Evidence of meeting #23 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 snowdy.
A recording is available from Parliament.
June 9th, 2010 / 4:35 p.m.
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
I don't really know how to best use my eight minutes now. My mood keeps changing on this.
One of my questions was going to be whether you spoke to the Ethics Commissioner's office. So to what extent did you talk about what you knew, or what you believed to be true, with her or with her office?
4:35 p.m.
Partner, Cassels, Brock & Blackwell LLP
The first call, I believe, was in advance of when the Ethics Commissioner's office called Mr. Snowdy. I wanted to make sure that the Ethics Commissioner's office was not hung out to dry and did not know where to go to source the information, which was the subject of the letter.
My first call was...I don't want to say it was a courtesy call, but it was a call of assistance to the general counsel at the Ethics Commissioner's office. I know Ms. Bélanger. I've worked with her on other matters, obviously—
4:35 p.m.
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
Not to interrupt you--sorry--but did you invoke solicitor-client privilege at any time during your conversation with the Ethics Commissioner?
4:35 p.m.
Partner, Cassels, Brock & Blackwell LLP
They weren't asking me anything that would impinge on privilege. So it was not necessary to do so, no.
4:35 p.m.
NDP
4:35 p.m.
Partner, Cassels, Brock & Blackwell LLP
Yes.
Just to help you, sir, the RCMP has obviously asked that discussions with them not be divulged. They have an ongoing investigation.
4:35 p.m.
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
Did you invoke solicitor-client privilege with the RCMP when you spoke to them on any details surrounding the case?
4:35 p.m.
Partner, Cassels, Brock & Blackwell LLP
Again, they weren't asking any questions of me that would impinge on solicitor-client privilege, so it was not necessary to invoke that principle.
4:35 p.m.
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
Would you agree that if you did divulge to them anything that you refused to divulge to us, you would have voluntarily forgone your solicitor-client privilege? You can't apply it in a selective fashion, right? You can't invoke it with this party and share information with that party, or you--
4:35 p.m.
Partner, Cassels, Brock & Blackwell LLP
I might have missed the first part of your question. Can you try that again? Sorry.
4:35 p.m.
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
Actually, I don't have time. It's just....
Navigator has raised its ugly head here again. What was Jaime Watt's role? Is he representing Ms. Guergis from a public relations point of view? Is that what you understand? Why would she go to Navigator?
4:35 p.m.
Partner, Cassels, Brock & Blackwell LLP
From my call with Mr. Watt, I understood that he had been approached to assist them, and he wanted to better understand the situation in making his determination as to whether he would take that retainer.
4:35 p.m.
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
Based on the information Mr. Snowdy gave you, were your concerns that you passed along to your client, the party, more of an ethical nature or did they encroach on the possibility that there was criminal activity? In other words, were you worried that what Mr. Jaffer and Mr. Gillani were doing may constitute influence peddling, which is a violation of the Criminal Code, and more than just illegal lobbying, which is just an affront to our rules around here?
4:40 p.m.
Partner, Cassels, Brock & Blackwell LLP
Well, I don't agree that it's “just an affront”, but in any event—
4:40 p.m.
Partner, Cassels, Brock & Blackwell LLP
Perhaps I can answer this way. As the information was coming forward from Mr. Snowdy, I recognized that it was all material, and it raised the basis for the need for an investigation, an investigation, frankly, that I could not conduct.
In truth, Mr. Martin, I didn't start parsing out what was criminal or what could have been regulatory in nature. I simply knew that it was information that I could not keep to myself. It had legs, and it had credibility, and it was reliable such that further investigation was warranted.
4:40 p.m.
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
Did the commercial enterprises that you thought Mr. Jaffer and Mr. Gillani were promoting include Dr. Chen and the Chinese connection, or were you dealing more with Mr. Wright and Mr. Harvey?
4:40 p.m.
Partner, Cassels, Brock & Blackwell LLP
Interestingly enough, Dr. Chen did not come up in my first discussion with Mr. Snowdy. It was Ms. Guergis who mentioned Dr. Chen to me, and that's when I answered one of your colleague's questions about her being a source that raised concern.
4:40 p.m.
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
You don't see her as your client, even though she's a member of the Conservative Party.
4:40 p.m.
Partner, Cassels, Brock & Blackwell LLP
I was not in a solicitor-client relationship with Ms. Guergis, no.
4:40 p.m.
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
Did she indicate that she had been meeting regularly with Dr. Chen to further his commercial interests?
4:40 p.m.
Partner, Cassels, Brock & Blackwell LLP
She didn't use the word “regularly”, but she did indicate, in what turned out to be an inconsistent statement, that the only time she'd had a business dinner to assist or be with Rahim was when she met Dr. Chen.
4:40 p.m.
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
Were you aware that he had travelled to China, using the diplomatic passport, on behalf of Dr. Chen, without her?
4:40 p.m.
Partner, Cassels, Brock & Blackwell LLP
I'm aware of that now. I did not know that on April 9, when I spoke to Ms. Guergis.
4:40 p.m.
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
Did the subject of the missing passport come up with Ms. Guergis at all?