I'm a lawyer, which means that I'll fight and argue, and then we're friends.
Mr. Souccar, first of all, let me dispel any notion in your mind that by saying that you weren't forthright I meant that you were less than honest. That was not my intent. Maybe I misused the term.
I was left with the impression, after today and the other day, that you were simply pursuing and following a particular policy, regardless of whether or not any damage might have been done, for disclosing to us that you had not gone to PCO. That's the impression I'm now left with. But when push came to shove, and PCO, an arm of government, said to you that they were going to actually confirm that you did not contact them with respect to any concerns in this matter, you weren't concerned at all about any damage you might be doing vis-à-vis this matter. I'm not asking whether you are or not.
As a former Attorney General, I can tell you that when the RCMP were pursuing important matters of state or were dealing with issues with government, they would come to the Attorney General and say quietly, “Get your premier off this issue”, or “Get that particular minister off this issue. We don't want you to talk about it. There is something sensitive going on.”
If you had something serious going on, you could have told PCO. That's what I'm puzzled about. Obviously there was nothing serious going on. You were simply pursuing a policy and following the policy to the letter. That left me with the impression that you weren't prepared to level with us. That's not an accusation; that's the impression I gained. I'm not looking for a comment, and I absolutely didn't mean that you were less than honest. I just felt that you felt compelled to not share with us that information that you confirmed after PCO went out.