Evidence of meeting #64 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 pelletier.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
Anthony Rota Liberal Nipissing—Timiskaming, ON
That answers my question. I'll pass on to Mr. Wrzesnewskyj.
June 6th, 2007 / 5:20 p.m.
Liberal
Borys Wrzesnewskyj Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON
Mr. Guité, over and over throughout today's hearing you've said the political system never interfered. Yet in testimony before the committee in 2004, when you felt at that point you were free from your oath of confidentiality as a civil servant, for the purpose of testifying before the committee, the funding operations you oversaw were, in your words, “political”. Let me be even more accurate: the wording you used was “very, very, very political”--three ”verys”. You went on to say “there were political appointees, and they ran the group from an operational point of view”. How do I match that?
5:20 p.m.
As an Individual
Because you're referring to the years of the Conservatives versus the years of the Liberals.
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy
Again, Mr. Wrzesnewskyj, we're way off the topic.
I urge members.... We're talking about the apparent inconsistencies between Mr. Guité's testimony before this committee and what he said in Gomery. And you're going back to the Conservative government. I assume it's the Mulroney government you're talking about now?
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
Borys Wrzesnewskyj Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON
Chair, we had an unequivocal statement here that the political system never interfered and only a few examples that came up in Gomery listed.... Yet we had a very clear statement before this committee in 2004 that the process was “very, very, very political”--three “verys”--and that there were political appointees who ran the group from an operational point of view.
5:20 p.m.
As an Individual
If he agrees to lose his minutes, I'll quote what I said to this committee.
5:20 p.m.
As an Individual
Again, you're referring to the years under Mulroney, when I had political appointees on my staff. When I appeared at this committee, I think we were dealing with the issue of the sponsorship. In my opening statement I referred to the Mulroney years.
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy
Thank you, Mr. Wrzesnewskyj.
Thank you, Mr. Guité.
Is it Mr. Williams next?
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
John Williams Conservative Edmonton—St. Albert, AB
Thank you very much.
Mr. Guité, you have gone to great lengths to try to differentiate between the awarding of an open-ended contract to an advertising agency and the granting of contracts under that award.
You said the question was to what extent there was ongoing political direction in that program. Then in your answer you say:
There is quite a bit of difference between political interference and political input. ... And to say that they interfered--i.e., with the selection of agencies—never. I would not let them do that, because ministers are not to interfere with the selection process.
I'll go back to the question. The question said “ongoing political direction in that program”. Now you're trying to say this was the selection process before the program started. The question was quite clear: ongoing political direction during the time the program was ongoing. You said “never”. Then you turned that around to say that there's a difference between granting the authority to hire the agency and then giving that out afterwards.
When the question to you was quite clear about political involvement in the operation of the program, you turned this around, trying to tell us it was by the approval of the agency at the beginning. Why did you mislead the committee?
5:25 p.m.
As an Individual
I've never misled the committee.
Mr. Chair, I think I'll have to give the same answer I gave to Mr. Christopherson and the other one.
Again, Mr. Williams, as I explained a while ago, the political system was never, never involved in qualifying. Were they involved in selecting agencies and assigning projects? Yes.
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
John Williams Conservative Edmonton—St. Albert, AB
Let me take another tack here; I'm not sure you were in the room when the chair read that you are supposed to give replies that are fulsome and complete and so on.
You mentioned earlier today about your department having a staffer within the PCO. Who decided that staffer would be within the PCO?
5:25 p.m.
As an Individual
I think it was a request that came from PCO to me. In fact it was Madame Andrée Larose who was assigned to PCO during the referendum period.
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
John Williams Conservative Edmonton—St. Albert, AB
You were talking about householders, which were printed in the millions and subsequently destroyed at the direction of PCO and so on.
5:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy
Mr. Williams, let me say this. We agreed, as members, and you were there, that we would talk about the inconsistencies in Mr. Guité's testimony before this committee and subsequent testimony at the Gomery commission. Now you're into householders that were printed in 1994 and 1995.
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
John Williams Conservative Edmonton—St. Albert, AB
What I was trying to get to, Mr. Chairman, goes back to your opening statement, when you talked about replies that are fulsome and so on. I was just wondering if Mr. Guité had anything to add to elaborate so we can fully understand these answers, which seem to be more fulsome today than the ones we got during hours and hours of testimony in the past.
5:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy
If you have anything specific to put to him on the inconsistencies he gave in this committee, I'll allow the question.
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
John Williams Conservative Edmonton—St. Albert, AB
Mr. Chairman, why don't we just let him see if he--
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
I have a point of order, Chair
You're intervening in Mr. Williams' testimony. Clearly you feel very strongly about the subject, but I'd ask that it not come off Mr. Williams' time. If you want to make an intervention we welcome that, but that is not something we're willing to give from our time.
Thank you.
5:25 p.m.
Liberal
Judy Sgro Liberal York West, ON
Mr. Chair, on a point of order, nobody takes off Mr. Williams' time. The issue was that we're talking about a discrepancy in the testimony, and his questions were not to do with the discrepancies here.
5:25 p.m.
Liberal