on this to whatever advantage it suits whomever at the time? A classic example is obviously that for the last couple of months, people have been screaming for Ms. Guergis' termination, and this week it's a love-in, so take your pick.
Conservative
Patrick Brown Conservative Barrie, ON
I can tell you that it certainly gives me confidence to know that the types of individuals who claim to have access to government and claim to have special back-door access to the Prime Minister's Office are the people who are clearly facing a door slammed in their face.
I think what we've seen in Ottawa is that we investigate lobbying. The benefit of this attention is the fact that we've seen some tremendous changes in Ottawa. It's encouraging to see that characters like Mr. Gillani can't find access through whatever nefarious means they may attempt.
As an Individual
I think the voters in Edmonton slammed the door on Mr. Jaffer, not the Prime Minister.
Conservative
Patrick Brown Conservative Barrie, ON
Well, I think clearly Mr. Jaffer's attempted lobbying career was short-lived, so clearly it was shut closed by the Prime Minister as well.
I think one of the benefits of--
Conservative
Patrick Brown Conservative Barrie, ON
One of the benefits of this investigation has been that it's highlighted that we now have a lobbying commission with a budget of $4.6 million. Do you think Mr. Gillani knew that under the new changes put forth by the Federal Accountability Act, not registering as a lobbyist could have resulted in fines of up to $50,000 and possibly jail time? Do you think he understood the criminal repercussions of what he might have been boasting about?
As an Individual
Sir, from what I've seen of Mr. Gillani, just as with any person operating this type of scheme, the law is irrelevant. It's like wondering why the gangbangers don't register their guns. It's the same principle. Mr. Gillani doesn't care what laws are in place. He's not working under the law.
Liberal
Liberal
Siobhan Coady Liberal St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL
Thank you very much.
I have just a couple more questions, if you would be so kind.
You talked earlier about your relationship with HD Retail Solutions. That was, I think, the company that hired you to do an investigation. Is that correct? Was it HD Retail Solutions?
Liberal
Siobhan Coady Liberal St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL
You've been involved with that company for how long?
Liberal
Siobhan Coady Liberal St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL
You said earlier, and I'm going to quote you directly now, “Some of the most outlandish things were coming true.”
Now I'm holding here an email--and it's been made public--from the company that you were working on behalf of, HD Retail Solutions. Mr. Gillani says, “Thanks for the the opportunity”. Then Mr. Gillani is saying that we've got a commitment from him on Monday and that he he believes we'll have the $5 million commitment in writing next week. It goes on to say that it's repayable at 2.4% interest over a period of five years, and repayable based on triple net profits.
My point to this--
As an Individual
There's a line at the end of that. I just wonder if you are going to finish reading it or not.
Liberal
Siobhan Coady Liberal St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL
I'm a good Catholic girl, but it says it is an effing good deal, a great deal. Thank you for putting me in that awkward position.
The point I want to make here is that at the beginning of this you said there was privileged access, special access, being given, and clearly the client that you represented was that, but I want to go back to a point that we were talking about before. You talked about Mr. Hamilton and said that you have met with him several times since. When we unfortunately ran out of time, you were starting to describe some of what you were discussing in those meetings.
We established the first one and what you were discussing. It was along the lines of, “Could this happen? Yes or no?” You said that in the next meetings you were able to have a more forthright discussion with him. Could you describe those discussions, please?
As an Individual
We touched on the intricacies of the scheme, who within potential law enforcement would have purview to investigate those matters, and why I didn't.... Most prominent on that list was IMET, which is the integrated market enforcement team of the RCMP, and why I didn't take that matter to the RCMP directly myself.
Liberal
Siobhan Coady Liberal St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL
Okay. Was there anything else? You had four meetings, so....
As an Individual
Mostly it was information with respect to the mechanics of the scheme. I identified some previous Gillani victims to him. They were casual meetings. One was in the lobby of the office. I was just touching base with him.
Liberal
Siobhan Coady Liberal St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL
On what dates did these meetings occur? You're pretty good at note-taking.
As an Individual
I saw him yesterday for about.... Oh, I'm sorry; I'm mistaken. I saw him on Monday.
Liberal
Siobhan Coady Liberal St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL
You saw him on Monday of this week. That's interesting. Okay.
