Public Accounts Committee on June 12th, 2007

[A/Commr David Gork]

No, no, I was. Excuse me, we're talking four years ago. There is a huge number of phone calls that I have dealt with, with Ottawa, a huge number of e-mails. I have done my best to try to recall every one of them that's transpired.

You're asking me, did Barb George call me? No, she didn't. Whatever happened, whenever I talked with Barb George, it was because I got an e-mail from her EA asking me to give Barb a call. I would then, when I had an opportunity, place the call.

The call you're referring to was on the Saturday. I had given the order to Doug Lang on the Friday prior to that for the order. So she was not phoning me to say get rid of Frizzell. The order had already been given to remove Frizzell.

[Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

You're displaying the same sort of selective memory of some of the previous witnesses. You can remember that a call was placed on a Saturday, but you can't remember whether you called or she called.

[A/Commr David Gork]

No, excuse me, I did not remember that the call was placed on a Saturday. I was shown the timeline, so it's not my memory. They are showing me, these are the records. Okay, fine; I don't remember the days.

[Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Let's move on to a different--

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Brian Fitzpatrick]

Yes, Mr. Williams.

[John Williams, Conservative, Edmonton—St. Albert, AB]

On a point of order, I appreciate tough questioning--I sometimes indulge too--but to accuse people of selective memory going back several years ago is I think a little bit over the top. We, as members, should be judicious in the choice of words.

It's fine to elicit the information, but do not accuse witnesses who are here on their own volition of things like selective memory unless you have some serious reason to believe that.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Brian Fitzpatrick]

Right.

I think Mr. Williams' point is well taken. We're here to find out facts. We should avoid offering inflammatory opinions or making inflammatory allegations without foundation.

[Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

In your opening statements before this committee, you also stated:

The Ottawa Police Service was responsible for the investigation at the beginning, throughout, and in the end. The Ottawa police conducted the investigation under their own auspices and without RCMP direction.

You went on to say:

At no time did I direct the investigation or have access to information for purposes of subverting a thorough and diligent investigation.

We had a memorandum tabled before this committee from Sergeant Frizzell to Inspector Roy. In it, he talks of his grave concerns about the integrity of the investigation, and requests that Mr. Roy pass on these concerns, this memorandum, up the line for consideration. I understand that you blocked Chief Bevan from receiving this memo.

Did Mr. Roy report to you or to Mr. Bevan?

[A/Commr David Gork]

That memo was never blocked by me. If the memo went to Paul Roy, it was up to Paul to deal with it. There was no memo ever blocked by me--ever.

[Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Okay.

We also heard from Sergeant Frizzell about an e-mail you sent on February 9, 2005. There is a key line in here, where you say, “I do not want us spending time on investigations that we know are not criminal in nature.”

That seems to indicate clear direction on how an investigation should go. In fact, it goes one step further: it presupposes what may or may not be criminal.

Would you not agree with that?

[A/Commr David Gork]

No, again, I would not.

As I said, I was not providing direction. Just as I did when other people asked me questions, if Paul Roy asked me questions, I went and discussed it with Paul and put it right back into his lap.

And that was just a comment. That wasn't saying “You will not do this.” It was a response back from the message that I had received. But I did not make the decisions on it.

[Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Sir, wouldn't it have been appropriate to say no, I'm just in charge of providing resources, and I should not be providing commentary on direction, on how an investigation should be proceeding?

[A/Commr David Gork]

Absolutely, and in hindsight, that's what I should have said. In hindsight, I should have kept a record of every e-mail. In hindsight, I should have written down every phone call. I didn't. You're not wrong, and I agree with you.

[Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Thank you.

So when an investigator sees this line from an assistant commissioner, then, from what you've just said, he would have seen that as direction.

When I take a look at the timeline here, that's February 9 of 2005. The memorandum of understanding between the Ottawa police and the RCMP was signed by three people--Chief Bevan, Deputy Commissioner Loeppky, and Inspector Paul Roy. It was ten months after the start of the investigation that it was finally signed. Deputy Commissioner Loeppky signed it on February 8.

And point 3.1, which lays out the status and position of the investigation, states:Inspector Paul Roy will be assigned as Case Manager to the RCMP Investigation. For the duration of the investigation, Inspector Paul Roy will report directly to A/Commissioner D. Gork.

It makes it clear, in the memorandum of understanding, that the chief investigator is told to report directly to you, not to Chief Bevan. And Chief Bevan signed off on it, the deputy commissioner signed off on it, and Inspector Roy signed off on it.

So you were in fact--

[A/Commr David Gork]

Excuse me. And where is my signature on that?

Let me finish now. I was not involved in the writing of that MOU. That was done by legal services. I did not see that MOU. I did not sign off on that MOU. That MOU was finished almost at the end of the investigation. It had no bearing in reality up until the time when it was signed. By that time, I was packing my bags and heading off to Lyons.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Brian Fitzpatrick]

I'm sorry, Borys. We have to move on to Mr. Laforest.

[Jean-Yves Laforest, Bloc, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to ask a couple of questions to Mr. Garry Roy.

Mr. Roy, at the June 4 committee meeting, Mr. Casey told us that you were his immediate supervisor during the negotiations on the insurance administration outsourcing.

At the time, were you familiar with Treasury Board's guidelines in this area?

[Garry Roy]

No, I was not familiar with Treasury Board policies related to contracting.

[Jean-Yves Laforest, Bloc, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

Did you ask Mr. Casey—these are the notes we have—to circumvent the rules governing the awarding of contracts, to ensure that Morneau Sobeco got the Great-West Life pension administration outsourcing contract?

Did you ask Mr. Casey to do that?

[Garry Roy]

No, I did not.

[Jean-Yves Laforest, Bloc, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

You didn't?

Have you received gifts from Pat and Kim Casey, Mr. and Mrs. Casey?

[Garry Roy]

Yes, I have.

[Jean-Yves Laforest, Bloc, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

What type of gifts?

[Garry Roy]

I received hockey tickets.

[Jean-Yves Laforest, Bloc, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

To a hockey game.

Concerning the Ottawa Police Service investigation or inquiry, did you know that you were a person of interest in the investigation into the insurance and pension funds?

Did you know that you were a person of interest in the investigation?