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.
Conservative
John Williams Conservative Edmonton—St. Albert, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I was just going to ask Mr. Guité if there was anything else he would like to add to his testimony to clarify our misconceptions about discrepancies and so on. So I'll give him the floor for a minute or so to see if there's anything he wants to add to our edification of this issue.
As an Individual
Mr. Williams, let me make the following point. When I came here in...was it 2004?
As an Individual
I had been gone from the government since August 1999. I came here, and in response to the questions I was asked, except the first time, when I was very blunt with answers, and I used the famous confidentiality clause.... The second time around I answered the questions to the best of my ability and as honestly as I could at the time, as openly as I could.
During the Gomery commission, I was grilled in Ottawa for four and a half or five days, and the same thing in Montreal, and they had an assistant assigned by the commission beside me with--I forget, I'll take a guess--150 volumes of data, of documents. If you put a document in front of me that I signed or did in 1995, 1996, or 1997, obviously my mind is going to be much sharper in reading the document. I'd say, “Yes, I do remember that”, but some of them I did not remember.
So for you to say that I was clearer at the Gomery commission, obviously I was. There's no question, because I had all the information in front of me. In fact, when I could not answer, the commissioner would say to me, “Well, Mr. Guité, if you want to think about it overnight and take that”--because I had a copy of those documents--“home and have a look at it to see if you can refresh your memory over a night's sleep...”. Several times I came back and I said, “Well, I'm not sure, but maybe”.
Conservative
John Williams Conservative Edmonton—St. Albert, AB
Now that you've had the experience of the Gomery commission and lots of time to reflect, are there any answers you had given to this committee that you think require further amplification or edification for the members, or perhaps even changes?
Conservative
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
Given that this has been a very lively exchange, I think it would only be fair for Mr. Guité to be given a chance to make a closing statement. We do have time, and I know that there's probably a lot on his mind, given that there are a lot of people or players who were involved in this particular affair. Anything additional he wants to share, I think he should be allowed to share.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy
Mr. Poilievre, that was clear at the outset. I said clearly that Mr. Guité would be given the opportunity to make a closing statement.
I just have one question, Mr. Guité. When you appeared in 2002, the following exchange took place.
Question: “...it's your belief also that all provisions of government contract regulations were followed?”
Your answer: “Yes.”
Question: “There's no one else that you're pointing the figure at.”
Your answer: “No.”
Question: “If there is a mess in this report, it's the sole responsibility of Mr. Charles Guité.”
Your answer was, “That's correct.”
Was that correct at the time?
As an Individual
From some of the information I saw, I don't know if I could comment on that. I'll give you an example, Mr. Chair, so that I'm not trying to avoid the question.
When Mr. Cutler testified, I don't know if he testified here. Yes, he did, in fact.
As an Individual
There was a contract, when I came in here the first time, that was put in front of me, which Mr. Cutler said was non-competitive. Subsequently, at the Gomery commission, when I had the backup documentation, it was competitive.
Liberal
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
This is very important. I must correct the record, and I appreciate the opportunity. I want to withdraw all the remarks and questions that I made around the question of gifts. I want to directly apologize to Mr. Guité for any discomfort in that question. It was a different witness. I had the wrong page.
So, again, I withdraw all of that, and I apologize to you, sir. That shouldn't have happened, and I feel bad that it did.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy
Thank you, Mr. Christopherson. I will accept your apology, Mr. Christopherson.
I'm going to invite you now, Mr. Guité, to make any closing comments that you want to make to the committee.
As an Individual
The only comment that I want to make is that if, down the road, you find other things that you want clarification on, I'm there to give it. I obviously have to be very careful of what I do and what I say, because of criminal charges and being sued for, I forget, $35 million, $38 million, and so forth.
Having said all that, there's another memo that I got during the Gomery commission, which was regarding access to the unity reserve. It couldn't be clearer, and I would recommend that a lot of you members here look at the Gomery commission in detail. It was the Prime Minister's Office, through the clerk, saying you're going to send all this money down to Guité, and so forth. “That said, it is your office which determines to which projects the monies are directed.” That's a memo to the Prime Minister from the clerk.
Bloc
Michel Guimond Bloc Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC
Could the witness file that document?