Evidence of meeting #4 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was million.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:15 a.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer
That combines the two costs, the civil case as well as the investigation case.
11:15 a.m.
Conservative
11:15 a.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer
Okay. The investigation case, which I thought was the question being asked, was less than a million dollars on its own. For the total, maybe combining the two, it's very possible that it would be around a million--
11:15 a.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
This number of a million dollars dates back to December of 2008. Is the investigation still ongoing?
11:15 a.m.
Conservative
11:15 a.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer
I would have to get that information.
11:15 a.m.
Conservative
11:15 a.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer
I can provide that within 48 hours to the committee.
11:15 a.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
So 48 hours. Okay.
What we're looking for, just to be precise, is the total cost of the elections commission's investigation, the total cost of legal fees Elections Canada has spent losing the two cases, one on GST, the other on in-and-out, and the total cost Elections Canada has spent on public relations matters related to these cases.
You can provide that information?
11:15 a.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
The public relations matters related to these cases: you can provide these costs.
11:15 a.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
Okay.
How much are you prepared to spend on lawyers and public relations consultants to continue to pursue the matter on which Elections Canada has been twice defeated?
11:15 a.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer
Again, unless there is another resolution, we'll have to continue to rely on the court to provide a decision.
The two cases raise very significant issues for the political financing regime. Without getting into the details, before bringing this matter for possible legislative changes, I think we need a decision from a higher court.
The two decisions, among other things, seem to be—
11:20 a.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
Can we have order, Chair?
Sir, I just can't hear you, because there's a lot of talking going on. It's not your fault.
Please continue.
11:20 a.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer
The two decisions raise important fundamental principles set out in the act regarding the whole concept of commercial value, and I believe we need a decision from a higher court.
I would also point out that with the in-and-out case there's a cross-appeal by the other party to the matter. So it suggests that both parties are not entirely satisfied with the decision.
11:20 a.m.
Conservative
11:20 a.m.
Chief Electoral Officer, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer
I know, but again, it's between the parties in the litigation.
11:20 a.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
We're quite satisfied with the decision, as it came down overwhelmingly in our favour. There's no reason not to be satisfied.
I'm getting some affirmation from my colleagues on the other side on that point.
On the matter at hand, on January 18, 2010, the court and the Honourable Mr. Justice Martineau recognized that Elections Canada's party handbook permitted candidates to spend funds on matters that promoted the party. Subsequent to that, you changed your handbook and attempted to apply your changes retroactively to an election that had already occurred. The court rightly found that this was not possible, and therefore the handbook was not applicable.
Do you believe, given Elections Canada's two defeats in civil proceedings where the burden of proof is much lower than in a criminal proceeding, there would be any chance of overcoming a much higher burden and succeeding in a higher burden setting?
11:20 a.m.
Liberal
Marcel Proulx Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC
Mr. Mayrand will decide for himself, or you will decide for Mayrand, but I think the honourable member is using the wrong venue. I think he's pleading his case and that should be done at another venue--something they call “the courts”.
11:20 a.m.
Some hon. member
Oh, oh!
