Government Operations Committee on Oct. 3rd, 2024

[Stéphane Cousineau]

Mr. Chair, I want to clarify the reality of what the consul was approving, which was essentially ensuring that his operation was not impacted. We wanted to make sure that the plan was fine for his operation, that there was no impact. He was actually approving the process of proceeding, not the purchase of the actual new residence. Mr. Clark was not—

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

I'm afraid that's all we have time for.

Mrs. Block, go ahead, please.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Ms. Nicholson, I join my colleagues in expressing a deep skepticism with regard to the explanation that you have provided to this committee today. I want to go back to a response you gave with regard to a question that was asked today. In response to the question about who asked for the update email sent on July 25, you stated that it was the office of the associate that requested it. Is that correct?

[Emily Nicholson]

Yes, to the best of my knowledge, that is correct.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Okay. Are you the chief of staff in the office of the associate? Is that the office you are referring to?

[Emily Nicholson]

Yes.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

So, you're telling us that your own office asked you for the update. Is that correct?

[Emily Nicholson]

No, Mr. Chair. I apologize for any confusion. It was our office requesting that the leads, my colleagues in the property branch, provide the chronology.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Okay. Thank you for that. There's a lot of confusion being created here today.

In fact, I want to go back to the email you sent on July 25. In that email, you state that the reason for this update email was a conversation between Minister Joly's chief of staff, Peter Wilkinson, and the chief of staff of the deputy minister, Karolina Guay.

I'll quote what you wrote at the top of your email:

Peter,

Following your conversation with Karolina and further to my email of June 17 below, I am writing to provide additional information on the purchase of a new Official Residence for the Consulate in New York....

I think we may have found the subject expert that you referenced in your testimony earlier in this meeting in regard to who advised you on what should be in the updated email. That would appear to be Mr. Wilkinson, in conversation with Karolina Guay.

I guess I'll give you one more opportunity to tell this committee: Did anyone in the minister's office—anyone at any level in the minister's office—directly or indirectly ask you to provide an update and to include this information in it?

[Emily Nicholson]

Mr. Chair, as I mentioned in my opening statement, the email I provided on June 17 was an initial email to the minister's office—

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

That's not what I asked. I asked you this: Did anyone in the minister's office ask you, directly or indirectly, to provide the information that you included in this summary?

[Emily Nicholson]

Mr. Chair, the answer is unequivocally no. There was no instruction on what to include. We were providing information to the minister's office. The minister's office had asked for the rationale and the business case for the sale of the original property, purchased in 1961, and asked if the head of mission was aware—

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Okay. I do have the email in front of me.

When did the conversation between Peter Wilkinson and Karolina Guay take place?

[Emily Nicholson]

Mr. Chair, with apologies, I don't have that information top of mind. I would need to go back and consult with the individuals in question, as I wasn't in that conversation.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

It certainly would have happened sometime between June 17 and the email that you sent. I'm going to assume that it probably took place much closer to July 25 than to June 17.

I want to ask you, Ms. Nicholson, if you will table all communications, emails, written documents or phone calls between you and any member of the real property branch of Global Affairs Canada, Peter Wilkinson, Karolina Guay and anyone working at the consulate in New York City from June 1, 2024, to October 3, 2024.

[Emily Nicholson]

Mr. Chair, if it's within the purview of the committee, I'm more than happy to provide whatever the committee needs in order to do its work.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

I can assure you that it absolutely is within the purview of a standing committee to ask a witness to do that.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Sousa, go ahead, please.

[Charles Sousa, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Thank you for appearing before us, and thank you for your composure. I know that this is not always an easy task. You're doing a phenomenal job.

Ms. Nicholson, you know that you are under oath.

Did you make the decision to buy this property?

[Emily Nicholson]

Mr. Chair, I did not make the decision to buy this property.

[Charles Sousa, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

In the correspondence that you wrote, did that indicate that someone had agreed to purchase the property, or did that...? Is that a correction, or are you trying to clarify what has taken place?

[Emily Nicholson]

Mr. Chair, I'm not totally sure I understand the question.

[Charles Sousa, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

In your subsequent email, you were.... I've heard the term “correcting the record”, that you've been correcting the record. Are you correcting the record or are you clarifying what took place?

[Emily Nicholson]

Mr. Chair, that is in fact a better use of words. The July 25 email was, as evidenced by the length of the email, far more thorough, far more comprehensive in its coverage and based on the information available at the time.

As I said earlier in my opening remarks, in my role I provide the best available information provided to me at the time of the request.

[Charles Sousa, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Is it appropriate for anyone from government who's proceeding to make a major transaction of this nature on behalf of Canadians—saving Canadians money, no less, in this transaction to the tune of $7 million—to then advise or consult with the head of that particular residence, who's going to be impacted by the change?

Did you advise for the purpose of acknowledging a sale, or was it acknowledging the process by which that person or department would be impacted?