Do you know why?
Evidence of meeting #62 for Public Accounts in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was contract.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #62 for Public Accounts in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was contract.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:25 p.m.
As an Individual
Yes, we requested to have counsel present at our interview, and Mr. Frizzell got quite threatening with me on the phone. He told me very specifically that I would be charged with obstruction of justice if I were to bring in legal counsel. He told me I had no right as a Canadian citizen to bring in legal counsel and he had a lot of intimidating statements to make about that.
I replied to him at the time that it was my understanding that just the previous week IBM had been interviewed, several of the staff from IBM, and they had their legal counsel present at that time, so why wouldn't I be able to have legal counsel present? He told me that he had come very close to charging them with obstruction of justice and he would not permit it.
4:25 p.m.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Okay. I suspect at some point, Chair, we're going to want to afford Staff Sergeant Frizzell an opportunity to respond to that, because they're pretty strong allegations, given that he's a police officer.
Let me ask Mr. Casey about the issue of these e-mails, sir, and again from Mr. Frizzell's testimony: “Mr. Casey sent the e-mail around saying that this meeting was rescheduled. It was Mr. Roy who replied, 'Smooth'.”
So what's going on there, Mr. Casey?
4:30 p.m.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Sorry, sir, this is about the meeting and the cancellation of it and offering up a fig leaf of an excuse and then this response, “Smooth”, to you from Mr. Casey. What does that mean?
4:30 p.m.
As an Individual
As I said, in that period of time I was directed to start the analysis, and the team I was a participant of was directed to throw all our efforts in that respect. Given that, we did not have the time to go to meet with Great-West Life, so again I was directed by Mr. Roy not to cancel the meeting but to postpone it.
4:30 p.m.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Staff Sergeant Frizzell said, “My interpretation of that was everyone had bought the reasoning, even though it was untrue.”
Your comments?
4:30 p.m.
As an Individual
The team, which included me, was directed to do this analysis and we were on that analysis full-time, so we didn't have time to go to Great-West Life. So we were full-time to do this analysis.
4:30 p.m.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
I'm not sure we're on the same wavelength. I'm going to move on.
This is Staff Sergeant Frizzell's testimony:
Later that month Mr. Roy and Mr. Casey had another e-mail exchange in which Mr. Roy stated, “Uh-oh, the foxes have the scent”. Mr. Casey's reply seemed to indicate that someone was asking questions about the insurance outsourcing, and he was devising answers that would put her off the scent. Mr. Roy replies, “Sounds good, and we should be able to come out of the closet soon as well”.
What's going on here, sir?
4:30 p.m.
As an Individual
I'm not sure who's being referred to. There are no names mentioned, so I can't comment on an e-mail that has no names mentioned.
4:30 p.m.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
I'm sorry, I want to be clear. It was an e-mail from Mr. Roy to you, which said, “Uh-oh, the foxes have the scent”.
Then you reply, and then Mr. Frizzell says about Mr. Roy's reply to your comment...I don't have the e-mail that he replied with, but it says, and this would be in terms of your response: “Sounds good, and we should be able to come out of the closet soon as well.”
What does this mean, sir?
4:30 p.m.
As an Individual
We were asked when we were doing the analysis to keep the information confidential. That's what we were doing. I did maintain that position.
4:30 p.m.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
No, I'm sorry: “Uh-oh, the foxes have the scent”. Clearly, for anybody listening, that has a connotation to it.
4:30 p.m.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
You responded to it, so I've just asked what you thought. Since you responded, what was your interpretation of what that meant, sir?
4:30 p.m.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Not somebody; it was Mr. Roy to you. I'm asking you, because you responded to it, what you think he meant when he said, “Uh-oh, the foxes have the scent”. I know what I'd take from it. I'm giving you a chance to change my thinking.
4:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy
Your time is up, and I want to give the witness a last opportunity to give an answer. We haven't got one yet.
Mr. Casey, do you have anything to add to that? The question is pretty clear to me, so do you have any answer to give?
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
On a point of order, Chair, that's not an answer. Witnesses before this parliamentary committee have a duty to answer the questions. I just saw Mr. Christopherson pose the same question about four times. They were clear terms. Anybody could have understood it. I ask that this witness be directed to answer the question.
4:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy
Well, Mr. Poilievre, the question had to do with interpretation. You're quite right, the question was asked on four different occasions. The witness apparently has no interpretation to give. He has nothing to add to the e-mail. The e-mail was addressed to him from Mr. Roy, and the response was from him back to Mr. Roy. The wording in the e-mails speaks for itself. It's unfortunate the witness didn't feel that he had anything to add to the interpretation, but certainly the committee is well within its rights to take the meaning of the e-mail.
It's unfortunate that the witness is not giving an answer. I'm not going to direct him to answer the question, but I find it very disturbing and unfortunate.
Ms. Sgro.
4:30 p.m.
Liberal
Borys Wrzesnewskyj Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON
Thank you.
Mr. or Mrs. Casey, besides Mr. Crupi, who else was a beneficiary of hockey tickets and golf games?
4:35 p.m.
As an Individual
I have no idea of anybody else who was at a golf game, but I can tell you that there were about 20 people within the RCMP who received hockey tickets. They would have been people we were working with, peers, at various levels within the NCPC.
