Refine by MP, party, committee, province, or result type.

Results 1-15 of 33
Sorted by relevance | Sort by date: newest first / oldest first

Public Accounts committee  This is after it had been looked at? Is this the final report you're talking about?

June 11th, 2007Committee meeting

Keith Estabrooks

Public Accounts committee  This is the final request?

June 11th, 2007Committee meeting

Keith Estabrooks

Public Accounts committee  We discussed it, and we had—now, these were our opinions—concerns about Mr. Gauvin's name being removed for no obvious reason on the final report that went out. In two or three places we felt it could have stayed in, that it wasn't personal information, but it had been removed.

June 11th, 2007Committee meeting

Keith Estabrooks

Public Accounts committee  That was in a memo that was sent to Superintendent Lavoie. That's not the other A5 about the cover-up question.

June 11th, 2007Committee meeting

Keith Estabrooks

Public Accounts committee  It's the way the words are being sort of changed—I said, “are we”; I didn't say, “we are”. You have to be careful how you word that.

June 11th, 2007Committee meeting

Keith Estabrooks

Public Accounts committee  No, no. When I wrote the A5--the handwritten one to Superintendent Lavoie--I thought I was doing the proper thing, because Superintendent Lavoie was my boss; my job as a senior NCO was to protect Superintendent Lavoie. I was hoping that when he read this, it would give him an ide

June 11th, 2007Committee meeting

Keith Estabrooks

Public Accounts committee  No. The relationship didn't get warmer—

June 11th, 2007Committee meeting

Keith Estabrooks

Public Accounts committee  Do you mean for access to information?

June 11th, 2007Committee meeting

Keith Estabrooks

Public Accounts committee  I don't think there is a maximum, as long as you—There is in that you have to notify. You have 30 days, and you can extend it to 60. On an access to information request, you can extend it to 120 days, 300 days, or whatever, as long as you notify the individual. That's under the A

June 11th, 2007Committee meeting

Keith Estabrooks

Public Accounts committee  Could you repeat that? I'm sorry. I was looking for the voice.

June 11th, 2007Committee meeting

Keith Estabrooks

Public Accounts committee  What was atypical?

June 11th, 2007Committee meeting

Keith Estabrooks

Public Accounts committee  Well, it was delayed by 69 days before I received it, which is not usually that normal. It took 69 days before I looked at it. I looked at it, I believe, on October 8, or something like that. I can give you the dates exactly. I looked at it. It took me a day and a half to review

June 11th, 2007Committee meeting

Keith Estabrooks

Public Accounts committee  I don't believe so. I talked to Louis in the hall a couple of times over the space of months. I don't know.

June 11th, 2007Committee meeting

Keith Estabrooks

Public Accounts committee  But I don't think there was a formal—I had nothing formal back. There are some notations on the ATIP flow screen, different dates it was requested—when would it be down? And I believe there was a conversation from an ATI investigator. A lady had phoned Mr. Alberti to question him

June 11th, 2007Committee meeting

Keith Estabrooks

Public Accounts committee  Just to make things clear, I think you're saying things were missing that day. Nothing went missing that day, that I know of.

June 11th, 2007Committee meeting

Keith Estabrooks