That's an interesting question, because it's so comically loaded it's worthy of nothing but contempt.
You are affirming that is the case, whereas if you look at that package, you'll see that on September 22, 2014, Marie-Dominique Sicé wrote to Christian Boileau, the same person who's talking at the House of Commons, and it says this:
Bonjour Christian, I just took up to the 11th Floor (Suite 11-45) fifty-one (51) Employment Forms from each Quebec NDP MP for staff working in Montreal.
These were the forms that divided up the number of people who were going to be paying the salary for each of the people based in Montreal.
We also have voluminous correspondence non-stop with the IT people in the House of Commons every step of the way. We also have every posting, because we are unionized, and every one of those public postings explains that it's a job in Montreal. We also have every single letter of nomination sent to the House of Commons authorities that either mentions specifically the address in Montreal of the work, or the person's address in Montreal. Every step of the way, the House of Commons, its staff, have been informed.
You are referring to something that someone today is saying happened three years ago. This is not a formal meeting. There are no minutes of this meeting. This is what your interpretation is of a snippet of a conversation or an exchange between two people.
Jess Turk-Browne, to my knowledge, was an exceptionally capable public administrator. She left several years ago to go work to help register women to vote in Pakistan, where she spent more than two years. She's back as far as I know, but I haven't spoken to her since she left for Pakistan. I find it grossly unfair for you to make that affirmation that she somehow broke the law.